I believe...

Is 56:1, 6-7; Rom 1;13-15, 29-32; Mat 15:21-28




We all surely have heard about the “Holocaust”- the systematic, state-sponsored persecution and murder of approximately six million Jews by the Nazi regime and its collaborators, throughout Nazi-occupied territory during World War II. The Nazis, who came to power in Germany in January 1933, believed that Germans were "racially superior" and that the Jews, deemed "inferior," were an alien threat to the so-called German racial community.


During the era of the Holocaust, German authorities also targeted other groups because of their perceived "racial inferiority": Roma (Gypsies), the disabled, and some of the Slavic peoples (Poles, Russians, and others). Other groups were persecuted on political, ideological, and behavioral grounds, among them Communists, Socialists, Jehovah's Witnesses, and homosexuals.


Shortly after the World War II, workmen were clearing out the debris from a bombed-out house in Cologne, Germany. On one of the cellar walls of the house they found a moving inscription. It had apparently been written there by a fugitive Jew who had used the basement to hide from Nazis. The inscription read:


I believe in the sun, even when it is not shining.I believe in love, even when I don't feel it.I believe in God, even when there is silence.


The inscription speaks a lot for whoever person wrote it. It’s about HOPE, it’s about FAITH. It’s about unwavering TRUST. And it brings us to the woman in today’s gospel—the Canaanite woman. She came to Jesus with hope, with faith, with trust. She believed in Jesus even though at first Jesus was silent. And at last the Lord acknowledges her faith. Her request was rewarded. Her daughter was healed.


The story of the Canaanite woman is more than just a demonstrative faith. It is a story that tells us about God’s love which is beyond the boundaries of race and nation. Because of that no one should be excluded from the all embracing reach of God’s love. That’s why the story of the Canaanite woman is so important to us. It explains how we came to share the legacy of the Chosen People of God—the common message of all the readings today.


In the 1st reading, Isaiah, speaking for God, says this: All who join themselves to the Lord “will be brought to my holy mountain.” It’s not just one person or one particular group but all. There are no exceptions. In the 2nd reading, Paul voices his pleasure in being sent to the Gentiles. He concludes in a beautiful statement that God is merciful to all. The Canaanite woman brought about the inclusiveness of God.


However, there is also another thing which we actually can learn from the Canaanite woman. She knew how to be a parent of faith. She is an exemplary mother who would do anything for her child’s welfare. AND.. you parents probably would claim the same for your selves. You would do anything and have done anything you could for your child’s welfare. You work hard to provide means for your children.. you are doing your best to ensure your children would be secure for their future. You send them to tuition, you give them hand phones so that they can call you anytime, you provide Internet for them so that would not be bored at home. You bought them pets to play and to love and so on and so forth.


But do you spend adequate time with them? Do you know their friends? Do you know what site they have logged in last night? Do you have faith in them? Or if you don’t.. have you given them faith? What is your expectation from your children? What if they don’t meet your expectation? What if you found out that your son is indulged in drug? What if you daughter gets pregnant and resorts to abortion?


We don’t want it to happen, at least not to our family members. But it’s a reality.. it’s happening in our society, in our community, in our family. Would we blame God for being silent to our prayers? Are we going to give up on God?


All the more reason we need the gospel today. We need the strength and courage of the Canaanite woman. We need her to ensure us that God is listening. We also need to embrace the FAITH of the fugitive Jews who was hiding from the Nazis. Remember what he had inscribed on the cellar wall?


I believe in the sun, even when it is not shining.I believe in love, even when I don't feel it.I believe in God, even when there is silence.

...back to Mama Maria

The Year For Priests ended last friday with a solemn mass at St. Peter's Square. The crowd was grand, the choir was great, the sermon of the Pope was enriching... But what touched me the most was the prayer of consecrating the priests, right before the final blesing..

Immaculate Mother,

in this place of grace,
called together by the love of your Son Jesus
the Eternal High Priest, we,
sons in the Son and his priests,
consecrate ourselves to your maternal Heart,

in order to carry out faithfully the Father's Will.

We are mindful that, without Jesus,

we can do nothing good (cf. Jn 15:5)
and that only through him,with him and in him,
will we be instruments of salvation
for the world.

Bride of the Holy Spirit,
obtain for us the inestimable gift
of transformation in Christ.
Through the same power of the Spirit that
overshadowed you,
making you the Mother of the Savior,
help us to bring Christ your Son
to birth in ourselves too.

May the Church
be thus renewed by priests who are holy,
priests transfigured by the grace of him
who makes all things new.

Mother of Mercy,
it was your Son Jesus who called us
to become like him:
light of the world and salt of the earth (cf. Mt 5:13-14).

Help us,
through your powerful intercession,
never to fall short of this sublime vocation,
nor to give way to our selfishness,
to the allurements of the world
and to the wiles of the Evil One.

Preserve us with your purity,
guard us with your humility
and enfold us with your maternal love
that is reflected in so many souls
consecrated to you,
who have become for us
true spiritual mothers.

Mother of the Church,
we priests want to be pastors
who do not feed themselves
but rather give themselves to God for their brethren,
finding their happiness in this.
Not only with words, but with our lives,
we want to repeat humbly, day after day,
Our "here I am."

Guided by you,
we want to be Apostles
of Divine Mercy,
glad to celebrate every day
the Holy Sacrifice of the Altar
and to offer to those who request it
the sacrament of Reconciliation.

Advocate and Mediatrix of grace,
you who are fully immersed
in the one universal mediation of Christ,
invoke upon us, from God,
a heart completely renewed
that loves God with all its strength
and serves mankind as you did.

Repeat to the Lord
your efficacious word: "They have no wine" (Jn 2:3),
so that the Father and the Son will send upon us
a new outpouring of the Holy Spirit.

Full of wonder and gratitude
at your continuing presence in our midst,
in the name of all priests
I too want to cry out:
"Why is this granted me,
that the mother of my Lord should come to me?" (Lk 1:43).

