Discipleship for Dummies

The readings from the Fifth Sunday of Easter could be the outline for a book entitled "Discipleship for Dummies." Discipleship is a difficult concept for me to understand, since it does not seem to be too common in our culture. I think discipleship can be thought of as a combination of two actions:

1. Imitate
2. Obey

In John 15, Jesus is comparing himself to a vine, and this followers to branches. He says his Father will be glorified when his followers "bear much fruit and become disciples" (John 15:8). This statement leaves us with two questions. How do we bear fruit? How do we become disciples? I think we'll see that these questions really aren't two, but rather one question.

John gives us an answer in the second reading. He says that we know we "belong to the truth" (1 John 3:19) if we "keep his commandments" (1 John 3:22). But what are God's commandments?

And his commandment is this: we should believe in the name of his Son, Jesus Christ, and love one another just as he commanded us (1 John 3:23).

John lays out two things we need to do to know we "belong to the truth" or in other words, to know we are disciples.

1. Believe in Christ
2. Love others, as he commanded

To truly believe in something is to imitate it. Think about the things you do everyday. Very few of the things we do are original. In most cases, we're imitating something or someone. Take brushing your teeth, for instance. I only know how to brush my teeth because my parents taught me. Suppose they never taught me, and never allowed me to see them brushing their teeth. Then one day, the put a toothbrush in me hand and said "use it." I would have no clue what to do with it.

Now suppose I go the dentist, and the dentist shows me a new way to brush my teeth, which she claims is better then the way I have been brushing. I have a choice. I can continue to imitate my parents, or I can imitate the dentist. I'll probably choose to imitate the method I think is most correct.

Certainly we don't imitate everything we believe (I try not to imitate the law of gravity, although I believe in it). But the things we imitate are things we believe most strongly to be good and true. So to say we believe in Jesus is to imitate him.

But besides imitation, we must obey him. And how does John claim we need to obey? We need to love others.

That's it. Simple, pure discipleship. Imitate and obey.

In the first reading, we get a glimpse of discipleship in action. Saul has traveled to Jerusalem, but he hasn't been accepted as a disciple. So Barnabas convinces the apostles that Saul is indeed a disciple by explaining that Saul has seen the Lord (believed, imitated) and spoken out in the name of Jesus (obeyed).

Discipleship certainly isn't easy, I tend to fail at it everyday. But we are called by Jesus to be part of the vine, to bear fruit in love and to become disciples.

Action-packed with Salvation

I know it has been a while since the Fourth Sunday of Easter, but the readings are so full of salvific meaning (even I can pick it up), that I just have to say something.

The drama starts out with Peter making the bold claim:

There is no salvation through anyone else, nor is there any other name under heaven given to the human race by which we are to be saved (Acts 4:12).

Even in our current day this claim irks many. But far from being a statement of exclusivity, Jesus explains in the gospel that salvation is for all.

I have other sheep that do not belong to this fold. These also I must lead, and they will hear my voice, and there will be one flock, one shepherd (John 10:16).

Now you're probably thinking, what does that statement have anything to do with salvation for all?

1. Immediately after making this statement, Jesus discusses his salvific act, his death and resurrection. So the context of his parable is clearly salvific.
2. The Jewish world-view consisted of Jews (those in "this fold") and Gentiles (everyone who is not Jewish). So when Jesus refers to other sheep not of "this fold" he is really referring to everyone in the world who is not Jewish. Thus his sheep are made up of those who are Jews and those who are not Jews, or in other words, everyone in the world.

So Peter's statement doesn't exclude anyone. But the question still remains, why does salvation have to come through Jesus alone? Why can't salvation come through Abraham or Mohammed or Buddha as well? The answer to that question depends on the nature of salvation. Not surprisingly, in the second reading, John presents us with the most concise definition of salvation in the Bible.

See what love the Father has bestowed on us that we may be called the children of God. Yet so we are (1 John 3:1)

By its nature, salvation is adoption. When we are saved, we become children of God, literally a part of his family. If we're going to be a part of his family, we need to have his permission, right? Suppose I want to be a part of Michael Jordan's family. I could claim to be his son, but unless he, or someone he sent invites me to be a part of his family, I can't really be adopted by him.

As far as I know neither Moses, nor Mohammed, nor Buddha, nor anyone outside of Jesus has claimed to be a messenger from God, inviting humans to join God's family. If someone else has made such a claim, I haven't seen evidence to back up that claim as convincing as the evidence Jesus presented.

You may be able to claim that Jesus was a cook or a con-artist, but it is unreasonable to claim that Peter's statement in Acts that salvation comes through Jesus alone is somehow closed-minded or divisive. On the contrary, it is a natural consequence of the nature of salvation.

Peter or Judas?

