标签： 主日证道

When Value Outweighs the Price Tag
(Lk 15:1-32)

Fr. Jijo Kandamkulathy CMF
Claretian Missionaries

Jesus discusses three parables: 1) the parable of the lost coin, 2) the lost sheep, and 3) the lost son to establish the compassionate heart of God. The reason for saying these parables begins with the derisive look of the Pharisees and Sadducees at the sinners and tax collectors, and their disapproval of a teacher eating with them. They had judged the sinners and tax collectors as unworthy of God. The three parables that Jesus discusses come in different degrees. A coin is inanimate, a sheep living, and a son is closer to the father than a coin to the woman, or the sheep to the shepherd. If the progression is understood, we can better peek into the deeper import of the three parables put together.

A coin has more value than what it can buy if it is a hard-earned. Ten dollars earned as interest is cheaper than a ten-dollar bill earned by physical labor. Often the value of the money is not calculated by what it can buy but by how much is left in the savings after you spend. Here, it is a woman who is in search of the coin because she earns her money with much more difficulty than a man. She has stronger emotional bond to what she earns than a man.

In the second instance, a shepherd who has an emotional connection is in search of his lost sheep. His reason is suspended and risks the loss of the other ninety-nine because of the emotional connection to what is lost. The numbers do not count here at all. The statistics officer who takes the number of annual deaths will never feel the pains of the families who lost one of their loved ones. There are intangibles that cannot be judged based on financial or numerical valuation.

The third parable of the prodigal son shows the progressing intensity of the loss and the joy in regaining what was lost. What match is a shepherd who lost one sheep from a hundred to a father who lost one out of two sons! The intensity is multifold. Jesus explains how God is emotionally connected to his children, saint or sinner.

It is a Pharisaic mind, that looks at the relationship between the father and his children with detached emotions as a matter of numbers. Only a schizoid detachment can separate the children as good or the bad, and abandon the bad ones. It is, of course, easy to judge the children of others, but when it comes to one’s own children, objectivity becomes out of place. The Pharisaic mind imagines that God belongs to the righteous, and the sinful ones do not belong to God. When God is pictured as the father, it undermines the strength of that basic premise of the Pharisaic religion.

People often judge one another based on one’s own preoccupations. The most recent example of this principle I heard is from a film, of which I forgot the title. A husband whose wife had just chosen to divorce him accused her of a relationship with another man. The woman had been suffering from this paranoid husband for a long time. Someone then confronts the husband, “You are worried about her fidelity because you have not been faithful.” This was the truth. This man was not good at being faithful, but he was preoccupied with her fidelity.

The Pharisees and Sadducees had “unfriended” the tax collectors as bad ones and unworthy of their respect. What was then their preoccupation? They were worried about two things: 1) popularity, and 2) sinfulness. They were worried about the number of followers that Jesus was gathering, and they tried to judge Jesus— that he was gathering cheap popularity from sinners and traitors. Jesus names the judgment of the Pharisees and the Sadducees as hypocritical. The Pharisees are not caught in their sinfulness not because they are holy but because they are shrewd enough to make mistakes that will not be discovered.

What should be our parameters in judging another person? First of all, we should not judge at all. What we can develop is to have a divine perspective to look at the people around us. God judges based on the law of love for God is love. Accordingly, the sinners and mistaken ones need more attention and care than the righteous ones. Jesus finds sinfulness not as a disqualification to establish a relationship with sinners. He knows that his Father considers saints and sinners alike as his children.

We keep judging others. The metrics of our judgment is our own value systems which vary from person to person. A person who has gone through poverty might develop the tendency to evaluate everything and everyone around him/her based on how affordable something is. A priest might keep judging his community based on church attendance, so those who do not go to church become bad people. Someone who has a preoccupation with cleanliness makes friends with hygienic freaks, and the rest become bad people!

I am reminded of the visit of Pope Francis to a prison in Italy, and talking to a prisoner he was heard saying that he did not know why he was the Pope and not in the prison. We really do not have any merit of our own for where we are. We are where we are because God has designed it so. We can only be thankful for what we are, and not judges over the plight of others.

© Claretian Missionaries
Cum Approbatione Ecclesiastica 2022

Fr. Jijo Kandamkulathy CMF
Claretian Missionaries

在今天的福音中，耶穌給追隨祂的人施加了三個勸阻條件：（1）惱恨你的父親和母親（2）捨棄你擁有的一切 （3）背著自己的十字架來追隨我。為任何領導人而言，這些條件，為那些追隨的人而言，都是致命的。只有在耶穌走向耶路撒冷的最後旅途的聖經文本中，才能理解耶穌所要求的這些勸阻人的要求。

正如我時常提到的那樣，耶穌往耶路撒冷的朝聖之旅，始於耶穌面朝耶路撒冷的那一刻（路9:51）旅途從加里肋亞開始，穿過各城各村，聚集起來的人數，越來越多，令耶穌感到憂慮，那些追隨祂的人，可能錯誤地理解祂的意圖。祂藉著說明這個旅途的目的和艱辛，以勸阻他們。祂感到憂慮，擔心他們在不知道自己選擇與祂相隨造成的後果的情況下，倉促地做出決定。將去作戰或建築一座塔的比喻，表明追隨耶穌，尋求天主的國的嚴肅性。

追隨耶穌的人，好像是在想像與黑落德和比拉多對抗，接管耶路撒冷，重建達味後裔王國。當然，耶穌知道這是一場不同的競賽。祂從顯聖容的那一刻就確信：在耶路撒冷，祂要被殺。正是在這個背景下，耶穌作出三個勸阻性的聲明。