Our Mother for all time,
do not tire of "visiting us",
consoling us, sustaining us.
Come to our aid
and deliver us from every danger
that threatens us.
With this act of entrustment and consecration,
we wish to welcome you more deeply, more radically,
for ever and totally
into our human and priestly lives.

Let your presence cause new blooms to burst forth
in the desert of our loneliness,
let it cause the sun to shine on our darkness,
let it restore calm after the tempest,
so that all mankind shall see the salvation
of the Lord,
who has the name and the face of Jesus,
who is reflected in our hearts,
for ever united to yours!

Amen.

A Personal Reflection in the "Year of the Priest"

On June 19, 2009 Pope Benedict XVI launched the Year of the Priest. The solemn inauguration took place in the Basilica of St. Peter with a celebration of vespers on the solemnity of the Sacred Heart of Jesus. Prior to the recitation of the vesper, the Holy Father led the crowd to venerate in silence the relics of St. John Vianney.

As I joined the celebration, two things came to my mind. In the first instance I was overwhelmed to realize that I was sitting there, being part of the crowds. Never in my wildest dreams did I think I could participate in such a historical moment. Secondly, my thought flew to the very person of St. John Mary Vianney also known as the Curé d'Ars (meaning the Parish Priest of Ars). It is from those thoughts that I would like to begin this short reflection.

I enrolled at the Pontifica Università Urbaniana last year (2009) to take up a licentiate in Dogmatic Theology. In simpler words, Dogmatic Theology is part of theology which treats on the theoretical truths of faith concerning God and His works. Pontifica Università Urbaniana is an academic institution belonging to the Congregation for the Evangelisation of Peoples. It provides for research and teaching within the framework of the Holy See’s educational system regulated by the Congregation for Catholic Education. The Urbaniana has about 1,400 students coming from over 100 countries and approximately 200 lectures.

It was not long for me to realize that my study-leave in Rome would mean more than just a “break” from the parish works. The University requires each student to frequent a minimum of 72 lectures for the whole two years course. Just like any university, there would be examinations, assignments, seminars and thesis. I was struggling to adjust myself with the new environment. Moreover, the three months intensive Italian course didn’t seem to work at all. Often, after the class, I came out perplexing what on earth had I learned. At times, I wished so much that I were studying in an English medium university.

However, the difficulties not only laid on the struggle with the Italian language but in finding time for the revision. Back to my room in Collegio Urbano, I had to find all the means to make up for the classroom studies. Finding the study materials was not a problem but most of them would be in Italian. Soon afterwards, I found myself being occupied translating the Italian materials into English, literally word-by-word.

At the same time, living among the seminarians, I was obliged to work for the community in Collegio Urbano. We would take turn in the centrolino (the control room) to receive telephone calls, to monitor the close-circuit cameras and to control the access at the main gate. At other time, we would be serving the meals, tiding up the dining hall and washing the dishes for about 200 students in the Collegio. On top of that, there were so many rules and regulations to observe.

I started to feeling homesick. I recalled the good times in the parish where wonderful and generous friends were all around. I thought of the supportive Parish Councillors members and the joy of working together with the various ministries in the Church. I longed for the time when I was free to move around. Most of all, I remembered those wonderful and supportive parishioners I left behind. There, in Collegio Urbano, there were friends and yet nobody seemed to be friend. It’s strange and probably scandalizing but it’s true. At times, there were also prejudices and discrimination. I recalled sitting on the dining table with a group of French speaking Africans, wondering whether I was exist because they seemed not to “notice” my presence at all. At another occasion, I was trying to converse with a Vietnamese priest. He did not speak English and both of us were struggling to communicate in Italian. We ended up using “sign language”.

It was not an isolated occasion but a typical situation we were facing every day. To begin with, we were all strangers. We came from different background of culture and mentality. Naturally, we needed longer time to adjust to one another. Hence, we remained very much on the superficial level. We were unable to reach down to a heart-to-heart level of conversation. It was for this reason that most of the time loneliness turned to be real. It was also for this reason that small issues within the community could be easily blown up. Often, these tensions found its way out very unhealthily in the form of grudging against the authority. Worst still, there would be tendencies to take things too personally. Thus, even before the first year of the academic calendar ended three members of the community had already pulled out. Two priests and a deacon packed their things home. We were all devastated but that was nothing compare to what had happened in another Collegio. A student priest was found dead in his room. The body was discovered only after the next door friend sensed a foul smell. Police came to investigate and, after the post mortem, it was concluded that the poor priest died of a heart attack. The case was closed.

The incident, however, disclosed many unspoken facts concerning community life and the relationship between students and authorities in the Collegio or rather Collegi. Sadly to say, many of us started to relate a parallel of that incident with that of the Mother Church and Local Churches relationships. The “new” instructions of the liturgical celebration, for example, were seen as an unnecessary imposition and more like an insensitivity of the Mother Church to the local customs. The abuses in many convents (especially in Africa and India) also were linked to the lukewarm attitude of the authorities. Above all, the long-time issues on the problems and scandals of priests re-emerged. All these, came into my mind as I was imbued with the thoughts on St. John Mary Vianney during the inauguration of the “Year of the Priest”.

I wasn’t really sure how St. John Mary Vianney looked like now but I recalled a vivid image of a skinny and a long haired man who would definitely need “extra make-up” if he were to appear in the front-page page of a magazine. In any case, he knows what struggle is. As a seminarian, he was struggling to cope with his studies. As a priest, he struggled in his pastoral ministry as seen in the opposition of many people to the orphanage for destitute girls (called “The Providence”) he founded. Later, “The Providence” was ordered to close but St. John Mary Vianney remained “faithful” to his authority and to his priestly vocation. No wonder, when the Holy Father wrote a letter to all the priests in convoking the Year of the Priest, he cited many of the words and witnesses of this saintly Curé d'Ars. The Holy Father must also have at the back of his mind St. John Mary Vianney when later on he convoked the theme, "Faithfulness of Christ, Faithfulness of Priests". Obviously, in facing the daily struggles, the Holy Father intended all the priests to take an example from the “simplicity” of St. John Mary Vianney.

