Monday, October 7, 2024

Memorial of Our Lady of the Rosary

Lectionary: 461

Now I want you to know, brothers and sisters,
that the Gospel preached by me is not of human origin.
For I did not receive it from a human being, nor was I taught it,
but it came through a revelation of Jesus Christ.


Saint Paul has heard that his Galatian congregation has been profoundly disturbed by Christian missionaries who followed him. They have insisted that belief in Jesus Christ is not sufficient for salvation if the gentiles among them have not been circumcised. This was the worst kind of news to a church that had been flourishing after Saint Paul's evangelization and founding of their church. After the blessings they had received, which served to confirm Paul's doctrine, why should the men among them be circumcised? What benefit would their souls gain from that? But the Jewish-Christian missionaries had spoken insistently about this, and they had the backing of an ancient, respected tradition. 

The Apostle was outraged not only at his rivals but also at the Galatians who had accepted that foreign teaching. The Gospel as he preached it was so transparently clear and convincing, how could anyone doubt it? 

But of course, Paul had seen all three sides of the controversy. He had lived as a devout, pharisaic Jew; he was deeply familiar with the ways of pagan gentiles; and he had received an indisputable favor directly from the Lord. The favor included both the intervention on the way to Damascus and his deep conviction that he had been shown the road to freedom. He knew beyond any doubt that the Pharisees had completely lost their way. 

This controversy is well recorded in the New Testament. It appears in Saint Luke's Acts of the Apostles and in Paul's epistles, and without much subtlety in the Gospels. The Lord's conflict with devout Pharisees was more intense than his conflict with the Sadducees and Herodians. The latter's religiosity was obviously compromised by a cozy cooperation with Roman occupiers. But because the Christian and Pharisaic practices were so similar, their conflict was more intense. 

That conflict remains in the Church today as we struggle to practice our faith and pass it to our youth. How do we practice fidelity with the freedom of God's children while insistently guiding our children through the narrow gate? How can they discriminate between our obedience to the Lord versus the faux freedom which every nation guarantees its citizens? 

The Holy Spirit knows the difference, and we learn it through many trials, errors, and betrayals, and with innumerable returns to the Lord through the Sacraments. If an apostle can betray the Lord while others deny knowing him flee into the night, we should expect our own denials, refusals, and denials. There is only one innocent disciple among us, and blessed be she. The rest of us must be ready to repent with the (surviving) disciples. 

In tomorrow's reading from Galatians we will hear Saint Paul speak of his "former way of life in Judaism," and how he "persecuted the Church of God beyond measure and tried to destroy it." 

Paul's opponents, whom he would brand as "super-apostles," could not own their sins. Perhaps they humbly -- and hypocritically -- acknowledged their fallible humanity; but they could not admit that, like everyone else, they fall seven times a day. 

Our freedom begins with the truth of our sins and the truth of God's mercy which is so obvious in his dealings with us. We hear much about transparency today. Governments and businesses proclaim their transparent honesty before the public, while the Church struggles to deal with a mystery that is far more complex and difficult than any government or corporation can imagine. 


No comments:

Post a Comment

I love to write. This blog helps me to meditate on the Word of God, and I hope to make some contribution to our contemplations of God's Mighty Works.

Ordinarily, I write these reflections two or three weeks in advance of their publication. I do not intend to comment on current events.

I understand many people prefer gender-neutral references to "God." I don't disagree with them but find that language impersonal, unappealing and tasteless. When I refer to "God" I think of the One whom Jesus called "Abba" and "Father", and I would not attempt to improve on Jesus' language.

You're welcome to add a thought or raise a question.