Father Denny Dempsey

New location for blog

Griff Wigley — 2009-04-01T15:11:18-07:00

This blog (and all previous blog posts and comments) is being moved to a new location:

http://dennisdempsey.wordpress.com/

If you forget, you can always find it by going to the Church of St. Dominic website and clicking on the Father Denny Dempsey navigation link in the left sidebar.

Palm/Passion Sunday April 5, 2009

dennisdempsey — 2009-03-29T21:54:37-07:00

Blessing of Palms, Mark 11:1-10 Bethany, a town on the eastern slope of the Mount of Olives about 1.75 miles from Bethany, was familiar territory to Jesus. Among his friends there we know most about Lazarus and his sisters Martha and Mary, at whose home Jesus was a familiar guest. The night before his entry into Jerusalem, Jesus was feted at a dinner at the home of Simon the leper. Many people in Jerusalem heard that Jesus would be there and went out to see both him and Lazarus, quite the celebrity since having been raised from the dead (John 12:9-11).

At the time, hundreds of people, among the nearly 100,000 pilgrims who had come to Jerusalem for the Passover celebration, were camped out in the Kidron Valley on the east side of the temple. I’m sure that those returning from Bethany spread the news that Jesus would pass that way in a triumphal entry into Jerusalem the next morning. They had undoubtedly all heard about Jesus. Tomorrow they and hundreds more coming out from the city, be it out of curiosity or Messianic hopes, would crowd the roadside to see him.

Leaving Bethany, just before reaching the crest of the Mount of Olives, the road passed through the village of Bethphage. From the crest it wound down the western slope into the Kidron Valley, passing the garden of Gethsemane on the way. There were no other villages along the way, so we can assume the colt came from Bethphage. Jesus had likely arranged the use of the colt beforehand, thus explaining why it had been left tethered outside on the street (people would usually keep their animals within the walls surrounding their property).

The crowds shouting “hosanna” used the word in a different sense than we do today. The Hebrew word “hoshana” actually means “Save (us), we beseech (you).” They were shouting out their hope that Jesus was coming as the Messiah to save them. Since we Christians believe that Jesus is the Savior sent by God the Father, the “hoshana” plea is converted into “hosanna” praise.

Reading 1, Isaiah 50:4-7 This is the third of four Servant oracles in Isaiah, generally believed to be the work of an anonymous author who wrote chapters 40 through 55 (Deutero-Isaiah) in the middle of the 6th century before Christ. The Servant suffers for being true to God but will be vindicated. Bearing the sins of his generation, he will be the instrument of God’s ultimate plan for all peoples. The image of the Servant became associated with a personal Messiah for Jewish people. We Christians see the fulfillment of the Servant in the person of Jesus Christ and note those Isaiah texts when focusing on Jesus’ passion and death.

Reading II, Philippians 2:6-11 In this text, possibly a hymn of the day quoted by Paul in his letter, we have a beautiful statement of the double nature of Jesus as both God and man. The Second Person of the Trinity, while retaining his divine nature, “emptied himself” of the marvelous qualities and abilities attached to that divine nature (all-knowing, omnipresent, all powerful, etc.) and took on our human nature, as we hear in Eucharistic Prayer IV, “a man like us in all things but sin”. In this total self-giving, Jesus both expresses the depth of God’s love for us and calls us to glory with him by a similar detachment of self out of love for God and others.

Gospel, Mark 14:1-15:47 (The Passion of our Lord)

5th Sunday of Lent B March 29, 2009

dennisdempsey — 2009-03-24T14:42:11-07:00

Gospel, John 12:20-33 People of non-Jewish background could join the Jewish religion as full members through circumcision or as associates or as “God-fearing” members who, short of circumcision, shared beliefs and could attend the synagogue services. This latter group was rather numerous by the apostolic period. Well before the time that John’s gospel was written, the leaders of the church at the Council of Jerusalem (c. 46 A.D.) determined that the “God-fearing”, or for that matter any non Jew, could be full members of the Christian community without need to be circumcised and follow the details of the Mosaic law.

The “Greeks” referred to in this reading may have been proselytes or “God-fearing”, but they might have simply been Greek visitors or tourists in Jerusalem out of curiosity. There is a simple song based their request with the words: “Open our eyes, Lord. We want to see Jesus”. The Gospels only speak of two other people “wanting to see” Jesus, Zacchaeus in Luke 19:3 and Herod Antipas in Luke 23:8. Philip, to whom these Greeks come with their request, wil make a somewhat similar one at the Last Supper: “Lord, show us the Father (John 14:8-9)”. Perhaps Philip had pondered over the request brought to him by these Greeks.

Why did they come to Philip? Was it because he had a Greek name (Philip = lover of horses)? Does being from Bethsaida, a more Greek-styled city have anything to do with it? By the way, Bethsaida was not in Galilee but rather on the Sea of Galilee across the northern section of the Jordan River just outside of Galilee. Could that little fact indicate that the final format of John’s gospel may have been written by some of his disciples since John was from that area and would have known different?

Why did Philip go to Andrew? John 1:44 says that Peter and Andrew were also from Bethsaida. By the time of Jesus’ ministry, they had moved to Capernaum in Galilee, perhaps to take advantage of the better fishing areas on that side of the lake or to reduce the taxes they would have to pay at the fish processing station at Magdala in Galilean territory. I like to think of Andrew as a kind of father figure, the quiet dependable go-to fellow whom Jesus left in charge when he would take Peter, James and John (Andrew being the fourth member of that initial group) with him as at the Transfiguration, going to raise Jairus’ daughter, and at prayer in the Garden of Gethsemane.

How does the request for Greeks to see him evoke Jesus’ response that his “hour” had come? Note that there is no ensuing conversation. Isaiah 2:2-4 (echoed in Micah 4:1-3) speaks of the mountain of the Lord’s house (the temple) being established as the highest mountain…all nations shall stream to it.” Jesus must have had a sense that, through his disciples, his mission would be expanded beyond the Jewish people to the Gentiles/Greeks. Transition into that next stage would only come through his death on the cross. Could Jesus have interpreted the request as the signal that the hour of transition had come?

As he has characteristically done so in the past, Jesus refers to himself as the “Son of Man”. This phrase was used well over 100 times in Ezekiel as God’s way of addressing the prophet (see also Job 25:6, Ps.8:4, Ps 80:17, Ps 144:3). It took on a special meaning, however, through Daniel 7:13 which refers to: “One like a son of man coming on the clouds of heaven…received dominion, glory and kingship, nations and peoples of every language serve him”. Perhaps understood initially as a symbol of a compassionate ruler to come in contrast to other world powers represented in Daniel by savage animals (bears, lions, etc.), by the time of Jesus “Son of Man” had come to be understood as referring to the Messiah to be sent by God.

As an indicator of Jesus’ teaching about himself which, short of claiming divinity, engendered the antagonism of the Jewish authorities, here is a brief summary of the phrase as used by Jesus in Matthew (the gospel most oriented to people of Jewish background): 8:20 the Son of Man has no place to lay his head / 9:6 that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins / 12:8 the Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath / 12:40 the Son of Man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth / 13:37 the one who sowed the good seed is the Son of Man / 13:41 the Son of Man will send out his angels / 16:13 Who do people say the Son of Man is? / 16:27 the Son of Man is going to come in his Father's glory with his angels / 17:12 the Son of Man is going to suffer at their hands / 19:28 when the Son of Man sits on his glorious throne, you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel / 20:28 the Son of Man did not come to be served but to serve / Mt 24:30 they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky with power and great glory / 24:44 the Son of Man will come at an hour when you do not expect him.

