The opposite of Envy is Love

Twenty Fifth Sunday in Ordinary Time Year B

One of the most destructive attitudes you will find in any family, community or even the Church is envy. Even the disciples of the Lord were not immune to its influence. This may be the reason why they were arguing over who is the greatest. Likewise, the enemies of our Lord were also envious of His popularity and growing influence. Their hostility and opposition toward the Lord were not just motivated by a desire for self-improvement or advancement. They were incensed by His success and gleefully plotted His downfall which they had actually achieved when our Lord was crucified. St James puts it perfectly in the second reading: “Wherever you find jealousy and ambition, you find disharmony, and wicked things of every kind being done…”

The Angelic Doctor, St Thomas Aquinas defines envy as “sorrow for another’s good.” Just think for a moment about how squarely malicious envy is based on this definition. In fact, just as pride is the opposite of humility, envy can be thought of as the opposite of love. Love desires the good of the other; envy is its opposite. Love says, “I’m happy when you’re happy, and I’m sad when you’re sad.” Envy says, “I’m happy when you’re sad, and I’m sad when you’re happy.” Could anything be more terrible? Envy is a sibling of hatred. Whereas covetousness is an inordinate longing for what someone else has, envy goes further, wanting the other person to lose what he has. Wherever envy exists, hatred also resides—and misery follows.

But here’s the painful irony, envious people believe that they will be happy when their rival or foe has been shamed or defeated but their victory would prove to be pyrrhic. You see envy is the constant thief of joy. Most sins have an up-front sweetness but a bitter aftertaste. Envy, meanwhile, is bitter as you do it and bitter afterward—doubly miserable. Envy can take any gift of God and make it rot; it can turn heaven into hell.

Rather than wishing the worse on our enemies we should be praying for them, encouraging them and even choosing to be in solidarity with them. Our Lord once again repeats His prophecy that He would have to suffer grievously at the hands of His enemies. Instead of showing empathy and offering to share His sorrow and burden, the disciples choose to deflect, change the topic and selfishly descend into navel gazing and self-pity. Our Lord, instead of remonstrating them for their insensitivity, begins to instruct them on the new paradigm of a disciple and how to love their neighbour as the Saviour does, even when He is personally undergoing pain and distress.

In the face of the disciples’ ambition for first places, honours and privileges so contrary to His teaching, our Lord points the way of suffering, surrender, humility and charity: “If anyone wants to be first, he must make himself last of all and servant of all.” While those of the world choose to ascend the ladder of success, power and prestige, Christians must take a different path and avoid the personal failings of ambition, pride and search for power and dedicate our lives in service to others. The former would foster a culture of dog-eat-dog, stepping over the corpses of others to get to where we want to go. It is fuelled by envy, where our humanity is sacrificed. The Christian’s path, on the other hand, must imitate the condescension of our Lord - humility expressed in self-giving and service to others. Like allowing soap to penetrate the deepest caverns of a dirty wound, we must allow humility to penetrate the deepest caverns of our envy. As we pursue humility—including by praying for and encouraging those we’re tempted to envy—we can be confident God will reward us with life, joy, and freedom.

The last bit of instruction is often taken as either a lesson in hospitality shown especially to the weak who cannot repay our favour or a call to emulate the innocence and simplicity of a child, the prerequisite for humility. But our Lord makes this call unique by tying the welcoming of a child to welcoming Him. Yes, this last line points to the need to show hospitality and express humility, but also provides us the standard by which these things are done. Once again, our Lord is turning the question of greatness on its head. There is no need for us to be envious of each other in that we attempt to outdo each other even in the area of Christian virtue. The standard by which we should set our eyes on is Christ Himself, and certainly no one can claim to be greater than Him. So, rather than compete in getting ahead of the other, we must constantly seek to imitate our Lord in every way, especially in His Incarnation. Christ did become a “child” who was welcomed by some but rejected by others and those who rejected Him failed to see that they had rejected the Heavenly Father who had sent Him.

