WRETCHED FOOD

 65 total views

Homily for Tuesday of the 5th Week of Lent, 28 March 2023, Nm 21:4-9, Jn 8:21-30

Today’s first reading makes me think of that passage in the sermon on the mount in Mt 7 where Jesus asks in v.10, “Which father among you would give his son a snake when he asks for a fish?” I wonder how Jesus would have reacted if one of the disciples played the wise guy and quoted Numbers 21:4-9 and said, “How come when the Israelites asked for food God gave them snakes causing many of them to die?” My answer to that is, “They were not asking for food. God had already given them food but they were still complaining about it.”

Listen to what they said to Moses in Num 21:5, “Why have you brought us up from Egypt to die in the wilderness, where there is no food or water? We are disgusted with this wretched food!” It was not true that they had no food. They did not like the food God was giving them. Siguro hindi masarap. What they longed for was the kind of food that they ate when they were still in Egypt. In short, they were practically expressing regret that they even escaped from slavery at all. It’s like saying, “We would rather remain as slaves and have good food, than be free and be hungry.” Imagine, they called the food that God was giving them “WRETCHED FOOD!” How painful that must have been for God!

Sometime children behave like that towards their parents. They don’t realize the kind of poison that comes from their mouth when they behave like spoiled brats. I remember a father, a jeepney driver, telling me how hurt he was to hear his son whom he was sending to college saying he was ashamed to show his classmates his “miserable Nokia phone” while everyone else had an iPhone.

What would you feel if you were a mother who had to wash a mountain of clothes just to earn some money and buy some food to serve at table for your children, and then the children say, “we are sick of this wretched food?” (Sawa na kami sa walang kuwentang pagkain na ito!)

I find it more sensible not to treat the story literally but literarily, meaning, figuratively. The Israelites, as it were, had been bitten by the poisonous snakes among their own companions, whose mouths were spitting venoms of uncharity and utter insensitivity to the very one who cared for them. Children can be like that when they are young and unaware of what their parents have to put up with to be able to feed them. It takes time before they realize that what was served to them was not just rice and fish but blood, sweat and tears.

The strange part of the story is when Moses is told to mount a serpent on a pole to save those who had been bitten from perishing by getting them to behold that which had poisoned them. It becomes even more strange when the Gospel applies it to the “lifting up of the son of man” so that those who behold him whom they have pierced will be brought to a realization and saved.

The symbolism is basically making a paradoxical statement—until we realize the deadly poison that has bitten us, until we get to recognize the pain that our own uncharity and insensitivity have caused on the very people who care or us, we will not be healed.

St. Paul is saying something like this in 2 Corinthians 5:21 “For our sake he made him to be sin who did not know sin, so that we might become the righteousness of God in him.” In short by looking at him who suffered for our sins, we are led to conversion.

I saw a Taiwanese video of a public school teacher who asked his pupils what their parents were doing for a living. One said his father was a miner. Another said factory employee in a fish processing plant. Another said Construction worker. Another, a security guard. But when he asked if they had ever seen what their parents do in their workplaces? They all said no.

So the teacher took a video of a miner sweating and all covered with dirt, and a fish factory worker gutting loads of fish whole day, a construction worker digging a canal under the heat of the sun, and a security guard enduring mosquito bites and forcing his eyes open so as to remain awake the whole night, the children silently and spontaneously wept as they watched. They did not realize until their teacher showed them on video the sacrifices their parents did for them. Apparently it was an effective way of changing the attitude of those among them who behaved like spoiled brats.

 

ALAM KO…NANINIWALA AKO

 107 total views

Homiliya para sa Ikalimang Linggo ng Kuwaresma, 26 Marso 2023, Juan 11:19-27

Sa kuwento tungkol sa muling pagpapabangon ni Hesus kay Lazaro, ang tutukan natin ng pansin ay si MARTA. Ang paglalakbay niya mula sa “ALAM KO” tungo sa “SUMASAMPALATAYA AKO.” Kung paanong binago ni Hesus ang bokabularyo niya, gayundin ang attitude niya.

Consistent ang kwento sa paglalarawan sa “strong personality” ni Marta, lalo na sa Lukas 10. Siya lang yata ang karakter na malakas ang loob na pagsabihan si Hesus, pagalitan siya o pag-utusan siya. Palagay ko talagang close sila.

Dito rin, malakas ang loob niya. Dalawang beses niya sinagot nang pabaláng si Hesus. Sa una, pagkatapos niyang ilabas ang sama ng loob niya: “ Kung narito ka lang hindi sana namatay ang kapatid ko. Ngunit kahit ngayon, ALAM KOng ibibigay sa iyo ng Diyos ang anumang hilingin mo sa kanya.” (Juan 11:21-22)

At ang sagot ni Jesus sa v.23 ay, “Muling mabubuhay ang kapatid mo.” Magri-react naman ulit nang pabaláng si Marta sa v.24, “ALAM KOng mabubuhay siyang muli… sa wakas ng panahon.” Parang sarcastic ang dating—kailan iyon?!

Pagkasabi niya nito siya naman ang mapagsasabihan nang pabalang sa vv. 25-26: “Ako ang muling pagkabuhay at ang ang buhay. Ang sumampalataya sa akin, kahit mamatay ay muling mabubuhay. At ang sinumang nabubuhay at sumasampalataya sa akin ay hindi mamamatay kailanman. Sumasampalataya ka ba sa sinabi ko?” Take note, hindi tinanong ni Hesus, “Alam mo ba ito?” Kundi, “Sumasampalataya ka ba dito?” Para ba siyang pinaglalakbay mula sa kaalaman ng isip tungo sa kaalaman ng puso sa gitna ng pagluluksa.