Nevertheless, solely imitating the “simplicity” of St. John Mary Vianney’s is not the whole point of the Pope. To begin with, “simplicity” is not a guarantee for one priestly life absent of problems. Neither does it a solution to the scandals of priests. But holiness does. St. John Mary Vianney’s one and only concern was to be “faithful to his priestly vocation” through a holy life and by faithfully ministering the sacraments. Sadly to say, there are many priests who missed out these two fundamental elements. In many instances, they are either too much indulging with personal agenda that parish works are often abandoned or they are too much involving in the pastoral agenda that personal spiritual life is abandoned.

The Holy Father noted this situation of which “the Church [herself] suffers as a consequence of infidelity on the part some of her ministers”. However, His Holiness also reminded the faithful to be realistic and acknowledge the beauty of priesthood, saying that “What is most helpful to the Church in such cases is not only a frank and complete acknowledgment of the weaknesses of her ministers, but also a joyful and renewed realization of the greatness of God’s gift, embodied in the splendid example of generous pastors, religious afire with love for God and for souls, and insightful, patient spiritual guides”.

This “Year of the Priest”, therefore, is a reminder for me to return to the essence of the Sacrament of Priesthood. To be faithful in the priestly vocation is, first of all, to keep closer to Jesus day by day. To be renewed in the priestly vocation is to constantly re-enact the very first time I responded to Jesus’ invitation to follow him. In this sense,  I'm reminded to come back to the original dignity of the priestly vocation that flows from Christ. This priestly nobility is not to be reflected in the authoritative manners and conducts but in fulfilling the obligation of the vows of ordination.

At the same time, I think, this Year of the Priest is also a reminder to all Catholics that the Sacrament of Priesthood is not exclusively a clerical affair. All the sacraments in the Church, especially the Eucharist, are connected to the Sacrament of Priesthood. In fact, all Catholics share in the common priesthood of Christ. As the Holy Father stated, “Priests and laity together make up the one priestly people and in virtue of their ministry priests live in the midst of the lay faithful, that they may lead everyone to the unity of charity, loving one another with mutual affection; and outdoing one another in sharing honor”. The sanctification and renewal of clergy therefore is but everyone’s responsibility.

It has been six months now since the inauguration of the Year of the Priest. I have completed the first year study and now stay in a new place called Collegio San Pietro Apostolo. It is located right on the top of Jeniculum Hill not so far from Pontifica Università Urbaniana (about 10 minutes by bus). Here, we have smaller community (only 164) but to me “struggles” continue for real. However in all these, I find consolations in the theme the Holy Father had chosen for this Priestly Year—“Faithfulness of Christ, Faithfulness of Priest”. As the Holy Father mentioned in his letter, this theme entails a necessity for priests to have a “deep personal identification with the Sacrifice of Cross”.

Reflecting the message of the Holy Father, I personally feel that this Year of the Priest is a time to going through another phase of priestly formation, aims to renew  and strengthen my priestly commitment.  Struggling to be faithful like Christ, my eyes should not cease to focus on the very word Christ who spoke to the Apostles in the Upper Room: “In the world you have tribulation; but take courage, I have overcome the world”.These same words were cited by the Holy Father and these same words would be my key theme as I journey through this Year of the Priest...

(N.B. This article was previously appeared in Catholic Sabah Newsletter, Vol. 21, January 2010)

La certezza dell'incertezza...

(Photo: "The Burning  Flame Peeps Out..."by Willothepooh)

I was browsing through Marina Mahathir's blog at  http://rantingsbymm.blogspot.com/2010/01/confident-people-do-not-get-confused.html. The article interested me because it seemed to parallel very closely the thoughts of many "confident people" I've talked with. To begin with, I've been always admiring Mirina's writings, not to mention the courage of her convictions in addressing many sensitive issues that majority of people would otherwise brush aside or blowout it unnecessarily. The article, written in a simple yet confident tone, reveals that she is indeed one of the few exceptional thinkers in today's Malaysia. Her point is straight forward but unfortunately some commentators seemed to have carried away with their personal sentiments.. sometimes deliberately crossed the line of blogging ethics. Others, in their attempt to project a rather vague opinion, exposed not only their confusion about the real issue but the ignorance of possibly harmful consequences of their comments to the whole nations of Malaysia. In any case, I couldn't help but to notice "la certezza dell'incertezza" (the certainty of the uncertainty)... What could be next? Would there be more induced riots? Would there be more political dramas? Would there be truly OneMalaysia? Would there be more insecurities...?? Or should I ask... would anyone care to pray with me for Malaysia, Tanah Air Ku?

All things have their season...

Omnia tempus habent et suis spatiis transeunt universa sub caelo

Tempus nascendi et tempus moriendi tempus plantandi et tempus evellendi quod plantatum est

Tempus occidendi et tempus sanandi tempus destruendi et tempus aedificandi

Tempus flendi et tempus ridendi tempus plangendi et tempus saltandi

Tempus spargendi lapides et tempus colligendi tempus amplexandi et tempus longe fieri a conplexibus

Tempus adquirendi et tempus perdendi tempus custodiendi et tempus abiciendi

Tempus scindendi et tempus consuendi tempus tacendi et tempus loquendi

Tempus dilectionis et tempus odii tempus belli et tempus pacis

Quid habet amplius homo de labore suo?

I thought it would be good to begin this New Year with a personal meditation on this scriptural text.. "There is a time for everything.."(Ecclesiastes 3: 1-9)  The background photo was taken at 00.00 (GMT+01:00) last night 01.01.2010. I was in Piazza Giuseppe Garibaldi watching the Italians welcoming the New Year. It was an attempt to snap some fireworks but the figure of the lady was unintentionally captured. Allora... (Italian word for 'now/so/then') ..must say that the inadvertent focus has enhanced this otherwise distorted photo. I couldn't help but to wonder how small unexpected thing could really make a  great difference.. (^__^) ...and it confirms to me again and again that "there is a time for everything and there is a reason for everything"  :))

Merry Christmas.. godfather.

I received this beautiful e-card from my “godsister”. I know there is no such a word in English (at least not in the Collins Dictionary) but I think its connotation is quite obvious. I mean.. just think about godparents, godfather or godmother in Christian sense...

