The torment of purity

 

Mk 7:1-8.14-15.21-23 (1-30)

 

 

When we do not accept ourselves as we are because in common opinion we "do not fit in" and are imperfect, we risk turning dissatisfaction into nagging.

But beyond ritual impudence, and beyond even the oscillations in religious ideologies, or the wrong-doing and the wrongness, if we shift our gaze to the highly original uniqueness of our own Task in the world and the Call to radiate (even simply not to be distant and vain bravadoes, but to be unhurried and unhurried who come), even in a climate of uncertainty, the torments will first go into the background, then transfigure, unfolding confidence in our Birth.

 

This Sunday's liturgy of the Word places the rawness of the confrontation between Jesus and the religious leaders on the specific weight of oral traditions, which in ordinary people amplify the idea of an icy and separatist 'perfection'.

Thus Jesus brings out his new proposal of Faith, which detaches itself from the common religious sense of his own people, so that it does not combine with the sick interiority of rituals that celebrate frigid distances from the world of others (comically considered corrupt).

The polemic between the Transmission of the Word (the only authentic 'Traditio') and oral or 'cultural' customs acquires a profoundly constructive context for our spiritual journey in the sacred passages.

The beginning of the first reading recommends Listening; then not to add or take away; then that wisdom is in the practice. God is Near.

In the second: the Gift "descends" so that we become Firstfruits; then "welcome" (not "obey"!); finally, the Gift imposes itself if we do not allow ourselves to be contaminated by the "world".

The latter term (in the Gospels, especially Jn) is identifiable with the devout appearance of officialdom.

A structure of sin characterised at its core by the symbiosis of power, religion and confessional commerce.

Anchored to an opinion of God designed in the image and likeness of the caste that sequestered him in separate places and tribal customs.

Singular indeed that Jesus (vv. 21-22) recommends a humanising adherence.

He does not denounce any attitude contrary to Religion, precisely because he considers the self-aggrandisement of narrow-mindedness invented by spiritual leaders - explicitly - a kind of theatrical comedy.

The disconnection from the sobriety of the Word of God conceals a perverse enmity towards reality and people as they are.

A sacred disease from which community leaders themselves (who are read in the watermark as recipients of the teaching) can be contracted.

Unfortunately, with the same frequency as the actors of archaic holiness.

Indeed, to build communion with God, it is not enough to be his admirers. Nor does the quietism of the instruction booklet satisfy us.

Procedures (it seems) do not leave us disjointed - just because they reassure.

Customs link individual emotionality to the habit of many (the apparent security of the 'long chain').

In purist religions, the precariousness of the personal Path is abhorred, and slumbering in habitual mechanisms almost a value.

On the Path of Faith in Christ, and at a certain point in the personal journey, it is precisely the little-valued boundary of creaturality that becomes a healthy spirit of dissatisfaction - and that spring that leaves us no longer certain or fulfilled; harnessed to goals.

Giuseppe Cottolengo, Teresa of Calcutta, and the saints who leave their mark have responded to the personal Calling by making room for multiple facets of the soul; palpably betraying the current 'social' adaptation.

Heaven is not jealous of its prerogatives, nor envious of our progress.

The departure? Not customs, but our personal, unrepeatable Roots of Essence.

The Roots are hidden, eager for understanding and appreciation; restless enough to compel us to explore further.

Enemy of a reverence-paravour, the Lord is not content with obvious birdseed, fragrant only with compromise.

He does not propose to his own to identify with an external model, which is inculcated through signs, gestures, formulas, typical images or established roles.

The conformism of the bigoted and cassock paradigm risks blurring the reason why we are.

The Master asks for an inner eye. For even in our radical impediments, or in our annoyance at repetition and in our fed up with the most established devotional mechanisms (once considered a sign of 'sloth') we unearth signals as mysterious as they are essential.

Dignity and promotion: in the authentic Master's teaching, the disciple can afford the luxury of following the path of the Spirit in the most unprecedented, least grey way; without letting himself be shackled by reassuring rubrics or conformism.When the time is right, even what one considers to be the incompleteness of a contracted and unbalanced character (only because he or she wishes to sift through the specific weight of constituencies that he or she does not understand) can come into play as a resource that will do what it must.