Kapag nagluluksa ang tao, para siyang nadidiliman. Lalo na kapag sa pakiwari niya para bang pinabayaan o kinalimutan na siya ng Diyos. May mga sitwasyon na hindi natin lubos maunawaan. At ang mga tanong natin ay hindi madaling sagutin. Tulad ng : Panginoon, Bakit nangyari ito sa kapatid ko? Bakit hinayaan mong mangyari? Question pa lang ng kapatid iyan.

Mas masakit daw kapag ang nagtatanong ay magulang—katulad ng binasbasan ko kahapon: nag-iisang anak ng kanyang mga magulang, 17 anyos. Nsgsuicide dahil sa depression. Sabi nila—sa Ingles may tumpak na salita para sa babaeng nawalan ng asawa: widow; o sa lalaking nawalan ng asawa, widower. Mayroon din sa namatayan ng magulang: orphan. Ano ang tawag sa nawalan ng anak? Wala, dahil walang salita daw na angkop para ilarawan ang sakit at pait ng mawalan ng anak.

Sabi nila, ang nagluluksa ay parang wala sa sarili. Itong si Marta na dating nagkakandarapa para i-welcome ang kaibigan, ngayon sumbat ang isasalubong sa kaibigan. Uulitin pa ng kapatid niyang si Maria, maya-maya. KUNG NARITO KA LANG. Ibig sabihin—nasaan ka noong kailangan ka namin?

Pero si Hesus hindi na nangatwiran. Hindi na siya nagpaliwanag na wanted siya sa Judea. Pinipigilan nga siya ng mga alagad dahil may peligro aarestuhin siya ng mga awtoridad sa Jerusalem. Tapos, sisisihin pa siya pagdating niya. Kamatayan niya ang magiging kapalit ng pagbuhay niya sa kaibigan. Pero hindi na siya nagpaliwanag. Hindi iyon ang sagot sa bakit ng magkapatid.

Minsan, talagang mas mabuti ang tumahimik na lang kaysa magsalita sa mga taong nagluluksa. Mas mabuting iparamdam na lang na naroon tayo para sa kanila. May mga sitwasyon talaga na hindi sapat ang ALAM natin. May mga tanong na bakit na hindi kayang sagutin ng nalalaman natin.

Kaya nang sabihin ni Hesus ang tungkol sa pagkabuhay, hindi niya sinabi kay Marta, ALAM MO BA ITO? Sa halip, ang tanong niya ay SUMASAMPALATAYA KA BA DITO?

Kapag hindi sapat ang nalalaman natin noon pa lang tayo nagsisimulang sumampalataya. Kaya tatlong beses gagamitin ni Hesus ang salitang SUMAMPALATAYA: Juan 11:25-26: “Ako ang muling pagkabuhay at ang ang buhay. Ang SUMASAMPALATAYA sa akin, kahit mamatay ay muling mabubuhay. At ang sinumang nabubuhay at SUMASAMPALATAYA sa akin ay hindi mamamatay kailanman. SUMASAMPALATAYA ka ba sa sinabi ko?”

At ang isasagot ni Martha ay “Oo, Panginoon. Sumasampalataya ako na ikaw ang Kristo, ang Anak ng Diyos, ang hinihintay na darating sa mundo.” Ito ang parang TURNING POINT sa buhay ni Marta. Nang ipahayag niya kung sino si Hesus sa kanya. Take note, nauna ang pagpapahayag ni Marta ng pananampalataya kaysa pagpapabangon ni Hesus kay Lazaro. Iyung iba naniwala pa lang matapos na buhayin niya si Lazaro. Kay Marta, baligtad. Nagpahayag muna siya ng pananampalataya, bago pinabangon si Lazaro. Maraming iba pang pagkakataon na tinatanong muna ni Hesus kung sumasampalataya ba ang tao bago ipinaranas sa kanila ang isang milagro.

Kailangan din ng Diyos ang ating bahagi, ang ating pananampalataya para maiparanas niya sa atin ang kanyang biyaya.

Kung ang transition kay Lazaro ay mula kamatayan tungo sa muling pagbangon, kay Marta ito’y mula sa KAALAMAN tungo sa PANANAMPALATAYA—bilang ibang antas ng kaalaman. Lumuha daw si Maria at napaluha din si Hesus nang makitang umiiyak si Maria. Pero hindi sapat ang luha para magpabangon mula sa patay. Kailangan din ang pananampalataya natin.

Bago binuhay ni Hesus si Lazaro, binuhay muna niya ang loob ng magkapatid, lalo na si Martha. Ito ay kuwento ng conversion ni Marta. Kailangang maranasan ito ng mga taong tulad niya na tipong strong personality, assertive, at confrontational. Yun bang may pagka-manager type, may pagka-demanding dahil sanay sa sitwasyong maayos at kontrolado. Darating at darating ang mga sandaling hindi mo kontrolado, at hindi na sapat ang nalalaman mo, kahit gaano ka pa katalino at maabilidad. Noon pa lang natututo ang tao na sumuko at sumampalataya.

Hindi totoo na ang pananampalataya ay parang bulag na paglundag sa dilim. Ang pananampalataya ay kakaibang antas ng pag-unawa na bunga ng mga karanasang unti-unting magmumulat sa atin sa galaw ng Diyos sa buhay natin. Di ba ganito ang sinasabi ng popular na kantang “I Believe?”

“Every time I hear a newborn baby cry, or touch a leaf or see the sky, then I know why I believe.” It when I believe that I begin to know why. Sa pananampalataya, noon ko pa lang nalalaman talaga kung bakit.