This card reminds me of my late godfather, Lucius Duki Mandadi. I was baptized in St. Peter Cleaver’s Church at my home parish, Ranau. I didn’t know exactly why my father chose him to be my godfather except that he was my father’s good friend. In fact, my father and he went to college together. Unfortunately, I didn’t have the opportunity to know him closer partly because soon after I was baptized, my parents moved to Semporna (a small town about 8 hours driving from my hometown) due to my father’s working commitment. Only some 15 years later did I came to know that he was my godfather.

“A man with a smiling face” I would describe him.. He never missed to talk to me whenever he saw me, sometimes just a small conversation but always with big smiles on his face. There were few occasions I would never forget about him... the first was when I met a car accident in the year 2000, he happened to pass by with his white van and took all the troubles to help me. Sometimes later he invited me for his daughter’s wedding. I promised him to come but I never turned up.. I felt so bad about it when I met him the next day but he simply grinned, couldn’t be bothered at all about it.

I would also never forget him for his zealous involvement in the parish organizing committee for my ordination. In one of the meetings, somebody proposed that, being my godfather, his name should be up in the ordination booklet but he humbly declined it. I regretted not to insist. But most of all, I remember when he was in agony in Queen Elizabeth Hospital.. I came to give him the Sacrament of Anointing. He was all on oxygen mask, obviously in extreme pain yet he still tried to smile at me.

I heard about the demise of him three days after he was buried... too late to attend his funeral. I remember sitting silently behind the Blessed Sacrament.. unsure what I should say for him in the prayer. I just felt so bad for many ambiguous reasons.. one thing for sure was in having taken for granted the irreversibility of time.

It has been two years now.. or was it three years ago? I must thank my godsister for being so thoughtful to me this Christmas. I guess she doesn't really realize how much this card actually mean to me but I’m sure her late father aka my godfather does.

Merry Christmas to you, godfather.

The Man of the Shroud

The "Man of the Shroud" (as it has been always named)  is an anatomical study based on the Shroud of Turin by Isabel Piczek, a noted monumental artist and theoretical physicist and a highly respected Shroud researcher.

This 24" X 5" bronze depicting Piczek's works captured my attention as I entered the Casa Nuovisima in Collegio San Pietro Apostolo. Placed on the right side of the staircase facing the main entrance of the house, one would never miss to notice the significance of it.  My own word to describe it is the "Humiliation of the Lord"..

"In his humiliation justice was denied him. Who can describe his generation? For his life is taken up from the earth." (Acts 8:33)

On the Threshold

"Songs of Chokhamela"
Why have you thrown this challenge, god?
Solve this riddle of mine;
Enter my shoes, know in your own self:
An outcast, what rights do I enjoy?
Says Chokha, this low born human body
Every one drives away?


Chokhamela was a fourteenth-century untouchable saint-poet who belong to the varkari tradition of Maharashtra. These poems, the first expression of dalit poetry, express poignantly a peculiar dichotomy: the awareness of living at the margin, and God's need and love for him.

Tuuhan

"Tuuhan" ka nopo do boros do Dusun nga tiinum do waig toiko nunu nopo ii miloh do inuman om okon ii ko kawanit. Nga iti nopo boros diti miloh nogi do popokomoi do kalangadan moginum dii tinuman papaauk migal ko lihing, bahar, montoku om kinomol.

Iti nopo tulun diti nga noiindaman tinuuhan om kotoboi dii isio do mindakod do piasau. Miagal dirii om nokokinam dii isio do popohtuuh di tatalan dau miampai waig piasau... :))

The Christian Priesthood: The Originality of Its Being and Action

Study Materials: Mazzanti, G., I Sacramenti: Simbolo e Teologia, Pontificia Universtà Urbaniana (class notes).

Introduction
This paper is written as a summary for the course TLD 1004 – Il sacerdozio cristiano: l’originalità del suo essere e agire (translated as “The Christian Priesthood: The Originality of Its Being and Action”). It is a required course for licentiate students in the Faculty of Theology, Pontifical University of Urbaniana, Rome.

Scope and Terminology
The lectures of the course TLD 1004 revolved around the theme of the Nuptial Design of God in the Christian Priesthood. This theme can be outlined into the following topics: [1] the Kingly Character of Christ, [2] the Prophetic Character of Christ, [3] the Priestly Character of Christ. It is notable that two terms have been consistently utilized throughout this course, namely sponsale and sponsalità. As such, it is necessary to study the etymology of these terms as well as to see the possibility of finding equivalent English translations for them.

According to DIZIONARIO ETIMOLOGICO ONLINE (http://www.etimo.it), the word sponsale derives from the Latin SPONÀLEM. Thus, the English word “spousal” (adjective) should be the most appropriate for its translation. The term sponsalità, however, is ambiguous as it is nowhere to be found in the dictionary. But it most likely that sponsalità is a noun considering that the Italian words conjugated with –tà (e.g. regalità and sovranità) are all nouns. Nonetheless, giving the benefit of doubts, the Italian terms sponsale and sponsalità will be retained throughout this paper.

The Kingly Character of Christ
In the history of Israel the institution of the Old Testament priesthood traces its origin to Aaron, the brother of Moses. It is also a hereditary of the tribe of Levi, one of the twelve tribes of Israel (Sir 45:7). However, Jesus is the heir of David whose lineage comes from the tribe of Juda. Thus, his priesthood is not from the tribe of Levi but of Juda (Heb 7:14). In this sense, Jesus’ priesthood is different from that of Levi’s priesthood. In fact, his priesthood is one which has been elevated. He is the "king-priest after the order of Melchizedek" (cf. Mt 26:63-64; Ps 109; Heb 5:9-10).

Melchizedek is a mysterious figure who appeared in Gen 14:18-20. He is linked to the Messiah, who is promised to the nations in Psalm 109:4. That Jesus is from the order of Melchizedek is important in order to understand Jesus’ Kingly Character. Melchizedek is a King of Salem (Gen 14:18) and Jesus Christ is accredited a king in his entrance to Jerusalem (Mt 21:1-11). As such, Jesus’ kingship is not only linked to Melchizedek but is different to that of the worldly kings. His kingship is a Kingship over all creation as testified in the Gospel of John “..the Father had given him all things into his hands..” (Jn 13:3).