“Whoever loves his life loses it.” The word for love here is “philos”, love based on attraction and attachment. We are to love our life, but strive for “agape” love, the unattached perfection of divine love. Is it bad to feel an attachment to life in this world? Of course not. That was part of the battle that caused Jesus’ spirit to be so troubled.

The voice of God, heard previously at Jesus’ baptism and transfiguration, once again encourages Jesus toward the completion of his mission. The voice is also for Jesus’ disciples to know that glory awaits those who, like Jesus, pass through the martyr’s suffering and death.

Reading 1, Jeremiah 13:31-34 Jeremiah prophesied for God during the period leading up to the Babylonian Captivity. As it became obvious that people were not going to heed God’s warnings and that disaster was imminent, he began to give messages of hope which the people could hold onto in their time of exile. This text is one such prophecy. Unlike the old covenant written on stone, the new one will be written in the hearts of believers. The passage begins with the words “the days are coming”, commonly used in many a prophetic statement. It enhances Jesus’ statement in the gospel that “the hour has come” as Jesus will be that new covenant. All, including the Greeks mentioned in today’s gospel and whoever else from the diverse races and nations of the world who comes to believe in Jesus, “shall know the Lord”.

Reading II, Hebrews 5:7-9 At first reading, this text seems problematic. How can the author say Jesus’ supplications were heard when he ended up being crucified? If Jesus “learned obedience”, doesn’t that imply that he wasn’t obedient before? And what can it mean that Jesus “was made perfect”? Jesus was the Son of God. In what way could he be considered “imperfect”?

I tend to think of obedience as an action, “being obedient” or doing what one is told to do, but that’s not the core meaning of the word. “Obedience” is a combination of two Latin words: “ob” meaning “under” (here not in referenced to location but being “under” another’s authority) + “audire” meaning “to hear” (think of “audio”). The word in the Greek text, “hupakoen”, has the exact same meaning (“hupo” = under, “akouo” = to hear….”acuoustics”). Obedience begins with attentive listening. Through his prayer Jesus learned to listen attentively to the voice of God the Father, to discern the will of God and then carry it out.

As to Jesus being “made perfect”, the Greek word used refers not to perfection in contrast with imperfection, but rather to being finished as compared to being unfinished with some tasks still to be accomplished. Jesus’ mission was not complete until his saving death and resurrection through which he became the source of eternal salvation.

In what sense did God hear Jesus’ supplications? God didn’t save Jesus from dying but he did save him from death. Jesus’ ultimate prayer was that the will of God be done, and he was heard. God used his Son’s earthly life to show the world the depth of his love for us…and the victory over death in which we, too, will have a share.

Teach me, Lord, to listen intently to you in prayer, that I might accomplish all that you desire of me, bearing the crosses along the path you have prepared for me. When the day comes that, like Jesus, I must bear the ultimate cross of dying, let me share in his victory over death and share in his resurrection for all eternity.

4th Sunday of Lent B March 22, 2009

dennisdempsey — 2009-03-19T21:40:57-07:00

Gospel, John 3:14-21 During the Exodus the people complained about the food. So God led them into an area infested with a type of venomous snake whose bite caused a severe burning sensation and even death for some. The people realized there were worse things than bad food and asked God’s forgiveness for their complaining. God told Moses to “make a seraph and mount it on a pole. If anyone who has been bitten looks at it, he will recover (Numbers 21:8).” The instrument of suffering was converted into the sign of healing grace.

The image of Jesus suffering on the cross is converted into the ultimate sign of healing grace. The cross was the instrument but it is looking to Jesus that brings us the healing saving grace of God. That is why we Catholics generally prefer the crucifix with the image of Jesus present.

“Whoever believes in him will not be condemned.” Is there a difference between “believing” and “putting faith” in God? Most people think of “believing” as an act of intellectual acceptance. By contrast, “putting one’s faith” in God requires a deeper commitment of the whole person. Consider the use of the word “faith” in such texts as Paul writing about the “obedience of faith” (Romans 1:5) or “the just person shall live by faith” (Romans 1:17) or James writing that “faith without works is dead” (James 2:26). Here’s the catch…the English words “believe” and “have faith” are two different translations of the exact same word in Greek. In other words, Jesus is not saying in John 3 that all you need to give God is an intellectual assent but something much deeper. A Jewish commentary on the Hebrew scriptures which I consulted says “in the Hebrew bible ‘faith’ does not mean belief in a doctrine or a creed. It refers to trust and loyalty expressed through commitment and obedience.” I believe that would have been the understanding in John’s Jewish mind as he wrote the Greek text of his gospel: “Whoever obediently entrusts their life to God will not be condemned.”

“This is the verdict.” The Greek word “krisis” means “judgment” or “verdict”, as here translated, but I like the extra meaning just leaving leaving it as “crisis”. A verdict is given when the challenge is over, but a crisis is an ongoing challenge in focus like the energy crisis and the financial crisis. Here is the faith crisis: the light of God is here but people are preferring the darkness of their ungodly lifestyles and choices. The way out of the crisis is to recognize the crisis, make a decision for the light of God, and then live by that decision.

Reading 1, 2 Chronicles 36:14-16, 19-23

The Greek title for the two books of Chronicles is “paraleipomena”, meaning “things omitted” with reference to the histories recounted in the books of Samuel and Kings. The underlying history is the same, but the chronicler brings a specific focus which affects both his selection of material and his retrospect evaluation of his nation’s history. The temple of Jerusalem and the worship at the temple were of utmost importance to the chronicler. On a fuller reading of the books, one might note that all of Solomon’s serious defects and sins highlighted in Kings are completed glossed over. Solomon was the builder of the temple, for which the chronicler affords him a status of greatness surpassed only by his father David. Judah’s kings (no history is given regarding the kings of Judah’s sister nation of Israel) are all judged by their attitudes toward the temple and its worship. The books are thought to have been written toward the end of the 5th century before the birth of Christ. A political realist, the chronicler realizes his little nation would never be a world power but it could still be great as a people of God, focused on the temple and the temple worship of God.

The books of Chronicles end with this passage which recounts the destruction of the Jerusalem’s first temple and the hope for purity of temple worship in the new one, financially backed by the Persian government and endorsed by the decree of Cyrus. With a few brief periods of reform, worship of foreign gods had continued in the hills around Jerusalem and in other localities in the country throughout Jewish history until the destruction of Jerusalem in 587 BC. The land would “retrieve its lost Sabbaths with 70 years of exile in Babylonia before Cyrus of Persia conquered the Babylonian empire. He followed the rather enlightened policy of supporting small independent nations on his fringes and giving them reason to be his allies rather than dominating them under a harsh hand as had the Babylonians.

Reading II, Ephesians 2:4-10 Note how many times the word “grace” appears in this reading. There is a tendency to think of grace as some kind of spiritual currency. This attitude is, perhaps, more prevalent among Catholics as our tradition has used phrases like “storing up grace” as though putting money in a bank account. We have analyzed and dissected grace as actual grace, supernatural grace, sanctifying grace, sacramental grace, etc. That is okay for study as when we dissected frogs in biology lab in high school. The one thing we could see in the dissection, however, was life…the one thing that gave what we studied meaning as far as the frog was concerned. So it is with grace. The one thing that gives it meaning is a living relationship with God. The word “grace” from the Latin “gratia” shares a common root with the words “gratis” (free) and “gratuity” (free gift or tip). So, grace is a sharing in the life and blessings of God…a freely given gift…a statement of the strength of one’s relationship with God. May we always live in God’s good graces.

