22ND SUNDAY IN ORDINARY TIME (YEAR C)

1st Reading       Ecclesiasticus (or Sirach) 3:17-20,28-29

Psalm                  68:4-5ac,6-7ab,10-11 (R. 11b)

R:// "In your goodness, O God, you provided for the poor"

2nd Reading     Hebrews 12:18-19,22-24a

Gospel                Luke 14:1,7-14

SIT LOW TO RISE HIGH

Friends, Peace and Goodness! Today is the 22nd Sunday in Ordinary Time (Year C). It is also the last Sunday of the month of August. Our first reading is from Ecclesiasticus (or Sirach) 3:17-20,28-29 and the Gospel is from Luke 14:1,7-14. Let us look at a few points from them. At first read, both readings point in the direction of the theme of humility. Therefore, we shall toe that same line. However, what in particular do the readings have to say about humility?

Let us say a few preliminary words about the first reading from Ecclesiasticus 3:17-20,28-29. Ecclesiasticus is also called Sirach. The book was written around 180 BC and that is the period of Greek rule. It was written in Jerusalem by Ben Sira, a sage and scribe who taught Jewish youth how to live faithfully under Greek cultural pressure. In the face of the encounter of Greek life, many cultural concerns will erupt. Unlike Greek culture which exalted honour, glory, and prestige, Jewish wisdom stressed anāwîm (עֲנָוִים), the humble or lowly, those favoured by God. This will be a cultural difference. We should glimpse that the book was written in Greek. It is one of the Deuterocanonical books. Let us pay attention to 3 details about what the author says about humility. 

The first detail is that he uses a paradox, thus, "the greater you are, the more you must humble yourself". The problem is that the people the author is addressing are being ruled by a culture that promotes honour and prestige. In themselves, honour and prestige are not evils. They can become good avenues. The author does not see them as bad but sees it as an opportunity to teach. The author knows about human success and societal progress and structure. He does not criticise. Knowing that God has a special place for the lowly, it is only good to say that while honour increases, ensure that you always secure a special place in God's heart. Always remember your root, your history, your own kind. In a culture of honour, humility was seen as weakness; but here it becomes the path to divine favour. The author plausibly intends to say that true greatness is not measured by power or prestige but by how low we are willing to bend in service. Hence, as you rise, make use of your honour and let it benefit your own kind. Do not disregard the fact that honour lies in being lowly. Remember your history. 

The second point is that Sirach stresses that God, who is all-powerful, chooses to be glorified in the humble, not the mighty. Thus, "There are many who are noble and renowned, but it is to the humble that he reveals his mysteries". The Hebrew/Aramaic concept of humility (anāw) is not self-deprecation but radical openness to God. The issue is that Humility, the choice to be lowly, remembering your root and history, having a place for people in your heart, and securing a place in God's heart, is not a curse or an attemptto debase onself. It rather opens us up to God. Historically, this speaks to Israel's own conditions. Israel was a small, oppressed nation surrounded by empires. Yet, God's glory shines through their littleness. It is not the prestige but the littleness of the heart that carries the prestige.

The third pint is that Sirach says, "the mind of the wise man will ponder the words of the wise, and an attentive ear is the wise man's desire" (v. 29). The author, Ben Sira connects humility with teachability. Wisdom is not about knowing it all, but about listening deeply. In Jewish tradition, a wise man is first of all a listener (shemaʿ = “hear”). The proud man interrupts; the humble man attends. Historically, Israel, in exile, had to learn by listening to God again. Humility will mean rediscovering identity through attentive obedience. The humble person makes space to "hear God" in his Word, in the cries of the poor, and in life's changing scenes.

The Gospel is from Luke 14, 7-14. The context of the passage is a meal, and the day is Sabbath. However, the place is the home of a leading Pharisee. These details speak deeply. A meal conveys the togetherness of a worshipping community. People of like minds, of same ideologies, creed, and culture share a meal. That is precisely the community formed in the religious sphere. That the meal is shared on the Sabbath heightens it. That is a highly regarded religious day. If there is any comparison we should make, then we should compare it to a Sunday Eucharistic Meal. The only problem is that the meal is not eaten in a church. The implication is that the meal should find further expression and meaning outside the Church's walls. In fact, Jews are fond of sharing meals at homes. A home or a house is an extension of the dwelling of God, the Temple. What it means is that a meal shared at home should embody the goals of union between God and man in His dwelling place. In the final analysis, whatever you heard ought to be practised at home. 

Jesus shows this unity at meals, and it is clear in the observation that in Luke's Gospel, Jesus is often cited going to a meal, at a meal, or coming from a meal. In fact, in the grand scheme of Luke's Gospel, in chapters 9 to 19, Jesus moves resolutely towards Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover. That is a feast where a meal will be shared. Interestingly, our Gospel passage is found within this space of Chapters 9 to 19. Chapter 14, our Gospel passage, makes a central or midway between that journey to Jerusalem. Sharing a meal is a vital event in Jesus' ministry. 

Jesus had been invited to the house of a leading Pharisee, and they WATCHED him closely. The Greek word translated as "Watch" is "paratēreō", which could be translated as "scrutinize". The word has the nuance of "hostile observance". This means that that kind of watching was not one of admiration, but that Jesus might do or say something they could use against him. Meanwhile, this is a moment of unity and togetherness. Why this reaction from the Pharisees? Let us remember, first of all, that every meal, principally the Eucharistic Celebration, is not an avenue for hostile observance but of togetherness and expression and celebration of our unity in Christ. Hostile observance defeats our participation in the Eucharistic Meal. 

As an invited guest to the feast, he has a place to sit. What does the feasting sitting structure look like? Normally, at feasts, 3 couches, called "triklinium", are arranged in such a way that the servants could approach the table from the fourth side. On each couch, three or four guests could take a place. There was a strict precedence: not only the three couches were different in standing, but on each couch, the places were ranked as 'high', 'middle', or 'low'. The high places are the first places. These are called "protoklisia". These are the places of honour.

Jesus noticed how they picked the places of honour. He used the occasion to teach them. He said, "When someone invites you to a WEDDING FEAST, do not take your seat in the place of honour". Matthew's Gospel has only "Feast". In Luke's Gospel, Jesus states the exact feast in his parable. It is a WEDDING Jesus used in his parable. Theologically, "wedding" has the futuristic (eschatological) notion of the wedding banquet in Heaven. The Eucharistic celebration is a foretaste of that Banquet. 

A meal on a Sabbath is what is in perspective. Jesus, in the parable, uses the image of a Wedding. One plausible indication Luke might give us about a faith community is that of a meal or a feast attended by the members of a faith community, especially a community that understand the Eucharist as a wedding banquet, a foretaste of Heaven. Luke wants to tell us that at the Eucharistic table, it is not position or social standing that matters but one's presence to serve. All positions are subsumed in the presence of a person with all his faculties.

On a different level, in a cultural context, the most revered or prominent guests at a wedding are the couples, especially the groom, or men of high standing invited by the groom who may be associated to the groom or the bride, or who may have a special role to play at the wedding. Such ones take the "protoklisia", the high places.

If you are not in one of such groupings, why take up the "protoklisia"? That will amount to taking up a role or authority that is not within your means. That is false identity. As the parable has to do with humility, we should then see humility as knowing your identity, accepting what you are, and acting in such regard.

In the sacred and secular spheres, let your social standing tally with what you will do there. Do not do what your social standing does not permit you to do. Actions within the sacred and secular spaces have deep meanings. They are not mere shows. 

Pax et Bonum