“惱恨父親和母親”這次旅行相當危險。 耶穌知道，祂決不會倖存，但是，誰會失了性命呢？關於這事，祂知道嗎？祂不確定。但是，祂確實很擔心。他們可能有去無回。祂被捕的時候，在革責瑪尼山園，耶穌確信，沒有一人會被捕，祂給他們說：“如果他們是來找祂，就讓祂的同伴離開。”祂所擔心的，是他們的安全。

耶穌用了一個詞彙“十字架”這個詞彙對聽到這話的人而言，可能造成了非常不祥的印象。這個詞只有一個含義。十字架，原是那些被判去釘在十字架上的人所肩負的。正如之前提到的那樣，耶穌所擔心的，是可能會有許多人與祂同去被釘在十字架上。祂給他們講述的，不是帶有比喻性的十字架。祂所講論的，是真實的十字架，祂必須首先背起十字架。他們要追隨祂。把十字架比作我我們身上移走的，生活的重擔，給那些追隨耶穌的人造成了一種觀念：耶穌已經預表，祂已移走了阻礙他們的危險。在若望所記述的福音中，許多追隨耶穌的人，他們在與耶穌同行的道路上，離開了耶穌。祂提及這事，是因為這個教訓，非常困難。實在，這些教導包括了這些追隨祂往耶路撒冷去的人，提供了被釘在十字架上的可能性。

耶穌也要求他們在啟程前聲明放棄一切產業。這裡，沒有比喻的意涵。祂是在說，要求他們真的放棄他們的產業，而非要求他們放棄那些被人看作非常珍貴的產業，而是真實的土地，真實的產業，因為他們正在踏上一段他們不確定是否能回來的旅途。後來，如果百姓在路上，對貧乏和資源的匱乏感到後悔，那麼，開始這段旅程，就沒有意義了。我們很容易記起以色列穿過西奈曠野的旅途。他們後悔離開埃及，耶穌提醒他們，要聲明放棄產業，近似合法的把他們的產業留給那些留下來的人。

在其他文本，特別是在路加福音中，很少提及到棄絕，卻常提到分享。在這裡，棄絕而非分享，把產業的產業拋諸腦後，因為他們可能無法再把它們取回來。這不是因為，他們愛護或憐憫窮人。只有那些被認為，堪當莊重追求天國的人，才有可能申明放棄自己的財富。

要明白，這段旅途是一段真正意義上的旅途，而比喻意義上的旅途。這段旅途，可以比作我們個人或我們團體已經開啟的信仰之旅。今時，我們團體的生活方式，已經改變。越來越少的孩子與長輩同住，特別是在半球之間發生的大規模遷移的背景下。老年人，當他們的生命行將結束時，時常有其他人照顧他們，而非他們的兒女。孝愛父母，有如在此世上最珍貴的關係，在許多情況下，已不復存在。現在，我必須說要惱恨父母。這件事，真實地發生在我們身上。愛自己的兒女，超過愛惜一切的數量，正日益減少。父母如果真愛自己的兒女，他們的家庭生活，就會發生調整。我不是在說：要維繫家暴的婚姻關係。我是在說：提出離婚的那些愚蠢理由。

十字架也有一些比喻性的含義。我們發現，越來越多的百姓受到壓力，對我們的時代感到擔憂。社會上患抑鬱症和精神疾病的比例，正日益攀升，這是因為，人們無力背負起他們必須背負的十字架。忍受痛苦的恢復能力 —— 疼痛閾值 —— 正日漸低下。我們有必要學會，為有目的的生活，作出必要的犧牲。

耶穌所邀請的，是為了更崇高的目的而生活。只有我們明確了自己的目標，我們就會願意去作犧牲，犧牲我們珍貴的關係，我們珍貴的產業，擁抱我們的十字架，不堅定于崇高目的，生活沒有目標，決不能為了長遠的將來，舍掉當下任何便利。這給我提出了一個核心的問題：“我願意捨棄我所擁有的一切的目的是什麼？”

©全屬於禰（Totus Tuus） & Claretian Missionaries（聖母聖心愛子會）
Cum Approbatione Ecclesiastica 2022

Fr. Jijo Kandamkulathy CMF
Claretian Missionaries

在今天的福音中，耶稣给追随祂的人施加了三个劝阻条件：（1）恼恨你的父亲和母亲（2）舍弃你拥有的一切 （3）背着自己的十字架来追随我。为任何领导人而言，这些条件，为那些追随的人而言，都是致命的。只有在耶稣走向耶路撒冷的最后旅途的圣经文本中，才能理解耶稣所要求的这些劝阻人的要求。

正如我时常提到的那样，耶稣往耶路撒冷的朝圣之旅，始于耶稣面朝耶路撒冷的那一刻（路9:51）旅途从加里肋亚开始，穿过各城各村，聚集起来的人数，越来越多，令耶稣感到忧虑，那些追随祂的人，可能错误地理解祂的意图。祂藉着说明这个旅途的目的和艰辛，以劝阻他们。祂感到忧虑，担心他们在不知道自己选择与祂相随造成的后果的情况下，仓促地做出决定。将去作战或建筑一座塔的比喻，表明追随耶稣，寻求天主的国的严肃性。

追随耶稣的人，好像是在想象与黑落德和比拉多对抗，接管耶路撒冷，重建达味后裔王国。当然，耶稣知道这是一场不同的竞赛。祂从显圣容的那一刻就确信：在耶路撒冷，祂要被杀。正是在这个背景下，耶稣作出三个劝阻性的声明。

“恼恨父亲和母亲”这次旅行相当危险。 耶稣知道，祂决不会幸存，但是，谁会失了性命呢？关于这事，祂知道吗？祂不确定。但是，祂确实很担心。他们可能有去无回。祂被捕的时候，在革责玛尼山园，耶稣确信，没有一人会被捕，祂给他们说：“如果他们是来找祂，就让祂的同伴离开。”祂所担心的，是他们的安全。