The last sentence of this reading indicates, as the note about the meaning of faith in the gospel reading, that our response to God is to be more than intellectual acknowledgement of God’s greatness. It requires living our faith by putting the grace of God into action, carrying out the good works that God has prepared in advance” for us to accomplish…God’s grace working in and through us.

3rd Sunday of Lent B March 15, 2009

dennisdempsey — 2009-03-11T18:16:53-07:00

Gospel, John 2:13-25 The first temple of Jerusalem was built by Solomon on the threshing floor of Araunah the Jebusite, the highest part of the hill of Ophel, where David had constructed an altar. That temple had been despoiled by the Egyptians shortly after Solomon’s death, later plundered by Joash of Israel around 800 BC, and again in 597 BC by Nebuchadnezzar who had the temple burned and torn down prior to leading the Jewish people into captivity in 587 BC. That temple was rebuilt under the leadership of Ezra and Nehemiah in the post-exilic period. It was a slow process which met a lot of opposition from the Samaritans. Completed in 515 BC, it was profaned by Antiochus IV in 167 BC and subsequently purified and rededicated by Judas Maccabaeus in 164 BC, an event celebrated annually with the feast of Hanukkah. By the time of King Herod the Great, the temple mount (about 81,000 sq. ft.) was too small for the crowds of pilgrims coming to Jerusalem for the major celebrations. In the year 19 BC Herod began to reconstruct the temple and surrounding courts and colonnades, eventually expanding the platform of the mount with an extensive series of supporting arches to 1.55 million sq. ft. or 35.5 acres. Compare that to the field and stands at the Metrodome in Minneapolis at 415,000 sq. ft. and you get some idea of how many people would fit on the mount at one time. The major portion of the project was completed within ten years, but the finishing details of the adornments continued until 64 AD…only six years before it was destroyed by the Roman armies following a Jewish uprising. The temple has never been rebuilt since. Today the outer walls of Herod’s temple still exist (including the western or “wailing” wall) but the platform houses two Moslem mosques, al-Aqsa and the Dome of the Rock, built in the 7th century.

The largest area of the platform was called the Court of the Gentiles. It was open to anyone, Jew and non-Jew alike. The successive areas became more restrictive with the Court of Women (for Jews only), the Court of Israel (for Jewish men only), the Sanctuary (for priests only), and the Holy of Holies (into which only the high priest entered and then just once a year). The animals and moneychangers were located in the Court of the Gentiles. The area had been intended as a space where people could meet to pray or discuss scriptural interpretation with rabbis. It was in this space that Jesus would teach during the week prior to his death. Jesus desired to clear the area of the animals and the noise so as to return the space to its intended use.

One of the major activities at the Temple was animal sacrifice. Since the families represented by the 100,000 visitors to Jerusalem would all need lambs for their Passover dinners and many families would also be making other sacrificial offerings, there would be a great demand for animals. All Jewish males paid an annual temple tax of a half-shekel and most people gave their major contributions of the year for temple upkeep and support of widows, orphans and the poor (like Christmas and Easter collections in Christian churches today). Most of the coins they brought, however, could not be donated at the temple since it bore images of Caesar or some other king or god. Those coins had to be exchanged for coins without such images. There was, of course, a charge for doing so. The priests must have thought it a great service for all those visitors to be able to exchange money and purchase animals right there rather than bringing them through the crowds from the markets in the city below. They undoubtedly received a kick-back from the merchants who, because of their location, overcharged for exchanging money and for their animals (like food and beverages at the Metrodome). The synoptic gospels make reference to this with Jesus accusing them of turning the temple into a “den of thieves” (Mt. 21:13/Mk. 11:17/Lk .19:46).

Being challenged by angry priests as to his authority to act as he did (“what sign can you give us?”) he turns the discussion to himself as the temple of God that will be torn down and rebuilt in three days. The English word “temple” used throughout this section is actually used to translate two different Greek words. In the part in which of Jesus clearing the temple, the word is “heiron” which refers to the general area of the temple mount. In the discussion about Jesus as the temple, the word is “naos” which refers more specifically to the sanctuary.

Jesus is not just a place where God is present in a general way…he is the sanctuary where the presence of God resides. Jesus clears the temple area to restore it to its true purpose. Paul writes to the Corinthians: “Do you not know that you are the temple of God and that the Holy Spirit dwells in you (1 Cor 3:16)”, and again, “We are the temple of the living God (2 Cor 6:16)”. In both instances he uses the word “naos”. We are the sanctuary where Jesus has chosen to reside. As Jesus comes into this temple, will he find it truly oriented to the purpose for which God has created you and me? Will he find cause to do some clearing and cleaning? Jesus, cleanse this temple and restore it to the purpose for which you have created it.

Reading 1, Exodus 20:1-17 The commandments are listed in this text from Exodus and in Deuteronomy 5:6-21, but neither text indicates the number of commandments. The statement that there are ten commandments comes from references in Deuteronomy 4:13 (also repeated in Dt 10:4): “He proclaimed to you his covenant which he commanded you to keep, the ten commandments which he wrote on tablets of stone.” The number thus being determined, how do we determine exactly what the specific ten commandments might be? There are actually four variations. The Jewish, general Protestant, and Orthodox lists are the same for numbers three through ten, but differ on which statements are actually the commandments for the first two. The Catholic-Lutheran list joins the first two of the other lists as one commandment, then has the others offset by one (ex: Jewish 5th is Catholic 4th), getting ten by dividing the final commandment from the other lists into two.

In the Hebrew text the words “you” and “your” are always in the second person singular indicating that the commandments, while being God’s covenant with the full Israelite community, are meant for every person. The list not only teaches us how to live in community with God and one another. It also indicates that how we treat one another is of concern to God. Where our translation describes God as “jealous”, the Jewish translation uses the word “impassioned”. Whichever word is used, God is not indifferent. The marriage bond is the implied metaphor for the covenant of God with Israel to which God demands our loyalty and fidelity which pledging the same to us.

Does God “inflict punishment for their fathers' wickedness” on their descendants “down to the third and fourth generation”? As far as moral guilt, through Jeremiah 31:29-30 God limits the punishment to the one sinning. Nevertheless, people observed that conduct inevitably has an effect on succeeding generations. Children are affected and shaped by parents’ habits, way of life, education, place of living, how they handle stress or quarrels, etc. Abuse of alcohol, verbal and sexual abuse are behaviors that too often are “learned” and passed from parents to children. How else could people from centuries past interpret such things as other than God punishing descendants for the sins of their ancestors?

"Remember to keep holy the Sabbath day.” Many years ago I was blessed to be in Jerusalem where, on a Sabbath evening, I spent a couple hours walking through the Orthodox neighborhood of Meah Shearim. The streets into the neighborhood were barricaded. No cars would move in Meah Shearim until the Sabbath was over. It was a warm evening and the windows of the houses were open. No radios, TV’s or other electronic devices could be heard…just the sounds of families eating, conversing, singing and praying in house after house. I recall Jesus’ words (Mark 2:27), “The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath.” What a blessing for those families to spend such quality time together for a full day every week. The Sabbath rest was an amazing proclamation of worker’s rights. No other society of its day gave everyone, down to the lowest employees and slaves, a mandatory day off each week and an opportunity to remember that whatever we achieve through our own efforts is secondary to the saving word of God.

