Author: Msgr. Charles Pope

We heard the parable of the sower at yesterday’s Sunday Mass. Someone asked me the following question: “Since the sower is the Son of Man, Jesus himself, why would the Lord, who knows everything ahead of time, sow seed he knew would not bear fruit?”

First, let’s review the text:

“A sower went out to sow. And as he sowed, some seed fell on the path, and birds came and ate it up. Some fell on rocky ground, where it had little soil. It sprang up at once because the soil was not deep, and when the sun rose it was scorched, and it withered for lack of roots. Some seed fell among thorns, and the thorns grew up and choked it. But some seed fell on rich soil, and produced fruit, a hundred or sixty or thirtyfold. Whoever has ears ought to hear” (Matt 13:1-9).

And thus the question, why would God waste any seed on rocky or thin soil, or on the path?

Perhaps a series of possible “answers” is all we can venture. I place “answers” in quotes since we are in fact touching on some mysteries here on which we can only speculate. So, here are some potential “answers.”

I. God is extravagant – It is not just seed He scatters liberally; it is everything. There are hundreds of billions of stars in over 100 billion galaxies, most of these seemingly devoid of life as we understand it. Between these 100 billion galaxies are huge amounts of what seems to be empty space. On this planet, where one species of bird would do, there are thousands of species, tens of thousands of different sorts of insects, and a vast array of different sorts of trees, mammals, fish, etc. “Extravagant” barely covers it. The word “extravagant” means “going or wandering beyond.” And God has gone vastly beyond anything we can imagine. But God is love and love is extravagant. The image of Him sowing seeds in almost a careless way is thus consistent with the usual way of God.

This, of course, is less an answer to the question before us than a deepening of the question. The answer, if there is one, is caught up in the mystery of love. Love does not say, “What is the least I can do?” It says, “What more can I do?” If a man loves a woman he does not look for the cheapest gift on her birthday, rather he looks for an extravagant gift. God is Love and God is extravagant.

II. Even if a failed seed represents one who ultimately rejects Him, God loves that seed anyway. Remember, as Jesus goes on to explain, the seeds that fail to bear fruit are symbols of those who allow riches, worldly preoccupation, persecution, and other things to draw them away from God. But even knowing this God still loves them. He still wills their existence. Scripture says elsewhere, But I tell you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous (Matt 5:44-45).

Yes, God loves even those who will ultimately reject him and He will not, despite knowing ahead of time of that rejection, say to them, “You cannot exist.” He thus scatters that seed  even though He knows it will not bear the fruit He wishes. Further, He continues to send the sun and rain even on those who will reject him.

Hence this parable shows forth God’s unfailing love. He sows seeds even knowing they will not bear the fruit He wants. He wills the existence of all, even those who He knows ahead of time will reject him.

III. The fact that God sows seeds and allows them to fall on bad soil is indicative of God’s justice. The various places the seed falls is indicative of human freedom more than illustrative of the intent of God. For one may still ask “Why would God ‘allow’ seed to fall on the path, or among thorns, or in rocky soil?” And the only answer here is that God has made us free.

Were the Lord to take back the seeds that fell in unfruitful places, one could argue that God withdrew His grace and that one was lost on account of this.  In other words, God manipulated the process by withdrawing every possible grace. But God, in justice, calls everyone and offers sufficient grace for all to come to faith and salvation. And thus the sowing of the seed everywhere is indicative of God’s justice.

IV. The variety of outcomes teaches us to persevere and look to sowing faithfully rather than merely harvesting. Sometimes we can become a bit downcast when it seems our work has borne little fruit. And the temptation is to give up. But, as an old saying goes, “God calls us to be faithful, not successful.” In other words, it is up to us to be the means through which the Lord sows the seed of His Word. By God’s grace, the Word is in our hands, but the harvest is not.

This parable teaches us that not every seed we sow will bear fruit. In fact a lot of it will not, for the reasons described by the Lord in a later part of the parable.

The simple mandate that remains is this: preach the Word. Go unto all the nations and make disciples.  St. Paul would later preach to Timothy, Preach the Word; be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encourage–with great patience and careful instruction (2 Tim 4:2). In other words, sometimes the gospel is accepted; sometimes it is rejected. Preach it anyway. Sometimes the gospel is popular, sometimes not. Preach it anyway. Sometimes the gospel is in season, sometimes it is out of season. Preach it anyway. Sow the seeds, don’t give up.

