TO WHOM SHALL WE GO?

HOMILY FOR THE 21^ST SUNDAY IN THE ORDINARY TIME, YEAR B

Rev. Fr. Ezekoka Peter Onyekachi

A group of primary school children were once on an excursion with their teachers in a distant place. At a point when the visibility was so reduced, the bus broke down. The driver came out, and started fixing the vehicle. So much time had passed now that it was getting darker. Due to this difficulty, the children in the bus were scared. There was a festival of cries as the children were almost uncontrollable. Many food and drinking stuffs were offered to them by their teachers to pacify them, all to no avail. But there was little Alfonso who was in the bus comfortably seated. He was happy and having fun with those food and drinking stuffs that the others had rejected. Afraid that the commotion had gone into his brain, and made him loose his senses, and since it was abnormal for someone to be happy in such a situation, one of the teachers approached Alfonso and asked: why do you seem to be happy amidst this troubling situation? Are you not scared and frightened like the rest? The little boy replied: why should I be scared? The driver is my father. If we take ourselves as this little Alfonso, think then how often we cry and lament even when we are sure that the driver of the bus is our father. In the face of an uncertain moment, what reason would you have to continue to hang on?

It is almost human to be scared and to look for another solution when the times turn tough, and especially when the expected turn out to be unpleasant. More to this is when that tough situation demands one to make an instant decision. And we can all imagine how tough it can be to make a decision when under pressure. This is the picture with which we can use to understand the situation in the First Reading (Joshua 24:1-2a, 15 -17, 18b) and in the Gospel Reading (John 6:60-69) of today. The situation was tough for Joshua who having seen that he was getting old and would join his forefathers became afraid and uncertain whether all the tribes of Israel would continue to keep the covenant God made with their fathers. He needed them to renew this covenant; thus he summoned them. Most probably, having perceived how the culture of the land (Amorites) where they have occupied may influence them negatively and having recounted all that the Lord has done for them, he dared them to make a decision to serve the Lord. To make his points very piercing, he used himself and his household as a point of contact: but as for me and my household, we will serve the Lord. In this statement, Joshua rededicates not only himself and his household to God, but also the whole tribes of Israel. His statement ever since has become one that represents strong decision for God in the midst of social pressures that present themselves harmful to the Christian faith. This is also what the statement of Peter in the Gospel does for us.

Peter who was the leader and the spokesman of the apostles (just like Joshua) answered Jesus: to whom shall we go? You have the message of eternal life. We must not forget that this answer of Peter had some backgrounds. The consequence of Jesus’ teaching of Himself as the bread of life in the sixth chapter of the Gospel of John met with series of oppositions. Something interesting about these oppositions is that it began with the Jews (John 6:41.52) and ended with the disciples (John 6:60.66). As always said, a man’s greatest enemy are those of his households. It is much easier to understand pressures from the externals than the pressures that are in the internals. This is what we meet in the Gospel. Many of Jesus’ disciples (surely not only the twelve) who have been witnesses to the arguments that went on between Jesus and the Jews finally took their stand. They said: this teaching is difficult; who can accept it? They were complaining/murmuring. As if their complaints were not enough, they made up their minds to leave Jesus for their formal ways of life. They left Jesus and no longer went about with him. Let us briefly assess these two reactions of the disciples.

The first is that they murmured against Jesus and His teaching. To this reaction, Jesus leads them into another deeper reality and mystery of himself. He forecasts ascension and tries leading them to a life of the spirit. His thesis is that on the day they will see him ascend to heaven, it will be clearer to them to accept the difficult teaching. It does not end in difficulty. There is also ascension. This implies that the ascension into heaven would be the most astonishing moment of encounter with Christ, which also would serve as the guarantee of the claims of Jesus as the bread of life from heaven. His ascension would become a sort of a vindication of his claims. The bread they were searching for surely was meant for their flesh, but he offered them the bread for their spirit. Little wonder he said that the life giving power is the spirit; the flesh is of no help. To understand this in a simple way. This is not to relegate the human body which is an instrument towards realizing all the divine potentials in us. The real value of any thing depends on its aim; that is, the spirit in which it is done. We do not eat just for the sake of eating. We eat to stay healthy and alive. When we eat without the appropriate spirit (gluttony), we may end up doing ourselves more harm than good. This is the same in sports. We do not just play soccer or jog for their sakes; otherwise it becomes a waste of time. We engage in sports to keep fit and to live on. Thus, the things of the flesh gain their value from the spirit in which they are done.

The second is that after this deeper awareness from Jesus, the disciples still went on their ways. Most probably, it became clearer to them that the “free material food” they were seeking was not going to be offered again. They may have followed Jesus for what He could offer to them, and most probably to be providing free food and easy wealth, but having discovered that there was something else Jesus was trying to lead them into, they resigned to their former ways. Their initial intention was not to meet a man who would be talking to them about some heavenly mysteries, but someone who would simply make them to belong to the group of the wealthy.  They defected. This is a great sign of disloyalty. This is then an eye-opener that these people were never loyal to Jesus. They were fair-weather followers. Well, we can also today see ourselves in these people. No one can actually give so much as Jesus, but if we come to him simply to get and never to give, we will certainly turn back. There is something we need to forego of ourselves when we decide to follow Jesus.