耶稣用了一个词汇“十字架”这个词汇对听到这话的人而言，可能造成了非常不祥的印象。这个词只有一个含义。十字架，原是那些被判去钉在十字架上的人所肩负的。正如之前提到的那样，耶稣所担心的，是可能会有许多人与祂同去被钉在十字架上。祂给他们讲述的，不是带有比喻性的十字架。祂所讲论的，是真实的十字架，祂必须首先背起十字架。他们要追随祂。把十字架比作我我们身上移走的，生活的重担，给那些追随耶稣的人造成了一种观念：耶稣已经预表，祂已移走了阻碍他们的危险。在若望所记述的福音中，许多追随耶稣的人，他们在与耶稣同行的道路上，离开了耶稣。祂提及这事，是因为这个教训，非常困难。实在，这些教导包括了这些追随祂往耶路撒冷去的人，提供了被钉在十字架上的可能性。

耶稣也要求他们在启程前声明放弃一切产业。这里，没有比喻的意涵。祂是在说，要求他们真的放弃他们的产业，而非要求他们放弃那些被人看作非常珍贵的产业，而是真实的土地，真实的产业，因为他们正在踏上一段他们不确定是否能回来的旅途。后来，如果百姓在路上，对贫乏和资源的匮乏感到后悔，那么，开始这段旅程，就没有意义了。我们很容易记起以色列穿过西奈旷野的旅途。他们后悔离开埃及，耶稣提醒他们，要声明放弃产业，近似合法的把他们的产业留给那些留下来的人。

在其他文本，特别是在路加福音中，很少提及到弃绝，却常提到分享。在这里，弃绝而非分享，把产业的产业抛诸脑后，因为他们可能无法再把它们取回来。这不是因为，他们爱护或怜悯穷人。只有那些被认为，堪当庄重追求天国的人，才有可能申明放弃自己的财富。

要明白，这段旅途是一段真正意义上的旅途，而比喻意义上的旅途。这段旅途，可以比作我们个人或我们团体已经开启的信仰之旅。今时，我们团体的生活方式，已经改变。越来越少的孩子与长辈同住，特别是在半球之间发生的大规模迁移的背景下。老年人，当他们的生命行将结束时，时常有其他人照顾他们，而非他们的儿女。孝爱父母，有如在此世上最珍贵的关系，在许多情况下，已不复存在。现在，我必须说要恼恨父母。这件事，真实地发生在我们身上。爱自己的儿女，超过爱惜一切的数量，正日益减少。父母如果真爱自己的儿女，他们的家庭生活，就会发生调整。我不是在说：要维系家暴的婚姻关系。我是在说：提出离婚的那些愚蠢理由。

十字架也有一些比喻性的含义。我们发现，越来越多的百姓受到压力，对我们的时代感到担忧。社会上患抑郁症和精神疾病的比例，正日益攀升，这是因为，人们无力背负起他们必须背负的十字架。忍受痛苦的恢复能力 —— 疼痛阈值 —— 正日渐低下。我们有必要学会，为有目的的生活，作出必要的牺牲。

耶稣所邀请的，是为了更崇高的目的而生活。只有我们明确了自己的目标，我们就会愿意去作牺牲，牺牲我们珍贵的关系，我们珍贵的产业，拥抱我们的十字架，不坚定于崇高目的，生活没有目标，决不能为了长远的将来，舍掉当下任何便利。这给我提出了一个核心的问题：“我愿意舍弃我所拥有的一切的目的是什么？”

©全属于祢（Totus Tuus） & Claretian Missionaries（圣母圣心爱子会）
Cum Approbatione Ecclesiastica 2022

The Discouraging Leader
Lk 14:25-33

Fr. Jijo Kandamkulathy CMF
Claretian Missionaries

Jesus uses three discouraging conditions to follow him in the gospel today: (1) Hate your father and mother, (2) Renounce all your possessions, (3) Take up one’s cross and follow. These are suicidal conditions for any leader to place to one’s followers. These discouraging demands can be understood only in the context of the final journey of Jesus to Jerusalem.

As I have mentioned often, the pilgrimage of Jesus to Jerusalem begins from the time Jesus sets his face to Jerusalem (Luke 9: 51). As the journey progressed from Galilee through the villages and towns, it was gathering more and more people and Jesus was worried, that those following hm might have misunderstood the purpose of his journey. He is dissuading them, by clarifying the purpose and hardships of this journey. He was worried they have taken hasty decisions without knowing the consequences of their choice to accompany him. The metaphors of going for a war or building a tower are to indicate the gravity of the pursuit of the Kingdom of God following Jesus.

The followers seems to have imagined the defeat of Herod and Pilot, the takeover of Jerusalem and the reestablishment of the Davidic Kingdom. Jesus, of course knew that this is a different ball game. He was sure from the transfiguration moment that he would be killed in Jerusalem. It is in this context Jesus makes the three dissuading statements.

Hating father and mother. This journey is quite dangerous. Jesus knew, he would not survive but who else will lose their lives? Did he know about it? Not sure. But he was definitely worried about it. It is possible that they might not return. When he was getting arrested, at the Garden of Gethsemane, Jesus was making sure, that no one else should be arrested and he told them, if they were looking for him, let his companions go. He was worried about their safety.

The usage of the term, cross might have been very ominous to the listeners. It had only one meaning. The cross was carried by those who sentenced for crucifixion. As mentioned earlier, Jesus was worried, together with many others might get crucified. He was not telling them about any metaphoric cross. He was talking about a real cross and he would be the one to take it first. They would have to follow them. Metaphorizing the cross as burdens of life has taken away from us, the sense of the impeding peril that Jesus was predicting to all of them. John would write in his gospel that many followers left his company on the way. He mentions it because of the difficult teachings. Well, that teaching included offering the possibility of a crucifixion for those who followed him to Jerusalem.