The kingship of Jesus is also attested by a woman by a symbolic gesture when Jesus was at the house of Simon the leper. The woman “came to him with an alabaster box of precious ointment and poured it on his head” (Mt 26:7, Mk 14:3). In the Gospel of John, this woman, identified as Mary the sister of Lazarus, is mentioned to have anointed Jesus’ feet with the ointment and wiped his feet with her hair (Jn 12:3). The connection of this gesture is seen in the last supper when, by washing the feet of his disciples, Jesus manifests to his disciple the true nature of his kingship (Jn 13). He is a servant-king not a dictator-king.

The nuptial design of God in this respect is seen from the fact that in Jesus Christ, the plan of God for humanity to be the King of creation is realized. Jesus the King mediated human being in receiving “all things that the Father has given him in his hands”. Thus, human being is understood as the authorized master of all other creations through Jesus Christ. On the other hand, in the Eucharist, Jesus the Priest represents human being in offering a perfect offering of thanksgiving to the Father for this wonderful gift. This reciprocal event in the king-priest of Jesus realizes the sponsale and sponsalità dimension of God’s nuptial plan.

The Prophetic Character of Christ
There are two closely interweaving aspects that constitute the theme of the Nuptial Design of God from the dimension of the Prophetic Character of Christ: [1] the corporate personality and [2] the original-destination of God’s plan. In both aspects, Christ the prophesied Messiah is seen as the embodied Word that fulfilled God’s plan for His creation.

The corporate personality sees the design of God in a manner of complementing pair (coppia). It begins with the creation of Adam and Eve (Gen 1:27; 2:2-25) who represent the whole human beings and continues with story of Abraham and Sarah (Gen 12) the patristic padre and madre of all humanity. In fact, the pair-up designation of God is evident since Noah’s time (Gen 7:2-9). This element of cooperate personality conveys not only God’s original plan for His creations to be in communion with Him but also the character of His communal divine image.

God’s original plan of communion implies “freedom” of both involved parties. Already in the first creations of Adam and Eve, God has bestowed freedom to them but the freedom was violated. As a consequence, the original sin came into the picture of human history and separated the communion between the God and humanity (Gen 3). However, the incarnation of Jesus, foretold in Isaiah 7:14, brings new hope for humanity to restore the original blessing of God. In this moment of incarnation, the perfect freedom is manifested. The divinities, in the form of the Son, willingly entered into human history and as such fulfilled the prophecy of old.

This fullness of time is not only a moment of creation for the new Adam (1 Cor 15:22; 45-49) but also a creation of the new Eve. In the book of Genesis, Adam called Eve "woman" (Gen 3:12). At the wedding in Cana nobody was identified but Jesus and his mother and Jesus called her "woman" (Jn 2:4). In this regard, the sponsale and sponsalità dimension in God’s nuptial plan once again takes place. But above all, it is important to acknowledge that the new Adam, the Word becomes flesh, is not of a man but of a woman (Gal 4:4). That seems to be a reverse from the original formation of the first woman, who is taken from the flesh man (Gen 2:21-22). Nonetheless, precisely on this basis, the prophecy about Christ the “seed of a woman” (Gen 3:15) is fulfilled and the design of God takes place.

The sponsale and sponsalità elements are also seen in the context of the Ark of Covenant and Mary’s womb. The Ark of the Covenant was significant to the Israelite as it is the Holy Place of God’s dwelling. The letter to the Hebrews reveals that the Ark contains the manna, the rod of Aaron and the tables of the testament (Heb 9:4). Mary, having bore Jesus in her womb, now becomes the new Ark of the New Covenant. Her womb is likened to the “bosom of the Father” as testified in the book of John (Jn 1:18). Thus, the “bosom of the Father” is understood as the Holy Spirit. Further, the manna which was given by God as the food for the Israelite is parallel to Jesus, who comes to the humanity as the bread of life.

The nuptial design of God in the prophetic character of Christ is seen in the sense that Jesus the embodied word, who was prophesied in the Old Testament now fulfills God’s original-destination plan of communion. This communion is understood as the union of love between God and human being. This so-called “wedding of the divine and humanity”, continues to take place in the celebration of the Eucharist. The bread is the consecrated body of Christ but also the embodied word. Thus, in the person of Christ, the communion of love between the human and divine is indeed being mediated.

The Priestly Character of Christ
Already from the topics of Kingly and Prophetic Character of Christ, the Eucharist is seen as a significant event in mediating the nuptial design of God. To construct the nuptial design of God from the dimension of the Priestly Character of Christ is naturally giving a significant place for the Eucharist. After all, a priest essentially exists for the Eucharist and vice versa. However, it is also necessary to come back to the crucifixion event as it was also a momentous revelation of Christ’s priesthood. Thus, this topic will focus on two main aspects: [1] the priesthood of Christ from the horizon of the cross as a gift and sacrifice; [2] the priesthood of Christ that as the “preside” of the Eucharistic.

The cross has been always seen both as a sign of suffering and also victory (Colossians 2:13-15). The crucifixion of Christ, therefore, is both a sacrificial offering to God and also a gift of life to humanity. As such, the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross is an act of love (un atto di amore) in obedience to the Father. It is an act of love of God the Father to the humanity. The obedience of Christ is a ransom for the human being not in the sense of “levy” (un dazio) but of “heart” (dal cuore). It is in this sense that we see the sacrifice of Christ the “High priest” as a spousal love sacrifice, a perfect love sacrifice of the bridegroom to his bride the Church. “Because of the insufficiency of the sacrifices of the law, Christ our high priest shed his own blood for us, offering up once for all the sacrifice of our redemption..” (cf. Heb 10).

As the “presider” of the Eucharistic, the nuptial design of God in the priesthood of Christ must be looked from two perspectives: [1] the Eucharistic act inherited from the synoptic tradition (Mt 26:26-29; Mk 14:22-25; Lk 22:19-20) and [2] the Eucharistic act inherited from the account of John’s Gospel (Jn 13-16).