There came the great profession of faith by Peter. Peter and the other apostles were determined. This reply was a great show of loyalty. Through it, they rededicated themselves and reassured Christ of their continual discipleship. This profession served to show that the apostles had begun to perceive Jesus as the messiah. This profession was not that the twelve had understood Jesus so well. It was that they had faith that following Jesus, the Messiah is better than their confusion or difficulty. They believed that Jesus was greater than that particular situation or difficulty. For Peter, Jesus alone had the words of eternal life. No one else. Here is an undivided attention to Jesus. They realized just as Robert Schuller had titled one of his books, that tough times don’t last, but tough people do. It is always good to realize that the driver of the bus remains our father.

A certain jogger once slipped and fell into a cliff, while embarking on his usual early morning habit. He was however lucky to grab a protruding stone as he fell. The cliff was about a hundred feet deep, and there was no way he could have made it out without external aid. In agony and out of fear, he cried out: is there someone out there? No answer came for a time. He shouted all the louder the second time. After some brief moments of silence, a voice came thundering out from the blues: This is the Lord. Frantically, the man yelled: well, if you are the Lord, make haste then and rescue me. After another brief moment of silence, the voice came back: let go off the stone, and I will come and save you. Again, there was some moments of dead silence, after which the jogger screamed all the louder: is there anybody else? Is it not true that it appears difficult to understand why the Lord must tell our jogger to hands off the stone so as to save him? Is it not also interesting to have seen how the jogger simply neglected that voice that dares him to hands off? This is how it is when we hold on to our beliefs more than we give God some chances in our lives. To hands off from the stone is to act like Peter and the other apostles that even in not being certain of the future, the Saviour would keep their hearts with Him. The driver is their father; yes, the driver is our father. When you throw a baby in the air, she laughs because she knows you will catch her. That is trust. Keep trusting in the Lord as I wish you a blessed week ahead. God bless you.

I THINK, THEREFORE I EAT; I EAT, THEREFORE, I AM

HOMILY FOR THE 20^TH SUNDAY IN THE ORDINARY TIME OF THE YEAR B

Rev. Fr. Ezekoka Peter Onyekachi

I remember the famous philosophical proposition of Rene Descartes which he thought to be the foundation of all knowing: Cogito ergo sum (I think, I am). In such line of thought, the philosopher placed thinking as the fundamental and necessary aspect of existence. Thinking becomes a condition for proving and assuring that one exists. But there is another proof and assurance for life and existence which Jesus’ own philosophy presents: unless you eat the flesh of the son of God and drink his blood, you have no life in you (the Gospel according to John 6:53). And so, borrowing Descartes construction of his thesis, our own thesis based on Jesus’ proposition becomes:  cogito ergo manduco (I think, I eat). The consumption of the body and blood of Christ becomes then the proof of thinking and of knowledge, which can then be rendered as wisdom. Eucharist then becomes the food for the wise. It does not surely stop at being the food for the wise; it is also the proof of true life and existence. Thus, we move from cogito ego manducare to manduco ergo sum (I eat, I am). The body and blood of Jesus in the Eucharist is then the assurance for life temporarily and eternally.

The two readings that preceded the Gospel give a clear examination of our first thesis: I think; I eat. The First Reading (Proverbs 9:1-6) speaks of wisdom as a person. In personifying wisdom, the author talks of wisdom as preparing a banquet and calling on people who are willing to come and partake of it with these words: let whoever is simple turn in here. This gives us a clear hint that the banquet is for the simple; the humble hearted. The opposite of simplicity is complexity. Wisdom does not call on the complex people, nor as it is the proud hearted. It is a meal for the humble. Wisdom calls on the simple to come eat and drink so as to grow more in knowledge and advance in understanding. This is what the Eucharist does. The more we eat, the more He (Jesus) increases. He must increase, but I must decrease (cf. John 3:30). And so, the more we eat, the smaller we become. God (the omniscient) invites the simple to partake of the Eucharist so as to grow more in humility and understanding. The Eucharist is a sure way for greater wisdom.

A wise person is that one who even in the wideness of his knowledge still finds himself/herself as one who should aspire for more knowledge. The person is humble to learn more, and by so doing grows in wisdom and understanding. The higher the person climbs, the simpler/humbler the person becomes. But the foolish person would just know a little and would think he/she has got the knowledge of everything. The person grows pompous and failure starts to creep in. Pride goes before a fall. Greater consciousness should then be encouraged to decipher the direction towards which we move; simplicity and complexity? And this is the exact warning of St. Paul to the Ephesians (5:15-20) in the Second Reading: “watch carefully how you live, not as foolish persons, but as wise, making the most of the opportunity…” Wisdom is here again connected to life. So, the wise person grabs the opportunity of partaking in the Eucharist, and so the person lives. When we live in wisdom, we truly live. And true wisdom consists in partaking of the Eucharist, and so in eating, we truly exist.