Discharge your duty! St. Paul goes on to remark sadly, For the time will come when people will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths. But you, keep your head in all situations, endure hardship, do the work of an evangelist, discharge all the duties of your ministry (2 Tim 4:3-5). Once again the message is the same: preach anyway; sow the seed of the Word; persevere; do not give up; do not be discouraged. Discharge your duty and be willing to endure hardship; just preach! Some of the seed will yield a rich harvest, some will not; preach anyway.

So, permit these “answers.” God sows seed He knows will bear no fruit because He is extravagant, because He loves and wills the existence even of those He knows will reject Him, because of His justice, and because he wants to teach us to persevere whatever the outcome.

I interpret this video to mean that God will never withdraw His offer rather than that He is trying to force a solution. For though He wants to save us and promises never to let us go, He respects our freedom to let go.

One thing I surely have easy as a priest is getting to Church on Sunday. All I have to do is walk down the stairs, go through the dining room and walk the passage through to the Church. And there I am. I realize that it is not as easy for most of my parishioners and I am always grateful to see them, knowing the sacrifices many have made to get here.

These days many of my parishioners are “commuters” who live up to 30 miles away from the parish and come back each Sunday because of liturgical preferences (we have an excellent choir) and historical ties. Not only do they have to drive, but finding parking in the city can be a challenge.

But praise God, here they are most Sundays. Given some of the challenges, we are not famous for starting on time. It’s almost laughable how empty the church looks at the appointed start time. We usually start about ten minutes late and the Church isn’t full until about the homily time.

Every Sunday I look out and say, “Thank God.” I really love my people, God’s people. I look forward to being with them each Sunday and am always amazed at the joy and the faith they manifest.

And once again, I know it’s not easy. I know of the frazzled nerves and little conflicts it took to get out of the house and the challenges faced as they headed down the road. Just a little rain or snow makes it harder, not to mention that “low fuel” light that comes on when they are already running late. So in they straggle, during the Gloria, the first reading, the second reading, the Gospel, and even the homily.

But thank God, I think. Thank God they are here. Yes, thank God.

Enjoy these videos of getting to Church.

At the bottom of this post is a video of dogs and cats who apparently never “got the memo” that they are supposed to fear and hate each other. As the video makes clear, they are bosom buddies who love to romp, play, wrestle, and even snuggle. How unlikely! And yet there it is before our eyes.

While the interactions between animals are mysterious and not to be compared with human relationships, I can’t help thinking of humanity as I look at these animals. What would things be like if some of the “memos” we pass back and forth were never received or got lost?

I remember some years ago when the former Yugoslavia broke apart as the long reign of communism concluded. It was good news, as Soviet-style rule there ended. But then a horrible bloodbath ensued and the Bosnian, Serbians, and Croatians turned on one another, rekindling old hatreds going back hundreds of years. I remember wondering how people who had lived largely without violence for so long could still hate one another so. It seemed that the injustices of the past predated most of the people who were alive now.

Bosnian babies were not born hating Croatian babies. Someone must have taught them to hate one another. Someone “gave them the memo.” So when the “strongman,” Tito, left the scene, ancient hatreds that had continued to be handed down from parent to child exploded. Looking with my American eyes, I wondered how the Bosnian, Croatian, and Serbian people could even distinguish one another. To me they all “looked alike.” But they surely knew the differences, drew the lines, and spiraled right down into the hell of hatred.

I realize that I may be oversimplifying things, but there is also the tendency to overcomplicate matters. The fact is, children do not enter this world with an intrinsic hated of an entire group of other children. Someone teaches them that. That part isn’t complicated.

Another awful example of this was what happened in Rwanda in the early 1990s. There, the Hutu and Tutsi tribes had separated back in 1959. But suddenly in 1990 civil war exploded and in 1994 a Tutsi Tribe undertook an attempted genocide of the Hutu tribe killing as many as a million people in a very short period of time. Some argued that the tensions went all the way back to colonial times. But here, too, most of grievances seemed to predate the soldiers and vigilantes who undertook the massacres. Who taught them this hatred? Who “gave them the memo”?

When I was a child, I lived in Chicago, Illinois. I never remember my parents ever telling me to hate or even be wary of black people. I give them a lot of credit for that. Neither do I remember any awareness of racial tension or hatred in my neighborhood. However, to be clear, I was still very young and the racial riots that followed Dr. King’s assassination did not really register in my 7-year-old mind.