IMAGING GOD AS MOTHER

 127 total views

Homily for Wednesday of the 4th Week of Lent, 22 March 2023, Jn 5:17-30

Today’s first reading is a good answer to people who feel that they have been forsaken by God. It ends with that particular line from Isaiah Chapter 49 that inspired the composition of the famous Tagalog liturgical song, “HINDI KITA MALILIMUTAN” (I will never forget you).

V. 15 of today’s reading is the prophet’s answer to the people’s lament about the tragic things that they had been through—the fact that their country had been conquered and destroyed by the Babylonian empire and their people had been exiled as slaves in Babylon and in other foreign lands.

I know that the common Tagalog translation for LAMENT is PANAGHOY. But I prefer to translate it as HIMUTOK or better yet, as TAMPO. In his oracle, the prophet begins by vebalizing his people’s reproach (TAMPO or HIMUTOK): “Nakalimutan na ako ng Diyos; pinabayaan na niya ako.” (The Lord has forsaken me, my Lord has forgotten me.) And then in chapter 49 he speaks on behalf of God, in reply to Israel’s reproach (himutok).

It is one of the few passages in the Bible where God is described as a woman, and a mother at that. “Malilimutan ba ng ina ang anak na galing sa kanya, sanggol sa kanyang sinapupunan? (Can a mother forget her infant and be without tenderness for the child of her womb?) Then he answers his own question by saying “Ngunit kahit na malimutan ng ina ang anak na galing sa kanya, hindi kita malilimutan kailanma’y di pababayaan.” (However unusual it might be for a mother forget her child, I will never forget you.)

We have become so used to referring to God as Father, we often forget that we are using the language metaphorically. It does not mean that God is a literal father exactly like our earthly fathers, or that God is a male or belonging to the masculine gender. Fortunately for us, Filipinos, our pronouns are gender-free—neither masculine not feminine. Unlike in English whose third person pronoun for God is always masculine (HE), in Tagalog we don’t have that problem when we refer to God as SIYA.

We also tend to forget the rich variety of metaphors for God in the Bible, where God is sometimes called “a rock”, “a fortress”, “a warrior”, “a shepherd”, “a potter”, “a lion”, etc. Jeremiah once even called God a “treacherous brook”. In Hosea, the description of God as a mother is presupposed in that line in Hosea 11, 3-4 that says,

“Yet it was I who taught Ephraim to walk,

who took them in my arms;

but they did not know that I cared for them.

I drew them with human cords,

with bands of love;

I fostered them like those

who raise an infant to their cheeks;

I bent down to feed them.”
This is another tender description of God like a mother breastfeeding her child. People often forget that Jesus also used the female imagery for God in the oracle of judgment that he pronounces over Jerusalem, predicting the inevitable destruction of the Holy City. In Luke 13:34 he says, “Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how many times I yearned to gather your children together as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, but you were unwilling!”

Most of you are probably familiar with the lament in Psalm 137 that refers to the same tragic situation described in our first reading “By the streams of Babylon we sat down and wept when we remembered Zion.” The Psalmist says they could not even get themselves to sing one of the songs of Zion when their captors asked them to play them some music. Instead of singing, he says, they hung up their harps on the trees growing in Babylon.

The Psalm has a second part which, in the light of our first reading today, can be read differently. Try reading it as a reply from God to his people, from the mother to her child, who thinks he has been forgotten. “If I forget you, Jerusalem, may my right hand wither.” I know it does not sound proper putting it in the mouth of God because the it makes God sound so human, like he’s swearing “Mamatay man ako.” But that precisely makes it sound more tender and intimate, can you imagine God saying to his people, “May my tongue stick to my palate if I remember you not, if I place you not ahead of my joy.”?

Today’s Gospel has a good news for people who are going through tough times in their lives. Jesus message of hope is, “…whoever hears my word and believes in the one who sent me has eternal life and will not come to condemnation, but will pass from death to life.”

LIFE-GIVING WATER

 56 total views

Homily for Tuesday of the 4th Week of Lent, 21 Mar 2023, Jn 5:1-16

Our first reading from Ezkiel 47 reminds me of the song “Gloria, Gloria Labandera”. It is not a serious song at all; it is rather the kind that is sung by drunkards after they have already downed a whole case of beer. It is actually a sexist song that men sing to the tune of “Glory, Glory Hallelujah”, an old triumphant Church hymn.

The Filipino mock version of this song tells a story; it is making fun of a girl named Gloria. Gloria is going out to the nearby stream to wash clothes. As she carries a basin with dirty laundry above her head, she wades into the flowing water. The singers describe how she gets wet little by little as she goes into the stream—first, her ankles, then her legs, then her knees, then her thighs. But they keep repeating in the refrain that she is not fully soaked yet. It is of course a malicious song by men describing themselves ogling at a girl from afar.

In Ezekiel 47, it is the prophet himself who goes into the water, which he sees in a vision, welling up, flowing out of the temple threshold, creating a stream. Ezekiel is told to go into the water that gradually rises—first, up to his ankles, next, up to his knees, then, up to his thighs, then up to his waist, until it turns into a river and he gets totally immersed and forced to swim.

The prophet does not say if he actually swims. He says the angel got him out of the water and brought him to the riverbank. There he was made to observe the trees growing and bearing fruits on either side of the riverbank. He also observes the water flowing out into the sea and freshening up the salt water and causing the fish to multiply in abundance.