The Gospel (John 6:51-58) gives us a clearer view of our second thesis: I eat, I am. The writer started by narrating the confusion of the Jews based on the teaching of Jesus on the bread of life. They questioned: how can this man give us his flesh to eat? In his reply, Jesus unravels the results of partaking of the bread of life. Each of the following verses gives a result of partaking of this bread.

1.      Eternal Life (v.54): “Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life.” To eat here means to eat zealously and with pleasure; just like the picture of one who is hungering for Christ and eagerly desirous to feed and feast on Him.

2.      True Satisfaction (v. 55): For my flesh and my body are real foods. The word ‘real’ implies true as opposed to falsehood. Worldly pleasures and satisfaction are not real; they leave people somewhat empty and insatiable. True satisfaction comes from receiving Christ into one’s life. Receiving Christ is very nourishing.

3.      Supernatural Intimacy (v.56): “Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him.” To remain is to abide and dwell, and never to leave. This intimacy entails fellowship and companionship which does not exclude the care and watchful eye of God in looking after us.

4.      Meaningful Life (v.57): “The one who feeds on me will live because of me.” Receiving Christ entails a life lived because of Christ. Such a life is meaningful and purposeful. It is because we are sure that we live for Christ that we can profess tomorrow.

5.      Incorruptible Life (v. 58): “The one who feeds on this bread lives for ever.” The body and blood of Christ that we eat is an incorruptible food received into our hearts, and in turn energizes life for ever. It is this living bread which preserves this life from decaying unlike the manna that was eaten in the desert which never assured incorruptibility.

Jesus presents his body and blood as a condition for life. If anyone wants to live, let him/her eat and drink. Anyone who refuses to eat and drink is a dead man spiritually and eternally. Physically, such a person lives in the realm of death. Spiritually, such a person has no life with God; the person has no true and real relationship with the true and living God. So, partaking, eating and drinking of Christ is absolutely essential in order to truly live; in order to have a life that lasts. It is the food for the humble. It is the food for the wise. It is the food that conditions life hereafter. It is the Eucharist. Think of how lovely it will be if every person in the world partakes of this meal and allows his/her life to be led by the demands of this meal. May we continue to feed and feast on Christ who is really and truly present in the Eucharist. Happy new week. God bless you.

HOW DO I PARTAKE OF THE BREAD OF LIFE?

HOMILY FOR THE 19^TH SUNDAY IN THE ORDINARY TIME, YEAR B

Rev. Fr. Ezekoka Peter Onyekachi

The story of the ministry of Jesus (John 1:19 – 12:50) in the Johannine Gospel can actually be read under the optics of oppositions to revelation. The first opposition is seen in the fifth chapter where there is a witness to the harassment of Jesus by the Jews on account of the cure of a sick man at the pool of Bethsaida. This happened in Jerusalem. The next chapter would be another form of opposition in Galilee which borders on the discourse of Jesus as the bread of life (chapter 6), after which we witness the great rejection (chapters 7-10), the decision to kill Jesus (chapter 10) and the movement of Jesus towards his death (chapters 11-12). And actually, we must mention that these oppositions did come as a consequence of Jesus’ miracles and wonders. And so, one can then be left to place the Gospel of today (John 6:41-51) in its proper position: another form of opposition to revelation, where the Jews began to murmur/complain to one another and raising questions that were meant to contradict the claim of Christ that he is the Bread of Life. Jesus corrects them and inadvertently offers them (and us) the way to respond to the Bread of Life which He is.

Jesus’ first reply to them was tough and direct: STOP COMPLAINING TO EACH OTHER. The murmuring against the teaching of Jesus refers to the discontent that arises from a crowd that is upset and confused. We are left to imagine that such a crowd is one that misunderstands, rejects and opposes a speaker. They were radically disagreeing with Jesus that he had come down from heaven. They questioned his origin because they were ignorant of the incarnation and his mission. The stark appeal to the crowd to stop complaining is an invitation to listen. And this links us to the first verse of the Shema prayer of the Jewish Liturgy: Listen, O Israel (Deut. 6:4-5). Traditionally, this prayer is recited with hands placed over the eyes, most probably to emphasise that the first approach to divine revelation is not to see but to listen. The invitation to revelation calls for listening without which its response would be impaired. As long as they murmured, they would never be willing to listen to the truth. Murmuring impedes our ability to pay attention to God and to others. If we need the Bread of Life, we must pay attention. And this is the first approach in partaking of the bread of life.