Gaps and eccentricities belong to us, as does the search for trial and error: not a fault, but a condition. This is despite the fact that in times past not a few 'guides' would have branded and ridiculed them as irreverent restlessness, disharmony or sacrilege.

In our vulnerabilities we see ourselves, we even glimpse in germs the complete Person we will be (full-blown humanisation, unthinkable before Jesus).

In the personal Exodus, to find oneself violating 'regular' compliance, to find oneself challenging the habit of 'characters' or betraying a commonly recognised role, in Christ becomes a golden opportunity to ignite more intense vibrations.

Not only to know oneself better within, but to fulfil one's own unrepeatable Realisation, unencumbered by the fear of punishment (even social punishment).

Although it may be disconcerting to squeamish souls, that transmigration from natural religiosity to Faith means moving from spiritualisations that elevate (but in detachment barbarianise) to humanisations that bring one closer.

Let us therefore learn not to feel dismay that we have not religiously 'succeeded'!

 

 

 

Purity of advantage, not of the model of perfection

 

Traditions or hypocritical ideas, and ideal order

(Mk 7:1-13)

 

"The heart of the believer is not too small for Him to whom Solomon's temple was not sufficient. For we are the temple of the living God. As it is written, 'I will dwell among them.

If an important person said to you, "I will come and dwell with you," what would you do? If your house is small, no doubt you would be bewildered, you would be frightened, you would prefer it not to happen. But fear not the coming of God, fear not the desire of your God. He does not shrink from you when he comes. On the contrary, when he comes, he will dilate you' (St Augustine, Discourse 23, 7).

 

Religiosity can deceive the ideal order; the life of Faith promotes it, relying on a perfection and purity derived simply from the human dimension - of common sense and realisation.

This is how one improves and redeems the world: by uniting with the Shekhinah of the Father; not by entrenching oneself in a fortress, as if in a lair.

And the full adventure, beyond boundaries, in the Spirit, makes us feel beautiful inside, instead of sick to be healed; indeed, capable of giving space to the magic of the Divine in ourselves and in our relationships.

Without ever feeling besieged, children react spontaneously to events - with countless personalising beneficial initiatives, unrelated to any habit, concatenation, nomenclature.

 

Under the Herod dynasty, the sense of clan and community was crumbling.

Although they felt the constant call of the Temple, because of pressing needs they were no longer open to communion.

There were too many taxes to pay, both to the government and to the House of God.

Thus debts increased, accentuating survival problems and fraying the brotherhood of kinship and solidarity of lineage.

Families were forced to close in on themselves, loosen their bonds, thin out attendance at meetings and think about their own needs.

This closure was reinforced by the devotion of the time in every respect, and here (vv.9-13) we see an incredible example of this: those who dedicated their inheritance to the Temple could leave their parents without help!

A picture of a creed that denied God's commandment in the name of God: korbàn [offering made to God] without mercy.

Ritual ruthlessness devoid of any glimmer of friendliness - yet religiously connected.

Offence and offering: injustice and normative behaviour.

Strange mutual bond, between two unrelated compasses - in the apparent form of the exemplary, devout, respectable, long-winded, confiding and pious accent.

"Beautifully ye cancel the commandment of God, to observe your own tradition" (Mk 7:9).

 

The observance of purity rules was a factor of ordinary marginalisation for many people: women, children, the sick, foreigners, the poor.

It was the most unpleasant real situation for the (true) sacredness of life, for its enchantment - subjected to a kind of compulsory schooling, all distant from the unfortunate.

Precisely the wretched were considered ignorant and cursed, because they were incapable of global fulfilment. Consequently, unable to receive the consoling blessing promised to Abraham.

A daily drip that undermined the profound meaning of existing together.

In particular, ablutions were a kind of ritual during which a satisfying dividing of the sacred and profane - holiness - was celebrated in the detachment from people and situations considered impure.

By staying away from supposed filthiness, no one could ever be uplifted.So the rules were not a source of peace, but of slavery: as mentioned above, those who could not observe them were considered ignoble, non-people.

