 |
||||||||||||
 |
||||||||||||
|
 |
|
||||||||||
|
|
|
|
 |
|||
|
Thirteenth Sunday in Ordinary Time C June 27, 2010 1 Kings 19:16b, 19-21 Ps. 16 Gal 5:1, 13-18, Luke 9:51-62 Theme: the Call 1. In 1969, I was teaching in Corentyne High School in Guyana. All along the coast, the school was familiarly
known as Chandi Singh School after the Principal. He was a strict man and ran a tight ship. The standard was high ad the results were consistently good. When he retired, it was commonly assumed that the Mantle of
the Principal would fall on his son. It did not matter whether the son was competent, or whether the son even wanted to teach. The same story occurs in our first reading. Elijah throws his mantle, his cloak on
Elisha. Elisha is now supposed to take on the role of being a prophet. He is to speak in God’s name.
Today my nephew wants to teach. He has done his degree in Education, he has police clearance, he has letters of reference – but he still has to find a job. Furthermore, he wants to teach! Not so with Elisha whether he wants to be a prophet like Elijah does not seem to be an option. Does Elisha have the freedom? It is a call he must answer. 2. In the second reading, Paul speaks of freedom. It is not a freedom to answer the Call or to say no. It is more foundational freedom. It is a freedom from sin and (as we say in our baptismal promises) – the choice to reject Satan and all his empty works, and all his empty promises. It gives a freedom of mind and heart, which allows us the courage and strength to do what is right and just. In order to do this, Elisha takes two radical steps. The first is pretty drastic. He burns all his bridges. There is no turning back. He slaughters the oxen, which are a means of his livelihood. If he fails as Elijah’s successor, he will have to find a new means of making a living. The second step is more natural and human. He bids farewell to his parents. 3. Most people in this parish are new immigrants and you too have taken radical steps. You have come to a new country, a new culture, a new tradition, a new language. I was going to say “new food” but that is not true. If you have a credit card, you can get in Toronto, every possible type of food in this world: pupusas from El Salvador, Tinola from the Philippines, Curries from India, and meat and potatoes as in Ireland. But many do not have the freedom to get the job of their skills. Either they do not have Canadian accreditation or Canadian work experience. 4. However, the call of Elisha is a more basic call: a call to a way of life that we have to fulfil in the various jobs we choose. It is a call to be single, a call to be married, a call to be religious (in the sense of priest, permanent deacon, a sister or brother). Our Gospel puts an entirely different veneer on this call. The call is to preach the Gospel in whatever state of life we have chosen. However, the call is urgent. The harvest is rich and the labourers are few. If we do not answer as labourers in the vineyard, in the field, the grapes will not be harvested, the wheat will not be taken to the threshing floor. 5. This urgency is seen in two apparently harsh and hard conditions. Those who answer the call of Jesus, have to come just as they are: There is no time to say farewell to their family. There is no time to bury the dead. 5a. Recently, there was a tornado warning and people were supposed to leave just as they were. Some went back to get a pet cat, others went for their jewellery, still others went to pick up albums, i-pods and laptops. They were all killed for things that could be replaced. Jesus has the same frame work in mind when he says, Follow me! – it is Now or never. You cannot even go back to say farewell as in the case of a tornado warning. 5b. The harsh words of let the “Dead bury their dead” seems more difficult to understand. However, if we know a little of the traditions, it might put this in a clearer light. In poor families, the “man” of the house would give his word to work for a period of time, e.g. Ten years. During that time, his wife and children would have their needs taken care of: they would have a house to live, they would be provided food, they would be given clothes. However, the “man” had to be available 24/7. No holidays, no day on the beach with the family. If he died before the ten years, his family, especially the eldest son had to complete the time left as an indentured labourer. So “let me go and bury my father”, did not actually mean that the father was dead It meant that if the father was ill or incapable of working, you would have to do it for as many years it took. For Jesus, that delay was unacceptable. The proclamation of the Kingdom meant right away. Some one asked me and what do you understand by the Kingdom of God.
|
|||