Jesus further said to them: NO ONE CAN COME TO ME UNLESS DRAWN BY THE FATHER WHO SENT ME, which he further explained in the exceeding verses. For there to be that initial motion, a person must be drawn by God. But this is not to suggest that there are persons who are not originally drawn by God, as there may be an inclination to argue that some are predestined to be drawn towards salvation, while others are not. We all are drawn, but only those who accept to be drawn by the Father have the potency of believing in Jesus. God has to draw man because we are prone to resistance, and man’s resistance is chiefly seen in the word ‘draw.’ The word has the idea of constraint and resistance; for instance, the same word is used for the pulling in of a net loaded with fish as this involves both the actions of pulling and resistance (cf. John 21:6). One can also understand the sense of the word ‘drawn’ in terms of divine initiative. Yes, we do get this spark of divine initiative to come to Christ. But, remember, God can draw men, but a person’s resistance can defeat God’s pull. We can also be drawn by God by teaching which may come from the voice of a preacher, the observation of nature or a myriad of other sources. And this is a very vital way of partaking in the bread of Life; being ready and docile to be drawn by God.

We can then actually grasp what happened to Elijah in the First Reading (1 Kings 19:4-8) from this wavelength of God’s effort to draw us to himself and our stubbornness to resist such a draw. Elijah’s life was under threat by Jezebel, and for this reason the prophet fled for his life to the desert. He ran away from his mission. He was wishing himself dead, but the Lord never wished him dead. He fed him with food and drink, and getting back his strength, he moved on to the mountain of Horeb. This divine visitation was a reawakening message, a kind of a push to Elijah not to give up. It was this message passed in the form of a food that sustained Elijah and rejuvenated his zeal for the journey and his ministry. This can be likened to why we must partake of this bread. When we consider ourselves weak and hopeless, then it is the best prescription for us. It is a food that sustains us even when we are trying to give up. It re-enkindles our spiritual strength to move on in our firm decision for God.

Jesus’ explanation was further made solid with a very striking truth: EVERYONE WHO BELIEVES HAS ETERNAL LIFE. I AM THE BREAD OF LIFE. And this is a very important way of partaking in the bread of life; we must believe in Christ. Believing in Christ would imply four things: 1) believing that Christ is the Bread of Life; the bread that feeds and nourishes man spiritually, and that saves and gives life, 2) believing that Christ came down from heaven to deliver man from death; the bread that gives us an assurance for heaven, 3) believing that Christ is the Living Bread; the bread that gives life eternally/forever 4) believing that Christ is the Life-sustaining bread; the body of Christ given for for the life of the world. And so, would it not be true to say that in refusing the offer of Jesus, one is prone to miss life in this world and in the world to come? Everyone who believes has eternal life. It is this eternal life that we seek. We pray it becomes our portion after here on earth. Amen. Happy new week, and God bless you.

FROM “BREAD FROM HEAVEN” TO THE “BREAD OF LIFE”

HOMILY FOR THE 18^TH SUNDAY IN THE ORDINARY TIME, YEAR B

Rev. Fr. Ezekoka Peter Onyekachi

It is in the passage of the Gospel of today (John 6:24-35) that we notice the terminus ad quem of the importance of bread in the salvation history. The expression used for the bread has gradually been shifted away from the Old Testament “bread from heaven” first to “bread of God” and now in connection with the claim that the “bread of God” gives life to the world, to “bread of Life.” This is indeed a spiritual movement leading us to something so spectacular, eschatological and salvific. The God of Jesus Christ leads us to go beyond the mere satisfaction that the “bread from heaven” can give to the life that the “bread of life” gives.

The First Reading (Exodus 16:2-4, 12-15) shows to us the importance of the “bread from heaven” in the exodus story of the Israelites. Having heard about the complaints of the people, the Lord told Moses “I will now rain down bread from heaven for you.” When the bread finally came, the Israelites not knowing what it was inquired among them: what is it (manna)? That became the name of the bread from Heaven. And actually, the question (manna) which turned out to become the name of the “bread from heaven” was indirectly pointing them to the Christ, the “bread of life” who they would need to discover as the source and summit of their livelihood on earth and in heaven, and as the point to which all other importance attached to bread pointed.

1.      Bread has a universal character. Bread was an all-important commodity of the ancient Near East. From ancient times, the word “bread” was used for food in general; for instance, the account of the punishment given to man after the fall that he would labour for ‘his bread’ (Gen. 3:19) and the admonition given to the foolish and lazy in Proverbs 6:8 concerning how the ant gathers ‘its bread’ during the summer. Bread enjoys the pride of place among other foods that every culture of the world is familiar with it.

2.      Those responsible for bread were important officials. Kings of the ancient world had their personal bakers. It was an important position. This is why the king of Egypt was annoyed with his baker (Exodus 40:1).

3.      Bread was used in sacred meals. Melchizedek, king of Salem brought bread and wine (Gen 14:18).

4.      Bread was included in certain offerings. For they shall offer the offerings made by fire to the Lord, the bread of their God; therefore they shall be called holy (Lev. 21:6). Above all, it had a special place in the sanctuary as the bread of the presence. Here, bread assumes a specific character of offering and a conscious application to holiness.