To extend a charitable hand would even have been sacrilegious. 

In short, inhuman trifles were placed before the Law itself, thwarting its inclusive spirit [fraternity that would have heightened the enthusiasm to exist].

Then, both the narrow limits and the extreme positions led to the incoherence of those who emptied the content of the Word and prevented a different path from being activated to reach the authenticity of purity.

"Perfection" had to be: immersion in dialogue, instead of that precipitate into an external ethical ideology. And in doing so, allowing oneself to be plunged by sacral ties that accentuated exclusive states, of self-satisfaction, exaltation - or addiction.

Dropped into that sterilised and humiliating context, identification prevailed over any vocation or missionary destiny.

Deceived and caged by one-way hoods, people only embraced paths they already knew.

Woman and man lost the sense of their multifaceted existence. And life without the "opposites" weakened the Exodus of the whole people.

 

Jesus could not bear that the closed world of religiosity could be bent and used to control, divide and discriminate - to annihilate the path and relationships.

The satisfied in this sense became a source of mediocrity, everywhere - whereas as we also know, Joy is the fruit of Liberation; not of one-sided paths.

The sense of completeness is linked to the appreciation of differences. This concerns both personal and social events.

We know this infallibly, by the wisdom of Nature.

For the Tao Tê Ching (LXXXI) says: "The Way of Heaven is to benefit, and not to harm".

 

Everywhere we encounter our personal alarms, or material worries; a thousand distracting occupations. Even projects for the quality of relationships - perhaps still mixed with the learning of venerable customs or la page [unrelated expedients] that debilitate us.

Hence, the Pharisees' control is opposed by the disciples' freedom (v.2), who refuse to obey what makes no sense for real life - where visible love feeds ideal love.

Jesus teaches that true worship is practical closeness and authenticity, not literal adherence to patterns or cerebral doctrines.

In the groove of the Word there is a stage and a whole new order, which conquers all external connections to the interiority.

He links rite and action, faith and love, customary prescription and intimate obligation.

The only command capable of purifying and making us the image and likeness of the Person who knows how to meet his opposite, according to the unity in Spirit of worship.

When we accept the call of the Gospels, recognising it as a stimulus that corresponds and builds conviviality of differences, we feel less hard and proud.

If, on the other hand, we remain distant, we will go to church stumbling with traditions or with new ideas, however great, but without relating to the Father's plan of salvation.

The Eternal One does not want to snatch away our abilities, but to open us up to goodness and true ecstasy.

Purity of advantage - not of perfection.

 

 

To internalise and live the message:

 

What is the meaning of the purity taught by Jesus?

Is your faith close or far from life?

 

 

And here is the problem

 

And here is the problem: when the people settle in the land, and they are the depository of the Law, they are tempted to place their security and joy in something that is no longer the Word of the Lord: in possessions, in power, in other 'divinities' that are actually vain, they are idols. Of course, the Law of God remains, but it is no longer the most important thing, the rule of life; rather, it becomes a covering, a cover, while life follows other paths, other rules, often selfish individual and group interests. And so religion loses its authentic meaning, which is to live in listening to God in order to do his will - which is the truth of our being - and thus live well, in true freedom, and is reduced to the practice of secondary customs, which rather satisfy the human need to feel right with God. And this is a serious risk of every religion, which Jesus encountered in his time, but which can also occur, unfortunately, in Christianity. Therefore Jesus' words in today's Gospel against the scribes and Pharisees should make us think too.

[Pope Benedict, Angelus 2 September 2012].

 

 

Two identity cards

 

To know our true identity we cannot be "sitting Christians" but we must have the "courage to always set out to seek the face of the Lord", because we are "the image of God". In the Mass celebrated at Santa Marta on Tuesday, 10 February, Pope Francis, commenting on the first liturgical reading - the account of creation in the book of Genesis (1:20 - 2:4) - reflected on an essential question for every person: "Who am I?".

Our 'identity card', said the Pope, is found in the fact that human beings were created 'in the image, according to the likeness of God'. But then, he added, "the question we can ask ourselves is: How do I know the image of God? How do I know what he is like in order to know what I am like? Where do I find the image of God?" The answer is to be found "certainly not on the computer, not in encyclopaedias, not in books", because "there is no catalogue where the image of God is". There is only one way "to find the image of God, which is my identity" and that is to set out: "If we do not set out, we will never know the face of God".