But in 1969 we moved to Northern Florida (think “Southern Georgia”). And there racial tension was in the air. I remember being confused and bewildered by the unexplained resentments and fears. I guess I was too young. I was a newcomer and had not “read the memo” telling me that I should be suspicious, hateful, and that I should in no way mix with “them.” I remember seeing black children on the other side of the playground and they were playing with some “really cool” toys. Not having “read the memo,” I went to join them. I was rebuffed not only by fellow whites, but also by some of the black children who were unaware that I had not “read the memo” and considered my “incursion” unwanted and even threatening.

Crazy stuff. We are not born hating any person, any race, or any ethnicity. Someone teaches us that. And this very fact increases the total disgrace that such hatred is. There is an old phrase that talks about “burying the hatchet.” You may call me naive and simplistic, even myopic, but I wonder what might happen if we could just “tear up the memo.”

I hope most of you know me by now well enough by now to understand that I am no moral relativist. I am not suggesting there is no such thing as truth, right and wrong, injustice, etc. Neither am I one to dispense platitudes such as “Can’t we all just get along?” or “Coexist.” For these sorts of bromides often rest on the faulty premise that there is no real truth to announce or protect. But honestly, some of the hatreds we struggle with go back to things long gone, things that predate any of us here today, and which, quite frankly, are not even grievances we know much about.  There are just some “memos” that need to go to the shredder.

The Catechism makes some very helpful observations:

Deliberate hatred is contrary to charity. Hatred of the neighbor is a sin when one deliberately wishes him evil. Hatred of the neighbor is a grave sin when one deliberately desires him grave harm. “But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven.” …

Peace is not merely the absence of war, and it is not limited to maintaining a balance of powers between adversaries. Peace cannot be attained on earth without safeguarding the goods of persons, free communication among men, respect for the dignity of persons and peoples, and the assiduous practice of fraternity. Peace is the tranquility of order. Peace is the work of justice and the effect of charity …

Injustice, excessive economic or social inequalities, envy, distrust, and pride raging among men and nations constantly threaten peace and cause wars. Everything done to overcome these disorders contributes to building up peace and avoiding war: Insofar as men are sinners, the threat of war hangs over them and will so continue until Christ comes again; but insofar as they can vanquish sin by coming together in charity, violence itself will be vanquished and these words will be fulfilled: “they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks; nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more (CCC # 2303,2304, 2317).

Well if nothing else, enjoy this video of animals who never “got the memo” that they are supposed to be mortal enemies and consider joining me in the dream that some of us humans, too, will never “get the memo.”

The climate in Palestine both today and at the time of Jesus has two distinct seasons. The wet or rainy season is from the middle of October to the middle of April. The dry or summer season lasts from the middle of June until the middle of September. It is quite dry in these months and rainfall is very unusual. Although the temperature in summer can get very hot, it often does not feel this way. Cool breezes and low humidity are typical, making the summers very pleasant, especially in areas directly on the coast or on the higher slopes of the hills. During these months the sky is almost always cloudless and sunny. Throughout the summer rain does fall because of the dominance of high-pressure zones in the area. This provides challenges for farmers, who have to develop special methods for trapping water during the rainy season. The rainy season does not feature rain every day, but there can be significant rains that cause streams to flood from time to time. While it gets cool in winter, and certain higher altitudes near Jerusalem and Bethlehem can even see snow, this is rare and limited to brief periods during December and January. Though the Bible mentions snow, it is mostly described as being in the mountains to the north near Mt. Hermon.

The climate of the Holy Land varies from north to south and from east to west. Since the topography is varied there can be dramatic differences within the span of just a few miles. Generally there is more rain on the eastern part of Palestine and it gets hotter the farther south you travel. The Dead Sea region and the area around Jericho are deep crevasses and pure desert. The mountainous regions have more rain on the west side than on the east side. The hottest days of the year are during the transition between the two seasons

The climate of Israel in Jesus’ time may not have been quite as warm and dry as it is today. Several references in Scripture would seem to imply that the land was wetter and more suitable for agriculture in the past, not requiring  the significant irrigation prevalent in the Middle East now. For example,

And Lot lifted up his eyes, and beheld all the plain of Jordan, that it was well watered everywhere, before the LORD destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, even as the garden of the LORD, like the land of Egypt, as thou comest unto Zoar (Genesis 13:10).

And the LORD said, I have surely seen the affliction of my people which are in Egypt, and have heard their cry by reason of their taskmasters; for I know their sorrows; And I am come down to deliver them out of the hand of the Egyptians, and to bring them up out of that land unto a good land and a large, unto a land flowing with milk and honey (Exodus 3:7,8).