Reading II, 1 Corinthians 1:22-25 Paul comments on the cultural differences between Jews and Greeks regarding what might help them believe in something. “Jews demand signs”. In today’s gospel the temple priests ask Jesus what sign he can give them proving his authority to drive the animals and moneychangers out (John 2:18). Later in the Bread of Life discourse, people ask Jesus (John 6:30), “What sign can you do that we may see and believe in you?” This was after he had healed many people and brought about the multiplication of loaves and fishes. The Greeks, on the other hand, “look for wisdom”. They loved philosophy and debate. But the message of Jesus was a stumbling block…neither the sign the Jews wanted nor the logic that made sense to the Greeks. What do I look for as proof…what do I need from Jesus to truly believe and entrust my life to God…so as not to relegate God to the sidelines of my life as a lower priority?

Second Sunday of Lent B March 8, 2009

dennisdempsey — 2009-03-03T13:01:59-08:00

Gospel, Mark 9:2-10 People in ancient times believed the world to be stationary. The place of God or gods was up above, controlling what happened down below like a puppeteer with puppets or a child with playhouse moving furniture and dolls about. To get closer to God or gods, people went up on mountains, natural or artificial (high altars or pyramids). Such was the case with Abraham going up on Mt. Moriah, Moses at Mt. Sinai, Elijah on Mt. Carmel and also Mt. Sinai, and Jesus in this gospel passage.

The figures of Moses and Elijah, both of whom had gone up mountains to converse with God, accompany Jesus in this transfiguration scene. They represent the Law (Moses) and the Prophets (Elijah), the two main branches of God’s revelation to the Jewish people. How Peter ascertained the identity of Jesus’ visitors, we don’t know. He may have had an intuitive sense of their identity or had figured it out from listening to the conversation.

Why build tents? The most common interpretations of this passage suggest that Peter suggested tents so that they figures of Moses and Elijah would remain for some time…that it was a way of giving dignity to each of the figures to have their own tent…that the Jewish way of entering into an intimate conversation was to meet within a tent. The word “tabernacle” refers to a tent. The prayer shawl (“tallit” or “tallis”) with which Jewish men customarily place over their head during prayer is symbolic of entering a tent to converse with God.

The voice of God the Father speaks to the apostles, confirming Jesus’ identity as manifested visually in the transfiguration. The Father had previously spoken a somewhat similar message at Jesus’ baptism, directed to the audience in Matthew (3:17) but to Jesus in Mark (1:11) and Luke (3:22). To the words spoken at Jesus’ baptism, the Father adds, “Listen to him.” This phrase takes on special meaning as we recall the presence of Moses and Elijah there on the mountain with Jesus. As the Jewish people had been directed to listen to Moses, Elijah and the other prophets as representatives of God, now the word of Jesus is given a priority as God’s most authoritative voice.

On Jesus' command the three apostles will not tell the others about what took place on the mountain, but the restriction did not extend to conversations among the three of them. How often would Peter, James and John discuss those and other events such as the raising of the daughter of Jairus (Luke 8:51-56) to which they were privy.

The Greek word translated as “transfiguration” is “metamorphosis”, a word which elicits thoughts of a caterpillar emerging out of its cocoon as a beautiful butterfly. In zoology, metamorphosis technically refers to a major change of form of the same being (egg - larva - pupa - adult). The (temporary) metamorphosis of Jesus was from his natural human body to his glorified body.

As with Peter, James and John, none of us can fully comprehend the reality of God. We receive glimpses, enough for us to continue on with day-to-day life in this world with faith and hope beyond our comprehension based on Jesus’ word.

Reading 1, Genesis 22:1-2,9a,10-13,15-18 What was Abraham’s test? First of all, it was a test of obedience to God’s command and making God’s will his priority. Would Abraham do what was totally contrary to the wishes of his heart to fulfill God’s command? Second, it was a test of Abraham’s hope. In an age when people had not yet come to believe in eternal life after physical death, the only way one “lived on” was through one’s offspring. Isaac was Abraham’s only hope of having offspring through his wife Sarah.

Along with the testing, God used this dramatic incident to teach Abraham a profound truth about God. Many cultures of the ancient world believed that, to please or appease their gods, human sacrifice was required. The choice of sacrificial victims varied. Some offered young virgins for their purity or soldiers captured in war for their bravery. In Abraham’s cultural background, or in religious practices of neighboring cultures, the victims may have been the first-born sons and daughters. Abraham may have hoped that his God would be different, but sadly accepted the fact that God wanted the same sacrifice as other gods. By staying Abraham’s hand and telling him to sacrifice a ram in place of his son, we see the transition from human sacrifice to animal sacrifice as a symbolic substitute. In the story of the Exodus, Israelite first-born are spared by the blood of the sacrificial lamb. The presentation of Jewish first-born children at the Temple of Jerusalem was a buying them back from God with the animal replacement. God taught Abraham that He is not like the conceptualizations of gods prevalent in other societies…that God is a personal, loving God who will not require human blood sacrifice to be appeased.

Reading II, Romans 8:31b-34 Abraham was willing to offer his first-born son to God. Paul may have been thinking of Abraham as he wrote to the Romans that God gave his first-born son as a sacrificial offering out of love for us. We call to mind that well-known text from John 3:16 that “God so loved the world that he gave his only Son.” With such great love, will God then turn and be against us?

First Sunday of Lent B March 1, 2009

dennisdempsey — 2009-02-25T13:26:35-08:00

Gospel, Mark 1:12-15 When I was a kid, professional boxing from Madison Square Garden dominated Friday night viewing on the “Gillette Cavalcade of Sports”. Managers and trainers would escort their man down the aisle and into the ring. The boxer typically wore a flashy robe with his name emblazoned across the back. He had trained for this fight and was there to face his opponent in battle.

In today’s gospel, the Spirit drives Jesus out into the desert….in Matthew and Luke specifically for Jesus be tempted by the devil. The image of the fighter comes to mind. The Spirit was guiding and preparing Jesus, not to run away from the devil but to face him and be victorious in the battle. The Spirit accompanied Jesus as the manager leads and guides the boxer. Jesus will square off against the workings of the devil a number of times during his ministry. We read of one example a few weeks ago in the account of Jesus casting the evil spirit out of a man in the synagogue at Capernaum. The text said that Jesus faced the spirit directly and asserted his authority. Jesus was ready to do battle and to reclaim territory for the Kingdom of God. He invites each person to enter that kingdom by repentance (renunciation of the reign of sin in one’s life) and belief in the good news of the gospel.

Reading 1, Genesis 9:8-15 The story of Noah comes from ancient traditions retold within the symbolism of the Jewish religion to express the covenant of God with his people. A covenant was a legal pact signed by the parties. Here God “signs” the covenant with the rainbow. Is there any natural phenomenon more beautiful than a rainbow? Today we can give scientific explanation to this phenomenon, but such was not the case in ancient times. As splendid as a rainbow is for us to gaze on today, how much more so would it have been for people of ancient times…especially when imbued with symbolic significance as an eternal testimony to God’s constancy and mercy. Jewish Sages taught people to recite a blessing whenever they saw a rainbow: “Praised are you, Lord our God, Sovereign of the universe who remembers the covenant, is faithful to it and keeps promises.” No matter how hard it may rain, the rain will eventually stop and the sun will come out again, just as God is always present and will give his blessing for all who weather the storms of life.

Reading II, 1 Peter 3:18-22 This passage follows from the previous verse (17) from Peter’s letter: “It is better to suffer for doing good, if that be the will of God, than for doing evil.” Jesus suffered for that good might be victorious over evil. Rather than giving in to evil through anger, resentment or vengeance, Jesus accepted his cross with love and forgiveness, thus winning the spiritual victory through his suffering and death. Reference is made here to the account of Noah in which evil is symbolically put to death and washed away in the flood for the eight members of Noah’s family who passed through in the ark. This becomes a prefiguring of those who pass through the waters of baptism to salvation in Jesus Christ.