This desire for knowledge is also found in the Old Testament. The psalmists, Francis noted, "many times say: I want to know your face"; and "even Moses once said this to the Lord". But in reality "it is not easy, because setting out means leaving behind so many certainties, so many opinions of what the image of God is like, and seeking him". It means, in other words, "letting God, life, put us to the test", it means "risking", because "only in this way can one come to know the face of God, the image of God: by setting out".

The Pope drew again on the Old Testament to recall that "this is what God's people did, this is what the prophets did". For example "the great Elijah: after having conquered and purified the faith of Israel, he feels the threat of that queen and is afraid and does not know what to do. He sets out. And at a certain point, he prefers to die". But God "calls him, gives him food and drink and says: keep walking". So Elijah "arrives at the mountain and there he finds God". His was therefore 'a long journey, a painful journey, a difficult journey', but it teaches us that 'whoever does not set out, will never know the image of God, will never find the face of God'. It is a lesson for all of us: 'the seated Christians, the quiet Christians,' said the Pontiff, 'will not know the face of God. They have the presumption to say: 'God is like this, like that...', but in reality 'they do not know him'.

To walk, on the other hand, 'you need that restlessness that God himself has placed in our hearts and that leads you forward to seek him'. The same thing, the Pontiff explained, happened "to Job who, with his trial, began to think: but how is God, who allows this to me?". Even his friends 'after a great silence of days, began to talk, to discuss with him'. But all this was not helpful: 'with these arguments, Job did not know God'. Instead, 'when he allowed himself to be challenged by the Lord in the trial, he met God'. And it is precisely from Job that we can hear "that word that will help us so much in this journey of searching for our identity: 'I knew you by hearsay, but now my eyes have seen you'". This is the heart of the matter according to Francis: "the encounter with God" that can happen "only by setting out".

Certainly, he continued, "Job set out with a curse", even "he had the courage to curse life and his history: 'Cursed is the day I was born...'". Indeed, the Pope reflected, 'sometimes, in the journey of life, we do not find meaning in things'. The same experience was had by the prophet Jeremiah, who "after being seduced by the Lord, he heard that curse: 'But why me?'". He wanted to "sit quietly" and instead "the Lord wanted to make him see his face".

This is true for each of us: "to know our identity, to know the image of God, we must set out", be "restless, not quiet". Precisely this "is to seek the face of God".

Pope Francis then also referred to the passage in Mark's Gospel (7:1-13), in which "Jesus encounters people who are afraid to set out" and who build a sort of "caricature of God". But that "is a false identity card" because, the Pontiff explained, "these non-restless ones have silenced the restlessness of the heart: they paint God with the commandments" but in so doing "they forget God" in order to observe only "the tradition of men". And "when they are unsure, they invent or make another commandment". Jesus says to the scribes and Pharisees who heap up commandments: "Thus you nullify the Word of God with the tradition you have handed down, and of such things you do many". Precisely this "is the false identity card, the one we can have without setting out, quietly, without restlessness of heart".

In this regard, the Pope highlighted a "curious" detail: the Lord in fact "praises them but rebukes them where there is the sore spot. He praises them: 'You are truly skilful in rejecting God's commandment in order to observe your tradition'", but then "rebukes them where the strongest point of the commandments is with your neighbour". In fact, Jesus recalls that Moses said, "Honour your father and your mother, and whoever curses father or mother shall be put to death". He continues: "You, on the other hand, say: if one declares to one's father or mother that "what I should help you with, that is, give you food, give you clothing, give you to buy medicine, is Korbàn, an offering to God", do not allow them to do anything more for their father and mother". In doing so "they wash their hands of the tenderest, strongest commandment, the only one that has a promise of blessing". And so "they are quiet, they are quiet, they do not set out". This then "is the image of God that they have". In reality theirs is a path 'in quotes': that is, 'a path that does not walk, a quiet path. They deny their parents, but they fulfil the laws of tradition that they have made'.