The Bible also describes Solomon’s use of prodigious quantities lumber to build the Temple and many other buildings in around 1000 BC.

Land-use studies throughout the Mediterranean, North Africa, and the Mid-East show the prevalence of crops and forests, which were suited to cooler, wetter climates in the period before 1000 B.C.

In Jesus’ time though, just like today, the hilly, mountainous topography (with the deep rift in the earth near the Dead Sea), strongly affected the microclimate from mile to mile. 

Lower Galilee (at left), where Jesus lived most of his life, was Israel’s lushest region, known for its sunny, temperate climate and its spring-watered lands. Each spring the valleys and slopes became an ocean of wildflowers and blossoming trees. Beginning in March, the area was covered by a vast blanket of green. The fertile land was a texture of vineyards and fruit orchards. Grapes, figs, olives, pomegranates, oranges, and other fruits flourished in its pleasant, subtropical climate.

First century Jewish historian Flavius Josephus, who knew the area well, wrote this about it:

Its nature is wonderful as well as its beauty; its soil is so fruitful that all sorts of trees can grow upon it, and the inhabitants accordingly plant all sorts of trees there; for the temper of the air is so well mixed, that it agrees very well with those several sorts, particularly walnuts, which require the coldest air, flourish there in vast plenty; there are palm trees also, which grow best in hot air; fig trees also and olives grow near them, which yet require an air that is more temperate. One may call this place the ambition of nature, where it forces those plants that are naturally enemies to one another to agree together; it is a happy contention of the seasons, as if every one of them laid claim to this country; for it not only nourishes different sorts of autumnal fruit beyond men’s expectation, but preserves them a great while; it supplies men with the principal fruits, with grapes and figs continually, during ten months of the year and the rest of the fruits as they become ripe together through the whole year” (The Jewish War, Book 3, Chapter 10:8).

Around the Sea of Galilee crops were plentiful and fish were abundant. The Sea of Galilee is a fresh water lake that is about 13 miles long and 8 miles wide. The typical crops grown in the region were grain, olives, and grapes. The area to the east of the Sea of Galilee was drier and had less vegetation.

An area to the south between Galilee and Samaria is called the Valley of Jezreel (at right), and many regions here featured rich soil and moderate rainfall. Judea, south of Samaria, has a gradual change in landscape. The most distinct change is the decreased rainfall.

Since Jesus’ time the overall area of the Holy Land has undergone gradual desertification. Desertification is described as a process by which a region is turned into desert either by natural processes or as a result of poor use of the land. Desertification has become especially noticeable during the last several centuries, though this process has been going on since even before Jesus’ time. 

Desertification such as this leads to less water, 
less arable land, 
warmer days, 
and cooler nights. 

The chief human contributions to this have been war and poor land management. Deforestation became a big issue during the war with the Romans (67-70 AD). But in the past 2000 years there have been many other wars and struggles that have caused environmental damage as well.

So it is a reasonable conclusion that in the time of Jesus, the climate would have been noticeably more moderate and wet than it is today. However, there still are many beautiful regions, especially in Galilee in the north. So we ought not overestimate the difference in climate. It would be noticeable to people of Jesus’ time were they to visit us today, but it would not astonish them. 

They would likely notice that it seemed a bit warmer and drier than they were used to and that there were fewer trees.

Note that Israel currently has a program underway that is attempting to reverse the desertification by planting trees (cedars—the same type used by Solomon!) This program that has received huge amounts of private financial support. They are in effect attempting to partially reforest Israel. The expected result will be that the land will hold more water, so more water will be available for farming, and thus more land can be farmed.

Then, as now, the area to the east of Jerusalem and Bethany over the Mount of Olives drops into a deep rift valley, well over 1000 feet below sea level. The area is deep desert. Jericho, in the region of the Judean Desert,  is an oasis, but the area is otherwise one where almost nothing can grow. It is mountainous and extremely dry.

Disclaimer: I am writing a series of reflections to prepare for a Bible Study of Life at the Time of Jesus. I am sharing some of these here. Please do NOT consider this article as associated in any way with the currently raging climate change debate. If there are differences in the climate today compared to 2000 years ago, they are minor. Climate is always changing on this planet in both macroscopic and microscopic ways. To what degree man is involved in this I cannot say. This is not a science blog and I do not wish to engage in a discussion of that issue here.

