Twentieth Sunday in Ordinary Time 'A'

Sunday August 17, 2008

All are invited—no exclusions.

It’s a safe bet that every ‘objective’ historian writes with a bias.

When I attended Catholic school, Catholics were presented in World, European or American history as heroes; villains of course were non-Catholics. Even the term ‘non-Catholic’ has by now become a pejorative term to those not of our tradition.

The story is told of a popular monsignor in Morristown many years ago who was preparing a young couple for marriage. The bride-to-be was a Catholic, the groom, a Presbyterian. When the good monsignor referred to him as a non-Catholic, he responded, “No, Monsignor, I’m a Presbyterian.” Msgr. Sheerin was known to be a bit stubborn so he insisted on referring to him as the non-Catholic. The young man courageously responded, “Then I will refer to you as a non-Presbyterian.” He made his point.

My mother was the epitome of Catholic bias. Her response to a story of criminal conduct was inevitable: “I doubt that he is a Catholic.” Inferring that a Catholic could never be guilty of a crime. It was even more impossible if he were Catholic and Irish! Alas, we have come a long way from those naïve days when Catholics seemed to be exempt from the temptation of public sin. The scandal of clergy abuse has put that myth to rest forever.

Who among us is so objective as to write our own story without bias? Somehow, I never fail to present myself in the best light when telling my own story. Even public confessions of notorious criminals tend to guild the truth in such fashion that even a self-proclaimed villain comes out smelling like a rose! In order to save what is left of their reputation, sexual predators typically state that “it was only once and that was forty years ago.’ Rarely is it only once.

Nevertheless, there is justification for literary bias that not only does not distort the truth but actually enhances it. Historical novels are good examples. Though fiction by definition, novels often contain more than an element of historic truth that serves the broader or deeper truth the author is attempting to convey. In other words, fiction establishes credibility for the deeper truth hidden in the story.

This disclaimer having been stated, it should come as no surprise to learn that biblical authors also wrote with a bias. Inheriting many musings and stories from their ancestors, few biblical authors were original thinkers and most of them added their own twist or spin called ‘midrash,’ based on what they believed their audience needed to learn or understand.

An author now called ‘Third Isaiah’ wrote in the style of the original Isaiah in order to gain the attention of his audience. He addressed his message to the Jews returning to Israel after their long exile in Babylon. At this point they were ‘protectionist’ in their views and exclusionary in their practice. For them reform meant purification and a return to ancient practices and temple worship that in effect excluded foreigners who had occupied their homeland and even those foreigners who had joined them during the exile.

This author challenges the myopic thinking of the Jews, reminding them that true worship recognizes the inclusive nature of God’s love for all people or every land and nation. Indeed, says ‘Isaiah,’ God did not choose the Jews because they were special; they were special because God chose them. This difference is significant. Though Isaiah was a Jew, his bias was for a God whose justice dictated equality and equanimity. As long as foreigners were willing to recognize the sovereignty of God and not profane the Sabbath, they were to be admitted to temple worship. Astounding theology even for Jews and Christians today.

Paul’s bias is obvious and quite frankly a bit irritating to Jews. It should be. His condescension toward them is crass. He protests his affection for them putting himself in the most favorable light and then goes on to chastise them for their rejection of the Messiah.

He redeems himself in his brief statement, “The gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable.” In essence, he is stating that their rejection is the occasion of God’s mercy to all, which is tantamount to suggesting that God intended the Jews to reject Jesus in order that God’s favor to outsiders might also be recognized.

In this year of St. Paul, we need to take great care not to over-interpret his disposition toward the Jews by recalling that he himself was a Jew. Consequently, his words should in no way be used as a defense of anti-Semitism that still pervades many quarters of the globe. We may have political differences with Israel but the Jewish tradition remains the foundation of our faith. Abraham is a common father in the faith.

On the other hand it is on this interesting twist of theology that evangelical thinkers base their support for the state of Israel in the hope that they the day of reckoning will come when they will join Christians in the recognition of Christ as the Messiah. However mainline Catholic biblical scholars do not support this.

According to ‘Isaiah,’ God intended the Jews to reach out beyond their inflated sense of self to a largess of heart to the gentiles. In effect Paul became the ‘apostle’ to implement God’s favor to the gentiles. This is why Paul is called the “Apostle to the Gentiles.” In doing so, he did not abandon his heritage as a Jew.

It is Matthew’s bias that Jesus is the ultimate breach in the barriers that divide races and nations. The anecdote about the Canaanite woman is both shocking and humorous. Shocking because Jesus refers to the woman as a dog; humorous because the word that Matthew places on the lips of Jesus is ‘puppy dog,’ a house pet who gladly receives the scraps that fall from the table. The reference is revealing because it speaks of God’s mercy vis-à-vis the willingness of Jesus to move beyond the bias of the Jews who considered themselves on top of the mountain—indeed, on top of the world, at least the religious world. Matthew seems intent on presenting a Jesus who is willing to banter with those normally excluded from the Jewish table with an eye toward total acceptance. “Woman, great is your faith! Let it be done for you as you wish.” And her daughter was healed in that instant.

In a world of private clubs, special memberships and passwords we are challenged by today’s readings to break down barriers of hate, breach walls of prejudice and remove barricades of exclusivity that keep people from our table. Our American table is still large enough to feed more empty mouths and hungry hearts. The scraps that fall from that table are sufficient to feed millions beyond our borders. We ought not allow fear of terrorist threats to feed our unhealthy biases and blind us to the good that exists in the hearts of those who yearn for the same freedoms and opportunities that we enjoy. We may need border protection but not border badgering.

A story: Jeremy Cohen and his family in Texas became the hosts some years ago of a rabbi from Moscow during the Christmas holidays. To treat the rabbi to a culinary experience probably not available to him in his own country, the Cohens took him to their favorite Chinese restaurant. After an enjoyable meal and pleasant conversation, the waiter brought the check and presented each person at the table with a small brass Christmas ornament as a complimentary gift.

Everyone laughed when Cohen’s father turned the ornament over and read the label, “Made in India.” Their laughter quickly subsided, however, when they realized that there were tears running down the rabbi’s cheeks. Cohen asked the rabbi if he were offended at having been given a gift for a Christian holiday. Smiling, the rabbi shook his head and answered, “Nyet. I was shedding tears of joy to be in a such a wonderful country in which a Buddhist gives a Jew a Christmas gift made by a Hindu.” [Story, courtesy of Pat Sanchez, Celebration, Preaching Resources, Kansas City, 2005]

Recent Articles

Fourth Sunday in Lent 'C'

Going home Shortly after the blessing of the Easter candle during the Easter Vigil Service, the priest presider or the assisting…continue reading...

Third Sunday in Lent 'C'

It’s never too late to make a difference. I enjoy my weekly visits to the nursing home in Morristown and my…continue reading...

Third Sunday in Lent 'A'

Conduits of Grace What would we do without water? Sixty percent of the composition of our body is water. We…continue reading...

Second Sunday in Lent 'C'

It was a transforming experience. It was during a trip to Colorado many years ago on a clear quiet evening that…continue reading...

First Sunday in Lent 'C'

No better time than now. In the movie, “The Passion of the Christ,” the depiction of Satan is subtle but interesting.…continue reading...