In the synoptic gospels, the conduct of the Last Super is designated in such a way that actually bring across the element of sponsale and sponsalità . First of all, the sponsale element is seen the choice of a place in the upper room. The upper room characterize a spousal room (camera sponsale), a private place. Secondly, in the Last Supper which has a typical Jewish character Jesus was with the twelve. The twelve is his family but also his spouse. In fact, the twelve are representing the Church the bride of Christ. Thirdly, the banquet has a character of a wedding banquet (un banchetto messianic nuziale) where everyone is welcomed, sinners included. Fourthly, the interval in the banquet namely the offering of the bread and wine completed the spousal union between God and human being but also in a special way the sponsale and sponsalità between man and woman. It is interesting to notice the elements in the making of bread namely the water and fire. These elements are symbol of the Holy Spirit. Likewise, the wine which is transformed into the blood of Christ symbolized life the gift of the Holy Spirit. Hence, the Holy Spirit is never absent in the nuptial design of God.

The symbolic actions and elements in the Last Supper are re-enacted again and again in the celebration of the Eucharist. The priest, being the presider or minister of the Eucharist, represents Christ the bridegroom whereas the people of God, the Church is the bride of Christ. However, equally important to consider is the “version of the Eucharist” according to John the evangelist. The Gospel of John replaced the account of the Eucharist in the Synoptic Gospel with the washing of feet and followed by a long discourse to his disciples. This “version of the Eucharist” reveals the dynamic aspect of the Eucharist namely all Christians are called to serve one another. But it is also an event where the nuptial design of God is revealed. The washing of the feet symbolize a spousal act of a husband and wife by the example of Christ and of the Church (Eph 5:25-27). On the other hand, the discourse that follows immediately is the prayer of Christ the Bridegroom for his Bride the Church. This prayer is continued by the apostolic work of the Church ministers in anticipation of the eschatological banquet, an eternal nuptial of the divinity and humanity.

Conclusion
The originality of the being and action in the Christian Priesthood obviously has the characters of sponsale and sponsalità. These characters reveal the beautiful plan of God for the eschatological wedding namely the eternal union between divinity and humanity in the Kingdom of God. However, the Kingdom of God is also here on earth. Thus, the wedding between divinity and humanity is already here and now. It takes place each time in the re-enactment of the paschal mystery of Christ especially through the Eucharist - the supreme manifestation of Christ's action and being.

This action and being of Christ constitute the Christian Priesthood. The priestly, kingly and prophetic characters of the priesthood, therefore, are not just an office per se but mediation for the nuptial design of God. It connects the whole events in the salvation history with the paschal mystery of Christ. It brings across the truest reality of God’s original design for human being. Understanding the elements that constitute the celebration of the paschal mystery in the Eucharist will not only enhance a liturgical participation in the Holy Mass but also a perception and encouragement to meditate more on the Holy Scripture. In a special way, the role of the Blessed Virgin Mary is also acknowledged and in fact closely associated in the nuptial plan of God. As such, the place of honour to Mary that especially prevalent in the Catholic tradition is not only secured but fortified.

Each of us is necessary..

..extract of the His Holiness Benedict XVI's Homily, Sunday, April 24th 2005

I came across this beautiful words of the Holy Father in the souvenir shop of the Catacomb of St Peter's Basilica last year (2008). It was imprinted as bookmark available in 5 languages (English, French, Italian, German, Spanish). Needless to say, every single word is impressively wonderful and inspiring...

And only where God is seen
does life truly begin.
Only when we meet
the Living God in Christ do
we know what life is.
We are not some casual
and meaningless product of evolution.
Each of us is a result
of the thought of God.
Each of us is willed,
each of us is loved,
each of us is necessary.
There is nothing more beautiful
than to be surprised by the Gospel,
by the encounter with Christ.
There nothing more beautiful
than to know Him and to speak to others
of our friendship with Him

Penitential: Celebration and Sacrament

(An assignment presented to Prof. G.Iuliano as a partial fulfillment for the course of TLD 1005 - Penitenza: celebrazione e sacramento, Faculty of Dogmatic Theology, Pontificia Università Urbaniana, Rome)

Study Material

Osborne, K., Reconciliation and Justification: The Sacrament and Its Theology, Wipf and Stock, Eugene, Oregon, 2001 (Paulist Press, New York, 1990).

Introduction

Fr. Kenan Osborne, O.F.M is a Professor Emeritus of Systematic Theology at the Franciscan School of Theology and the Graduate Theological Union in Berkeley, California. He is the past-president of the Catholic Theological Society of America and a worldly renowned teacher and scholar. His other books are including The Christian Sacraments of Initiation, Sacramental Theology and Priesthood.

The Reconciliation and Justification presents two main concerns of Fr. Osborne namely the full efficacy of Jesus’ saving act and the absolute gratuity of God’s grace in relation to the Sacrament of Penance. In his efforts to bring out these two points, Fr. Osborne develops the following subjects: [1] The issues of justification and Sacrament of Penance, [2] Jesus, the Primordial Sacrament, [3] The historical and theological background of the Sacrament of Penance, [4] Vatican II and the Sacrament of Reconciliation, [5] The Unresolved Issues on Justification and the Sacrament of Penance.

The issues of justification and the Sacrament of Penance

“Justification” in Fr. Osborne’s mind is one way to speak the mystery of salvation. There have been other terminologies preferred in the various Christian traditions i.e. redemption, divinization, sanctification as well as “reconciliation”. The ritual or sacrament of penance is intended for reconciliation of the penitent and God. However, it should not be seen as the only means for the reconciliation because every Christian sacrament actually involves reconciliation. The issues in justification and the issues in the sacrament of penance are interdependent because both are focusing on the full efficacy of Jesus’ saving act and the absolute gratuity of God’s grace.

