The Lost Sheep of Israel

Twentieth Sunday in Ordinary Time Year A

“I was sent only to the lost sheep of the House of Israel.” These words are striking in their context because of the obvious persistence of the Gentile lady pleading with the Lord and the apparent perplexity of the disciples who were privy to the conversation. But it is striking also because it echoes directly what the Lord had already said to the disciples when He sent them out to preach the Gospel of the kingdom (Matthew 10:6). Two questions that arise in both instances are ‘Why did the Lord put this restriction on His mission, as shared with His disciples?’ and ‘What did he mean by “the lost sheep of Israel”?’ And, flowing from both, ‘What relevance, if any, does this have for the Church and her mission through the ages?’

A cursory reading of this passage may lead to an uncomfortable shallow interpretation. Our Lord Jesus seems to have been led by a pagan, a Canaanite woman, to revisit some of His prejudiced and preconceived notions of His mission - from a narrow vision which focused only on the “lost sheep of the House of Israel” to a broader vision which encompasses the Gentiles too. Based on such a humanistic interpretation, it would seem that the woman was more broad-minded than the Lord Himself and was responsible for leading Him to a personal epiphany and turning point in His ministry. By confining His mission to a particular group of people whilst excluding others seems very un-Jesus like. But was this a eureka moment for the Lord, the Word Incarnate, who came to reveal the Father’s loving will to the world? Or is the Lord the One who is trying to reveal something about His mission and that of the Church to us?

To get to the bottom of this mystery, let us consider the category of persons mentioned by the Lord - “the lost sheep of the House of Israel”. Who were they? This is not the first time the Lord made reference to this group of persons. Earlier in Chapter 10, as the Lord was sending out the Twelve, He specifically defined their mission as being confined to this same category of persons: “Do not go in the way of the Gentiles, and do not enter any city of the Samaritans; but rather go to the lost sheep of the house of Israel” (Matthew 10:6).

The reference to the House of Israel is strange. Israel no longer exists as a political entity during the time of Jesus. Its denizens are now living in the diaspora. The former kingdom of Israel had been divided, then conquered and now redistributed into various client states of the Roman Empire. These states look nothing like the Israel of old. In fact, Israel has been exiled from the land that was promised to them. Under the dominion of pagan empires, some Israelites have somewhat sort of returned to the land, but she is also scattered across the nations. While Jerusalem is still the centre of her identity, Israel does not rule the land or in possession of it, either. In a way, one could rightly describe the people of the House of Israel as “lost”, they had lost their homeland, yearning to return to it and see it being restored to her past glory.

But there is also a spiritual sense to the description of being “lost sheep.” These people once belonged to God, and He to them. But now the nation that is supposed to be a shining beacon to all the others, showing to the nations of the earth what it looks like to be a new creation of people serving the God who made the heavens and the earth, had become just like everyone else. God’s treasured possession had been lost. The image of the common people of Israel as “lost sheep” is a big part of the Old Testament prophetic indictment. The image is especially common in Jeremiah, reaching a fever pitch in Jeremiah 23.

In a sense, all of us are lost. “All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way.” (Isaiah 53:6). Yet in another sense, there were also lost sheep that were abused and neglected by their spiritual shepherds, the scribes, priests, and Pharisees. This is the sense of Jeremiah: 50:6 “My people have been lost sheep. Their shepherds have led them astray”. In the third book of the prophet Isaiah, which we had just heard in the first reading, the hope and desire of every “lost sheep” is that God would come in search of them and bring them home. But God will not only confine His action of restoration and reunification to the House of Israel. Even in the Old Testament, we see a fervent expectation that He will lead all nations to His Holy Mountain so that they can offer worship to Him in His “house of prayer” which is to be a “house of prayer for all the peoples” and not just for the Israelites.

So, the words of our Lord to the Canaanite woman is not meant to limit His mission to a particular group nor are they intended to exclude her and others. Rather, our Lord is actually telling her that He is fulfilling the prophecies of Isaiah and Jeremiah and that this Canaanite woman is going to be one of the first beneficiaries of His mission because she fits the criteria set out by Isaiah in the first reading: “Foreigners who have attached themselves to the Lord to serve him and to love his name and be his servants – all who observe the sabbath, not profaning it, and cling to my covenant – these I will bring to my holy mountain.” Her reverence for the Lord is expressed by her action - she alone is recorded as “kneeling at His feet.”

