22nd SUNDAY IN ORDINARY TIME

 

Readings: Jeremiah 20:7-9
Romans 12:1-2
Matthew 16:21-27

 

 

"Whoever chooses to save his life will lose it,
but the one who loses his life for my sake will find it.”

 

 

Today's gospel is a continuation of the gospel last Sunday. It offers us at least two important points for meditation. First, it gives us another insight on Peter's primacy. Second, it teaches us about the real meaning of the Christ.

 

1. Last Sunday, we meditated on the primacy of Peter as the gospel's central theme. Undoubtedly, it was a matter of divine choice. But the triggering thing was Jesus' question to which only Peter gave the most profound answer. Surprisingly, however, right after that commission as the visible head of the church, Peter received one of Christ’s most piercing rebukes. And what triggered it was also Peter’s statement. A comparison may help us.

 

Peter: "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.”

Jesus: "You are a happy man, Simon Barjona, for it is not flesh or blood that has revealed but my Father in Heaven.”

Peter: "Never, Lord! No, this must never happen to you."

Jesus: "Get behind me, Satan! You would have me stumble. Your thoughts are not from God but from man.”

 

The first dialogue reveals that Peter's answer is out of divine enlightenment. The second dialogue, however, shows that Peter’s statement is purely out of his understanding as a human being. It is because of the first that Peter is rewarded; it is because of the second that he is rebuked. While because of the first he is called rock, it is because of the second that he is called Satan. One thing is clear. Christ chooses Peter despite his being human. Today's gospel is a proof that there is nothing in Peter that would make him worthy to that primal post. What is shown here is his human weakness. This human frailty would be repeated in the future when he would out rightly deny the Christ whom he knew. And that denial would happen for three times. But these weaknesses and shortcomings did not cause in any way for Jesus to retract from his promise to Peter. Instead, this promise would even be reinforced after the resurrection by his mandate: "Feed my sheep!” (cf Jn21:15-17).

 

Most often, we want to see a holy pope, a holy bishop, a holy priest. Our religiosity seems to be too delicate that we cannot afford to hear even the slightest mistakes from our pastors. This could be understandable since all of us are human, and thus we need somebody like priests to look up to. But it is precisely for the same reason of being human that we ought too, to give some allowances to these very same people. Sadly, however, we sometimes behave as if we were more than God. Priests are no angels but we expect them to be pure spirits. They are no divine but we expect them to be sinless. This attitude simply shows that we seem to forget that the "greatest vocation" ever offered to man happened in a context which was most human. Man was never worthy of it. In fact, man’s worthiness was not even a qualification for it. It was simply and purely because of divine choice that the unworthy man became worthy of it.

 

True, Christ hailed Peter to be the head of the Church because of the latter’s answer. But looking closely at it, we discover that it was not really because of Peter’s answer that he was chosen as Christ's vicar. Rather, it was the other way around. It was because he was chosen that Peter was able to answer. And when he was now chosen as vicar, it never meant that he lost his being human. The fact that he was rebuked because of his statement, the fact that he denied Christ for three times, the fact that he would have future quarrels with St. Paul, etc., all these prove that Peter was not stripped off of his humanity. And yet by that time, he was already de facto the first pope.

 

2. It is worth noting that it was again because of being human that Peter would like to prevent the tragic fate of the Christ he knew. Perhaps, believing that it was now his responsibility as head to protect the Messiaship of Jesus, Peter stood his ground as a great defender. This was simply in keeping with the grandiose over and undertones of the Jewish political messiah. But sadly, that was not the meaning of the Christ.

 

"From that day Jesus Christ began to make to make it clear to his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem; he would suffer many things from the Jewish authorities, the chief priests and the teachers of the law. He would be killed and raised on the third day.” - - - After that big revelation that he wass the Christ, he began to talk about his suffering in order to open their eyes that his Messiaship consists in doing the hard way. This is getting out of the Jewish traditional understanding. While the Jews envision their messiah as a mighty warrior and conqueror, Jesus offers them his person as a meek and obedient suffering servant. While the Jewish traditional messiah is he who exercises strong political leadership, Jesus' Messiaship is that of a moral and religious reformer who restores the reign of God to all humanity through pain and suffering. This humble yet genuine meaning of the Christ would be the cause of the people’s repugnance that would ultimately bring him to the cross.

 

But what is quite striking here is that this understanding on Christ’s Messiaship has become the model of Christian discipleship. “If anyone wants to follow me, let him deny himself, take up his cross and follow me.” This truth is difficult to take. All of us, including the apostles themselves, acknowledge such difficulty. Perhaps, the reason of this difficulty is the fact that pain and suffering stand diametrically opposed to man's basic aspiration to be happy. This apparent contradiction is truly hard to reconcile. And of course, this will remain irreconcilable if we take it as plain contradiction. A closer look at the gospel, however, reveals that Jesus preaches no contradiction. The most we can see in Christ's words is a paradox. For indeed, Christian message is a big paradox. Greatness consists in being humble. Lordship means service. Death promises life. This is precisely the meaning of Jesus’ statement as he continues: "Whoever chooses to save his life will lose it, but the one who loses his life for my sake will find it."

 

With this, we understand that what we have is not really a sadist God. He is simply a God who teaches the nobility of the hard way. And he does so not because it is repugnant to human nature, but because it is a noble affirmation even to man's most simple experience. Is not victory sweetest when fought in the hardest way? Certainly. In the same way, virtue is born by hard practice, as gold is tested by fire. That is why the same process is demanded of him who wants to be his follower. The path of Christian spirituality takes him to the long and winding road where "deaths" seem to be an endless encounter.