Jesus, the Primordial Sacrament of Reconciliation

Jesus, the “Primordial” Sacrament of Reconciliation is seen from the fact that the New Testament is all about reconciliation. In other words, reconciliation is an essential part of gospel living. Thus, the Church, being the Body of Christ, is the basic sacrament of reconciliation. In this sense, the classical passages on the power to forgive sin (Mt 16:16; Mt 18:18; Jn 20:22-23), cannot be interpreted as applying only to hierarchy but to the power to isolate, repel and negate sin. It’s a power which Christians found in every aspect of their life, not simply in leadership. That Jesus the primordial sacrament of reconciliation is to be considered from two aspects: [1] his message of reconciliation; [2] his life-death-resurrection. These two aspects call to realise that a new way of being with and in God is the goal of all salvation.

The historical and theological background of the Sacrament of Penance

There is no indication in the New Testament of a sacramental ritual of reconciliation. The earliest historical evidence of a rite of reconciliation for sins committed after baptism is found in the writings of Hermas (c. 150). The ritual was public, imposed to serious sins (i.e. adultery, apostasy and murder) and could be received only once in a lifetime. It required an entry in the “order of penitent” for at least three years and exclusion from attending Mass. This public ritual was a normative approach for the next nine hundred years throughout the Christian church.

The present sacrament of penance which is private in nature and can be repeated as often as needed has the origin of the Celtic Churches (Wales, Ireland, Scotland and England). It started as a form of spiritual direction in the monastic life. In 1215 the Fourth Lateran Council adopted it, thereby officially abandoning the public form of sacrament. The Celtic form of penance encouraged the “confession” of sins and, as a help had several Penitentials, books which listed sins and penance. The Celtic form of penance was one of the most important catechetical means that brought about a genuine renewal in the moral life of continental Europe in the early medieval period.

In the reformation period the sacrament of penance became an issue of focus of criticism because the theology of justification found expression in the sacrament of penance. Unfortunately, the Catholic response (in particular the Council of Trent) did not really address the real issue. In many ways the response focused on the denial of sacramentality, not on the interrelationship of the theology of justification and the theology of penance. The ambiguity of the statements of Trent among others was influenced by the unsettled issues between various schools (i.e. the Thomists and Scotists). Council of Trent, however, became the dominant approach to the Sacrament of Penance in the Roman Catholic Church for the next 400 years.

Vatican II and the Sacrament of Reconciliation

The new rite for the sacrament of penance (Ordo paenitentiae), promulgated on December 2, 1973 is an important development of the sacrament of penance. Its significance is noted mainly because of the two documents of Vatican II (Lumen Gentium and Sacrosanctum Concilium) that become the basis for renewal. Among notable points in the new rite are the presentation of the social nature of sin (offence against God and the Church) and also the communal nature of reconciliation (reconciliation with God and with the Church).

The term “mortal” and “venial” also have been carefully avoided in the new ritual. Furthermore, the new rite highlights the importance of the use of scripture in the liturgical celebration of the sacrament of penance. The theology of the Sacrament of Reconciliation is also linked to the baptismal and Eucharist. Nonetheless, despite all these, the new ritual of reconciliation (hence Vatican II) did not address in any way the issue of justification nor attempt to bring the theology of justification into the renewal effort.

The Unresolved Issues on the Sacrament of Reconciliation

Fr. Osborne remarks that the Post-Vatican II theology is left with a number of unresolved issues on the Sacrament of Reconciliation and has selected five issue for consideration: [1] The issue of general absolution, [2] The issue of private confession to a priest, [3] The issue of the age for first reconciliation, [4] The issue of frequent confession, [5] The issue of justification.

[1] The issue of general absolution

The problem lies on the statement of 1972 regulation (Sacramentum paenitentiae) that instructing the usage of general absolution only in “case of necessity”. It is theologically incorrect because obviously every time the rite of reconciliation is celebrated, there is operative in one way or another a “case of necessity”. Even if it is referring to the situation in “imminent danger of death”, one still can argue as such situation has its own form (cf. Shorter Rite 1). The instruction that requiring the penitent who received general absolution to come back “within a reasonable time” to private confession to a priest is also another problem. By giving a “condition” to general sacramental absolution given, it is compromising the full efficacy of Jesus’ saving act and the absolute gratuity of God’s grace.

[2] The issue of private confession to a priest

The new ritual of reconciliation instructs that all sin is an offence against God and an offence against the community. Also, the instruction goes that reconciliation at all levels is both reconciliation with God and reconciliation with the community. In other word, there is no such thing as completely private or personal sin neither a merely personal reconciliation. Thus, private confession to priest becomes an issue. The teaching of the Church on contrition (which of itself takes away sins), the recognition that the priestly absolution given generally is valid and the theology that an integral confession of all serious sins is necessary for an absolution of sin make this issue even more complicated.

[3] The issue of the age for first reconciliation

This is closely related to the issue of receiving first Holy Communion. The first confession prior to the first Eucharistic is a current practice of the Roman Catholic Church. The problem arises not only with regard to the catechetical process of the children but also to the theology of the sacrament i.e. “there is no necessary prior reception of the sacrament of penance unless there has been a serious and substantive separation by a Christian both from God and from the community”. The directives of the Church authorities which have been adopted from time to time to require first confession before first Eucharist, therefore, become questionable. To be exact, it can’t be said “absolute”. They can only be interpreted as endorsing and encouraging a pastoral practice otherwise we will be having an erroneous theological doctrine.

[4] The issue of frequent confession

This issue become a problem because the renewed rite of reconciliation, especially Rite 1 (private confession to a priest) signals priests to spend more time with each penitent. On the other hand, church officials signal priests to confess large number of penitents. The two signals do not fit well together. It also can foster many unhealthy pastoral position and ambiguous theological positions. For example, a doubt that sin is truly forgiven in the sacrament of reconciliation and also an implication that the penitent must “do” something again and again so that sins can be forgiven. Such consequences, obviously, compromise the full and absolute gratuity of God’s grace and the full efficacy of the salvific work of Jesus.