Seventh Sunday in Ordinary Time B February 22, 2009

dennisdempsey — 2009-02-17T08:17:30-08:00

Gospel, Mark 2:1-12 This is one of my favorite Gospel texts, encompassing such a variety of characters and so visual I find it easy to place myself in the scene. Jesus has returned once again to the home of Simon Peter, to the same room in which he had previously healed many of the townspeople following casting out of the evil spirit during the synagogue service.

The house was built in the typical style of the time…an enclosing outside wall along which the interior rooms were built. In Capernaum, walls were constructed of uncut basalt stones balanced with small rocks and pebbles, then plastered with mud and whitewashed. Ceiling beams were spaced about every two feet, crisscrossed with a cover of branches and reeds held together with mud and a final layer of smooth clay mud on top. There on the roof people dried fruits and grains and even slept up there on nights when the poorly ventilated rooms were too hot and stuffy.

The four men who brought their paralytic friend to Jesus knew how such roofs were built…and disassembled when needs be. It was their faith that Jesus noted, not just that of their paralytic friend. I can imagine him looking at them, a smile acknowledging their ingenuity in getting their friend before him…and them smiling back in recognition. I am sure that, after the paralytic was healed and the crowds dispersed, they would get to work repairing the roof and spending some time with Jesus, home-owner Peter, and the rest of the disciples.

Jesus forgives the paralytic’s sins before the physical healing. Some years ago a friend who participated in a healing prayer ministry told me of a person who had come numerous times for prayer but had not received the healing she desired. One of the team members, sensing that God wanted to heal her, asked if she was holding onto any resentment toward another person. She acknowledged that she was. They began praying for the grace for her to forgive, and when she was finally able to do so, she received the physical healing following the spiritual one. We are a unity of physical-emotional-spiritual and it is not surprising that illness and healing in the physical realm be related to spiritual illness and healing.

In the order in which Jesus healed, Jesus also wanted to give his naysayers evidence that he had the authority to forgive sins. They weren’t convinced. I wonder if their lack of spiritual openness may have also resulted in a little arthritis or indigestion.

Reading 1, Isaiah 43:18-19,21-22,24b-25 Chapters 40 to 55 of Isaiah, often called Deutero-Isaiah, are gene4rally attrtibuted to an anonymous poet, a later disciple in the tradition of Isaiah, who prophesied toward the end of the Babylonian exile. From this section come the positive words of encouragement reviving the Israelites’ hope in the “something new” that God is preparing for their future. The sins of the past are forgiven. The people had learned and repented. Now God could begin to refashion his people. How many times has the cycle of “living without focus on God – falling into difficult times for living by our own will – recognizing the basic error of our ways – repenting and turning to God – receiving forgiveness and rising to newness with God” been repeated in the history of the world…or in our own personal histories, for that matter? With God there is always forgiveness and hope for those who turn to him.

Reading II, 2 Corinthians 1:18-22 The words in this passage don’t flow very well in English…I’m not sure how well they came across in the original Greek. Read it in context with the preceding verses. Paul had previously told the Corinthians that he was going to visit them on his way to and from Macedonia. Apparently, plans changed and Paul was not able to do so. Some members of the highly-factionalized Corinthian community, perhaps a bit smitten by the strong language of Paul’s previous letter to the Corinthians, probably took the occasion to challenge the trustworthiness of Paul’s words and, perhaps, character. Although he hadn’t been able to visit them as he had said, Paul nonetheless asserts the integrity of his person and his mission…not “yes” and “no” any more than Jesus had been “yes” and “no”. Specific situations of life may be beyond our control, but Paul was true to Jesus in every moment. That’s how he could write, as we read in the second reading last week (1 Cor. 11:1): “Imitate me as I imitate Christ.” Although we may not be as constant in our following Christ, more like the Corinthians than Paul, God takes us and transforms our “Amen” into a pure offering and newly bestows the Holy Spirit upon us.

Sixth Sunday in Ordinary Time B February 15, 2009

dennisdempsey — 2009-02-09T11:49:33-08:00

Gospel, Mark 1:40-45 See the commentary after today’s first reading regarding leprosy and Jewish understanding of both cause and cure. The leper in this account was rather bold, coming up so close to Jesus rather than keeping his distance and calling out “unclean!” OR he had such confidence in Jesus’ healing power (as clearly indicated in his statement) that he knew Jesus was immune from catching the disease.

It gives us cause to consider what our confidence level is as we approach God in prayer or follow what we sense to be God’s will but don’t really know where it is going. You may have read the account passed around by email of the person who had a sense from God to go buy a gallon of milk, then to bring it to a certain house. Feeling rather embarrassed to go up to a strange house to give them a gallon of milk, he discovers that the family had no money and needed milk for their baby. Whether an actual happening or an inspirational fable, I don’t know, but it illustrates the point…we do best to follow what we sense to be God’s will and let God surprise us as God takes care of a plan beyond our understanding.

Regardless of Jesus admonition to the opposite, who could blame the former leper for telling everyone about what Jesus had done for him? Wouldn’t it be wonderful if we were all such good evangelizers, sharing with others how we have experienced the goodness of God in our lives? Jesus was concerned both for the number of people who would descend upon him seeking favors as well as their stopping at that rather than going on from the healings to become hearers of his message. Well, the resurrected Jesus doesn’t get tired out from crowds, but he may still be concerned that people stop at asking favors rather than going on to be hearers of the word.

Reading 1, Leviticus 13:1-2,44-46 The Greek word “lepis” means a scale or flake and is the base word for “leprosy”. The symptoms described in this text from Leviticus describe a variety of skin blotches or lesions, but although the Hebrew word tzara-at is translated as “leprosy”, it does not share the major symptoms of Hansen’s disease, what today in a more limited scope is referred to as leprosy. Hansen’s disease exhibits a puffiness of the skin rather than a dry flaky condition. Only 5% of the general population is susceptible to the bacteria which causes Hansen’s disease which is only contagious for a few days after treatment is administered.

You have probably heard the term “holistic healing” based on the belief that the physical, mental and spiritual dimensions of the person are closely interconnected both in the development of illness and recovery. As clearly seen in the book of Job as well as numerous other biblical texts, common Jewish thought was that physical suffering is the result of sin and physical well-being the reward for doing God’s will. Leprosy was considered a physical manifestation of a spiritual illness. In that context it is not surprising that the Jewish priest was both the spiritual and medical authority of his community and the person to whom the leper would go both for diagnosis as well as reintegration into the community.

The leper was to cry out, “Impure, impure!”on seeing anyone approach. According to the Talmud the leper does this not only to warn others of possible contagion but also to elicit compassion and prayers on one’s behalf. It was the responsibility of the community to offer support and prayer rather than shun or ignore the afflicted. Nevertheless, given the belief that the leprosy was the result of sin, there would exist a tendency to judge and wonder how the leper had offended God to deserve such an illness.

Reading II, 1 Corinthians 10:31-11:1 This follows on a discussion of whether or not to eat meat and vegetables purchased in the general marketplace or served at table. Sometimes food was brought to a temple as a thanks to the gods prior to being sold in the marketplace. Paul had told people not to be concerned about this unless someone knew for sure that it had been offered in sacrifice. In that case Paul advised not to eat the meat or vegetables, not because it was tainted but out of respect for the conscience of the person who complained (1 Cor. 10:23-30). On that principle, Paul tells us to be sensitive to others and avoid giving offense, trying to do all for the glory of God.