Concluding his reflection, the bishop of Rome reproposed the meaning of the two liturgical texts as 'two identity cards'. The first is 'the one we all have, because the Lord made us that way', and it is 'the one that tells us: set out and you will know your identity, because you are the image of God, you are made in God's likeness. Set out and seek God". The other instead reassures us: 'No, rest assured: fulfil all these commandments and this is God. This is the face of God'. Hence the wish that the Lord "give us all the grace of the courage to always set out, to seek the face of the Lord, that face that one day we will see but which here, on earth, we must seek."

[Pope Francis, St. Martha, in L'Osservatore Romano 11/02/2015].

 

 

The origin of evil is not in an external cause

 

Purity, impurity and holiness misrepresented

(Mk 7:14-23)

 

The Church has preserved faith in the goodness of creation; it does not look down on nature, society, and the concrete work of the Father, as is unfortunately advocated in certain squeamish mentalities (in a devout key).

Neither does he believe that to feel saved, there are instruments or zones of refuge that one only needs to use, enjoy, or reach out to. The Lord is for an all-round humanisation.

In ancient cultures, the religious and mythical view of the world led people to appreciate any reality from the category of holiness as detachment and separateness - even inaccessibility.

Purity laws indicated the conditions necessary to stand before God and feel good in his presence - but in fact always dismayed, because (obviously) not totally fulfilled.

One could not present oneself where the person was, or on any occasion and in any way - but according to rules related to food, contact, dress, recommended times of prayer; so on.

 

In the context of Achaemenid rule, in order to enhance identity, rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem, and maintain their class, the priests accentuated purity norms and sacrificial obligations, repeatedly manipulating the meaning, contexts, and postulates of Scripture.

Obviously, a substantial part of the offerings thus inflated remained with the class that performed the rites.

All this, at the expense of a flattened conception of the propitiatory and (supposedly) thaumaturgical cultic style, which invested every aspect of people's ordinary lives.

A multitude enslaved by the imposed vision - childish in itself - algid perhaps, but swampy and irritating.

 

At the time of Mk some Jewish converts believed they could abandon the ancient customs and approach the pagans; others were of the opposite opinion: it would be like rejecting substantial parts of the Torah [e.g. Lev 11-16 and 17ff].

In fact Mk emphasises that the problem is "in the house" (v.17 Greek text: inside the house) i.e. in the Church and among its intimates [the CEI translation reads in "a" house].

A place where paradoxically we still do not understand the Master [!] who came to free us from invented and contrived obsessions.

Christ must insist in his teaching, now not addressed to strangers, but precisely to the habitués, incapable - unlike the crowds - of "understanding" (v.14) even the rudiments of spiritual things.

In order to educate the stubborn ones still "devoid of intellect" (v.18) who consider themselves masters, he does not go to just any dwelling place, but precisely to the place where, unfortunately, expectations are cultivated that are sometimes far removed from the people (vv.14.17).

The evangelist rejects the distinction between the religious sphere of life and a 'contaminated' daily set-up; a source of corruption. But normal, trivial, summary - for this reason assessed as distant from the 'divine'.

Quintessence that conversely does not intend to subjugate anyone.

 

Prescriptions remain insufficient to give us access to God: they are but symbols, trajectories, and images.The active presence of a new Order abolishes legal prescriptions, and shifts the centre of the morality of our acts.

Here we recall Jesus' teaching: impurity does not come from without [i.e. from outside to inside].

That is not the threat to the life of the woman, the man, and the community, according to God's trickless design.

The realities of the world are never wicked and unfit - not even for worship.

They only become obnoxious by passing through decisions that are sacrilegious, because they block life. And detachments that barbarise.

 

The canonicity of the bigot and the cassock has nothing to do with divinisation, which conversely rhymes with what is concretely humanising.

The debate on the pure and the impure should not be placed on the level of things [e.g. food that goes to the stomach] but of behaviour, which starts and goes to the heart. A place that is not always serene and well 'ordered'.

There are no sacred apriorisms: it is not enough that a place, a house, objects, a person ... have been legitimised by ceremonies or even exchanges, for them to become untouchable, honest and eminent.