Instead of seeing Jesus’ messianic mindset in terms of either or, one ought to see His mission as to Israel on behalf of the nations. In other words, in narrowing His focus to Israel, our Lord Jesus does the work necessary for the entire world to be blessed. That is why He specifically called twelve disciples to be with Him and to share in His mission. The number twelve is not accidental. It is deliberate. Our Lord is reconstituting Israel in the form of the Church built on the foundation of these twelve men as how God had made Israel a nation through the foundation of the twelve tribes. But then our Lord is reminding His Church, the new Israel, as well as the old, that they have been constituted not for some exclusive self-serving purpose. Israel is meant to draw all nations to God and to lead them to worship Him on His Holy Mountain.

The mission to the Gentiles was not at the expense of the mission to Israel, nor was it merely an extension. Instead, Israel was to be the catalyst through which God would accomplish His promises to the world. Mission to the nations depends upon Jesus’ accomplishment of His mission to Israel. This was the conviction of St Paul which we heard in the second reading. He tells the Romans that He is an apostle to the pagans so that the Jews may grow envious of this mission and be the catalyst of bringing some of them to embrace this new faith. The faith of the nations will in time convince Israel that the God of all peoples has been revealed in Jesus Christ. The mission inaugurated by Christ will then come full circle.

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”.

Racism is a Sin

Twentieth Sunday in Ordinary Time Year A

The easiest way to disarm your sparring partner in any intellectual argument would be to rain down ad-hominem labels on him. Call him a racist, a chauvinist, a fascist, a homophobe, and you can unilaterally declare yourself the victor. Such labels do not attempt to get to the bottom of the truth, but merely seeks to delegitimise and invalidate your opponent’s arguments. The frightening trend is that many frequently use this method to silence other opinions and viewpoints. Recently in America, Jesus has fallen victim to this form of stigmatisation.  He has been accused of being “too white,” which is strange, since Jesus is actually a “brown” Jew.

Let’s be fair, reading today’s gospel through modern revisionist lenses could give the impression that Jesus is indeed a bigot, and only got “woke” because of this Canaanite woman. A modern interpretation would sound like this – Before His awakening, Jesus is wrestling with His own prejudices and a blinkered view of His mission. He was a racist and a chauvinist as evidenced by Him ignoring this woman from the outset and later uttering a racial slur. So, it takes a foreign woman to challenge the Son of David to shake off His prejudices and expand His sense of His mission to include her and her child. She saved the Saviour of the world by opening up His mind and taught Him a lesson or two about being inclusive and tolerant. Thank God for this woman.

Does this interpretation sound reasonable? It would be if the characters were indeed following some modern identity politics playbook. But this kind of interpretation is dangerous as it would be reading our own modern prejudices into the text. Could the Son of God really have been prejudiced? Did He need someone to change His mind or teach Him a lesson about His own mission? If we answer “yes” to these questions, we are effectively denying that Jesus was the sinless One, God-Incarnate, because any type of biasness and prejudice would be sinful. But we are told that He was like us in all things but sin (Hebrews 4:15). Although the Divine Word became flesh, He never ceased to be the eternal second person of the Holy Trinity. He never ceased to be perfect. Therefore, He did not need to learn how to be less racist from a Canaanite woman. There is no need for Him to alter His moral orientation because He is the foundation of all moral truths. 

So then, what exactly is the right way to read this passage? Instead of reading this text as an occasion where the Canaanite Woman schooled Jesus in how to become more inclusive and tolerant, it was our Lord who was teaching this woman and His disciples several important truths. Notice that it was the disciples who wanted to send her away; if anyone in the narrative has not yet understood Jesus’ wider vision for the inclusion of the Gentiles, it is the disciples, not Jesus.