Jesus also asks about renouncing all possessions before undertaking the journey. There are no metaphors here. He was talking about renouncing their possessions for real, not about things that a person considers precious, real land and property because they were embarking on a journey that he was not sure if they would ever return. If people regretted later about poverty and lack of resources on the way, then, there was no point of beginning this journey. We can easily remember the journey of Israel through the desert of Sinai. They regretted leaving Egypt, because they missed the food and comfort of Egypt. Jesus was reminding them to renounce the possessions, nearly legally, meaning write off their possessions to those staying behind.

In other places, particularly in Luke, there is little reference to renunciation. It is always about sharing. Here, the renunciation is not for sharing, but leaving the properties behind because they might not be able to return to claim them. This is not because of the love or compassion for the poor. It is just renunciation of the riches possible only for those who have found worth in the pursuing the Kingdom of God.

Understanding that journey in a real sense does not take its present metaphoric meanings. The journey could be well taken metaphorically for our personal faith journeys or that of our societies. Societies our times have changed their life styles. Children who live with elderly parents are becoming fewer, especially in the context of large migrations happening inter-hemispherally. The oldies often have someone else other than their children caring for them by the end of their lives. Loving parents, as the most precious relationship on earth is not found true in many cases, now. I hate to say this. But this reality is just on us. The number of parents who love their children more than anything else is also on the decline. A lot more adjustments in family life would have taken place, if the parents really cared for their children. I am not talking about maintaining abusive marriage relationships. I am talking about the silly reasons on which some divorces are initiated.

Crosses have their metaphoric meanings as well. We find more and more people stressed and worried in our times. The ratio of depression and mental illnesses in societies are climbing due to the inability of the people to come to terms with the crosses people have to carry. Resilience in bearing pains – the pain threshold – is pretty low. There is a need to learn to embrace the sacrifices we have to make for living a purposeful life.

The invitation of Jesus is to live for a sublime purpose. If we have clarity on the purpose only, we will be willing to sacrifice, our precious relationships, our precious possessions and embrace our crosses. The one who is not convinced of a sublime purpose, or living without purpose will not be able to forgo any present convenience for a future advantage. This question challenges me to the core: “What is the purpose for which I am willing to sacrifice everything I have?”

© Claretian Missionaries
Cum Approbatione Ecclesiastica 2022

Fr. Jijo Kandamkulathy CMF
Claretian Missionaries

在路加所在的團體中，關於分餅的次序和規則，可能成了一個問題，正如在格林多的教會一樣（格前11）。可能有許多百姓爭相前往這類重要場合的地點。因此，關於耶穌的這則故事，可能是來著手向民眾解釋：無須爭相前往這類重要的場合。在聖體聖事中理解這段經文，帶給這段經文不一樣的味道。但是，我們要稍後反思。首先，讓我們試著理解宴席和分享食物的文化背景。

赴宴的禮儀因文化而異。在許多文化中，在宴席的坐次具有高度的層級化，同時，有一些文化承認：在面前的食物，沒有層級化。赴宴不在於食物，而是更在乎提升社會上的地位。如果赴宴在於食物，而是在於座次。如果你能純樸地坐在金制的椅子上，或坐在木制的椅子上吃飯，那麼，這和你坐在哪裡有什麼關係？同樣，同一個宴席，有關不同的目的。許多人類學家已經認定：在創造和維繫社會秩序和社會結構時，分享食物的重要性。你提供的食物的類型、方式、地點、與你一起進食的物件，在社交上，需要更明確的規範，比對普遍認知的認定，更為需要。

在許多文化中，避免蒙羞，是人類行為的主要動機，讓某人在錯誤的宴席上落座，等同於讓自己的同伴失了面子，同時貶損了賓客。在這樣的場合下，給賓客安排座次，需要十分小心。過去，在印度，直到今天，在有些地方，種姓之間，共用炊具，仍有一些禁忌。較低層級的種姓，通常會在庭院的一角，獲得一片葉子 ，他們拿這片葉子可以鋪滿整個小坑，使之變形，足以盛下米粥。這樣做的目的，在於預防受到較低種姓人格文化的污染。我們怎能變得這樣冷酷無情！耶穌願意打破猶太人分享食物的禁忌，使之成為人類遵從的榜樣。

一種更深入理解福音段落的方法就是：默觀耶穌所組織並參與其中的宴席。令我們記憶特別深刻的，有兩個宴席。最後晚餐和在匝凱（Zacchaeus）家中的宴席。兩個場合，都是學習天國價值觀的絕佳機會。在最後晚餐，耶穌把自己交出，充作食糧。以後，祂藉著給門徒洗腳，以此作為教給他們的，謙遜的表樣。在耶穌受到匝凱的邀請，親臨匝凱的家中赴宴的那個場合，匝凱因認識了基督的價值觀，捨棄了他所擁有的一切。基督充作食糧時，其它的一切，索然無味；基督充作財富時，其它的一切，再無價值。

耶穌與匝凱和其他稅吏一起進食的那頓飯，吸引了法利塞人的注意。耶穌受到指控，因為祂與那些法利塞人認為不可接受的稅吏和罪人一起進食。耶穌非常輕易從法利塞人的家和那些被稱作是罪人的家之間穿行。法利塞人發現：很難與耶穌一起進食，因為祂與罪人分享著手足情誼。一起進食所代表的是分享習慣和社會地位。耶穌與罪人一起進食時，法利塞人顯得很謹慎，因為耶穌也分享他們的地位和習慣。耶穌卻不然，祂藉著同他們一起進食，給了他們自尊。同那些多餘的人一起進食，為那些多餘的人而言，這事會令他們感激不盡。這是改變他們生活方向的一餐，如同匝凱那一餐一樣。這是能教人許多事的一餐！