In the Gospel, the symbolism of the water is sustained. The prophet is replaced by the crippled beggar who seems familiar with the vision of Ezekiel and the angel in the Bible, suggesting that the Pool of Bethesda is the place in the temple threshold from where the water had welled up and flowed. This must have been the origin of the tradition that when the water moved, it meant an angel was stirring it up and it had curative powers. Whenever it happened, the handicapped beggars scrambled to get ahead in order to obtain a cure, but he had no one who could help him get there.

Remember our reading for the 3rd Sunday of Lent about Jesus telling the Samaritan woman that he could give her a “living water” that would never make her thirst again? That was in chapter 4; now here we are in chapter 5 of John with a story of healing that sustains the image of water that heals and gives life. It comes, not from the pool of Bethesda but from the words of Jesus, from his very person.

Of course, John is preparing his readers for the symbolism of the water of baptism. People often forget that the Greek word BAPTISMA means immersion. It is not about wading or dipping or soaking into water. It is rather about totally submerging into it, in imitation of the God who totally immersed himself into our human condition, the God who totally emptied himself for our redemption.

It is what he invites us to do as well when he asks us, as the angel did with Ezekiel, to dare not just to wade or dip or soak but to immerse fully into the mystery of God’s grace and mercy.

The water of baptism has to be be first a symbol of death before it can become a symbol of life. It is about participating in the passion and death of the Lord in order to share in his resurrection, in order to have life and be life-giving ourselves.

KINIKITA AT NAKIKITA

 95 total views

Homiliya para sa Linggo ng Laetare, Ikaapat na Linggo ng Kuwaresma, Juan 9:1-41

“Laetare” ang tawag nating mga Katoliko sa ikaapat na Linggo ng Kuwaresma. Kung merong Gaudete sa Pangatlong Linggo ng Adbiyento, meron ding Laetare sa Pang-apat na Linggo ng Kuwaresma. Magkaibang bokabularyo, pero pareho din ang ibig sabihin: MAGALAK! Kaya ang madilim na kulay ube ay liliwanag at magiging kulay rosas. Para bang preview ito ng liwanag na hatid ng Paskong Pagkabuhay.

Kaya siguro natataon sa araw na ito ng Laetare ang pagbasa tungkol sa pagpapagaling sa taong bulag mula pa sa pagkapanganak. Siya ang larawan natin ng mabuting balita na hatid ni HesuKristo sa atin—isang taong nakasilay ng liwanag sa kauna-unahang pagkakataon.

Ang bulag na pulubi sa kuweno ay hindi katulad ng ibang mga bulag na pinagaling ni Hesus sa mga ebanghelyo. Karamihan sa kanila ay dating malinaw ang mata ngunit lumabo at nabulag pagtanda dahil sa sakit. Itong taong ito, hindi pa nakaranas na makakita ni minsan sa buhay niya. Kaya nga siya lumaking nagpapalimos . Dalawang bagay ang bibigyan natin ng pansin sa kuwento: una, merong dalawang yugto ang kuwento ng paggaling ng bulag, at pangalawa, pinalayas siya mula sa pinagpapalimusan niya.

Simulan natin sa una, nakita muna niya ang paligid niya for the first time. Pagkatapos, nakita niya si Hesus at sinamba niya. Dalawang bagay ito: ang makakita sa pisikal na mata at makakita sa mata ng pananampalataya.

Kay San Markos, may dalawang kuwento ng pagpapagaling na medyo hawig sa kuwentong narinig natin kay San Juan. Una, iyung bulag na taga-Bethsaida sa chapter 8 ni San Markos, vv22-26. Dalawang yugto rin ang pagpapagaling sa kanya: sa una, nakasilay na siya ng liwanag pero malabo pa ang paningin niya. Kaya inulit ni Hesus ang proseso at pagkatapos, luminaw na. Sa chapter 10 naman ni San Markos, vv.46-52, naroon ang kuwento ng pulubing si Bartimeo: may dalawang yugto rin. Sa una, gamit ang pandama kahit walang nakikita, lumapit si Bartimeo kay Hesus. Sa pangalawa, nang gumaling siya at nakakita, sumunod siya kay Hesus at naging alagad o disipulo.

Dito sa binasa natin, nang hugasan ng bulag na pulubi ang mga mata niya at nakakita siya, wala si Hesus sa tabi niya. Kaya hindi niya alam kung sino ang nagpagaling sa kanya. Palagay ko sinadya ito ng Panginoon dahil ayaw niyang pagkaguluhan siya. Pagkatapos na ng mga interogasyon na gagawin ng mga Pariseo sa pulubi, saka lang niya makakatagpong muli si Hesus. Silang dalawa na lang. Noon siya tatanungin kung naniniwala ba siya sa Anak ng Tao at ang isasagot niya ay, “Sino po siya para maniwala ako sa kanya?” Noon sasabihin ni Hesus, “Ako siya, ang taong nakikita mo ngayon sa harapan mo.” Noon siya magpahahayag ng kanyang pananampalataya at sasamba kay Hesus. Ito ang tinatawag kong pangalawang yugto ng pagsilay niya ng liwanag, ang liwanag ng pananampalataya o pagkilala kay Hesus bilang Anak ng Diyos at kanyang Tagapagligtas.

Noon sasabihin ni Hesus sa Juan 9:39, “Naparito ako sa mundo … upang ang hindi nakakakita ay makakita, at ang mga nakakakita ay mabulag.” Obvious ba kung sino ang pinatatamaan ni Hesus? Ang mga Pariseong walang nakikitang mabuti sa pangyayari—isang taong bulag mula sa pagkabata ang biglang nakakita. Pero wala silang nakikita kundi ang paglabag sa batas ng Sabbath.