First, there is a lesson of humility. Most of us are more concerned about defending our personal dignity, raising our defences, going on the offensive, than listening to the perspective of another. But here we witness the motherly love of this woman. She was prepared to humiliate herself, throw herself at the feet of our Lord, and be subjected to seemingly hurtful speech for the sake of her daughter. Her love for her daughter and her faith in our Lord’s ability to provide the solution overcame her need to defend her own pride and dignity. In this manner, she puts the disciples to shame. This woman epitomises the ideals of Christian discipleship – she is not ambitious for positions of power and honour, but is willing to place herself in a position of the lowliest servant, a servant who listens patiently and obediently to the Master’s bidding.

Second, there is a lesson of perseverance. The Canaanite woman was not daunted by our Lord’s initial silence and indifference. She did not fear being regarded as a nuisance. Just like the other parables in Luke’s gospel on the virtue of persevering in prayer (the widow and the wicked judge, seeking a neighbour’s help in the middle of the night), the story of the Canaanite woman is another demonstration of the power of perseverance. Faith is not just a one-off experience but grows in momentum and strength when fueled with determination and resilience.

Finally, there is the lesson of the priority of salvation over all other claims. The woman had come to our Lord asking Him to heal her daughter. But He gave her more than she bargained for. In exchange for her faith, He gave her the gift of salvation. The disciples, like the rest of the Jews believed that the Messiah’s mission is confined only to Jews. But here, our Lord reveals to all of them that He has come to seek out and save the lost. He had been sent by the Father for the salvation of souls. As we profess in the Creed, “For us and for our salvation, He came down from heaven.”

But this begs the question: How can we reconcile this with what our Lord says in this passage, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of the House of Israel”? If you read the entire gospel of St Matthew, you would come to recognise that He makes this important distinction between the false Israel and the true Israel.  Membership in the True Israel did not come from lineage or the purity of one’s bloodline, nor did it even come from rigorous and scrupulous observances of the Law. Ultimately, the most important criterion for membership in the True Israel, according to the Gospel of St Matthew, is that the person, the disciple, listens to, adheres and finally does whatever he has learnt from Jesus, and in observing all that has been taught by Jesus, does the will of the Father perfectly. So rather than being excluded by Jesus’ professed mission to the lost sheep of Israel, the Canaanite woman is revealed to be a member of the true Israel because of her faith.

Jesus recognises the woman’s wisdom, insight and faith; this is the only time that faith is described as ‘great’—something of a contrast to the ‘little faith’ of Peter when he gets out of the boat! At the end of the day, it is not racial identity, or one’s political beliefs or sexual orientation which can unite us, what more save us. It is faith. In fact, all this talk about “diversity” is actually a cover for division. At the end of the day, it is faith which unites us and saves us and helps us move beyond all these divisive categories. When St. Paul said that “in Christ there is neither Jew nor Greek” (Gal. 3:28), he was talking about how Christ brings unity based on religion, not race. Our Lord does not destroy our cultural and racial identity but redeems it and brings it to alignment with God’s will and purpose for all humanity.

Yes, we are bad at talking about race, in part, because we do not trust each other. Such a lack of trust is a barrier to honesty. And it is hard to have meaningful conversations without that. But our Lord teaches us that we must engage in such conversations, difficult as it may be. This is what evangelisation is all about. Evangelisation is having conversations with those who hold values which are at odds with the gospel. We do so by being both truthful and respectful. Such conversations can never take place without humility and perseverance. Humility is necessary for listening with an open heart rather than being on the defensive or offensive. Perseverance is also necessary because the path to conversion is never quick nor easy. But finally, the solution to racism is not just a human one. The solution to racism is just like a solution to every other problem which arises from sin. The solution is repentance and faith. Here alone is hope for racial reconciliation.

Lead us to the Light, Lead us to the Truth

Solemnity of the Epiphany of the Lord

Although we Christians have been taught and we know that Easter is our greatest and most important feast in the Church’s liturgical calendar year, most of us, if not all of us, have a soft and sentimental spot for Christmas. One can safely say, Christmas is everyone’s favourite feast (for believers and non-believers alike). But I must say that what I love about Christmas by far, is the last day of this shortest season, the Feast of the Epiphany, because of its sacramental richness displayed in the many customs that have been passed from one generation to the next. In every way, the Church, through these sacramentals and customs, is giving life to, and making visible the very meaning of the word “Epiphany.”