耶穌敢於打破同桌共餐的一切禁忌，祂認為：在天主的國內，眾人都是平等的，在那裡，無須接受層級和條框。或者，假如有，那麼，世俗上衡量層級的一切標準都被摧毀了。至此，我們都熟悉了有關天主國宴席的隱喻。

耶穌也給我們關天主主持筵席的一些比喻。祂召叫一切在街市和小巷上的人來赴婚宴。天主不介意人的等級，或者說，祂顛覆了人的等級。在天國的筵席上，主人發覺，那些被進一步受邀來赴婚宴的，有許多不參加婚宴的理由。他們難道沒有發現，這個邀請給他們無上的榮耀嗎？在上主的宴會廳裡，卻坐滿了無家可歸的，赤貧的人。在天主的國，那些認為自己是在先的，必要成為在後的。在這個世界上，如果用人的地位，被用來衡量人在一個宴會上的座次，那麼，在天主的宴會上，這項邀請，就會使人驕傲；那主持這場宴會的天主，使作賓客的我們，變得珍貴無價。

耶穌給我們的教訓，不僅是關於謙遜的教訓，而且也是關於分辨這邀請本身價值的教訓。在這天上的筵席上，耶穌交出了自己，充作飲食。

©全屬於禰（Totus Tuus） & Claretian Missionaries（聖母聖心愛子會）
Cum Approbatione Ecclesiastica 2022

Fr. Jijo Kandamkulathy CMF
Claretian Missionaries

在路加所在的团体中，关于分饼的次序和规则，可能成了一个问题，正如在格林多的教会一样（格前11）。可能有许多百姓争相前往这类重要场合的地点。因此，关于耶稣的这则故事，可能是来着手向民众解释：无须争相前往这类重要的场合。在圣体圣事中理解这段经文，带给这段经文不一样的味道。但是，我们要稍后反思。首先，让我们试着理解宴席和分享食物的文化背景。

赴宴的礼仪因文化而异。在许多文化中，在宴席的坐次具有高度的层级化，同时，有一些文化承认：在面前的食物，没有层级化。赴宴不在于食物，而是更在乎提升社会上的地位。如果赴宴在于食物，而是在于座次。如果你能纯朴地坐在金制的椅子上，或坐在木制的椅子上吃饭，那么，这和你坐在哪里有什么关系？同样，同一个宴席，有关不同的目的。许多人类学家已经认定：在创造和维系社会秩序和社会结构时，分享食物的重要性。你提供的食物的类型、方式、地点、与你一起进食的对象，在社交上，需要更明确的规范，比对普遍认知的认定，更为需要。

在许多文化中，避免蒙羞，是人类行为的主要动机，让某人在错误的宴席上落座，等同于让自己的同伴失了面子，同时贬损了宾客。在这样的场合下，给宾客安排座次，需要十分小心。过去，在印度，直到今天，在有些地方，种姓之间，共享炊具，仍有一些禁忌。较低层级的种姓，通常会在庭院的一角，获得一片叶子 ，他们拿这片叶子可以铺满整个小坑，使之变形，足以盛下米粥。这样做的目的，在于预防受到较低种姓人格文化的污染。我们怎能变得这样冷酷无情！耶稣愿意打破犹太人分享食物的禁忌，使之成为人类遵从的榜样。

一种更深入理解福音段落的方法就是：默观耶稣所组织并参与其中的宴席。令我们记忆特别深刻的，有两个宴席。最后晚餐和在匝凯（Zacchaeus）家中的宴席。两个场合，都是学习天国价值观的绝佳机会。在最后晚餐，耶稣把自己交出，充作食粮。以后，祂藉着给门徒洗脚，以此作为教给他们的，谦逊的表样。在耶稣受到匝凯的邀请，亲临匝凯的家中赴宴的那个场合，匝凯因认识了基督的价值观，舍弃了他所拥有的一切。基督充作食粮时，其它的一切，索然无味；基督充作财富时，其它的一切，再无价值。

耶稣与匝凯和其他税吏一起进食的那顿饭，吸引了法利塞人的注意。耶稣受到指控，因为祂与那些法利塞人认为不可接受的税吏和罪人一起进食。耶稣非常轻易从法利塞人的家和那些被称作是罪人的家之间穿行。法利塞人发现：很难与耶稣一起进食，因为祂与罪人分享着手足情谊。一起进食所代表的是分享习惯和社会地位。耶稣与罪人一起进食时，法利塞人显得很谨慎，因为耶稣也分享他们的地位和习惯。耶稣却不然，祂藉着同他们一起进食，给了他们自尊。同那些多余的人一起进食，为那些多余的人而言，这事会令他们感激不尽。这是改变他们生活方向的一餐，如同匝凯那一餐一样。这是能教人许多事的一餐！

耶稣敢于打破同桌共餐的一切禁忌，祂认为：在天主的国内，众人都是平等的，在那里，无须接受层级和条框。或者，假如有，那么，世俗上衡量层级的一切标准都被摧毁了。至此，我们都熟悉了有关天主国宴席的隐喻。

耶稣也给我们关天主主持筵席的一些比喻。祂召叫一切在街市和小巷上的人来赴婚宴。天主不介意人的等级，或者说，祂颠覆了人的等级。在天国的筵席上，主人发觉，那些被进一步受邀来赴婚宴的，有许多不参加婚宴的理由。他们难道没有发现，这个邀请给他们无上的荣耀吗？在上主的宴会厅里，却坐满了无家可归的，赤贫的人。在天主的国，那些认为自己是在先的，必要成为在后的。在这个世界上，如果用人的地位，被用来衡量人在一个宴会上的座次，那么，在天主的宴会上，这项邀请，就会使人骄傲；那主持这场宴会的天主，使作宾客的我们，变得珍贵无价。

