15th Sunday 2024
Amos 7:12-15; Ephesians 1:3-14; Mark 6:7-13
A little over thirty years ago, it was decided by the powers-that-be to offer the priests of the Lancaster Diocese a support programme. We were offered the choice of two, one of them called the Emmaus Programme, the other Ministry to Priests. The two programmes were presented to us on different days: Emmaus by a couple of American priests, Ministry to Priests by two priests of the Diocese of Westminster, immaculately turned out, speaking perfect “received pronunciation” English, and bearing unmistakeable signs of having been trained at the English College, Rome.
Unanimously, we opted for Emmaus. We may not have been too keen on being told what to do by Yanks, but they were seen as infinitely preferable to people regarded as “posh Southerners”, especially “posh Southerners” from the English College.
There is something similar to be seen in Amos’s rejection by Amaziah, the priest of Bethel. Amos may not have been posh, but he was definitely a Southerner. He came from the southern Kingdom of Judah, and he was preaching in the northern Kingdom of Israel. Hs accent would have given him away, and he was told in no uncertain terms to clear off back where he came from. No one, I expect, enjoys taking instruction from outsiders, especially when those outsiders are relatively close neighbours.
Yet the reason which Amaziah puts forward for giving Amos the bum’s rush is bizarre: “We want no more prophesying in Bethel; this is the royal sanctuary, the national temple”. Excuse me, Amaziah, but isn’t a temple the very place where you would expect prophecy? Ah, maybe not, because prophecy is disturbing, and none of us likes to be disturbed, especially where religion is concerned.
I still recall, as may some of you, the alarm caused by the Second Vatican Council, or rather by the way it was reported. No doubt the theologians, and those well versed in the history and inner workings of the Church were delighted, but for the average person in the pew, the response was frequently one of confusion. Everything seemed to be changing, and no one appeared capable of explaining why, least of all the parish clergy, who were as ill-informed as anybody. Reading the Council documents, one can see what a powerful and indeed prophetic event it was, but who, at the time, had ready access to the Council documents?
The priests and religious should all have been given copies, and guidance on how to read them, in order that they could interpret them to the rest of us, but I am fairly confident that they weren’t. I was introduced to them only when I entered the seminary, six years after the end of the Council, and I found them a revelation, a joy, a delight. Most of the laity, however, had to rely on crumbs of information, often shaped by the prejudices of those who passed them on, and who were themselves frequently relying on rumours and half truths.
We are still, I suspect, a long way from grasping fully the prophetic call of the Council, and some of those who believe that they have understood it have rejected it, because it is too disturbing, too demanding. Only a week or so ago, Archbishop Vigano, the former nuncio to the United States, was excommunicated for publicly rejecting the validity of the Council, and the authority of the Pope. In that rejection, it is possible to hear an echo of Amaziah’s complaint: “We want no more prophesying in the Church. This is the house of God, the possessor of eternal truths”.
Yet it is in the house of God that prophecy must begin, because the Church is the Body of Christ, and a body must have breath if it is to remain alive, and that breath is the Holy Spirit who will inspire us, but who, in inspiring us, will disturb us, will not allow us to drift along comfortably, giving notional assent to our faith, what a former parish priest of mine used to refer to as “an occasional nod to God”.
Jesus warned His apostles that their message would be too disturbing for some, and would be rejected, as He Himself was to be rejected. Their message was to be of repentance, of casting out evil, of anointing and healing the sick. Ever and again we need to hear and respond to that call to repentance both as individuals and as the Church, however much it may disturb us.