In contrast to the blueprints provided by life coaches on how to be successful and getting ahead in life, this passage provides us with a blueprint for an incarnational discipleship. Firstly, we are all called to follow the example of His great humility in coming down from heaven to earth (Phil 2: 5-8). We are to be like Christ in His Incarnation in the amazing self-humbling which lies behind the Incarnation.

Secondly, we are to be like Christ in His service. We move on now from His Incarnation to His life of service; from His birth to His life, from the beginning to the end, from His birth to the Last Supper and finally, to His death on the cross.

Thirdly, we are to be like Christ in His love. Love is the wisdom from above. As St James teaches: “the wisdom that comes down from above is essentially something pure; it also makes for peace, and is kindly and considerate; it is full of compassion and shows itself by doing good; nor is there any trace of partiality or hypocrisy in it.”

So, rather than seek to be ahead of others and be envious of those who seem to do better, let us learn to be more Christ-like. But this begs the question: is it attainable? In our own strength it is clearly not attainable, but God has given us His Holy Spirit to dwell within us, to change us from within. As long as we hold on to our prideful stubbornness, it would remain humanly impossible. But if we assume the attitude of a child filled with awe and wonder, a hapless child who cannot do things for himself but rely on the strength and help of others, all things are possible with God!

The Economics of the Cross

Twenty Fifth Sunday in Ordinary Time Year A

One of the most common vices which has taken a firm grip on us is our penchant to whine and complain. Who hasn’t complained, grumbled and ranted about others or a situation? We constantly complain about our parents, our children, our spouses, our leaders, our bosses, our subordinates, our fellow church members, our priests, and of course, God - no one has been spared from our list of complaints. What underlies our disgruntled feelings, unbeknownst to most of us, is our sense of entitlement. But here’s the irony. We feel entitled to respect from others, often without giving respect in return. And worse-yet? We feel that God owes us everything because we feel that we’ve either earned it or deserved it.

The sense of entitlement rears its ugly head in today’s gospel parable. It is what transforms the initial sense of gratitude into a gnawing sense of resentment. The story is told by the Lord in response to Peter’s question. A modern rephrasing of Peter’s question would sound like this, “What’s in it for us?” Peter wanted to know what reward would be given to those who give up everything to follow Jesus. In a sense, Peter wanted to know what his entitlement is.

Yet there is something in Peter’s comparative attitude and his need for the assurance of reward that does not fit well with labouring in the Lord’s vineyard. If Peter is worrying about a poor payoff which does not match the sacrifice he is called to make, the Lord overwhelms him with vision of gratuitous abundance. To Peter’s self-serving motivations, our Lord proposes another paradigm, that of generosity – a generous heart is one filled with gratitude and sees everything as grace. A generous heart considers the struggles, difficulties, the welfare of others, instead of just focusing on the injustices that life has dished out to us.

The story starts out with a conventional plot, hiring day workers, which already suggests that they were unemployed till that moment. But it has an unconventional ending - people who worked the least got equal pay, and got paid first. The owner of the vineyard orders that all be equally paid a denarius, whether you had worked the entire 12 hours or less than an hour. Something immediately strikes us as wrong. Conventional social dealings would dictate that those who only worked one hour would receive a twelfth of what the first group agreed to. But there is a greater surprise. To add injury to the already incensed members of the first group of workers, the latecomers get paid first. The master’s generosity, which is a pleasant surprise to the latecomers, becomes a cruel disappointment to the early birds.

The dissatisfaction of the first group of workers is understandable. They had endured the unrelenting heat of the sun, the hot scorching desert winds throughout the whole day, while the others worked for far less during the cool of the evening. Economic justice would demand that “to every man (be given) what he deserves.” Weren’t these workers entitled to a larger pay-out and extra benefits for the time and effort which they had put in? Therefore, thinking in terms of standard social and economic conventions, they expected more. But was their complaint justified? Didn’t they get what they deserved, what they had agreed upon at the beginning, and even more than the prevailing market standards? The landowner’s offer of one denarius for a day’s work is indeed generous. They had accepted it happily at the beginning. Furthermore, where vineyard day workers were victims of an exploitive socio-economic system, the graciousness of the landowner to provide work opportunities to them at a wage that was unequal to their job, was not a sign of meagerness but rather generosity.