 

In this way, there is no sacred and profane in itself.

Mystery and bliss come into the world exclusively through the channel of dialogue and encounter with respect for intelligence, personal souls, and differing cultures. Not through entities of merit, nor through misrepresented straits.

 

Sanctification is linked to conduct. And in cases of consistency, even to the failure, anguish, and frustrations that result from challenging field choices.

These are decisions that jeopardise, and sometimes ridicule us in comparison with, the custom of compulsory authentication - where it sometimes seems necessary to avoid life. Or you are 'nobody'.

Here, formal legalism unfortunately kills any expansion of resources and ideals.

In short, impure is what poisons the existence and spontaneous realisation of people, their relationships, and creation itself.

 

Yet it is imperfections that make us new, exceptional, unique!

 

Jesus opens up a new Way to bring all of us imperfect people closer to God, to others even far away, and to ourselves - without puritanical exclusions.

When, for example, we do not accept ourselves as we are - inside, or in the field, not welcoming the different and the opposite - because in common opinion 'it is not right', we risk transforming dissatisfaction into intimate nagging.

Even the religious sense of impurity will lead us from unrest to disaster.

But outside the commitment to friendship with ourselves, with created things, and the spirit of fraternity, of conviviality of contraries, the fear of contamination is unfounded.

On the contrary, we are called to love limits: they are the ground, even broken and impudent, of preparatory energies for real flowering.

They are primordial impulses and signs of our task in the world according to God's newness.

Every Exodus values alternatives.

And we find fulfilment, the meaning of life, as well as gradually greater completeness, by encountering precisely our opposite sides.

 

Anyone who intimidates the 'inadequate' brother threatens the life of the cosmos and makes the very people who are most sensitive and attentive distrustful.

Jesus frees the crowd of the voiceless, the lost, from the obsession of apprehensions and fears, from always being on the defensive.

We are not called to fixate on one direction. There are others.

So let us learn not to be dismayed that we are not religiously 'successful' - but Firstfruits!

 

 

To internalise and live the message:

 

What do you think makes you presentable in society? In what sense are you impeccable - because you are embellished and conform to opinion?

Does being a 'son' and 'firstfruit' make you defensive or does it restore your desire to live to the full?

 

 

Conclusion:

Eucharistic crumbs

 

Sons, little dogs, demons and free movement

(Mk 7:24-30)

 

Jesus discovered the will of the Father in the events of life. The same was true for the growth of awareness of the first communities, which carried no small prejudices, at least until the third generation of believers (inclusive) - as witnessed by the Synoptics.

Religious law prevented dealing with foreigners and people of other ethnicities, borders or cultures. At first, Jesus [i.e.: He in the first communities, His mystical Body] seems not to want to care (v.27).

But after helping the crowds and his own to emancipate themselves from the prison of the norms of purity (vv.14-23) Christ breaks out of conformist ways of experiencing God.

He even exoduses himself from national and racial territories that were then sequestering the life-bloods - thus overcoming sacred preconceptions.

 

The Son's singular initiatives arise on the basis of a wholly personal experience of the divine, of a Father munificent in bestowing without conditions.

Provident and unequal from the stingy God of religions: the latter discordant from creatures, alien, and (incomprehensibly) habitual.The Lord himself helps us in his story to experience the transcendent in even summary life. Thus, to get out of the contrived doctrinal ways that cage existence [territory, customs, ideology, memberships of various kinds - even 'internal'].

With an unusual gimmick, the young Rabbi tries to open up the Judaizing mentality, crossing borders.

The intent is to make us develop his own Faith. It promoted diverse existence, and outside of traditional myopia could thus find astounding adherences.

No boundary fences, no obstacles ... can contain our will to live: we want to feed not on pride (or resistance) but on love at risk, not debased - and express ourselves completely.

Even dialogue with a woman not of his people was a 'thought' alien to the mentality of the crowds of the time - alien even to the conceptions of the first two generations of believers, in this respect still entrenched and mixed with idols.

But there was a whole people of strangers [the mestizo 'woman' and her spiritual offspring] who felt they had no future. And this challenged the many apriorisms of the time.

