Dissension in the ranks

A favorite author of mine is the wise Christian apologist, C.S. Lewis. He wrote prolifically (a lot!) on Christian morality and a host of other issues. Though he was not a Catholic in membership I feel he was certainly so in his spirit.

In his famous work, Mere Christianity, he writes: ". . . Whenever we find that our religious life is making us feel that we are good - above all that we are better than someone else - I think we may be sure that we are being acted on, not by God, but by the devil. The real test of being in the presence of God is that you either forget about yourself altogether or see yourself as a small, dirty object . . ." Hmmm. Such an image flies in the face of present day sensibilities that say, "God doesn't make junk!" Therefore, "You are not junk." A "small dirty object" is not exactly the image of myself that I would choose. Don't we also sing in the popular hymn Amazing Grace, " . . . save a wretch like me." A dirty object and a wretch. I feel better about myself already, don't you? Something deeper is brewing here.

The Gospel passage from Matthew 20:17-28 for today's Mass finds Jesus trying to calm down his Apostles who seem to find some dissension in their ranks. I imagine Him stepping in between them and essentially saying, "Ok boys. Take a breath, relax and listen to what I have to explain." What's the problem?

It seems the mother of the son's of Zebedee, James and John, a mother's love is blind, makes a bold request of Jesus:"Command that these two sons of mine sit, one at your right and one at your left, in your kingdom . . ." Wow, now that's chutzpah! It is a shame the Gospel writer never described the expression on Jesus' face when he heard her request - or more pointedly, her command.Eyes wide open with shock at its directness? Struck speechless for a moment as he formulated a response? A look of anger as he stared at the two brothers?

Do you think her two boys put her up to this assuming that Jesus would never refuse their mother or do you think she initiated it herself. I think it was a conspiracy. They, or more likely all three of them, had the idea and she initiated the request. Mama's boys? Luke implies they injected their dream for power, using their mother as a spokeswoman, before the other's could get to it themselves. Considering the indignation of the other Apostles, I don't think I'm too far off the mark.

The point of the issue, however, is not that the question was asked in such an undiplomatic manner but rather the nature of the question elicits from Jesus an answer that challenges their lust for power and prestige. Notice he does not dismiss their request as foolish or insulting. Rather he goes with it and brings it to a new level: "Can you drink the chalice that I am going to drink?" Jesus invites a deeper understanding on the meaning of servanthood - what leadership and authority truly mean from a Christian (Christlike) perspective. Our Lord wasn't holding a chalice and offering them a taste of wine. He refers to the "chalice" of his impending suffering and death. Whether they realize his deeper meaning or not (it seems they eagerly offer a "yes" to his question - if they only knew what their "yes" was gong to entail - Jesus used this moment to basically assure them of their future. They would suffer and die as he did for the cause of truth and for his Gospel as the foundational sheperds and leaders of his Church. But their "power" would be exercised not as they imagined.

In other words, true leadership, after the example of Christ, for those who seek positions of power is never self-seeking. It is never power exercised for the sake of power but the power of service and selfless giving. Notice this entire passage is framed by Jesus' prediction of his coming suffering and death. Jesus directly says, as he refers to the "rulers of the Gentiles" and their "lording over" the people that power and leadership among his Apostles and by implication all his disciples (you and me)will be the power of love and self-giving. Humility will be our guide and not advancement in a career or a fatter pay-check.

I know that sounds idealistic - that's easy if you're a Trappist or a Benedictine monk or a Carmelite nun! O yeah? Just ask them how easy it is!
Jesus' words are for all Christians across the board and we all fight our pride each and every day. I have my dose of it and it raises its ugly head in my life often. I can be pretty skilled at talking myself out of things or making excuses.

Married couples have a responsibility to their children and to one another. As Priest, I cannot flee from my parishioners but stand with and by them in their faith journey with all that entails. What's wrong with an advanced position in ones company or an increase in pay? Nothing is wrong with it and it is a good thing. We should always seek to do our best and live up to the talents God has given us.

But, if my core motivation is only self-centered - whatever makes me look good or brings attention to myself (remember C.S. Lewis' quote)- then maybe I need to enter the ranks of the Apostles and their "come to Jesus" meeting.

In this Lent, I think we should all seek humility first. God knows the world today needs truly humble and self effacing servants of the Gospel. Parents who love their children, enrich them with their faith, and sacrifice and go without for their sake: "We can't have it all kids but we have each other."

We need corporate executives and CEO's who recognize the needs of their employees first and lead by example (like that's going to happen? It could.)

Bishop's and priests who are driven by the Christ-centered charism of service to their people and not seek position for advancement in ecclesial careers. No more "scarlet fever."

"The Son of Man did not come to be served but to serve and to give his life as a ransom for many." (Mt 20:28)