We, therefore, come to realise that the root of their indignation came not from an exploitive wage scale but from seeing the good fortune of others whom they felt were not deserving of the same. The landowner had not been unjust, he has every right to do what he wants with his money. The real problem is that the grumblers harbour envy. The master’s generosity is an expression of gracious freedom, not callous arbitrariness, while workers’ complaints are an expression of their loveleness, not of their unfair treatment.

It is here that we see the radical difference between their sense of justice and that of the landowner, who symbolises God. The parable thus shows that God’s justice is not according to man’s calculations. God’s justice bestows mercy on the hapless and rebuffs the proud claims of merit. In contrast to human justice which rewards “every man what he deserves,” the divine principle of justice accords “to every man what he needs.” This is the economics of the cross. Our Lord Jesus died on the cross for us not because we deserved it. He died for us because we needed His perfect sacrifice of love. Thus, the bestowal of grace is not correlated to the work done – the sacrifice made, the amount of prayers offered, the expanse of one’s missionary efforts. It flows from the nature of God who is good, loving and gracious. Grace operates on the basis of the free choice of God, who dispenses his gifts with generosity.

Our society has truly been infected by an epidemic of envy and complaints. Rather than blaming God for the injustices in the world, the parable calls for honest self-examination – have we truly allowed our obsession with self-interest to dampen our joy and blind us to the needs of our neighbours? Pope Francis rightly states the problem in the second paragraph of Evangelii Gaudium, “The great danger in today’s world, pervaded as it is by consumerism, is the desolation and anguish born of a complacent yet covetous heart, the feverish pursuit of frivolous pleasures, and a blunted conscience. Whenever our interior life becomes caught up in its own interests and concerns, there is no longer room for others, no place for the poor. God’s voice is no longer heard, the quiet joy of his love is no longer felt, and the desire to do good fades. This is a very real danger for believers too. Many fall prey to it, and end up resentful, angry and listless.” (EG 2)

The generosity of God should always awaken us to greater mercy, compassion and generosity, rather than be a cause for complaint and grumbling. At the end of the day, for Christ’s disciples, all rewards are really “gifts” or expressions of divine favour and not earned “wages” or “mercy”. Don’t ask “what’s in it for me?” but rather, “What’s in it for the other guy?” That is a hard lesson to learn, because oftentimes when we go to God in prayer we think we deserve something from Him. We believe He owes us something. The same goes with service offered to the community of the Church. This parable is a painful but necessary reminder that what we receive from God is an undeserved gift. The Church owes us nothing. God owes us nothing. In fact, we owe the Church and God who works through the Church, everything.

A wise priest once gave me this potent piece of advice, “in God’s business, rule number one is that no one works for himself. Everybody takes care of somebody; in that way, all our backs are covered. If you doubt this kingdom paradigm, you will never be happy… so instead of looking at your neighbour as a nuisance and a burden, pray that he be your opportunity and strength.”

Serve God Alone

First Sunday of Lent Year C

“When Man ceases to worship God he does not worship nothing but worships everything.” This maxim may be the single most quoted line from G.K. Chesterton’s prolific pen, that is, if he had actually written it. No one seems to be able to trace the original source of this quotation, but everyone seems to have no issues about its popular attribution to the great Catholic apologist and writer.

Today’s Gospel begs the question: if the Lord Himself could be subjected to temptations by the devil, what is the worst temptation that can challenge a faithful Christian? Is it lust or some other form of sexual temptation; money or power; insincerity or betrayal or self-righteousness? The answer may not be that obvious from a mere cursory reading of the gospel, but we need only to look back to the first temptation that was wrought by the devil in that pristine paradise known as Eden. Despite God having given Adam and Eve dominion over the whole of creation, a unique authority accorded only to man among all God’s creations, they were still susceptible to the lie of the devil, who tempted them with the authority of becoming “gods.” In other words, they attempted to usurp God’s power as their own. They wanted to be “like gods.”