5.      The manna became the meal that sustained and satisfied the Israelites in their physical journey towards their promised land. In Psalm 105:40, the manna was referred to as the heavenly bread.

6.      And in the New Testament, our Lord referred to himself as the bread of Life, which would now become the meal that sustains and gives life to every person in our spiritual journey towards our promised land, heaven. He later chose the same bread of the Passover to be the symbolic memorial of his broken body; the Eucharist.

Jesus had fed the 5000. And it was so incredible that some were still asking for a miraculous sign to help them believe He was who he claimed to be. The people in the Gospel started seeing Jesus as an artist who had come to entertain them. They needed some sort of concert in order to believe. Thus, they brought up the manna their forefathers ate in the wilderness as the context of their inordinate plea. Their reference to manna even after the miracle of multiplication implies that they saw the incidence of manna as higher than what Jesus had done. Most probably, the bread that fed the 5000 had begun in earthly loaves and was also issued in earthly loaves. So, the manna became for them something totally different from what the miracle of multiplication. Some of them may probably be thinking that since they had witnessed “feeding from something,” they now need to witness “feeding from nothing.” This was the transitional test they needed Jesus to pass.

Jesus answer to them was two-fold. 1) He reminded them that it was not Moses who had given them the manna; it was God. 2) The manna was not really the bread of God. It was the symbol of the bread of God. And so, Jesus puts them right that the manna was meant to be a model of the messiah. The bread of God would become the Christ who came down from heaven to give men life, and not mere satisfaction. So when Jesus said “I am the bread of Life,” it then means that without Christ, life cannot be sustained. And so, whoever partakes of him will no longer know spiritual hunger,

But what is life? Remember, the manna gave satisfaction whereas the Christ gave life. Surely, this life must be beyond the physical existence.

1.      Real Life becomes the new relationship we share with God

2.      That relationship is made possible only by Jesus; without whom, there may be satisfaction and existence, but not life.

3.      If Jesus then is the essential of life, his title as the ‘bread of life’ remains and it’s non-negotiable.

.In Jesus then, the restless soul is at rest, the hungry heart is satisfied. In him, our thirst is quenched. As for our thirst, we must recall how Jesus told the woman at the well that the water He offered would cure her thirst for ever (John 4:13-14). Jesus does not offer bread alone to quench hunger; he also offers some liquid to quench thirst. Little wonder the Gospel in talking about the “bread of life” ended with those similar words “and whoever believes in me will never thirst.” Therefore, we are compelled to repeat with the Psalmist “as the deer pants for running streams, so my soul pants for you, O God.” It is virtuous for us to continue to hunger and thirst for this “bread of life” which Jesus, together with his blood offers us in the Eucharist. Jesus has really made himself the bread of life. So, anyone who wants to grow in life should try to come back to the Eucharist. Everyone who sought the manna found it; so anyone who seeks Jesus would find him. Happy new week. God bless you.

THEY WILL EAT AND BE CHANGED

HOMILY FOR THE 17^TH SUNDAY IN THE ORDINARY TIME, YEAR B

Rev. Fr. Ezekoka Peter Onyekachi

Miracles are not ends in themselves. They point to something, and the stuff they point to can never be taken to be unserious. They gear towards change or an announcement of change. Its occurrence goes with and leads to a change in the persons involved. Allowing this faith to remain would now become the effort of the person who has experienced it. And therefore, approaching Jesus for the miracles he offers may not be bad in itself. What may be counted as evil would be the failure to remain with him after the miracle is performed. Remaining in him implies a change from a former life to a new life in Christ. With this in mind, we come to realize that the matter which may be termed as the ingredients for the miracle should not be the focus of the miracle, as the focus is on the human person. In the case of the feeding of the Five thousand (the Gospel of today; John 6:1-15) in which lies the miracle of multiplication, the ingredients become the five small loaves and the two small fish.

What may be termed a prefiguration of the Gospel is found in the First Reading (2 Kings 4:42-44) in which is contained the story of Elisha. Elisha had gone to the brotherhood of the prophets in Gilgah and after having performed the miracle of cleansing of the poisoned soup, a man (not a boy as in the Gospel), brought (was not discovered) twenty barley loaves and fresh grain (not five loaves and two fish) to be served to a hundred men (not five thousand and more), and Elisha simply mandated (no thanksgiving offered to God) his servant (and not shared by himself) who had raised some doubts about the sufficiency of the bread for the number of people to share in it. Elisha reminds the servant of the promise of Yahweh, and at the end it turned out to be that the men ate and had some left over (not twelve baskets full). This is indeed a miracle of multiplication which is indeed negligible when compared with the recipient population and the ingredients for the miracle in the case of Jesus.