Ibang klaseng kabulagan ito, hindi makita ang kamay ng Diyos sa pangyayari dahil pinadilim ang kanilang mga isip ng pagkainggit at pagkamuhi kay Hesus. Hindi naman talaga lahat ng tumingin o nakinig kay Hesus ay sumampalataya sa kanya. Ibang klaseng pagpapagaling ang kailangan para dito—pagbubukas ng esiritwal na mata. Hangga’t hindi nabubuksan ang mata ng pananampalataya, talagang hindi makikita ng tao ang pagkilos ng Diyos sa buhay niya, hindi makikita ang mapagkalingang kamay ng Diyos sa mga karanasan niya. Kaya siguro PAGKAMULAT ang tawag natin sa pag-unawa. “Ah, nakikita ko na ang ibig mong sabihin!” Ito ang nasasabi ng tao kapag naiintindihan na niya ang sinasabi ng kanyang kapwa.

Pansinin naman natin ngayon ang dulo ng kuwento. Pinalayas daw ang dating pulubi mula sa puwestong pinagpapalimusan niya. Parang ganoon din ang naranasan ng maraming mga Hudyo na yumakap sa pananampalatayang Kristiyano—pinalayas din sila mula sa mga sinagoga. Kung masakit ang mapalayas, palagay ko dito hindi.

Di ba matamis sa pandinig ng pulubi ang “Lumayas ka dito.”? Simula na ito ng bagong buhay para sa kanya. Hindi na siya bulag; hindi na niya kailangang umasa sa limos ng iba. Pwede na siyang magtrabaho, magtrabaho hindi lang para kikitain kundi para sa kaharian ng Diyos. Hindi lang nanauli ang silbi niya sa buhay, nanauli rin ang layunin at misyon niya bilang tao, ang dangal niya bilang anak ng Diyos, na tinanggap niya bilang regalo mula sa Anak ng Diyos.

Iyun marahil ang tinutumbok ni San Juan kung bakit sinabi pa niya na ang kahulugan ng salitang Siloam na pangalan ng balon kung saan naghugas at nakakita ang pulubi ay SUGO. Sa pagsamba niya kay Hesus, magsisimula rin ang kanyang pagiging sugo. Ang katapusan ng kanyang buhay pulubi ay simula ng kanyang buhay-alagad at sugo.

Ang punto: ito ang tunay na pagpapagaling na hangad ni Hesus—hindi lang ang mabuksan ang mga mata ng tao, kundi ang mamulat siya sa tunay na kahulugan ng buhay, ang tunay na layunin nito. Marami na akong nakilalang mga tao na malaki ang kinikita pero walang nakikitang saya, kabuluhan o kaligayahan. May isang linya sa Book of Revelation 3:17-18 na parang ganito rin ang mensahe:

“Sinasabi ninyo na mayaman kayo, sagana sa lahat ng bagay at wala nang pangangailangan. Ngunit hindi nʼyo alam na kaawa-awa kayo dahil dukha kayo sa pananampalataya, bulagsa katotohanan at hubad sa paningin ng Dios . Kaya pinapayuhan ko kayong bumili sa akin ng ginto na dinalisay sa apoy upang maging totoong mayaman kayo. Bumili rin kayo sa akin ng puting damit upang matakpan ang nakakahiya ninyong kahubaran, at pati na rin ng gamot sa mata upang makita ninyo ang katotohanan.” Pahayag 3:17-18

THE TWO LOVES

 150 total views

Homily for Friday of the 3rd Week of Lent, 17 Mar 2023, Mk 12:28-34

Did you notice the answer? What was the question? “Teacher, which is the FIRST of all the commandments”? I think what the scribe meant by THE FIRST was, “the most important”, or “the greatest”, or “the very heart of all the commandments”. He was expecting Jesus to answer like a good Jew.

When a Jew begins to enter teenage life, at 13, he is expected to answer this question by parrotting what they call the GREAT COMMANDMENT, which comes from Deut. 6:4-5., which says,

“HEAR, O Israel! The LORD is your God, the LORD alone! Therefore, you shall love the LORD, your God, with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your strength.”

But Jesus surprises him by adding a second answer; he says, “The second is this: You shall love your neighbor as yourself”. He is quoting it from Leviticus 19:18.

The man reacts with excitement to Jesus’ additional answer; he expresses his approval by practically repeating the two lines given by Jesus, and even includes a commentary that comes from Jeremiah. He says these TWO LOVES are worth more than all the burnt offerings and sacrifices that people can possibly offer in their temple. Jeremiah once stood in the temple and declared that all their temple sacrifices and pious practices were worthless if, at the same time, they oppressed the migrants, the orphans, and the widows, if they continued to shed innocent blood, steal, murder, bear false witness and worship other gods. (Jer 7:3-15)

Why is Jesus adding the second, if the first would have been enough to answer the question of the scribe? Well, because Jesus’ intention was not just to answer the scribe but to challenge him. Take note what Jesus said to him in the end: “YOU ARE NOT FAR FROM THE KINGDOM OF GOD.” It sounds like a compliment but it is actually a challenge.

Remember that song that says, “SO CLOSE, SO CLOSE AND YET SO FAR?” You are “not far” means you are close, but you are not necessarily there yet. Imagine a hungry dog that is just one foot away from his food, but he cannot reach it because he is on leash and his leash is tied to a post? What a torture that must be! The man answered with understanding, but for Jesus understanding is not enough. Even the devil understands a lot of things about God and even quotes the Scriptures. It is one thing to know what is right and another thing to actually do it. Jesus as it were is saying, you are not far because you know and understand; but you are not there yet until you actually do it.