The Great Temptation—the sin of Adam —is to rewrite the rules, tell God when He may and may not tell us what to do, and to live as our own god. As Pope Emeritus Benedict keenly notes in the first volume of his bestseller, Jesus of Nazareth, “At the heart of all temptations, as we see here, is the act of pushing God aside because we perceive him as secondary, if not actually superfluous and annoying, in comparison with all the apparently far more urgent matters that fill our lives.”

This is the common thread running through all three temptations and all other temptations we face. It is basically this: to treat God as less than God. We are constantly being tested in our trust that God sustains us, protects us and, in fact, delivers us. We would rather trust in our own strength, devices and resources than to trust in God and His Providence. And ultimately, “when Man ceases to worship God he does not worship nothing but worships everything;” material possessions, power, men’s approval and affections.

The three temptations narrated in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke (though in a slightly different sequence) are three manifestations of the same mother of all temptations – to be ‘like gods’. As opposed to doing the will of the Father, Satan tempts Jesus to follow his own path and way. The devil tries to make Jesus believe the fallacy that the end justifies the means. The first temptation seems harmless enough - to make bread. It was the temptation of too much self-reliance, the temptation that posits our belief that we are capable of manufacturing our own salvation through some socio-economic or political solution. The second temptation is the temptation of naked power, it is taking the short cut to salvation, minus the inconvenience of the cross, and thus cancelling the need for genuine conversion. And finally, the third temptation is the temptation for the spectacular and the sensational, seeking a sign, expecting God to do something special, telling Him to do it my way.

But here is how our Lord responded to the three temptations of the devil: to the temptation to satisfy our wants, He says focus on God and not the world. Love the Lord your God with all of your heart and mind and soul. To the temptation of power, our Lord Jesus reminds us that God alone is the source of all abundance and power in our lives. We derive power not from autonomy but from faithful and humble obedience to God. And finally, to the temptation of seeking the approval of others, the Lord reminds us that it is far more important to please God, than it is to please and impress men. Ultimately, the ultimate defence and cure to all forms of temptations is this, putting God first above all else.

Today, this proposal to be like gods, to decide for ourselves what is right and wrong, is still the mother of temptations. It is still the basic temptation in the world today, the temptation to reject God’s norms of right and wrong, norms implanted in human nature and in creation, the temptation to reject divine authority, either direct, or mediated through the magisterial church, and become like gods ourselves. Dissent is never an excuse that one has to think creatively. It is the product of hubris, the arrogance of man who thinks that he is smarter than God and the Church, which Christ had established to provide us with clear guidance and direction. Thus, to submit to the will of God, to be obedient to His voice and to listen to the tender counsel of Mother Church, is not stupidity as many would wish us to think. In fact, to resist the temptation to be gods, calls for the virtues of courage and humility.

Although Lent begins with this meditation on the temptations of Christ and invites us to contemplate our own proclivity to choose sin, we should not be contented to just remain here. A hurdler soon learns that if he starts looking at the hurdles, he is going to fall right on his face. He must fix his gaze on a point at the finish line, and the hurdles will seem to just pass by his eyesight almost unnoticed as he focuses intently on the goal. Well, that's the essence of Lent. The goal of Lent and our Lenten penitential practices, is not Lent. It is to prepare for the triumph of Christ over temptation, sin and death. Our gaze must be fixed on Easter because our Lord’s resurrection is irrefutable proof that sin and death will not have the last say. And so, as we allow ourselves to follow our Lord into the spiritual wilderness of these forty days, we are assured that despite the temptations to turn our backs on God and pretend to be like gods, we have the assistance of the Holy Spirit to guide us back to acknowledge that there is only one God and that “you must worship the Lord your God, and serve him alone.”

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”.