I put this video together to celebrate the beautiful gardens of God throughout the world:

Last week we read from the book of the prophet Amos. And something profound yet rather subtle was taught by Amos in the selection from Friday’s Mass. After warning of many sins such as the trampling the needy, putting profit over Sabbath observances, cheating by altering scales and so forth; after also warning of sexual and many other sins, Amos says this:

Days are coming when the Lord God will send a famine upon the land: not a famine of bread, or thirst for water, but a famine of hearing the word of the Lord. Then shall they wander from sea to sea and  from the north to the east in search of the word of the Lord, but they shall not find it (Amos 8:11–12).

Thus, among the ills of a society or culture mired in injustice, sexual confusion, and misplaced priorities is an absence of the Word of God. How does this happen? It happens on several different levels, one of them rather subtle.

I. First of all, when many people insist on sinful, unjust, and evil practices, the Word of the Lord begins to sound obnoxious and they refuse to read or hear it. No one likes to be convicted for their sinfulness or to be confronted with the fact that they are wrong, and the Word of the Lord has a way of calling us to account. Many resist this, and such a problem is epidemic in our current culture.

People do not like to be reminded that they have no business defrauding the poor, lying and cheating, engaging in greedy or covetous practices, indulging in illicit sexual union, or cultivating lust. In avoidance and anger they set aside the Word of God, and when they cannot reasonably do so, they attack those who still speak of it. They issue condemnations that those who do so are judgmental, intolerant, bigoted, unenlightened, homophobic, etc.

But of course the problem isn’t the Word of God or those who announce it. The problem is sin. And thus we see a kind of self-induced famine of the Word of God. Many starve themselves from the Word because it is no longer a food that is palatable to them. They would rather dine on the strong wine of this world that numbs them from the pangs of their own consciences. Or perhaps they would rather eat the Twinkies and other junk food of pop culture, which excuses and even celebrates bad behavior.

Here is a famine—of the Word of God.

II. Second, we see a kind of induced famine caused by those who collectively work to eliminate the Word of God from the public square. Perhaps it is those who seek to banish any form of prayer or reference to Scripture in public schools, public gatherings, school graduations, or any other gathering outside the walls of the church.

We live in a culture in which the First Amendment’s promise of freedom of religion has become freedom from religion. And thus there is a kind of famine of the Word of God imposed by a small number of people who dislike religious influence, who seek to eliminate any religious expression in the public square. Almost anything can be taught, celebrated, and advanced in public schools—anything except Jesus Christ and His gospel.

It is a strange, highly selective, and intense famine of the Word of God.

III. The third form of famine, though, is more subtle and it occurs even in the Church. Indeed, many who write in the combox of this blog complain of it quite frequently. This is the famine of the Word of God that occurs on account of silence from the pulpits.

The one place where one would think that the Word of God would be clearly and even boldly proclaimed would be in the pulpit of the Catholic Church or any Christian denomination. And yet even here, there is a strange famine.

But why is this? The mechanisms here are a bit more subtle, but  come down essentially to one word: fear. The subtlety comes from the fact that while it is clear that many clergy fear to speak the truth boldly from their pulpits, there is another side to the equation.

Many clergy know instinctively that even in the theoretically safer environment of the Church, if one speaks boldly on moral issues, one can often expect backlash and letters of protest, whether delivered directly or to the bishop. There are dissenters who do this, and even some of the faithful.

One might wish the clergy were brave enough and bold enough to be unconcerned and still speak unambiguously to moral issues of the day. But the reality is that clergy are drawn from the stock of human beings. Some are brave, but many are not. Some are willing to endure trouble, pushback, criticism, and being misunderstood, but some are not. Some clergy today are willing to accept that many modern listeners cannot distinguish between hyperbole, analogy, and straightforward discourse, let alone make subtle distinctions, but many clergy are not willing to accept this.

Yes, a poisonous climate exists even in many parishes. Surely there are dissenters, but even among the faithful there are those who would criticize a priest who tries to speak the truth but does not say it exactly the way that they want him to say it. Perhaps he should have quoted St. Thomas Aquinas rather than Thomas Merton. Perhaps he should have made more distinctions, but given the insistence that homilies last little more than ten minutes, was unable to do so.

Some priests are able to navigate the complexities of the modern parish setting creatively and courageously. But many cannot and draw back to uttering safe bromides, contenting themselves with abstractions and generalities. They play it safe in what is often a hostile environment. Dissenters with poisonous looks are lurking in the pews. But even among the hard-core faithful there is sometimes a “particularism” that renders bold prophecy a very dangerous thing.