The old saying may be "When the going gets tough, the tough get going." But usually the reality is "When the going gets tough, the tough wimp out." Welcome to fallen human nature. When things get difficult, when adveristy rears its ugly head, I know that my first response is often depair. Just as the apostles fled from Jesus' side in the Garden of Gethsemane (Matthew 26:56), so I find often find myself succumbing to fear and despair when the going gets tough.

We don't know exactly when it happened, but at some point, the going got so tough for Judas that he decided to hand Jesus over to the his enemies. Even Peter, the rock (Matthew 16:18), who promised Jesus he would die with him (even earlier that same night! (Luke 22:33)), three times vehemently denied knowing Jesus. Yes, when the world seems to be against us, it is hard to focus on the victory of Christ. But thankfully, Christ expects, he even knows that we will fail.

Before both Judas and Peter denied Jesus, he told them explicitly what they were about to do (John 13:21-30, Luke 22:34). So certainly our challenege as Christians is to not deny Christ in the first place, to battle despair at ever turn. But when we do lose (and we will), we must seek forgiveness in humility. It is one thing to despair at the circumstances of the world. It is quite another to despair in thinking Christ cannot forgive even the worst sin. Who sinned more grievously, Peter or Judas? That is a difficult question to answer. But Judas doubted Christ's ability to forgive him, and ended his own life (Matthew 27:5), while Peter accepted Christ's forgiveness (John 21:15-19), and went on to lead the church.

Have any of us sinned as grievously as Judas or Peter? Only when we think that our sins of despair, of wimping out, are too bad for Christ to forgive.

What do children know about God?

This past weekend, I had the privilege of attending a first communion mass for one of my young cousins. He, along with about thirty other second-graders, received the Eucharist for the first time.

I don't remeber much about my first communion, other then being disappointed that all of my presents were religious in nature (I wanted G.I. Joes and Transformers). I certainly don't remember understanding anything about the theology of the Eucharist. Had you asked me, I would have replied that transubstantiation was something Optimus Prime did. Even the reality of the Real Presence likely escaped me. I just knew that was Jesus up there, and I wanted to go up there and get him like everyone else in the church did.

As my cousin's first communion mass progressed, I found myself almost looking down on those thoughts, since I now have a much more educated approach to the Eucharist. After all, I can quote scripture to defend the Real Presence. I can explain Aquinas' use of Aristotle's philosophy of substance and accidence to describe transubstantiation. I understand the Eucharist. I understand it better than all of these children, they can't possibly be prepared to receive the Eucharist, just as I wasn't prepared at that age.

Notice all of those I's in that last paragraph? Pride can run wild so easily, can't it? As my mind conntinued to wander, I stumbled upon the beginning of Matthew's chapter 18.

At that time the disciples approached Jesus and said, "Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?" He called a child over, placed it in their midst, and said, "Amen, I say to you, unless you turn and become like children, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven. Whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. (Matthew 18:1-4)

Then it hit me. Wow, I'm just like one of the disciples, and Jesus is sending me a message. These children, like me at my first communion, don't understand the doctrine. Yet they believe, and their faith is stronger than mine, because it depends completely on God. My so-called faith, which I have built on the rock of my own understanding, won't stand up to trials, because my understanding really isn't that good. If faith is based on understanding, then Augustine and Aquinas and Pope Benedict XVI can look at me and say "We understand it better than Josh, he can't possibly be prepared to receive the Eucharist." Sound familiar?

I thank God that faith is not based on understanding, but on Grace, and I pray for the humility to remember that. St. Thomas Aquinas, pray for me. Mary, Mother of God, pray for me.

The best Bible study ever

What was St. Luke thinking? I know he was inspired by the Holy Spirit and all, but I hope he at least put up some sort of a fight on this one.

He said to them, "These are my words that I spoke to you while I was still with you, that everything written about me in the law of Moses and in the prophets and psalms must be fulfilled." Then he opened their minds to understand the scriptures. And he said to them, "Thus it is written that the Messiah would suffer and rise from the dead on the third day and that repentance, for the forgiveness of sins, would be preached in his name to all the nations, beginning from Jerusalem. (Luke 24:44-47)

Of course that is a fight Luke lost, being that the Holy Spirit is God.

All kidding aside, last Sunday's gospel reading highlights the second time (the first is 24:27) Luke writes about Jesus explaining how the scriptures all point to him. Can you imagine being a fly on the wall during those converstations? Talk about a lesson in typology. Who better to explain the Word of God than the Word himself? At times I wish Luke would have given us a description of what was said, but then I realize the wisdom of the Holy Spirit.

That amazing chunk of the deposit of faith could not be left to the devices of men in written word, rather, it needed to be protected by the Holy Spirit through the church, where it would be much more difficult for man to distort the teaching of the best Bible study ever.