In St. Luke’s version of basically the same conversation about the greatest commandment (Lk 10:25-37), Jesus returns the question to the man who posed it. And the man answers his own question by quoting the two commandments, without referring to a first or a second. Namely, “To love God wholeheartedly and one’s neighbor as oneself.” In reply, Jesus said, “You have answered correctly, JUST DO IT.” That’s where the challenge is for him, because he would try to justify himself by asking the famous question, WHO IS MY NEIGHBOR?, which got the famous answer, the PARABLE OF THE GOOD SAMARITAN.

St. John says it more sharply in his first epistle, 1 Jn 4:20. He says, “Anyone who says he loves God but hates his neighbor is a liar.” Then he asks, “How can you say you love God whom you do not see but do not love your neighbor whom you see?”

Now I know why Judaism prohibits the making of images of their invisible God. Why? Because God has already made the best image of himself—the human being. The late Cardinal Sin once referred to the TWO LOVES as the two lines that make up the cross: the vertical referring to LOVE OF GOD, and the HORIZONTAL, referring to LOVE OF NEIGHBOR AS ONESELF. We cannot experience the redeeming effect of the Cross of Christ until our TWO LOVES have begun to intersect with each other and become ONE LOVE, namely the LOVE OF CHRIST.

TUBIG NG BUHAY

 64 total views

Homiliya para sa Ikatlong Linggo ng Kuwaresma, Ika-12 ng Marso 2023, Juan 4:1-42

“Ang humihingi ng tubig ang siyang nagbigay nito; ang hinihingan ng maiinom ang siyang nabigyan nito.”

Ito ang maikling summary ko sa ating ebanghelyo para sa ikatlong Linggo ng Kuwaresma.

Tungkol ito sa isang sitwasyon na bumaligtad. Ang humihingi ng maiinom ay si Hesus; ang hinihingan niya ay ang Samaritana. Pero ang mabibigyan ay ang Samaritana; ang magbibigay ay si Hesus. May twist kasi ang kuwento mula sa literal na tubig tungo sa matalinghagang tubig, ang tubig ng walang hanggang buhay, pampawi ng mas malalim na klase ng pagkauhaw. Ang pangkalahatang tema ng ating pagninilay ay PAGKAUHAW. Nagsisimula sa literal na pagkauhaw, nauuwi sa matalinghagang pagkauhaw.

Lumalapit sa balon ang Samaritana upang umigib ng tubig na pamatid ng literal na uhaw. Makakatagpo niya roon si Hesus na lumapit din sa balon dahil nauuhaw, ngunit walang pang-igib. Kaya hihingi siya sa babae ng maiinom. Ang kanilang pag-uusap sa konteksto ng literal na pagkauhaw at paglapit sa literal na balon ay unti-unting mauuwi sa pag-uusap tungkol sa matalinghagang pagkauhaw at pagnanasa para sa matalinghagang balon.

Ang Samaritana ay kumakatawan para sa taong uhaw sa pag-unawa pero umiiwas sa kapwa dahil ramdam niya na parang hinuhusgahan ang pagkatao niya. Kaya nga tanghaling tapat na ang oras ng pag-igib niya. Nauuhaw siya sa tunay na pag-ibig na hindi tuturing sa kanya bilang bagay na gagamitin kundi bilang taong may dangal. (Pasintabi po, pero sa wikang Filipino, ang babae, kapag inabuso o pinilit sa pagtatalik na walang pag-ibig, nasasabi niya “Ginamit ako.”)

Para bang ibig ipahayag sa kanya ng Samaritana—“Kung alam mo lang kung sino ako, iiwasan mo ako. Hindi lang dahil Samaritana ako at Hudyo ka, babae ako at lalaki ka, kundi dahil pinagparausan na ako ng maraming lalaki, wala akong kuwentang babae, sawi sa pag-ibig at uhaw sa tunay na pag-ibig.”

Pero naramdaman niya na nasa harapan niya ang isang taong kahit alam ang tunay na pagkatao niya ay hindi umiiwas sa kanya, tumuturing pa rin sa kanya nang may paggalang, kumikilala sa pagkauhaw niya ng totoong pag-ibig. Hindi alam ng babae na ang tunay na balon na ninanasa niya ay nasa harapan na niya mismo. Ni hindi niya kailangang salukin dahil kusa itong umaagos, handang pumuno sa buhay niya kahit sa pakiramdam niya hindi siya karapatdapat. Kailangan lang niyang buksan ang puso niya. Kumbaga sa timba, hindi naman talaga mapupuno ang lalagyan kung may takip ito, di ba?

Ang anak ng Diyos ay naging Anak ng Tao dahil sa pagnanais niya na pawiin ang pagkauhaw ng sangkatauhan. Dumarating siya sa buhay natin bilang kaisa natin sa pagkauhaw. Ang kinauuhaw niya ay ang pananampalataya natin, ang kusang pagbubukas natin sa kanya ng puso at kaluluwa para daluyan ng kanyang biyaya. Kaya nga isa sa mga huling salita na binigkas niya sa krus, ayon kay San Juan ay NAUUHAW AKO. Sayang kasi ang tubig ng walang hanggang buhay na umaagos kung ang tao’y pilit na umiigib sa ibang balon kung saan ang tubig ay nakalalason at hindi makapapawi sa kanyang pagkauhaw.

Nang matuklasan ng Samaritana ang bukal ng buhay, para bang nawala ang literal na pagkauhaw niya. Iniwan daw niya sa tabi ng balon ang pansalok niya ng tubig at nagtatakbo patungo sa mga kababayan niya. Para bang siya mismo ang naging balon na umaagos at ibig magbahagi ng buhay na tubig na nasumpungan o natuklasan niya.