Remember, we talked about the changes that every miracle initiates in the human person, it is now time to freely ask ourselves about these changes that the miracle of multiplication of loaves brought (can bring) to the lives of the people (and us). Hence, as one could have simply said that Elisha’s miracle of multiplication led the brotherhood of the prophets to a better faith in Yahweh, so too we can say that Jesus’ multiplication miracle of multiplication led to the faith in him as the messiah. But there is more to this. There are two major facets of change that one can perceive to be the goal of the miracle of multiplication; one is the change effected in the apostles, and the other is the change effected in the crowd. Concerning the apostles, the change effected in them is not unconnected to the questions asked by them. Concerning the people, the change effected in them is not also unconnected with their profession of faith and the perceived reaction from them to crown Jesus.

Out of his compassionate heart, Jesus asked Philip (most probably because he was from Bethsaida which was their location): where can we buy bread for these people to eat? The answer from Philip was despairing. Oh! What a pessimistic faith! But then, Andrew spoke up having known of a boy with some loaves and fish: but how far will they go among so many? The reaction of Andrew was helpful and helped to calm the situation. Oh! What an optimistic but questioning faith! Philip’s question reveals his interest on money and human resources more than on faith in Christ, a ridicule of the wages of the apostles and stresses the impossibility of the situation. In other words, the pessimistic faith sees the problem more than the power of God, and does not see the opportunity for the power of God to be demonstrated in conquering the problem. In crises, the power of God seems to be forgotten. Thus, the miracle led the apostles to learn to go beyond a pessimistic faith that sees tough situations above the power of God. It changed them that they developed a formidable faith in the messiah who was in their midst. It can also do the same for us.

Andrew’s reaction and question reveal his conviction that no matter how little the resources or how poor the quality, it is all laid before the Lord. But looking at the need and the meagre nature of the resources, the praiseworthy faith begins to question. Thus, the optimistic but questioning faith questions instead of believing God to take care of the situation. And so, it complains about the problem, grows anxious of the problem, and grumbles over the small provision. All that is needed is for one to learn to trust Christ and not to question and doubt his love and care, wisdom and power. Thus, this miracle led the apostles to a total trust in Christ, becoming more stable in their optimistic faith without having the need to doubt the power of God. It teaches us to quit the complaint and focus on the power of God, to have more hopes in God and to convert grumbling moments into praying opportunities.

There may be another and a very lovely explanation offered by Barclay. It remains scarcely to be thought that the crowds left on a nine-mile expedition without any preparations at all. We know that pilgrims always possess supplies for the journey, even though we may not say in surety that all in the crowd made preparations for food. The situation might have actually been that none would produce what he had for he selfishly (and very humanly) wished to keep it all for himself. It is not ruled out then that Jesus in the awareness of this, and with that rare smile of his, produced the little that he and his disciples had, and thanking God for it had to share it out. Moved by such example, everyone who had anything did the same and bore with one another through love (cf. Second Reading Eph. 4:1-6). And there was abundance for all. Thus, it may be that this is a miracle in which the presence of Christ changed selfish men and women into a fellowship of sharers. And so, this miracle might represent one which actually changed not loaves and fishes, but men and women.

The rest of the story demonstrated Jesus’ power over insufficiency to the extent of making something that was initially insufficient finally abundant as twelve baskets were collected, as waste is meant to be avoided. This is a lesson to all of us. This miracle of multiplication can actually be felt by each one of us. It does not follow that because somebody appears insufficient, he/she would not be efficient. Nick Vujicic (an Australian Christian) was born without arms or legs, and even attempted suicide at 10 for being bullied at school. He thought he would never get married. Nick got married in 2012, has a healthy child, and today a powerful evangelist and motivational speaker. Isn’t it great? The initial disability should not affect the final ability. One can be small, but accomplishes great things. One might not have enough intelligence but turns out to be the best. One can start small, but ends very big. One can have little talent (humour) but it turns out to be a talent that creates joy in so many people. Think about the businesses that had small beginnings but now wax strong. And finally, think about how that little embryo develops into a human being, and how that little infant grows into a big adult. Is it not true then that the miracle of multiplication is everywhere around us? Discover them and give God the praise. Happy New week. God bless you.

WHO IS THE COMPASSIONATE SHEPHERD?

HOMILY FOR THE 16^TH SUNDAY IN THE ORDINARY TIME YEAR B

Rev. Fr. Ezekoka Peter Onyekachi

Compassion is  etymologically traceable to the Latin word, compassio (sympathy). Compassio comprises of two words com (together) and pati (to suffer), which when combined gives the meaning: to suffer together. It has been explained to be a synonym for the word pity which some of the biblical translators preferred in their translations, and in fact is used in today’s Gospel (Mark 6:30-34) by our Lectionary. But, the word pity does not capture well what the word compassion depicts. Pity can be a feeling of sympathy at the misfortune or suffering of someone or something. But compassion goes beyond it; it is a deep awareness of the suffering of another, coupled with the wish to relieve it. There are three levels in a compassionate feeling: Looking to see, seeing to feel, and feeling to act. Pity as a word does not necessarily involve the third level. Pity can stop at the second level. This is why I favour compassion when linked with Jesus. And in fact, the Greek word used in Mark 6:34 confirms my proposition. Splagchizomai is a Greek word which denotes mercy and sympathy and a loving concern. The word denotes sympathy with a firm plan to assist.