[5] The issue of justification

Justification has been a long-standing issue that Fr. Osborne claimed to have not been officially addressed by the leadership of the Roman church. Many areas in the new rite of penance are ambiguous because they are not developed in these contexts of justification. For instance, the various theologies of the sacrament of penance on the “the work of the penitent”, the “efficacy of the priestly absolution”, the “disposition of the penitent” and the “intention of the priest” could be appeared to compromise the absolute gratuity of God’s grace.

Other Pastoral Observations

Fr. Osborne’s critical analyses on the unsolved issues of the sacrament of reconciliation are mainly linked with the theological issue of the full and absolute gratuity of God’s grace and the full efficacy of the salvific work of Jesus. The following issues on the sacrament of reconciliation are some other observations that probably more pastoral in nature:

1. The individual comes to the Reconciliation Chapel or confessional wanting something other than the Sacrament of Reconciliation. They may have a question; they may want advice; they may want a candle or a rosary blessed; they may need money or food or medicine. They may be lonely and want to talk to someone. They may need psychiatric help: advice, counselling or therapy.

2. The conviction that sins will be forgiven if, in true contriteness, an individual ask God directly for absolution. Hence, confessional box, reconciliation chapel, and the priest are unnecessary.

3. The people are losing confidence in their parish priests’ ability to understand and relate to the real-life trials in their daily lives. Confessional counselling isn’t taken seriously. Worst still, they see no leadership or example being set by their priests where the sacrament of reconciliation is concerned. They see that many priests seldom, or never, go to confession themselves.

4. They have had terribly bad experiences in the confessional at one time or another either because of the crudely, tactlessness, or insensitiveness of the priest. They are also often embarrassed or hurt by priests who imply that some of the sins they confess are nothing more than triviality.

Joseph Ratzinger and the Sacrament of Penance

In the course of the recent development in the Post-Vatican era, there have been a lot of insights from other Catholic theologians as well as the Roman Catholic officials that either for or against to Fr. Osborne. In the context of this study, it is of vital necessity to mention that of Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict XVI) in the motu proprio Misericordia Dei dated 2 May 2002. The letter highlights other aspects which were not touched by Fr. Osborne. Obviously, it was not intended as a response to Fr. Osborne but the insights are important for us to understand the position of the Catholic Church on the issues in the Sacrament of Reconciliation.

The then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger starts with the Personalist nature of Christian life. Despite all our bonds with the human community, sin is ultimately something totally personal. Thus, our healing with forgiveness also has to be something that is totally personal. God does not treat us as part of a collectivity. He knows each one by name. This nature is manifested in a particularly clear way in the Sacrament of Penance. Personal confession and the forgiveness directed to this person, therefore, are constitutive parts of the sacrament. Collective absolution is an extraordinary form that is possible only in strictly determined cases of necessity; it also supposes the will to make the personal confession of sins as soon as it will be possible to do so.

Secondly, the Judicial-Sacramental character of the Sacrament of Penance is explained. The disciples are not simply a neutral instrument of divine forgiveness, but rather a power of discernment is entrusted to them and with it a duty of discernment for individual cases. Hence, two aspects belong essentially to the Sacrament of Penance: (i) the sacramental aspect, namely the mandate of the Lord, that goes beyond the real power of the disciples and of the community of disciples of the Church; (ii) the commission to make the decision that must be founded objectively and, therefore, must be just and in this sense has a judicial nature that requires a juridical order in the Church. The judicial-sacramental character of the sacrament implies that the sacrament of penance is different from Baptism. It is a specific sacrament that supposes a special sacramental power and it is linked with the Sacrament of Orders.

Thirdly, the limitation of the Church with regard to the sacrament of penance is acknowledged. The duty of confession was instituted by the Lord himself and is constitutive of the sacrament. Therefore, it is not in the power of the Church to replace personal confession with general absolution. Hence, only in situations of necessity, in which the human being's final salvation is at stake, can the absolution be anticipated and the confession left for a time in which it will be possible to make it.

Finally, the individual confession is affirmed as an experience of liberation in God. The simple confession of one's guilt is presented with confidence in God's merciful goodness. If it is done with the spirit of trust proper to the children of God it can become an experience of deliverance, an experience of liberation in God. This last explanation expresses the conviction of the Catholic Church on the Sacrament of Reconciliation. The spirit of trust proper to the children of God implies that our liberation is not our personal effort but because of the full and absolute gratuity of God’s grace and the full efficacy of the salvific work of Jesus.

Conclusion

The book of Reconciliation and Justification is indeed an excellent work of Fr. Osborne. His thorough historical and theological analysis on the issue of reconciliation and justification enriches ones understanding on the background of the Sacrament of Reconciliation. Most importantly, his observations offer informative insights and stimulate the readers to think critically in order to perceive the truest celebration of penance as a sacrament.

In the context of our study, the question of Fr. Osborne remains valid for reflection: “In what way does the sacrament of reconciliation, in its currently revised form, celebrate the central mystery of justification?” There is no simple answer for this question but definitely, as Fr. Osborne has consistently echoed, the way in which it is to be answered must incorporate the issue of justification in its theology and pastoral dimensions.

In any rate, it must be noted that Fr. Osborne is neither promoting nor supporting the justification issue of the reformation era, in particular the Lutheran’s opposition to the Catholic Church. His critical analysis on the issue of justification with regard to the sacrament of reconciliation should be rather seen as a call to the Church authority to officially address this long-standing issue.

On the other hand, Joseph Ratzinger (Pope Benedict XVI) offers a remarkable reflection on the sacrament of penance. His deeply grounded theology enables him to integrate the personal design of God for human being with the essence of the sacrament of penance. The individual character of the sacrament of penance does not despise the social dimension of it. In fact, individual or private confession is seen as a corporate act of worship which builds up the Body of Christ.

The recognition of the limitation of the Church must not be looked from Christological perspective i.e. the church as a Body of Christ rather in a juridical sense i.e. the Church as an institution. The judicial-sacramental character of the sacrament of penance distinguishes it from the other sacraments. As such, it is a “specific sacrament” that should be treated in a manner proper to its nature. In this sense, one can say that “penance” is truly a “celebration” of the Mystery of God’s love and also a “sacrament” namely, an outward sign of the inner grace of God.