耶稣给我们的教训，不仅是关于谦逊的教训，而且也是关于分辨这邀请本身价值的教训。在这天上的筵席上，耶稣交出了自己，充作饮食。

©全属于祢（Totus Tuus） & Claretian Missionaries（圣母圣心爱子会）
Cum Approbatione Ecclesiastica 2022

The Banquet Etiquette
Lk 14:1, 7-14

Fr. Jijo Kandamkulathy CMF
Claretian Missionaries

The question of rank and order for the breaking of the bread might have been a problem in the community of Luke just as it was in Corinth (1 Cor 11). There might have been people rushing for places of importance on such occasions. So, this story of Jesus might have come handy to explain to the people not to rush for places of importance. Understanding this passage in the context of the Eucharistic celebration gives a different flavour to the meaning of the text. But that we will reflect on later. First let us try to understand the cultural underpinnings of banquets and sharing food.

Banquet etiquettes differ from culture to culture. The order of seating is highly hierarchized in many cultures while some cultures admit no hierarchy in front of the food. A banquet is not about food but more about galvanizing social status. Had it been about food, none would bother about the position of sitting. What does it matter where you sit if you can simply eat the same food seated on a golden chair or a wooden one. So a banquet has a different purpose. Many anthropologists have identified the significance of sharing food in creating and maintaining social order and structure. The type of food you serve, how you serve, where you serve, whom you serve, and with whom you eat are significant social codes that need more than ordinary perception to identify.

In cultures where avoiding shame is a major motive of human behavior, seating someone on the wrong table and company is equal to losing face and denigrating the guests. Great care is taken in the seating arrangements in these places. In the erstwhile India, in some places even today, sharing even the cooking utensils between the castes was a taboo. The lower castes were often given food in the courtyard of the house on a leaf spread in a small pit which can curve the leaf enough to hold the rice porridge. The practice was to prevent getting contaminated by the culture and practices of a lower caste person. How inhuman we we are capable of becoming! Jesus would break the taboos on food sharing among the Jews as an example for the humanity to follow.

A way to understand the gospel passage deeper is to look at the banquets that Jesus organized and participated in. There are two banquets that we remember specifically. The last supper and the one in the house of Zacchaeus. Both were occasions of immense learning of the values of the Kingdom. In the last supper, Jesus was giving himself as food. Then, he taught them an extraordinary symbol of humility by washing the feet of the disciples. In the other meal where Jesus invited himself to the house of Zacchaeus, the man gave away everything he had because of the worth of knowing Christ. When Christ is the food, everything else is tasteless. When Christ is the wealth, everything else is valueless.

That meal with Zacchaeus and other tax collectors raised the eyebrows of the Pharisees. Jesus was accused of eating with the tax collectors and sinners with whom the Pharisees found it unacceptable to eat. Jesus moved between the estates of the Pharisees and the so-called sinners very easily. The Pharisees found it difficult to share table with Jesus because he was sharing a friendship with the sinners. The sharing of meals represented sharing of habits and status. When Jesus shared the food of the sinners, the Pharisees were scrupulous that Jesus also shared in their status and habits. Jesus instead, gave them their self-respect by sitting to dine with them. Sharing a meal with the unwanted is a matter of great appreciation for them. One meal with them can change the whole orientation of their lives as that of Zacchaeus. One meal can teach a lot!

Jesus dares to break all taboos on commensality and finds everyone equal in the Kingdom of God and accepted no ranks and files there. Or if any, all the worldly standards of measuring ranks have been undermined. By now we are all familiar with the metaphor of the banquet of the Kingdom of God.

Jesus gives us also some parables where God is the host of a banquette. He calls all people from the streets and alleys to participate in the wedding feast. God does not care about the ranks of people, or he reverses the ranks. In the Divine Banquet, the Master finds out that those who were invited in advance had different reasons to skip the banquet. Did they not find the invitation giving them sufficient honor? But the banquet hall of the Lord got filled with the homeless, the poor ultimately. In the Kingdom of God, those who consider themselves in the first is likely to be the last. In this world if the status of a person is evaluated by the position one sits for a banquet, in God’s banquet hall, the very invitation is a matter of pride; the one who hosts the heavenly banquet has made the guests, us, invaluable.

The lesson that Jesus gives us is not just about humility but about discernment of the value of the invitation itself to the heavenly banquet where Christ gives himself as food and drink.

© Claretian Missionaries
Cum Approbatione Ecclesiastica 2022

Fr. Jijo Kandamkulathy CMF
Claretian Missionaries

從福音的讀經來看，顯然，許多早期基督徒團體都日思夜想有關天主國的來臨。不斷重複這個短語，時常會削弱天主國的效力。天主的國的簡單含義是：建立一個神國。於是，直到現在，許多人相信，耶路撒就是天主國的首都。關於天上的耶路撒冷的概念是從對耶路撒冷的緬懷而來。這個可能的想法並非每人都要屬於這個王國，選民會在這個王國內。

誰會進到這個王國，誰會從這個王國出去呢？聖路加福音妥處了他所在團體關於這個問題的焦慮。這表明：這個問題是他們討論的積極組成部分。想要瞭解這個問題，必須明白耶穌與一大群加里肋亞人往耶路撒冷的背景。日復一日，與耶穌同行的人，對天主國的想像，日漸成長。