In common and secular parlance, epiphany refers to insights, realisations and awakenings, “aha moments” and even major, life-changing revelations that have had the greatest impact on our lives. The word takes its name from the Greek “epiphania,” which denotes the visit of a god to earth. To us Catholics, the Epiphany is more than just a beautiful word; it signifies the feast in which we celebrate the manifestation of Jesus Christ. The feast actually unites three events in the life of Christ when His divinity, as it were, shines through His humanity: the adoration of the Magi; the baptism of Christ in the Jordan; and the first miracle at the wedding feast of Cana. Moreover, at Epiphany the Church looks forward to the majestic second coming of Christ when His manifestation as God will be complete.

The story of the Magi and the brightness of the star also speaks to the minds and hearts of the men and women of our time, men and women who continually search for truth. Saint Augustine wrote, that our hearts are restless until they rest in God. Pope Emeritus Benedict in his homily on this feast describes these wise men in this fashion: “These men who set out towards the unknown were, in any event, men with a restless heart; driven by a restless quest for God and the salvation of the world.  They were filled with expectation, not satisfied with their secure income and their respectable place in society. They were looking for something greater. They were no doubt learned men, quite knowledgeable about the heavens and probably possessed of a fine philosophical formation. But they desired more than simply knowledge about things. They wanted above all else to know what is essential. They wanted to know how we succeed in being human. And therefore they wanted to know if God exists, and where and how he exists. Whether he is concerned about us and how we can encounter him. Nor did they want just to know. They wanted to understand the truth about ourselves and about God and the world. Their outward pilgrimage was an expression of their inward journey, the inner pilgrimage of their hearts. They were men who sought God and were ultimately on the way towards him.”

In this splendid exposition of the condition of the Magi, Pope Benedict helps us to see the deep correlation between the quest of the Magi and that of our largely secularised non-Christian society. These wise men were Gentiles, not Jews. The term magoi in Greek refers to a wide variety of people, including fortune-tellers, priestly augurs, magicians and astrologers. Because of their connexion with the star in this story, it is safe to conclude that St Matthew identified them mostly with the last group. Instead of searching the scriptures, they looked to the skies, to the stars and constellations.  But in reward for their ardent though perhaps misguided search for truth, God in His great mercy, led them to Christ anyhow.

The universal message of Epiphany is also reflected in the other readings. The first reading speaks of non-Jews bringing gifts in homage to the God of Israel. Here the Prophet Isaiah, consoling the people in exile, speaks of the restoration of the New Jerusalem from which the glory of the Lord becomes visible even to the pagan nations. Thus, the prophet in this passage celebrates the Divine Light emanating from Jerusalem and foresees all the nations acknowledging and enjoying that Light and walking by it. Again in today’s Psalm, we are told that all the kings of the earth will pay homage to and serve the God of Israel and His Messiah. Thus, the readings express hope for a time when “the people of God” will embrace all nations.

As a privileged recipient of a Divine “epiphany”, Saint Paul in the second reading reveals God’s “secret plan,” that the Gentiles also have a part with the Jews in Divine blessings. Hence, St. Paul explains that the plan of God includes both Jews and Gentiles. Jesus implemented this Divine plan by extending membership in His Church, making it available to all peoples. Thus, the Jews and the Gentiles “now share the same inheritance, that they are parts of the same body, and that the same promise has been made to them, in Christ Jesus, through the gospel.” Hence, there are no second-class members in the Church among the faithful. If you’ve ever wondered what the word “Catholic” means, here we have it.  Derived from the Greek word meaning “according to the whole,” it means that Christ did not come to establish some local religious sect for a select few, one “cult” among many.  No, the Church He founded is “catholic” or universal, spread over the whole world, welcoming the whole human race into one nation, one family, under one King.