Noong una, malamig ang pakikitungo niya; matigas ang puso. Ang tao nga naman, madalas ay katulad ng bato sa kuwento ng ating unang pagbasa sa Eksodo. Humingi daw ng tubig ang bayang Israel sa gitna ng disyerto dahil uhaw na uhaw na sila. At sinabihan ng Diyos si Moises na hampasin ang bato upang umagos mula dito ang tubig.

Tayong lahat, mayroon din tayong maibibigay tubig pero kailangan munang mahampas ng tungkod o pamalo. Ang problema, takot tayo sa tungkod, ayaw nating mapalo. Lumalayo tayo. Ibig nating manatiling matigas ang ulo o magsapusong-bato. Mas gusto natin ang uminom kaysa magpainom.

Itong araw na ito ay ispesyal sa akin dahil ito ang araw ng ika-40 anibersaryo ko sa pagkapari. Naordenahan ako sa pagkapari noong March 12, 1983. Mula nang matuklasan ko kay Hesus ang Balon ng buhay na tubig ng Salita ng Diyos na pumawi sa aking sariling pagkauhaw, para bang naramdaman ko na ang buhay ko ay naging poso, hindi na huminto ang pag-agos ng Salita ng Diyos.

Poso lang ako, daluyan ng biyaya. Hindi naman akin ang tubig kundi sa kanya. Hindi rin ako mapupuno at aagos kung hindi ako lumalapit sa kanya upang tumanggap. Sa karanasan ko, nang maordenahan ako sa pagkapari, dumaloy sa akin ang ang walang hanggang biyaya. Pero ang sikreto ng tuluyang pagdaloy ay ito: ang tumatanggap ay kailangang matutong magbigay, ang nabahaginan ay kailangang matutong magbahagi. Ang nakarinig ay dapat matutong magpahayag. Ang dinaluyan ng grasya ay kailangang maging daluyan ng grasya.

Kaya siguro ayon sa kuwento ni San Mateo tungkol sa Huling paghuhukom, dumarating ang Diyos sa buhay natin bilang nagugutom, nauuhaw, hubad, bilanggo, maysakit (Mat 25:31-46). Ito’y para gisingin sa loob natin ang biyaya ng Diyos, ang Espiritu Santong tinanggap natin sa binyag upang sa pamamagitan ng ating malasakit, mapapabusog niya ang mga nagugutom, mapapawi pagkauhaw ng mga nauuuhaw, mapapagaling ang mga maysakit at mapapalaya ang mga bihag at alipin sa daigdig.

MUMO (CRUMBS)

 99 total views

Homiliya para sa Huwebes sa Ikalawang Linggo ng Kuwaresma, 09 Mar 2023, Lk 16, 19-31

Ang dating arsobispo ng Maynila na mas kinagigiliwan naming tawaging “Lolo Dency” and nagpasimula ng Pondo ng Pinoy. Kinuha niya ang inspirasyon mula sa konsepto ng mumo, o mga tira-tira mula sa mesa na hinihintay ng mga aso. “Hindi ako humihingi ng malaki,” wika niya; mumo lang. Kahit iyung pinakamaliit na mumong barya na 25 sentimos na naiiwan sa bulsa o di na pinupulot pag nahulog sa lupa, ipunin lang sa bote at dalhin sa parokya. Ang importante ay hindi mga minsanang donasyon na malakihan, kundi maliliit na tira-tira na kusang iniipon para ibahagi sa mga nangangailangan. Ang islogan na pinasikat niya ay “Anumang maliit, basta malimit ay patungong langit.“

Kaya nasabi kong ang inspirasyon na pinagkuhanan ay ang ebanghelyo natin ngayon ay dahil, ayon sa kuwento, mumo lang o tira-tira ng mayaman ang hinihintay ng pulubing si Lazaro na mahulog mula sa mesa, pero kahit iyon hindi niya maabot dahil nauunahan pa siya ng mga aso. Kaya namatay siya sa gutom.

Maliit pa kami, madalas nang ipaalala sa amin ng nakatatanda na huwag magsasayang o magtatapon ng pagkain kung ayaw namin mahulog sa purgatoryo. Kaya siguro naging prinsipyo ni Lolo Dency, hindi naman kailangang milyon o libo ang ibahagi. Kahit mumo lang, basta tiyaking makaabot sa nagugutom, anumang maliit, basta malimit ay patungong langit. (Ito rin ang isnpirasyon ng ating “Alkansya sa Kuwaresma”).

Alam kasi ni Lolo Dency na madalas ang mga mumo o tira-tira na inaabangan ng mga dukha, kahit sa mga aso ay hindi na nakakaabot ngayon. Una, dahil ang mga alagang aso ngayon ay hindi na pinakakain ng mumo, may ispesyal na dog food na para sa kanila. May ispesyal pa nga silang mga barberya, restaurant, ospital at libingan. Pangalawa, dahil ang maraming mumo ng mayayamang lipunan ay sa basura ito itinatapon ng mga tinatawag ni Pope Francis na “throw-away societies”.

Kung minsan, kapag medyo ginabi na ang uwi ko mula sa isang appointment, napapansin ko na kung kailan malapit magsara ang mga restaurant at fast food chains, mas lalong dumadami ang tao sa labas. Saka ko lang nalaman na hindi pala kostumer ang mga iyon kundi mga nag-aabang sa basurang siguradong makukuhanan nila ng tira-tirang pagkain na hindi naubos ng umorder. Sa panahong ito na pumapalo sa 8-9 porsiyento kada buwan ang inflation rate, kahit hindi alam ng mahihirap ang ibig sabihin ng inflation, ramdam nila ang epekto nito: gutom.