Parents, too, struggle in preaching boldly to their kids, who are not taught by this culture to respect their parents or to revere sacred tradition and teaching. Thus parents, too, often exhibit the “silent pulpit syndrome,” and teaching in the domestic church of the home is often silent, uncertain, and compromised.

A hostile environment does lead to silence. Perhaps it should not, but in the aggregate it does. And therefore there is a famine of the Word of God that Amos addresses. Hostility tends to breed silence and conformity. Maybe it shouldn’t, but overall it does. At some level when a culture turns hostile, stubborn, hypersensitive, and just plain mean there sets up a famine of the Word of God. While there will always be the courageous, like Amos, in the big picture, the Word of God will suffer famine when the soil resists or even refuses the seed of the Word.

St Gregory once reproached silent clergy, but he also warned the faithful that they too have a role in ensuring the proper climate for the Word of God to flourish:

 The Lord reproaches (silent pastors) through the prophet: They are dumb dogs that cannot bark (Is 56:10). On another occasion he complains: You did not advance against the foe or set up a wall in front of the house of Israel, so that you might stand fast in battle on the day of the Lord (Ez 13:15). To advance against the foe involves a bold resistance to the powers of this world in defense of the flock. To stand fast in battle on the day of the Lord means to oppose the wicked enemy out of love for what is right. When a pastor has been afraid to assert what is right, has he not turned his back and fled by remaining silent? Whereas if he intervenes on behalf of the flock, he sets up a wall against the enemy in front of the house of Israel … Paul says of the bishop: He must be able to encourage men in sound doctrine and refute those who oppose it (Titus 1:9). For the same reason God tells us through Malachi: The lips of the priest are to preserve knowledge, and men shall look to him for the law, for he is the messenger of the Lord of hosts (Mal 2:7).

Anyone ordained a priest undertakes the task of preaching, so that with a loud cry he may go on ahead of the terrible judge who follows … Beloved brothers, consider what has been said: Pray the Lord of the harvest to send laborers into his harvest (Matt 9:38). Pray for us so that we may have the strength to work on your behalf, that our tongue may not grow weary of exhortation, and that after we have accepted the office of preaching, our silence may not condemn us before the just judge.

For frequently the preacher’s tongue is bound fast on account of his own wickedness; while on the other hand it sometimes happens that because of the people’s sins, the word of preaching is withdrawn from those who preside over the assembly. With reference to the wickedness of the preacher, the psalmist says: But God asks the sinner: Why do you recite my commandments? (Psalm 50:16) And with reference to the latter, the Lord tells Ezekiel: I will make your tongue cleave to the roof of your mouth, so that you shall be dumb and unable to reprove them, for they are a rebellious house (Ez 3:26). He clearly means this: the word of preaching will be taken away from you because as long as this people irritates me by their deeds, they are unworthy to hear the exhortation of truth.

And thus today Amos’ warning of a famine of the Word of God extends even to the Church. As clergy and laity, we have every reason to encourage bold preaching and to preserve a climate in which God’s Word is still revered and respected. We ought to work to surround clergy and parents with support and a hedge of protection from dissenters even as we also work to avoid the hypercriticism and “particularism” that can discourage priests, deacons, and parents who are trying to make a good effort to reach the lost and confused. Otherwise the famine of the Word of God of which Amos warns will surely exist even in our parishes and homes. A proper harvest of the Word requires the support and action of all.

 

When it comes to the demands of the moral life, one of the tendencies of our fallen human nature is to emphasize our weakness and minimize the reality of our strength. It is surely a tendency related to the cardinal sin of sloth, wherein we experience sorrow, sadness, or aversion to the good things that God is offering us.

There’s a part of us that would rather stay locked in our sins and in our weakness, either because we fear the changes that holiness would bring or, even worse, we find holiness unappealing.

Sloth and the negativity associated with it are drives of the flesh. In biblical terms, “flesh” refers to the rebelliousness of our fallen nature. Paul uses the term (sarx, Flesh) not so much to describe our physical bodies, but rather that part of us that does not like to be told what to do, that is stiffnecked and stubborn, that resists what is holy and good. It is the part of us it does not want to have a thing to do with God. It is that part of us that, when we do try to pray, fidgets and would have us ponder anything but God and the truth He reveals.

Okay, so far the picture looks pretty grim. We are slothful, negative, and locked in the pursuits of the flesh.