The Gospel periscope started with the missionary account of the disciples, and would serve to be an introduction to the feeding of the Five thousand in Mark 6:35-44. The response of Jesus to his disciples that have done so well in their missionary work was to invite them to rest. Surely, after work comes rest. But even at that, people were still coming that they had no opportunity even to eat. They later on succeeded in getting a boat to go to a quiet place, and on discovering about their desired location, many of those people ‘made use of google map to decipher the shortest route’ to that place. And so, they reached there before Jesus and the disciples. One can then imagine the surprise on the faces of Jesus and his disciples on seeing this huge crowd. Instead of an expected expression of frustration and anger as a result of their privacy which has been invaded, Jesus felt compassion on them, for they were like sheep without shepherd. And without getting the rest they wanted or even eating the food they needed, He immediately began to teach them. Compassion breeds sacrifice. Jesus and his disciples have ended up sacrificing their vacation (rest, holiday, an hour off, a day off, sabbatical leave) and their meal (personal engagements, pleasures, leisure and recreational experiences) because they looked, saw and acted. And this is compassion.

But how are they like sheep without a shepherd? A sheep without a shepherd cannot find its way. This means that such a sheep will get lost. If the people were left to themselves, they would probably grope in the darkness of evil, and losing their souls. A sheep without a shepherd cannot find its pasture and food. This means that such a sheep will go hungry and die off. And so, leaving the people to themselves would probably lead to spiritual starvation, denying them of the salvation needed by our souls. A sheep without a shepherd is defenceless against dangers. This means that such a sheep is prone to several attacks, planned or unplanned. Therefore, leaving the people to themselves would tantamount to their exposition to danger and to an easy attack from the arch enemy of God -the Devil- and his messengers -the demons. Thus, Jesus Christ as the compassionate Shepherd forfeited his rest and his meal to become the shepherd. He is the Good Shepherd who lays down his life for his sheep (cf. John 10:15). He began to teach them. The teacher desires to dispel ignorance from the mind and character of the student. My people perished for lack of knowledge (Hosea 4:6). And so, the act of teaching the people was salvific in itself. Jesus does not want them (and us) to perish but to be taught to know God and follow his will.

God desires that we have shepherds that can gather us, his flocks. The First Reading (Jeremiah 23:1-6) saw the promise of God to his people of a good shepherd. I will appoint shepherds for them who will shepherd them so that they need no longer fear and tremble, and none shall be missing, says the Lord. The absence of compassion in these shepherds led them to be regarded as fake. They did the opposite of what a good shepherd should do. They left the sheep to go astray and failed to care for them. For this, they would be punished and a new shepherd from the shoot of David (the Christ) would rise and save the people. Indeed, he would be called “the Lord of Justice.” This title would be his, because according to the Second Reading (Eph. 2:13-18), he would abolish the law and its claims “that he might create in himself one new person in place of the two, thus establishing peace…through the cross.” On the one hand, the law Jesus abolished was the law that had no compassion and sympathy for the human person; and on the opposite hand, the law Jesus inaugurated was the law which has as its foundation compassion for justice and order. And that is the law of love and sacrifice.

The stories of great personalities who have shown compassion for their fellow humans, for the society and for the Church becomes an encouragement and a calling to become extensions of the compassionate Shepherd in the areas we find ourselves. We too are called to be compassionate. Maximilian Maria Kolbe, OFM who was proclaimed the patron saint of our Difficult Century by John Paul II was a Polish Conventual Friar volunteered to die in place of a stranger in the German death camp of Auschwitz. He was canonized on 10 October, 1982. Mother Teresa of Calcutta who was canonized on 4 September, 2016 devoted her life to the care of the sick/dying, abandoned children and the education of street children. John Mary Vianney, canonized in 1925 and the patron saint of Parish priests in his compassion to liberate the people from the slavery of sin became very outstanding in his persevering ministry in the sacrament of confession. These are great acts of compassion. If such stories make us want to be like them, we may need to think how others would want our stories to make them want to be like us. We can imagine a world in which every person in it ever desires to reach out and touch another human being not just with our eyes or with our hands, but with our hearts. Indeed, compassion is a necessity; without it, humanity cannot survive.  Compassion is the key. Happy New Week. God bless you.