In short, even the church of Mk had not fully grasped the meaning of the 'bread of the sons' - all available to be 'recognised'.

 

Because of atavistic rivalries, ancient peoples used to call foreigners by the derogatory appellation 'dog', synonymous with impudence, meanness and ignoble baseness.

They were widespread misgivings about the sense of human brotherhood - from primitive vision [and not only, in the age of access].

The Lord's harsh sentence (v.27) reflects a comparison from poor areas and family life, where pets and youth once abounded.

There was still a difference between children generated by hearing the Word of God and those who regulated themselves 'by scent'.

But although no one denied sustenance to the "children" in order to give it to the "dogs" around - the latter at least had the right to the crumbs that fell on the ground.

In fact, the text speaks of 'little dogs' [kynaría-kynaríois] as pets loved by the very young and who easily fed them leftovers during meals.

In a certain sense, they belonged to 'the house'.

 

For the different and distant - even the misunderstood - it is not a problem to resort to Jesus instinctively; on the contrary, they would be content with the scraps.

According to this, the community of the sons should not lack bodily nourishment and wisdom food for anyone (Mk 6:42-44).

However, the old-timers, who considered themselves family members of entitlement and asserted registry rights, sulked and in the assemblies pretended not to allow everyone to partake of the communion, the Eucharistic grains, the gifts of the festive kingdom.

But thanks to the appeal of the Gospels [quite different from the exaggerated imperial or legionary 'evangelical' proclamations] the dominion of demons (v.29) - so alive in all the various forms of religiosity at the time in Rome - was coming to an end.

According to Mk. there should be no obsession, chain or preconception that can take away our direction of progress and energy, so that with extreme freedom we are enabled to work and be open to the needs of others, even pagans (Mk 6:45a).

 

Thus a debate arises in the Roman fraternities about the conditions of community membership.

What is the position of converts from paganism? Do they have the right to participate in the breaking of the Bread without prior doctrine-discipline? Is there or is there not a break with the observant tradition?

Mark emphasises that we have no pre-emption: the principle of universal salvation is the attitude of Faith; not a right.

The community of the baptised is not allowed to live on rent. The Gospel is open, overriding the biblical priority of the chosen people.

The reason for any exception is sensitive love, which has the freedom to yield, which becomes the only principle of membership.

 

The condition of membership in the new people of God is Faith in the heart and not in the blood or in the head, nor in the discipline that distances us from ourselves, God and others.

Faith: a new principle, which shatters every illusion of exclusivity.

 

With the Father, in the Son, it is no longer a matter of mortifying oneself, depending, striving and struggling, in order to stand before one another.

Legal purity is insufficient (vv.1-23), indeed now it is the person even of disconcerting origins - formerly an outsider - who emerges 'victorious' from the fight with the Lord.

Spousal entrustment is appreciable everywhere, by anyone: foundational Eros gushing from every soul, and not bound to repertoires. It overcomes any particularism.

Of course, it has its criteria - but they are essential: transparency, freshness, tension towards unity, overcoming conditions and taboos; value of the person; secret empathy of energies.

 

The Gospel passage traces a whole path of adherence to Christ.Those who are far away can approach and even start from the popular - inconvenient - idea that Jesus is the expected 'Son of David' [cf. parallel Mt 15:22]: a military commander and ruler who was supposed to seize power, subjugate the nations, ensure the golden age, himself fulfil the prescriptions of the Law as if he were a Model, and impose their observance on all.

The starting point of the journey may be a miserable glimmer, a beginning that perhaps does not promise much. In fact, in this specific case, it is decidedly confusing: the Master does not answer (Mt 15:23).

The title affixed to Him has nothing to do with God, nor does it concern the authentic Firstborn. He is not a powerful Messiah - a predatory, homologated image - but a servant.

It makes no sense even to ask Him for "Mercy" (Mt 15:22)! Indeed - let's face it - despite the superficial ritual habits we have, here Christ seems quite angry (v.23).

This is not the healthy relationship with the Lord: He does not chastise or enjoy being begged by the needy.

Rather, He educates as He does a friend, brother or parent; and He does not grant graces by lottery, or miracles by sympathy and protection, or favours by territory - like pagan gods.