Minsan naikwento ng isang kilala kong pari na ang yumaong tatay niya ay naging waiter sa isang steak house sa Clark noong panahon na ang Clark ay Base militar pa ng mga Kano. Bawal daw na mag-uwi ang mga empleyado ng kahit na tira-tira. Kaya ang style ng mga waiter ay ilalagay sa hiwalay na basurahan na tinawag na “kaning-baboy” ang mga tirang pagkain at iyon ang hinihingi sa boss na Amerikano. Pag-uwi, dinudukot mula sa kaning-baboy ang mga tira-tirang steak mula sa basura, hinuhugasan, at nilulutong muli para pagsaluhan nila. Kaya daw siya tumaba, sa kakakain ng steak. Tawa siya nang tawa pero ako—naluha ako sa kuwento niya. Uso na pala noon pa ang tinatawag ngayon na “pagpag”.

Ang babala ni Abaraham sa ebanghelyo ay hindi pakunswelo-de-bobo sa mga dukha na may langit namang naghihintay sa kabilang buhay kahit puro pagdurusa ang danasin nila dito sa lupa. Ito ay babala para sa atin na nabubuhay pa dito sa lupa—na wala tayong hihintaying langit sa kabila kung hahayaan natin maging impyerno ang daigdig para sa nakararami, kung hahayaan nating manatili ang mga malalaking agwat sa pagitan ng mga tao, kahit alam nating pantay-pantay lang naman ang dangal natin.

May isa pang kuwento sa ebanghelyo tungkol sa mumo o tira-tira, na mas positibo kaysa pagbasa natin ngayon. Ito ang kuwento ng limang tinapay at dalawang isda na nagpakain ng limanglibo katao. Doon, mas marami pa ang mumo o tira-tira, kaysa pinagmulan nito. Negatibo ang konsepto ng mumo sa kuwentong binasa natin ngayon. Mumo ito ng mga nagpapasasa, mumo ng walang pakialam o malasakit. Mumong imposibleng maabot kahit ng mga aso dahil mas mahal pa ang aso kaysa kapwa-tao.

Ang positibong mumo ay ang pinasikat ni Patricia Non—na mga community pantries noong kasagsagan ng pandemya. “Kumuha ayon sa pangangailangan; magbigay ayon sa kakayahan.” Kahit malakas ang palo ng inflation sa pera, basta malakas din ang palo ng malasakit sa kapwa—laging mas marami ang mumo at tira-tira kaysa mga tinapay at isda na pinagmulan ng mga ito.

JESUS AND MOTHERS

 204 total views

Homily for Wednesday of the 2nd Wk of Lent, 08 Mar 2023, Mt 20:17-28

If you are a Bible reader and are familiar with the way Jesus is portrayed in the Gospels, I think you will agree with me if I say Jesus had a soft spot for mothers. He could not afford to turn down their requests. At the very least, he would not embarrass them.

Start with Peter’s mother-in-law, meaning, his wife’s mother (Mk 1:29). We’re told how Jesus quickly volunteered to give the old lady a pray-over the moment he heard that she was sick with a fever. Then you have that story about him on his way to a village called Nain (Lk 7:11) where he encountered a widow whose only son had died. How he was moved to his guts at the sight of this woman, and how he brought her dead son back to life.

There is another mother in the story of the Syro-Phoenician woman (Mk 7:26)who was being shooed away by the disciples. Actually, Jesus had put up a mean face to her at the start, but he could not sustain it. What touched his heart was this pagan woman’s persistence for the sake of her sick daughter. She did not mind staying in a corner quietly like a dog waiting for crumbs of grace from the master’s table.

Remember also those mothers who were trying to get their children near Jesus so that they could have them blessed by him (Mk 10:14), and how the disciples were also driving them away? That was one of the rare occasions when Jesus got really angry with his disciples. I think what he really meant to say was, “Let the mothers bring their children to me.” He could not turn them down.

Or remember his own mother at that wedding feast at Cana in Galilee (Jn 2:1-11)? How Mama Mary pressured him to do something about the crisis situation that could bring embarassmen to the newly married couple? And how Jesus gave in, even if he had already said his hour had not yet come?

In today’s Gospel (Mt 20:20), Jesus allows the mother to represent her two sons, James and John, and communicate their request—namely, for positions of authority. First, he addresses the mother and asks, “What can I do for you?” After she tells him her wish, he says to her, “You do not know what you are asking for.” I think the gentle rebuke was his way of saying, “You wouldn’t ask for that if you truly love your sons.” But he did not say that anymore. He did not want to embarrass her. I imagine that he just gave the old woman’s face a gentle pat and dismissed her saying, “Let me talk to your sons now.” And that’s when he asked, “Can you drink the cup which I am about to drink?”

Mothers must have inspired Jesus a lot. Why? Because he saw in them the readiness to give up everything for their beloved. When he said, “Whoever wishes to be great among you must be your servant; whoever wishes to be first among you must be your slave.” (Mt 20:26-27) He must have had mothers in mind. That’s the kind of role most mothers voluntarily embrace for the sake of their loved ones. It was the role his own mother played when he responded to the angel and said, “Behold the maidservant of the Lord…” (Lk 1:38)

I remember my mother who raised thirteen children without a housemaid. She was interviewed when she received a Gintong Ina Award. At some point she was asked if she ever thought of applying for a job. She said no because she was more needed as a fulltime housewife. I vehemently reacted and said, “But what you did was equivalent to more than four full-time jobs!” She smiled and said, “Being mother is being a mother; it is not a job. It is a vocation.”

OF TITLES AND ENTITLEMENTS

 75 total views