I particularly like the final verse of this selection. The scriptural reference is full of 1’s and the English text is full of I’s…even more so in an earlier translation which I memorized, “Imitate me as I imitate Christ.” One might, at first, think Paul is boasting. Not so, he is challenging both his audience and himself. He is to imitate Christ, and he gives his readers permission to hold him to that high standard. I am mindful of a familiar story from the life of Mother Teresa of Calcutta on being interviewed by a reporter, “Mother Teresa, people say you are a living saint. What do you think about that?” She responded, “Isn’t that what we are all supposed to be?” We are all to be imitators of Christ and challenge ourselves to be an example of such for others.

Fifth Sunday in Ordinary Time B February 8, 2009

dennisdempsey — 2009-01-24T19:05:24-08:00

This is being sent out a week early since I'll be visiting our sister parish in Mexico for ten days.

Gospel, Mark 1:29-39 This took place in the synagogue at Capernaum. As I mentioned last week, Capernaum had a population of around 1,500 people, nearly all Jewish. Jesus had cast an evil spirit out of a man in the synagogue. It was the Sabbath when Jewish people were not allowed to do unnecessary work, so no one had asked Jesus to perform any healings right after the service. Instead, they went to their homes, in every one of which what Jesus had done in the synagogue was the topic of discussion. If he could cast out an evil spirit, people thought, he could surely heal grandma or Uncle Jacob. The Jewish day ended at sunset. People waited. After sunset they headed for Peter’s house, perhaps surprised that everyone else in town had the same idea. These were the first healing that Jesus did in Capernaum.

Glance through the gospels and you’ll find a great number of healings recounted in the four gospels took place in that village. Jesus went out on several tours of the surrounding region, but always returned to Capernaum to find both townspeople and those who had come to await his return gathering in great numbers. The people of Capernaum understandably wanted Jesus to stay around. In addition to physical healings, how else could a person with such God-given power bless their lives? Lots of people were unemployed and didn’t know how they were going to feed their families and take care of their basic needs. Jesus met lots of needs, but how many people only saw him as a miracle worker rather than a prophet and teacher of the ways of God? How many crossed the bridge from favors received to faith in Jesus as spiritual guide? Much later in his public ministry, we’ll hear some of Jesus’ frustration expressed right there in Capernaum after crossing from the other side of the Sea of Galilee where 5,000 people had filled their stomachs on bread and fish: “Amen, amen, I say to you, you are looking for me not because you saw signs but because you ate the loaves and were filled (John 6:26)”. Jesus’ desire to move on to other villages carries a hint of this tension he will experience throughout his ministry.

Reading 1, Job 7:1-4,6-7 Popular logic in Old Testament times was that people who observed God’s commandments prospered and sinners suffered. So, after the upright Job lost nearly everything and was in physical anguish, three of his best friends came to encourage him to confess and repent of whatever he had done so God could restore him to health and prosperity. This passage is part of his response to the comments of Eliphaz, the first of the three friends to speak.

How many of the people who would come to Jesus, including those who came to Peter’s house on the evening recounted in our gospel reading, wondered for what sins God was punishing them with sickness and infirmity. The apostles even put credence in the sin-suffering logic, asking Jesus with reference to a blind man, “Who was it who sinned, him or his parents, that he was born blind?” Jesus gave no credence to their way of thinking, responding, “Neither, it is so the works of God might be made visible through him” (John 9:2-3). The apostles should have read the book of Job more closely.

Reading II, 1 Corinthians 9:16-19, 22-23 Are those who preach the gospel and pastor churches entitled to a salary? Certainly, they deserve to receive recompense for their ministry just as their predecessors from the time of Paul did, but people feel uncomfortable about the purity of a preacher’s faith if it seems the preaching is more motivated by the desire to make money from it. Apparently that was a concern in the time of Paul as well, since he gives such emphasis to the fact that he supports his own ministry and does not live off people’s donations. Paul mentions this to assure people of the truth of the gospel he preached and the authenticity of Paul’s fervor in preaching…so true and important that Paul was offering it “free of charge”. Paul found great personal satisfaction in this as well…the recompense he seeks is not money but a part in the very gospel he proclaimed.

Fourth Sunday in Ordinary Time B February 1, 2009

dennisdempsey — 2009-01-24T18:20:29-08:00

Gospel, Mark 1:21-28 Capernaum became the headquarters of Jesus’ public ministry. A prominent fishing village on the Sea of Galilee with a population of around 1,500, Capernaum was also the home of five of Jesus’ apostles (Peter, Andrew, James, John and Matthew). According to archaeological evidence, the town had a long breakwater (waves coming off the lake during big storms could reach eight feet in height) and several piers with moorings for fishing boats. Houses were constructed of black basalt rock commonly found in the region, roughly shaped if worked at all, built into walls using pebbles for leveling the stones, and mortared over with mud. An outside wall would be built enclosing a property and individual rooms constructed inside along the wall around courtyards where they cooked, cared for animals, and planted a few grapevines. Several related families might have lived in such a compound, forming several smaller courtyards and room arrangements within the larger outer wall, a way of building still common in many countries of the world today.

The house thought to be Peter’s house, based on archaeological evidence at the site run by the Franciscans, was the second such compound in from the sea and breakwater. Simon’s mother-in-law lived there and whatever other family Peter had including Andrew, as well as families of other relatives or partners in the fishing syndicate. Jesus took up residence there during his time in Capernaum. The synagogue, the only building in the village from that period with shaped stones, was about 150 feet further up the same street that passed by Peter’s home. In the synagogue service, an official of the synagogue (later in the gospel we will hear about Jairus, one of the officials at the Capernaum synagogue) invited someone, usually a guest or noted person if present, to do the reading. That person would then be given the first word in saying what he thought the reading meant. The others present would then enter the discussion, giving their opinions on the passage’s meaning. Jewish men were accustomed to quote various rabbis when giving their interpretations. Jesus taught with “authority”, meaning he taught both with power and as the “author” of his interpretation of the meaning of the scripture. Jesus brought that same authority to his action in casting the spirit out of the man. Jesus, Son of God, is “author” of all good for us as he was that day in Capernaum.

Reading 1, Deuteronomy 18:15-20 To what does Moses refer when he speaks of “a prophet like me”? The word “prophet” means “one who speaks for another”. The true prophet does not speak, then, for himself and certainly not in the name of some other god. Moses was extremely careful to consult the Lord in everything he said relevant to his leadership and prophetic role. It was clear that the “author” was God. This passage is selected to highlight Jesus’ speaking and acting with authority in the gospel reading today.

Reading II, 1 Corinthians 7:32-35 Paul was not anti-marriage. In the previous verses Paul had advised the Corinthians to be living for an imminent return of Jesus, not with a “business-as-usual” attitude. He believed that the normal responsibilities of caring for a wife and family could cause anxieties and compromise the attention and focus one might otherwise give to God. Why be intent on such things if Jesus would be returning before the kids were even old enough to go to school? Had Paul known that the second coming was not so imminent, would he have been less emphatic in his encouragement to remain single? Maybe.