That image is totally deviant, but it is a bogus figure that comes out of the very "insiders" (Mt 15:23-24), who would have nothing to object to [cf. again v.23].

Indeed, their own catechesis is the source of it: the title "son of David" sounds strange, on the lips of a pagan.

 

Even today, this homologising paternalistic idea - of inculcated guilt - tends to drive away those who seek an amiable companion.

The priority for 'Israel' is acknowledged by Jesus because it is precisely the eldest sons who must be converted to a new Face of the first God of Sinai - still valued Lawgiver and Judge, instead of Creator and Redeemer of our intelligence and freedom.

[Albeit in a good-natured way, they unfortunately continue to spread it, as a sullen notary, since pre-catechism].

Jesus distances himself from those who make claims and at the same time divert the souls of the needy who seek him.

Then, in spiritual terms, no one can boast a right to anything: the truly sacred Gifts do not derive from any selective election relationship, nor even clientelistic [of the buying and selling kind].

 

So, to become intimate with Christ... can one be content with the Eucharistic 'crumbs' - i.e. 'minimal salvation'?

Can one be satisfied with the mere crumbs that fall from the table of the supponent closed in small schemes (Mk 7:27-28)?

Certainly, because it is Faith that saves (Mk 7:28-29a), not a grand gesture or a long habit in the disciplines of the arcane - nor a code of purity.

The authentic Lord only says:

"By this Word, go" (v.29) - i.e. proceed to the joy of a full life, transmissible to an "offspring" not destined for torment or premature death.

And without the judgement of others, the one with the usual deceptive tares of inadequacy, on your back.

Thanks to Him we are not introduced into a summary religious practice, but into a Relationship that is chiselled over time (vv.25-30).

 

How to orient oneself?

Instead of the narrow Law, it is the Gospel that fully empowers us.

As if we were "little dogs" (vv.27-28) that seek life and nourishment, instinctively proceeding [by "sniffing"] along unexplored paths. And that according to character, inclination, Calling by Name, appeal to other secret forces.

In short, all men - although still far from an explicit adherence to faith - are inhabited by this knowledge that is at once personal and primordial, that gives immediate and infallible direction.

So in simplicity will we too, to find the Way.

For Faith has no nationality, and is the only valid language-relation-trajectory for communication between God and woman and man.

It is universal; it crosses time, denominational and even religious borders.

 

Commenting on the Tao Te Ching (LVIII), Master Wang Pi states:

"He who rules well has no form or name, he does not initiate administrations. The various categories divide and separate, that is why the people are fragmented'.

Master Ho-shang Kung adds:

"When the ruler is liberal, the people are united in wealth and satiety: people love each other and get along well".

 

Today it is about sharing the minutiae and fragments of the 'more' we in the West inherited from past generations.

A very instructive and affluent 'more'; lavishly bestowed, yet received without 'anything too much' [ne quid nimis] nor much merit or risk (as 'good Christians...').

And respecting in all things the nomenclature of the veterans, of the cordate and the powerful - always disinclined to real coexistence.

Christ, on the other hand, is sapiential food for free circulation; not impeded food, to be kept locked in tabernacles.

His virtue is now understood only outside the sacristies - from far and wide (vv.24-25) - where even a minuet of bread makes one trust and rise, in sharing.

To break the Eucharist as source and summit is to proclaim it a Gift not to be withheld or kept intact, but rather to be displayed and distributed without moralising.

To share that Food is to participate in the root of existence, what we have and are; the yardstick of what we proclaim, believe and practise.

 

Sadly, not infrequently the strangers and dissimilar are hungrier for the true Manna from Heaven.

Saturated to the point of nausea - and perhaps still unable to comprehend its meaning - why live the shared Nourishment [perhaps with little regard for its meaning] as a problem and fear?

 

 

To internalise and live the message:

 

If not of 'your people', do you at least want to talk to them - even if veterans, inner clubs and regulars forbid it?

Don't you think the synodal path is a good opportunity to review abstract positions?

Do you know of any ecclesial parishes that do not give outsiders a chance?

Do you know people hurt by exclusions? What do you do, silence-consent?