福音中提到的：從東從西，從北從南而來的兒女，取自依撒意亞先知書的一個篇章（依43:5-6）將與耶穌同行的人內心所關注的焦點，聚焦在重建耶路撒冷城的背景下。如同依撒意亞設想的那樣（依25:6-12）得勝的人將在耶路撒冷舉行盛筵。這則故事，在追隨耶穌的加里肋亞人的腦海中浮現出這樣的一個肢體語言：藉耶穌 ——默西亞——重建耶路撒冷。耶穌給他們所準備的含義是一種屬靈上的意義。重建耶路撒冷與天主的國並不是同一個含義。對耶穌來說，天主的王國，是天主眾子得到自由，一如祂在納匝肋會堂內首次宣講時所宣告的那樣。自人類文明開始，順從天主（神明）慣常是人類行為的一部分。在耶穌腦海中，整個世界都得到更新，從目前來看，使人順從天主，使那些與祂同行的人，在耶路撒冷得到一個確切的名份。

那時，耶穌要求他們經由一個窄門進入，這則故事，在追隨耶穌的加里肋亞人的腦海中，浮現出在耶路撒冷的，駱駝將要穿過的門，關於這門，在瑪竇福音關於駱駝將要穿過針眼的記載中也有提到。（瑪19:24）。駱駝將要穿過的門，可能是當城市主要的大門關閉時，被用來往城裡運送物資的。這要求商人從駱駝的背上取走物資，把物資拿在手上，因為這門很窄，只有沒有載荷的駱駝才能通過。

耶穌仍然在講論靈性的含義。那些因財富而自我膨脹的，在他們進入天國以前，必須卸下它們。如果你擁有許多財富，你必須要花費時間把它們卸下，並把它們裝載，你可能會遲於赴宴。在這則故事中，我們可以找到：對於那遲到的人，主人所施加的懲罰，嚴厲非常。他們有些是宣講者，有些是驅魔的人。他們的包袱實在眾多，以致他們遲來赴宴。

這則故事讓我想起一則鐵路公司的廣告，那則廣告說：包袱越少，越得安逸。生活就是一個旅途，如果我們攜帶許多事物，不論是好是壞，每段旅程，就是難以負擔的。它們都已經逝去。我們結束旅途的時候，如果我們留下所做善行的清單，這才會顯得明智。我們身後所留下的，也有關於受人背叛，失敗和受傷的記憶。讓我們輕裝上陣。

我們在旅途中，不斷攜帶什麼，都必須攜帶可供別人消耗的物品。我確信，你已聽說過會士的旅程。一群會士決定，花費三天，徒步旅行，花費一些日子，在山上祈禱。他們必須帶上自己的食物，並帶上一切他們在山上必須用到的用品。他們把所需要的一切，預備妥當，每人匆忙帶上重量較輕的包裹。只有一位會士，趕忙帶上最重的包裹。這個包裹，是他們在路上吃飯用的行裝。其他會士，因這位謙遜會士所做的，顯然不明智的決定，友善地對他大笑。清晨，他們的旅途來到吃早飯的時候，那位謙遜的會士打開自己的包裹，給每位會士吃早餐，使自己的行囊越來越輕。他用同樣的方式，為那一天和以後的那一天預備午飯和晚飯。那時，其他會士背著他們沉重的行囊，精疲力竭。隨著旅途的進行，他們的行囊看似更為沉重，同時，那位謙遜的會士行李的重量，逐漸減輕。在我們一生的旅途中，時常攜帶可供他人使用的物品，實在應當。

©全属于祢（Totus Tuus） & Claretian Missionaries（聖母聖心愛子會）
Cum Approbatione Ecclesiastica 2022

Fr. Jijo Kandamkulathy CMF
Claretian Missionaries

从福音的读经来看，显然，许多早期基督徒团体都日思夜想有关天主国的来临。不断重复这个短语，时常会削弱天主国的效力。天主的国的简单含义是：建立一个神国。于是，直到现在，许多人相信，耶路撒就是天主国的首都。关于天上的耶路撒冷的概念是从对耶路撒冷的缅怀而来。这个可能的想法并非每人都要属于这个王国，选民会在这个王国内。

谁会进到这个王国，谁会从这个王国出去呢？圣路加福音妥处了他所在团体关于这个问题的焦虑。这表明：这个问题是他们讨论的积极组成部分。想要了解这个问题，必须明白耶稣与一大群加里肋亚人往耶路撒冷的背景。日复一日，与耶稣同行的人，对天主国的想象，日渐成长。

福音中提到的：从东从西，从北从南而来的儿女，取自依撒意亚先知书的一个篇章（依43:5-6）将与耶稣同行的人内心所关注的焦点，聚焦在重建耶路撒冷城的背景下。如同依撒意亚设想的那样（依25:6-12）得胜的人将在耶路撒冷举行盛筵。这则故事，在追随耶稣的加里肋亚人的脑海中浮现出这样的一个肢体语言：藉耶稣 ——默西亚——重建耶路撒冷。耶稣给他们所准备的含义是一种属灵上的意义。重建耶路撒冷与天主的国并不是同一个含义。对耶稣来说，天主的王国，是天主众子得到自由，一如祂在纳匝肋会堂内首次宣讲时所宣告的那样。自人类文明开始，顺从天主（神明）惯常是人类行为的一部分。在耶稣脑海中，整个世界都得到更新，从目前来看，使人顺从天主，使那些与祂同行的人，在耶路撒冷得到一个确切的名份。

那时，耶稣要求他们经由一个窄门进入，这则故事，在追随耶稣的加里肋亚人的脑海中，浮现出在耶路撒冷的，骆驼将要穿过的门，关于这门，在玛窦福音关于骆驼将要穿过针眼的记载中也有提到。（玛19:24）。骆驼将要穿过的门，可能是当城市主要的大门关闭时，被用来往城里运送物资的。这要求商人从骆驼的背上取走物资，把物资拿在手上，因为这门很窄，只有没有载荷的骆驼才能通过。