‘I WAS NO PROPHET’ BUT SENT AS ONE

HOMILY FOR THE 15^TH SUNDAY IN THE ORDINARY TIME, YEAR B

Rev. Fr. Ezekoka Peter Onyekachi

Some persons seek job while some jobs seek persons. There is a story of a young man who passed out from the university with the best result of his set. Many Companies and Firms began writing to him and begging him to come and work for them. They needed him to come translate the wonderful result in their job places. They needed efficiency, and for these Firms, efficiency is dependent of academic excellence. Surely, this is true, but there is an extent where it does not apply. Some persons may not do excellent academically, but are excellent in the field. Some persons are powerful painters and artists even when they had not studied anything theatrical and aesthetic. Thus, we may say that Amos never received the training for prophecy but he had the character. You need just to do it well, and the job will seek you. Yes, some jobs seek persons; persons who have characters and qualities needed for the job. For instance, if we assume God to be an employer, what do you think would be his needed qualities in men for the role of prophesy?

One can claim or belong to the company of prophets but has lost his prophetic voice, while another who does not belong to that group can be called by God to do the job. After all, God is the employer. This was simply the case of Amos in the First Reading (Amos 7:12-15) of today. There was a group for prophets known in Israel from the early monarchical years. They were so to speak the professional prophets. They were respected and sometimes paid for their prophecies by the people who listened to them; and this led them to corruption. They expected gifts for their prophecies; little wonder then they carried collecting bags which Jesus warned His disciples against. In some other Ancient Near Eastern religious practices, it was worse. The servants of their gods and goddesses went about with bags to collect contributions for the temple and for their gods. They were regarded as pious robbers. There was even an inscription in which a man who regarded himself as a slave of the Syrian goddess said that he brought in seventy bags full each journey for his lady. Most probably, the professional Israelite prophets of the time may not deny being influenced by such a practice.

Now, we understand better why Amaziah had to tell Amos to leave their land and go back to Judah; there he could earn his bread by prophesying. Thus, Prophesy became for these men a source of liveliness. And so, God had to select and elect some other person(s) that would relay His message in an unflinching manner and with no corruption. Thus, when Amos stated that he was not a prophet, he made it clear that he was not in the ‘guilds’ of prophets known in Israel. He denies relationship with the professional prophets. This denial could become a denial against their practices of prophesy for money, for firm and for themselves, which led them to prophesy what was only pleasant to the people. His prophetic call was not his choosing but the choosing of God who called him out of his major means of livelihood, which was shepherding and dressing of sycamore. This reminds us of God’s choice of David who was called from the pasture to be prince over Israel (cf. 2 Sam. 7:8). Amos, by this answer too appears to us as a simple person who, with no thought of personal advancement or motivation, responded to a spontaneous call of God to serve in a special and authoritative capacity. It therefore stresses the claim to authority on the part of the prophet; that is, he did not want the job, but the job came seeking for him, as he was compelled by God to do it anyway. This answer thus serves as a preparation to the new prophetic role which would be set by Jesus Christ in the New Testament.

This new role and the rules that would guide it are seen in the Gospel of today (Mark 6:7-13). Jesus summoned (called/elected) the twelve and sent them out two by two (mission) and gave them authority over unclean spirits (the role of prophecy). Jesus elected his new people and gave them mission to become prophets of the new age. Since the Old dispensation of the prophets had failed to work according to the mind of God, Jesus would now inaugurate a new people who would pattern their prophetic life in line with the prophetic role of Amos which is according to the way God wants it. Since the New age has come, Jesus would now give them some instructions so as not to repeat the mistakes of the past. 1) They were to take nothing for the journey (no food, no sack, and no money). 2) They were to take only the most necessary things (walking stick, sandals). 3) They were to be contented with the available homes for mission work 4) They were to leave any house that refuses their message. Having kept the instructions, they returned successful from the mission.

These instructions were geared towards the disciples’ training in detachment and contentment (not accumulation and luxury in material things), total resignation to the will of God (who would be with them in the person of the hospitable), total dependence on the good will of the people (not an imposition or forced charity), and humility to discover that they were merely sent and must not be accepted everywhere. And because of the transitory nature of their work, it becomes more understandable why they should not be overloaded. It would not be wise to waste time on a particular place of rejection to the detriment on so many other areas of possible acceptance. These would become some kind of missionary manual for the apostles of the early Christian community, and can also become our manual in the present world bereft of contentment and detachment. We are today faced with the problems of materialism, insecurity based on care of missionaries, frustration that may come from aversion and rejection from the people ministered to. This is also some bit of encouragement to all those who take care of prophets of today not to give up in their spirit of hospitality and charity.

But beyond looking at this in its direct application to the Church, we can also apply it to see ourselves as missionaries to one another, to the world of pleasure and discontentment, to the world of generosity and hospitality, to the world of rancour and hatred, to the world that shuts out other persons who are not of the same family, group or society, to the world that grows selfish day by day, to the world that sees the visit of other people as a threat to their strength or economy, to the world that trades togetherness, love and unity for national security, boundary protection and national pride. This also makes a call to the world that abuses hospitality to inflict pains on people, to the world that plays goodness in the guise of treachery, and to the world that plays down on truth in the guise of diplomacy. We therefore pray that Jesus raises among us more successful missionaries for our world of today. Amen. Happy new week. God bless you.