God has shown us that pagans can be mysteriously drawn to him and used by him, at times even through their own imperfect traditions of wisdom.  Michelangelo depicts this beautifully in the mural paintings of the Sistine Chapel. Lining the top of one wall of the chapel are famous paintings of Old Testament prophets. Opposite them are not New Testament apostles as one may expect. But rather, a row of the Sybils, the pagan prophetesses of the ancient world, in whose oracles there were discovered shadowy allusions to a future Saviour.  Illustrating the insightful humour of Michelangelo, one of the Sibyls has her mouth agape with astonishment, her eyes fixed on the fresco of the risen Christ at the altar wall of the chapel.  Indeed, the deepest desires of all peoples, the elements of truth found in all their religions and philosophies, are fulfilled in Christ. From the very beginning of the Christian story, then, Jesus is clearly not just the Jewish messiah who has come to deliver the people of Israel from foreign oppression.  No, He is the universal king, the ruler of all, who has come to tear down the hostile wall dividing Jew from Gentile, nation from nation. This is the magnificent message of the Epiphany.

Does this mean that all religions are equal and that we should not impose our ideas upon others?  Not at all. St. Justin Martyr said that there are “seeds of the Word” scattered throughout the world.  But seeds are meant to sprout, grow, and bear fruit. These seeds are merely meant to be preparation for the full and complete proclamation of the good news in Jesus Christ. Jesus is the light who illumines our personal existence and who guides us toward the fullness of life in heaven. He is the light who guides us on our journey of faith. All peoples of the world have a right to this “Catholic” fullness.  And it is our obligation to share it.

When we think about the condition of the world today, we see a lot of darkness or, at least, a lot of fog. Many are longing for truth and meaning, hope and joy, whether they are actively searching or not. The task of the new evangelisation calls us to bring the light of Christ into this darkness, to help people to see through the fog of confusion in a culture of increasing secularism and relativism, to sieve through the many ideologies, opinions and subjective truths, and to identify and recognise the Truth. For us Christians, the Truth is a person, our Lord Jesus Christ, who is the Way, the Truth and the Life. The Church has the mandate from Christ to offer the light of the Gospel to all people. Christ is the light of the nations who came to offer salvation to all people. We are all called to be stars to lead others along the path toward Christ, to show God’s light by the way we live, speak, and act.

The scandal of particularity

Fifth Sunday of Easter Year A

I have been called a Catholic Taliban! What did I do to deserve this title, you ask? Well, I didn’t earn it by being a gun-totting, suicide-bomb-threatening nor bible-thumping Catholic. My major unforgivable sin, in the eyes of my critics, would be that I hold on too ‘blindly’ and ‘rigidly’ to what the Church proposes as the perennial Truth and my refusal to bend to changing trends of society.  One of the main teachings of the Church in particular, which often gets me into trouble is that which concerns the saving mission of Our Lord Jesus Christ and the Church. I profess and hold to be true, that Jesus Christ is the unique and universal Saviour of the World and that the Catholic Church is the ordinary means of salvation. Many, including Catholics, find this offensive and objectionable, especially in the context of a pluralistic world. However, the fact of the matter is that this is exactly what the Church teaches, no more and no less. And yet, it is a teaching that is hardly emphasised or even preached. I suspect that this is because it offends the ‘doctrine’ of pluralism, which has been elevated by our culture to the status of a new religion.

The word “pluralism” can be used in different senses, some harmless and some less so. In a harmless factual sense it can be applied to any complex and extensive society. For example, here in Malaysia as in other parts of the world, we are no longer experiencing a monolithic homogenous culture that observes only one specific world-view, religion or set of values. Thus, to deny such factual pluralism would mean that you are living in a bubble. But ideological pluralism, as the name suggests, is something quite different.

As a doctrine, ideological pluralism claims that hostility and division can be avoided if due and equal credit is given to all sides. This is what that makes this doctrine so attractive. In today’s world, division is the enemy of all that is good, peaceable and tolerable. We want to be united as a people and we see tolerance as the answer. This clichéd statement is its tagline: “There is no right or wrong answer, it’s how you look at it.” The philosophical equivalent to this would be relativism, “There is no such thing as Absolute Truth. All truths are merely partial and a manifestation of a greater Truth, which no religion can claim to have a monopoly over.” “Agree to disagree,” sounds like a sensible basis for peace in a situation of fundamental disagreement. But, what if someone is actually wrong? What if someone, or an ideology, is actually harmful?