Third Sunday in Ordinary Time B January 25, 2009

dennisdempsey — 2009-01-20T14:55:07-08:00

Gospel, Mark 1:14-20 Last Sunday we heard about the call of Peter from the gospel of John. This week we read the better-known account from Mark. Herod Antipas had been tetrarch of Galilee since shortly after the death of his father, King Herod the Great, in 4 B.C. Building the city of Tiberius, his jewel on the Sea of Galilee, and maintaining a full retinue of government officials, soldiers and construction workers required a substantial income. Herod’s government licensed fishing rights on the Sea of Galilee to fishermen who partnered together to form a syndicate large enough to make purchase of the license feasible. I have read that, for the best fishing techniques, two boats were needed for stretching the nets. Such boats were expensive, but business loans could be arranged with Herod’s government (a second source of income). Each day’s catch was also taxed according to the take (a third source of income). They would need a minimum of eight workers to help with fishing each night and hire others for during the day when the boats were used to transport cargo and passengers around the lake. By keeping the boats busy all the time, they could make ends meet. It is possible that Peter was head of the syndicate and title holder of at least one of the boats. If that were the case, leaving the nets behind was more complex than pulling a little runabout up on the shore. Peter would have had to figure out how to keep the business going, pay expenses, take care of his workers, and delegate out responsibilities while he, his brother Andrew and friends James and John dedicated their lives and much of their time to becoming disciples of Jesus. The reality of how Peter would have had to organize his responsibilities with priority to following Jesus is a good example for us today who must learn to do the same given the various responsibilities of our lives.

Reading 1, Jonah 3:1-5, 10 Nineveh, the capital of Assyria, was located on the west bank of the Tigris River opposite modern-day Mosul, the city in Iraq of which we have heard so much in recent years. It was a large and beautiful city with many temples and palaces of the kings of Assyria. The book of Tobit in the Old Testament places Tobit as a Jew deported from Israel during the Assyrian conquest of that nation in 721 B.C. to Nineveh where he was eventually put in charge of purchases for the household of the king, a rather favorable and lucrative position for a deportee. Nineveh was eventually destroyed by the Babylonians in 621 B.C. and never rebuilt. The story of the conversion of Nineveh was likely written to bring home to Jewish people that, if a major world city like Nineveh could repent and do the will of God on the word of a single prophet, why don’t they, the people of tiny Judah, do the same, get rid of their petty nationalism and rejoice that the Lord God is lord of the whole earth, not just their small country.

Reading II, 1 Corinthians 7:29-31 Paul advises the Corinthians to not go about life with a “business-as-usual” attitude. What is deemed a reason for joy in the short-term may, in the bigger picture, be an obstacle to fuller blessings and vice versa, suffering in the present moment may be a source of blessing in the bigger picture of time (reminiscent of the Beatitudes in Matthew 5:3-12).

Second Sunday in Ordinary Time B January 18, 2009

dennisdempsey — 2009-01-13T20:11:08-08:00

Gospel, John 1:35-42 We read a lot about John the Baptist during Advent and again at the Baptism of Christ. I suggested that John the Baptist received so much attention in the gospels because a significant number of people throughout the regions the apostles were evangelizing had received the baptism of John, either directly at his hand or through his disciples. The evangelists used the person and ministry of John as a bridge to that of Jesus. The fact that the fourth gospel, traditionally believed to have been written at a much later date than the other three, gave so much attention to John, even to having him state directly of Jesus, “Behold, the Lamb of God”, indicates how strong and enduring was the effect of John’s ministry. In the gospels of Matthew and Mark, Peter first meets Jesus while putting nets in order down at the lakefront, at which time Jesus calls Peter to follow him. Luke presents a similar lakefront call, but has the initial encounter take place following the synagogue service with Jesus going to Peter’s house to heal his mother-in-law. John’s gospel gives a different scenario with Andrew, previously a disciple of John the Baptist, coming to Jesus first and then bringing Peter to Jesus. His question on meeting Jesus, “Where are you staying?” let Jesus know Andrew wanted to spend more time with him than just a quick interview on the spot. The mention of it being about “four in the afternoon”, literally “the tenth hour”, would have special significance if they were approaching the beginning of the Sabbath which began at sunset or around the twelfth hour. Since Jewish people were not to do unnecessary work on the Sabbath, Andrew and his companion would spend the day in prayer and conversation with Jesus…a wonderful encouragement for us to honor the Day of the Lord by spending time with Jesus in prayer /conversation. Regarding the name used for Simon Peter, “Cephas” is the Hebrew word for “rock”, the same as “Petros” in Greek.

Reading 1, 1 Samuel 3:3b-10,19 Eli and his sons functioned as priests at the sanctuary in Shiloh at which the tabernacle with the ark of the Lord was kept (the ark would not be transferred to Jerusalem until the time of King David). Hannah, a childless woman getting along in years, had gone to Shiloh to petition the Lord for a child, promising that her child would be dedicated to the Lord’s service. Eli, observing her emotional sobbing, thought her to be drunk and reprimanded her. On learning what was actually going on, he blessed her. Hannah conceived and gave birth to Samuel. After he was weaned, Hannah and her husband brought the boy and turned him over to Eli’s care and direction. Thus, Samuel, as a young boy, helped Eli at the sanctuary. The good-hearted boy must have been a good companion and solace to Eli whose heart was grieved by his own sons who had “respect neither for the Lord nor for the priests’ duties toward the people” (1 Samuel 2:12). In this beautiful recounting of little Samuel learning to recognize the voice of the Lord, we all would do well to pray in the words old Eli taught the youth: “Speak, Lord, for your servant is listening.”

Reading II, 1 Corinthians 6:13c-15a, 17-20 What does it mean that “the Lord is for the body”? In the first part of verse 13 (not included in this reading) Paul refers to a popular saying of the time: “food for the belly and the belly for food”, a rationale for indulging in feasting and partying…the belly’s purpose…if it tastes good, why not enjoy it. Undoubtedly some people applied the same logic to sexual license…the body for sexual immorality. Paul corrects that logic with a similar juxtaposition of terms as in the saying about food and belly: “the body is for the Lord and the Lord for the body.” Now the saying makes sense. The purpose of the body, as God has created it, is to give honor to the Lord. Elsewhere in 1 Corinthians, Paul refers to the body as the “temple of the Lord” (3:16-17 and here quoted in 6:19). The Lord is for the body as its creator who will “change our lowly body to conform with his glorified body” (Phil. 3:21). So, glorify God by using the body for the purpose for which it was created.

Response to a reader's comment: "Just to be clear, Fr. Dempsey, you are instructing readers to accept as a historical fact Herod's dispatching of a specific grouping of 'Magi'--is that correct?"

The reader brings up a very good point regarding the historicity of scriptural accounts. What actually took place? Did things happen exactly in the manner in which they are recorded in the bible? Did some texts undergo significant editing? Was some material included in the gospel accounts which did not actually take place? Take, for example, the geneologies of Jesus presented in Matthew and Luke. They are markedly different in both the names included and the number of generations. At least one of the two is not historically accurate. It seems probable that Matthew intentionally edited the list to arrange names in groups of 14 (2 x 7, the number symbolic of perfection for Jewish people) to teach theological truths about Jesus, truths more important to him than scientifically accurate history. Is the gospel, then, not true? Better to look at the intent of the author and seek out the theological truths presented. The four gospels often present the same event in different formats or changing details, so it is evident that the authors felt a certain editorial licence to rework the details of an event to better get across theological points. Is it possible that that extended as well to insertion of events that didn't actually take place? Consider the infancy narratives in Luke. If shepherds had told everyone about the angels' appearance and identifying the child, would not someone have remembered it years later? What about Jesus spending three days in the temple impressing the teachers of the Law with his questions and answers...would they not have noted the event or at least have contacted a rabbi from the Nazareth area to do some follow-up? Some scholars believe these accounts are purely theological in nature, not actual historical facts, written as a sort of children's version of the adult story of Jesus. In the case of the magi, we know the group did exist and advised kings, even the Roman emperor on at least one occasion. We know that King Herod was paranoid and had had members of his own family put to death. The magi could have come, and King Herod was capable of attempting to have the competition killed, be it a very tiny baby. Nevertheless, there are no extra-biblical accounts of the visit, and it is logical to assume that someone would have noted the news brought by the magi for future reference. As the reader noted, many scholars believe this to be a purely theological rather than historical account, perhaps a way of emphasizing that Jesus came for people of all nations and backgrounds. Having Joseph and Mary go down to Egypt, then, could be interpreted in the same way since there would have been no reason to go to Egypt...to have Jesus come out of Egypt as with the account of the exodus. My intention with this or any other brief commentary is not to "instruct you to accept as historical fact" the visit of the magi or any other aspect of scripture for that matter. Applying the criteria of outside evidence from extra-biblical sources, some people choose not to accept the resurrection of Jesus as true historical fact. Although reference is made to people believing in the resurrection of Jesus, it is not recorded anywhere other than in the gospels. In my limited scope here, I try to give a bit of background to things mentioned in the readings, at times as in this case without focusing on the question of where things fall on the spectrum from verifiable historical fact to strictly theological overlay. How you choose to interpret texts and what you choose to believe is up to you.