But the problem is that too many people stop here and do not go on to reflect that within each of us there is also something called the spirit (pneuma). The human spirit is the part of us that is open to God, the part of us that is drawn to goodness, beauty, truth. It is the part of us that craves justice and looks beyond itself for meaning. It is the part of us that seeks to improve the world, that builds great cities, that creates beautiful works of art, that writes great literature and, most importantly, that seeks God.

It is the human spirit that most distinguishes us from any other animal on this earth, including primates. No other animals, even those closest to us genetically, build cities, form bicameral legislatures to debate law and justice, or create great works of art. No other animals write great literature, or store their collective wisdom in libraries and teach it in universities  No other animals long to go to the moon and beyond. No other animals sing, build great cathedrals, ponder the meaning of life, or call on God. The human spirit is magnificent, powerful, and creative. God Himself has put this magnificent power within us. 

Yet we so quickly discount this magnificent gift and instead run for the cover of “the flesh” to excuse or explain away our sinful tendencies.

But Jesus, in an important instruction at a critical moment, teaches us otherwise. What is most tragic is that most people completely miss the point, even concluding the opposite of what Jesus is trying to teach.

The teaching comes on Holy Thursday, in the garden of Gethsemane. Finding his disciples sleeping, Jesus rouses them and warns them saying,

Watch and pray, that you enter not into temptation: the spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh, weak. (Matt 26:41)

Sadly, most people completely miss the point. In effect, they say, “Yeah, that’s right! The flesh is weak; that explains everything. That’s why my life is messed up. See? Jesus understands and kindly accepts why my life is a mess.”

But this is the opposite of what Jesus is teaching. The point that Jesus is making is that the spirit is indeed willing!  In other words, he is saying, “Lay hold of the fact that within you is your human spirit, which I gave you,and that is eager, willing, and desirous to do what is right. Come to experience the reality and force of the spirit that I placed within you, and that will be quickened with my Holy Spirit. Your spirit is willing!”

The Greek word translated as “willing” is πρόθυμον (prothemon), which is also translated (perhaps even better) as “eager, or ready.”  Yes, the spirit is eager for that which is good, true, and beautiful. The flesh is of no avail; the flesh must grow weaker.  Feed your spirit; listen to its desires for the good, true, and beautiful. Yield to it and feed it! Whatever you feed grows! Starve the flesh but feed the spirit. Do this by staying awake and praying.

So much of the misunderstanding of Jesus’ teaching comes down to the emphasis. Most place the emphasis on the flesh being weak. But Jesus says that the spirit is indeed willing! And here is where the emphasis must fall.

The word “indeed” helps us to understand this. Jesus says, “the spirit is indeed willing…” It is a Greek word (μὲν, men), which is difficult to translate because its meaning varies depending on the context. But one thing is clear: it is an intensifier. It is meant to place emphasis on the verb “willing.”  So, the flesh is weak—got that. But the spirit is indeed willing or, literally, the spirit is indeed eager!

This is where the emphasis must fall and this is what Jesus teaches. He is not making excuses for us; he is summoning us to something within us that is more powerful than the flesh: our spirit.

Many Christians do the same thing with St. Paul’s letter to the Romans in the seventh chapter. There, Paul gives a vivid description of the human person locked in the flesh. He writes,

7:14 We know that the law is spiritual; but I am carnal, sold under sin. 15 I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate. 16 Now if I do what I do not want, I agree that the law is good. 17 So then it is no longer I that do it, but sin which dwells within me. 18 For I know that nothing good dwells within me, that is, in my flesh. I can will what is right, but I cannot do it. 19 For I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I do. 20 Now if I do what I do not want, it is no longer I that do it, but sin which dwells within me. 21 So I find it to be a law that when I want to do right, evil lies close at hand. 22 For I delight in the law of God, in my inmost self, 23 but I see in my members another law at war with the law of my mind and making me captive to the law of sin which dwells in my members. 24 Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? 25 Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, I of myself serve the law of God with my mind, but with my flesh I serve the law of sin

And many reading this say, “Ah ha, that’s me! Well, that explains it all. And I guess if even Paul was a mess, its okay that I’m a mess too.” Of course it is not clear that Paul is writing about himself, he may be describing Adam before Christ.

But even so, what is more important is that we read on! The break between Romans chapters 7 and 8 did not come from St. Paul. Chapters and verses are wonderful ways of being able to find text quickly, but they tend to break up the text artificially. St. Paul does not conclude his thoughts at the end of chapter 7. He continues to write, and in chapter 8 goes on to describe the human person living in the spirit. And to every wretched problem of Romans 7, Romans 8 gives a direct response.