The basic problem is that pluralism can’t possibly be truly pluralistic. It proposes a particular form of society where anything that does not conform to its ideals and principles would have to be altered and modified so as to “fit in”. Since social cohesion and social tolerance are its ultimate goals, ideological pluralism always seeks for the lowest common denominator. Thus, when trying to find the ultimate common denominator among people of different religious or philosophical leanings, one would necessarily have to preclude God, since some religions and individuals choose not to believe in Him. Perhaps another prime example of this danger may be seen in the area of morality, specifically in terms of human sexuality.

At the end of the day, in the name of pluralism, the Catholic Church, cannot be fully and truly Catholic if she wishes to exist and survive in such a society without having first abandon those teachings that may collide with the belief systems of others or risk offending them. When people claim that all religions are principally the same, with merely insignificant and superficial differences, as open-minded as they may sound, it actually betrays a certain ignorance. No one could ever possibly make this claim unless he is abysmally ignorant of what the different religions of the world actually teach. Certainly, there are similarities and parallels, but there are also many differences and even contradictions between truth claims. To ignore or to collapse every single difference and contradiction into a single voluminous salad bowl of beliefs is like thinking the earth is flat.

That is why the most popular of all objections against the claims of Christianity today comes from this field. The objection is not that Christianity is not true, but, that it is not THE Truth; not that it is a false religion but that it is only A religion, one among many. Thus those who speak of the uniqueness of Christianity or even of Christ are deemed narrow minded and intolerant. This is the scandal of particularity or specificity.

Coming back to our gospel for today; Jesus is the reason that the Christian faith is a problem. “…No one can come to the Father except through Me” is the bone of contention. There is no way of getting around this declaration, unless you choose to ignore it or expunge it from the Bible for being too fundamentally exclusive. He tells us in no uncertain terms: “I am the Way, the Truth and the Life.” Not just any way, or one among many truths or merely a path of life among other valid paths. He is The Way, The Truth, and The Life.

But what seems to be a scandal to the world is one of the most beautiful and surprising things about Christianity - its specificity.  In our culture, we tend to think that the most valuable things are those that are most universal.  We value abstract ideas and broad concepts.  We prefer to think of God as a nameless “force” that infuses everything equally with its love and goodness. We think it is reasonable to assume that there can’t be just one way to God.  Yet Scripture shows us just how un-Democratic God can be.  God did not reveal Himself to all the world!  Instead, He chose one man (Abraham) to become the father of one nation (the Jews). C.S. Lewis adds: “Within this nation there is further selection: some die in the desert, some remain behind in Babylon.  There is further selection still.  The process grows narrower and narrower, sharpens at last into one small bright point like the head of a spear.  It is a Jewish girl at her prayers.  All humanity (so far as concerns its redemption) has narrowed to that.” (C.S. Lewis, Miracles)

Contrary to all our intuitions about what God must be, God was, in the Incarnation, not everywhere, but somewhere.  He was not just any Tom, Dick and Harry, He chose to take flesh and become Jesus of Nazareth. It would not be hubris on our part to proclaim this truth but it would certainly be hubris, to believe that “I know better” than God and that God should have taken a more democratic and pluralistic approach to things by manifesting Himself in different avatars and preaching different equal paths to salvation. This is certainly not Christianity.

That is why the Church continues to proclaim that God intends the salvation of all, and He does so through the mediation of His Only Begotten Son, Jesus Christ, and the Church, which is His Body. And yet, those who through no fault of their own do not know Christ or His Church, but who follow the dictates of their conscience as prompted by the Spirit, may also be saved. But their salvation too comes from Christ and never apart from Him. If there are elements of truth and goodness found in other religions, they are preparations to hear the gospel.

Though the world may appear to be a free market place of ideas, opinions, theologies and ideologies, where we are constantly tempted to come up with a recipe or salad of ideas, we Christians have already made our choice. There may be many rivers which may ultimately lead to the sea, but there is only one Way, one Truth and one Life that leads to Heaven, it is Christ!  And it is the Church’s duty and mission, which remains the same as it was yesterday, today, and tomorrow: to humbly and charitably evangelise and “proclaim the Cross of Christ as the sign of God’s universal love and the source of all grace.” (Nostra Aetate 4)