Baptism of the Lord B January 11, 2009

dennisdempsey — 2009-01-04T14:50:13-08:00

Gospel, Mark 1:7-11 All three persons of the Trinity are present here. The Father speaks directly to Jesus (in Matthew’s gospel the voice speaks to the other people present saying “THIS is my beloved Son”). The Spirit does not depart (although perhaps no longer visible), for the next verse tell us that “at once the Spirit drove him out into the desert”. The descent of the Spirit, then, was not merely symbolic but empowering. But wasn’t the Spirit already with Jesus? Consider for a moment the text of Philippians 2:6-7. When the Son of God became man, he set aside all the divine gifts and attributes while retaining the divine identity. As a child he had to learn to walk and to speak. He had to study and learn to read and write as did other children. He “grew in wisdom” (Luke 2:52). He had to pray, even during the years of his public ministry, to discern the Father’s will. It seems that, having taken on human nature, the Son of God as Jesus only received from the Father what he needed at each moment to complete his mission…no more, no less. Some theologians believe that Jesus only became aware of his identity at the moment of his baptism (not that he received divinity at the time…merely became aware of it). Regardless of when Jesus became aware of his divine identity, the baptismal moment gave him both clarity and power for what lay ahead.

Reading 1, Isaiah 42:1-4, 6-7 This is one of four Servant-of-the-Lord oracles in Isaiah, the others being 49:1-7, 50:4-11 (although it does not use the word “servant” in this passage), 52:13-53:12. We Christians see those oracles fulfilled in the person of Jesus Christ. The emphasis in this passage is on the bestowal of the Spirit of God which we associate with the descent of the Spirit upon Jesus the day of his baptism.

Reading II, Acts 10:24-28 Cornelius is described in Acts 10:2 as “God-fearing”. This term referred to Gentiles who associated with Jewish people, accepting many of their beliefs and joining in synagogue prayer but had not actually become Jewish by circumcision. Cornelius’ entire family were God-fearing, and joined the Jewish people in prayer and was generous in giving alms to the Jewish community. He was a Roman centurion at Caesarea, a beautiful city constructed by King Herod on the coast of the Mediterranean Sea with the largest man-made harbor in the world at the time. During the ministry of Jesus, the main Roman garrison in the region was stationed there. Paul sailed there at the end of his second and third missionary journeys and later spent two years imprisoned there awaiting trial. Cornelius was told in a vision to send for Peter who was at Joppa about 35 miles south along the Mediterranean coast. Although Cornelius was God-fearing, he was still considered a Gentile, and Jews were not permitted to enter a Gentile home. Just prior to the arrival of the delegation from Cornelius, Peter had received a vision telling him not to consider anything unclean that God has made clean. He realized that the vision was meant for him to enter Cornelius’ house. While he was speaking, they received the Holy Spirit, reason for Peter to baptize them…an act which he would have to defend before the more conservative disciples of Christ who considered the new way to be a branch of the Jewish faith and bound to the full Mosaic law. Peter’s baptism of God-fearers opened the door for Paul to do the same on his missionary journeys.

Epiphany B January 4, 2009

dennisdempsey — 2008-12-30T10:39:20-08:00

Gospel, Matthew 2:1-12

The Magi were not themselves kings but, rather, a priestly group who sought knowledge from every imaginable source (the word “magic” is derived from their practices)and the ability to apply that knowledge to predict and prepare for the future. One of those sources of information came from watching the stars. According to the popular cosmology of the time, people believed the earth to be covered by a dome, across which God or gods caused the heavenly bodies to move in patterns thought to contain coded messages. Such was the logic behind astrology. From a science acceptable in our day, astronomers tell us that in 6 B.C. Magi in the region of Assyria and Babylonia would have been able to see Jupiter (which represented royalty) pass through Aries (representative of the Jewish people, perhaps due to their history as shepherds). The Magi would have interpreted this as a divine sign of the birth of a great Jewish king. On reporting their findings, their own king may have sent them as his representatives bearing gifts, a common way from kings of past to build alliances and secure peaceful relations.

King Herod ruled as King of Judah from 37 to his death in 4 B.C. Tyrannical and suspicious to the point of paranoia, he had all actual and presumed opposition eliminated including his wife and several other members of his own family. He built fortresses (including Herodium and Masada) around the country as places he could escape in case of a popular uprising. I have read that he had a list drawn up naming those most popular in every town and city of Judah with a standing order that they be killed in case of his own death…a unique sort of life insurance policy. His soldiers, however, refused to carry out the order when he did die. Such a person would be capable of commandeering soldiers to kill babies in Bethlehem on the possibility of one being a future king. No wonder both he and the people of Jerusalem, for different reasons, were troubled at the news brought by the Magi.

Placing Jesus’ birth a couple years prior to the death of Herod (the family was living in Egypt when they heard of Herod’s death) would put the birth of Jesus around 6 B.C. which aligns well with the appearance of the star. When the monk Dionysius Exiguus was commissioned by the pope in 525 A. D. to figure out the year Jesus was born and renumber all years accordingly, he was off by those six years…not bad given the information he had to work with.

Reading 1, Isaiah 60:1-6

The Midianites were a nomadic group that originally lived in the Sinai desert. Ephah was a branch of the Midianite tribe. When Moses fled from Egypt after killing an Egyptian overseer of Jewish slaves, he found shelter with the Midianite chieftain Jethro and eventually married his daughter Zipporah (Ex. 2:15-23; 4:18-23). Centuries later when the Israelites had settled in the Promised Land, Midianites would raid Israelite camps and villages on their camels and make off with grain and sheep. Being adept with camels and life on the move, many Midianites became merchants, transporting goods from far-away lands on their camels. Sheba, located in the SW of the Arabian Peninsula, became prosperous as a port for international trade. The use of frankincense was restricted to liturgical uses among the Jews. It is the resin of a variety of rather scraggly desert trees found in the southern area of the Arabian peninsula. The imagery is of a renewed Jerusalem, prosperous as a center of trade and renowned far and wide, with the brilliance of a sunny day following the cold cloudy season.

Reading II, Ephesians 3:2-3a, 5-6 The word “Gentiles” means “the peoples” and referred to all who were not of the Jewish race or religion. Such people were allowed to enter the Temple of Jerusalem (the first large area on entering the Temple was called the Court of the Gentiles) and could join the Jewish religion as full members through circumcision or as associates or “God-fearing” members who, short of circumcision, shared beliefs and could attend the synagogue services. This latter group was rather numerous in the areas Paul visited on his missionary journeys and comprised a high percentage of those who became baptized Christians. Paul carried their cause to the Council of Jerusalem (c. 46 A.D.) which determined that they could be full members of the Christian community without need to be circumcised and follow the details of the Mosaic law.