7:14 – I am carnal, sold into sin –

8:2 the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set me free from the law of sin and death
8:9 But you are not in the flesh, you are in the Spirit, if in fact the Spirit of God dwells in you

7:18 – Nothing good dwells in me –

8:9, 11 the Spirit of God dwells in you

7:23 – I am captive to the Law of sin –

8:2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set me free from the law of sin and death.

Thus, St. Paul is giving the same teaching that Christ did: the spirit is willing, the spirit is eager, and the spirit, quickened by God’s Holy Spirit, can overcome every tendency of the flesh—every darned one of them!

Romans 7 and Matthew 26:41 are not meant to be used as a justification for Christian sloth. They do describe the problem of the flesh, but they also indicate that the spirit is more powerful, that the spirit is eager and willing, that we must lay hold of this great gift that God has given us, and is quickened with His Holy Spirit.

No more excuses now about how the flesh is weak—the spirit is eager and willing!

The World Cup captured a lot of attention these past few weeks. I puzzle a bit as to the popularity of soccer since it seems that almost no one ever scores. A fan corrected me, saying that I sounded like a typical American who cares only about results. He said that most soccer fans appreciate the game for its own sake, for the skill and teamwork involved. All right, I’ll accept the judgment I received. I am surely in the minority since a vast percentage of the world deeply appreciates the game. I am also aware of the need to be wary of caring only about results, scores, and winning. There is, or should be, more to sports than scoring and winning.

However, I am mindful that St. Paul used the image of an athlete to describe the Christian life in several places and he did talk about winning. Consider this one:

Do you not know that the runners in the stadium all run in the race, but only one wins the prize? Run so as to win. Every athlete exercises discipline in every way. They do it to win a perishable crown, but we an imperishable one. Thus I do not run aimlessly; I do not fight as if I were shadowboxing. No, I drive my body and train it, for fear that, after having preached to others, I myself should be disqualified ( 1 Cor. 9:25-27).

And yet even here it is clear that Paul has more in mind than just winning. Clearly there are many virtues necessary in the athlete that are also essential for the Christian.

• Discipline – The athlete must carefully and persistently train the body. Without this discipline he will not master the sport nor will his body have the necessary stamina, strength, and coordination. Athletes train every day and work to perfect their prowess. So too must Christians undertake a clear regimen, diligently training in the ways of faith by praying, reading Scripture, partaking of the Sacraments, modeling moral virtue, and exhibiting self-mastery. The Christian must practice every day.
  
• Persistence – The athlete must be disciplined all the time, not just occasionally. Failing to train persistently not only jeopardizes good performance, but also risks injury. So too for the Christian. We cannot expect much progress with an on-again, off-again regimen. Without persistent good habits, the Christian not only impedes progress, but also risks injury (sin).
  
• Willingness to obey rules – Every sport has rules that must be accepted and followed. Athletes are not free to reinvent the game. They must play by the rules or risk exclusion and disqualification. S0 too Christians must play by the rules set forth by God. If we are going to be on the winning team, we have to abide by the rules. To refuse this is to risk being disqualified. We are not free to reinvent Christianity, as so many try to do today. There is only one playing field and one game. Follow the rules or risk being ejected.
  
• Vigilance for signs of injury – Good athletes listen carefully to their bodies, watching for any signs of injury. If they detect an injury they see the team doctor quickly and take measures to heal as quickly as possible. Further they avoid injury by stretching, learning proper form, etc. So too for the Christian. We must monitor ourselves for injury, and upon discovery of even minor injury, we should consult our team physician, the priest, and get on the mend quickly. Further, we should try to ward off injury by learning proper Christian form (moral life) and by avoiding whatever leads us to sin (a kind of stretching to prevent moral injury).
  
• Teamwork – Many sports involve learning to work together toward a goal. Athletes should not seek glory only for themselves; they must have the good of the entire team in mind. They must learn to work with others toward the common good and overcome any idiosyncrasies or selfishness that hinders the common goal. So too Christians must strive to overcome petty and selfish egotism and work for the common good, learning to appreciate the gifts of others. The team is stronger than the individual alone. Life is about more than just me. When others are glorified, so am I—if I am on the same winning team.

Well, you get the point. Why not add a few of your own thoughts on how sports can provide a good metaphor for the Christian life?