耶稣仍然在讲论灵性的含义。那些因财富而自我膨胀的，在他们进入天国以前，必须卸下它们。如果你拥有许多财富，你必须要花费时间把它们卸下，并把它们装载，你可能会迟于赴宴。在这则故事中，我们可以找到：对于那迟到的人，主人所施加的惩罚，严厉非常。他们有些是宣讲者，有些是驱魔的人。他们的包袱实在众多，以致他们迟来赴宴。

这则故事让我想起一则铁路公司的广告，那则广告说：包袱越少，越得安逸。生活就是一个旅途，如果我们携带许多事物，不论是好是坏，每段旅程，就是难以负担的。它们都已经逝去。我们结束旅途的时候，如果我们留下所做善行的清单，这才会显得明智。我们身后所留下的，也有关于受人背叛，失败和受伤的记忆。让我们轻装上阵。

我们在旅途中，不断携带什么，都必须携带可供别人消耗的物品。我确信，你已听说过会士的旅程。一群会士决定，花费三天，徒步旅行，花费一些日子，在山上祈祷。他们必须带上自己的食物，并带上一切他们在山上必须用到的用品。他们把所需要的一切，预备妥当，每人匆忙带上重量较轻的包裹。只有一位会士，赶忙带上最重的包裹。这个包裹，是他们在路上吃饭用的行装。其他会士，因这位谦逊会士所做的，显然不明智的决定，友善地对他大笑。清晨，他们的旅途来到吃早饭的时候，那位谦逊的会士打开自己的包裹，给每位会士吃早餐，使自己的行囊越来越轻。他用同样的方式，为那一天和以后的那一天预备午饭和晚饭。那时，其他会士背着他们沉重的行囊，精疲力竭。随着旅途的进行，他们的行囊看似更为沉重，同时，那位谦逊的会士行李的重量，逐渐减轻。在我们一生的旅途中，时常携带可供他人使用的物品，实在应当。

©全属于祢（Totus Tuus） & Claretian Missionaries（圣母圣心爱子会）
Cum Approbatione Ecclesiastica 2022

Less Luggage More Comfort
Lk 13:22-30

Fr. Jijo Kandamkulathy CMF
Claretian Missionaries

From the reading of the gospels, it is clear that many early Christian communities were preoccupied with the question of the coming of the Kingdom of God. Repeated usage of this phrase has often taken away the power of the concept. Kingdom of God simply means the establishment of divine reign. Many believed then, even now that Jerusalem is the capital of the Kingdom of God. The concept of heavenly Jerusalem evolved out of this nostalgia for Jerusalem. The idea in the air was that not everyone will belong to this kingdom and there will be selection.

Who will be in and who will be out? The gospel of Luke deals with the anxieties of his community with that question.it shows that it was an active component of their discussions. The question must be understood in the background of the journey of Jesus to Jerusalem with a great company of Galileans. The imagination of the fellow travelers is growing as days pass about the establishment of the Kingdom of God in Jerusalem.

The reference to the children coming from east and the west from south and north is a leaf taken out of Isaiah (43:5-6) placing the mental preoccupations of the co travelers in the right context of the restoration of Jerusalem. The victory is celebrated with a banquet in Jerusalem as envisaged by Isaiah (25:6-12). The story played in the mind of the Galilean followers is this language of the physical restoration of Jerusalem with the Messiah, Jesus. The meaning that Jesus prepares them for is very spiritual. Restoration of Jerusalem and the Kingdom of God are not one and the same. For Jesus the reign of God is the liberation of all children of God as he announced in his debut sermon at the Nazareth synagogue. Domestication of the divine has been one of the patterns on human behaviour from the beginning of the civilization. The universal restoration that Jesus has in mind seems well domesticated for now and given a locus and name in Jerusalem by those who were accompanying him.

When Jesus asked them to enter through the narrow door, the story running in the mind of the folllowers was probably the camel’s gate in Jerusalem which is mentioned also as the eye of the needle Matt. 19:24). The camel’s gate was probably used for moving supplies to the city while the main door is closed. It required the traders to take out the supplies from the camel back and carry by hand since the gate was narrow and only a camel without any payload could pass through.

Well, Jesus is still speaking the spiritual sense. Those who are fat with riches and ego will have to unload them before they enter the new Kingdom. If you have too much of them you will spend time unloading and loading them and likely to be late for the banquet. We find the master in the story showering very harsh judgments on those who come late. Some of them were preachers and some of them were exorcists. Well, they had heavy baggage with them and got late to the party.

The story reminds me of an advertisement of a railway company which said, less luggage more comfort. Life is a journey and every journey becomes burdensome if we carry too many things, no matter, good or bad. They are just dead weight. It is wiser to leave the list of good things that we have done behind on our journey of life. Leave behind also the memory of betrayals, failures and hurts. Travel light.

Whatever we carry with us on our journey should be things that are expendable for others. I am sure you have heard of the journey of the monks. A group of monks decided to go on a three-day long trekking and prayer on the mountain top for a few days. They had to carry their provisions and everything they needed on the mountain top. They readied the needed stuff in bundles and everyone rushed to carry the light weight bundles. There was one monk who rushed to carry the heaviest bundle. It was the food kit for their meals on the way. Others, kind of, gave a hushed laugh at the apparently unwise decision of the humble monk. As the early morning journey progressed to the breakfast time, the humble monk opened his bundle and gave breakfast to everyone making his luggage lighter and smaller. He continued the same way for lunch and dinner for that day and the next. While the rest of the monks got exhausted carrying their heavy burdens. As the journey progressed their luggage seemed to grow heavier while that of the humble monk kept shrinking. All that is worth carrying during our life journey is what we can give to others.

© Claretian Missionaries
Cum Approbatione Ecclesiastica 2022