My friends, I would guess that you, like me, had to wonder a bit hearing the first reading from Exodus today.  Here we have a “God” depicted through the words of Moses who is definitely lacking in one of the key components that we all would look for in a loving God—the quality of “mercy.”  In fact, Moses seems more compassionate and understanding than does God, and he has to basically talk “his God” into acting more like God. 

   We question why God is depicted this way, and all that I can come up with is that the people of Moses’ time, as we have discussed before, saw their God more as a reflection of themselves, then of the loving entity that God was.  Often, in the Old Testament, it is the prophets, like Moses, who call out the best in the people when “God” apparently falls short. It would take Jesus coming among us, to show who God truly is!

   Few of you probably remember Pope John Paul I because he was only pope for a month, dying far too soon, and as one reads about him and his life, he had much that he could have offered our beleaguered Church.  Some have even thought and wrote about the fact that this otherwise, very healthy man may have had some help in dying before his time.  Regardless, this John Paul was said to have not liked the “God” of the Old Testament! My guess is that the Old Testament God, as depicted here by Moses, was a far cry from the God depicted by our brother Jesus. 

   The remainder of the readings for today uplift the quality of mercy—in Paul’s letter to Timothy, his young convert, and also in the gospel of Luke, where in the long version that we used today, we are gifted with three versions of our merciful God:  the Good Shepherd who will always search out the lost one, the woman who turned her house upside down looking for a lost coin—which by the way, is the same story as the Good Shepherd, only giving a feminine face to our loving God.

   The final face of God given us to consider in this lengthy reading from Luke is probably, in my mind, the most beautiful depiction Jesus gave us of who our God truly is—the story of the “Prodigal Son,” but more so, the “Prodigal Parent.”  The son shows us, “over-the-top” selfishness, and disregard for the mores of his family and community, and the parent shows, “over-the-top” love, and acceptance, regardless of mores, for the errant child, and thus, we, today, get a clear view of how God will look upon us as well. 

   In order for us to truly get a view of what Jesus is saying here about God in using the story of the Prodigal, it is important for us to look at how the people in Jesus’ time and culture would have heard and understood it.

   An inheritance was given to an offspring at the death of the parent.  In this story, the son asks for it early—the first custom broken which shows disrespect for the parent, which the parent dismisses and gives the inheritance anyway. 

   Now it would have been one thing had the son gone out and used the inheritance wisely, but as the story reveals, this was not the case.  When the son, who eventually becomes penniless and is basically starving, having squandered his father’s gift, comes to his senses and returns, expecting to no longer be treated as a “son,” but as a “servant,” he discovers instead, the over-the-top love of his father. 

   It is good to look further into the cultural mores of this time, to get a better—more complete view of the parent’s action.  The story tells us that the father “runs” to meet his son.  This is important because the custom would have been for the “errant one” to be met at the city gates by a representative of the community, who would have broken a clay pot at the person’s feet, signifying that the relationship with the community had been broken, and going forward, “the sin” would always be remembered.

   The Prodigal Dad, wanting to spare the child that humiliation, runs ahead, meets him, and lovingly takes him home.  In our time, we would say, this dad “had his son’s back!” 

   And this notion of God, “as merciful” is fine nuanced in Paul’s letter to Timothy where Paul relates the sins of his former life and proclaims the “mercy” he was shown by the God of Jesus, [when he] “did not know what he was doing in his unbelief.”

   So my friends, because “mercy” is so dominant the theme today, I used some literary license in changing the psalm response to the prayer of the 23^rd psalm, “Shepherd Me O’ God and used it likewise for the Prayers of the Faithful.  Where psalm 51 indicates the first action needed, “I will rise up and return to my God,” the 2^nd response is the on-going prayer of one who wants God to always show them the way.

   In conclusion then, the heartfelt words of Paul to Timothy, “that he did not know what he was doing in his unbelief,” seem perhaps, a response to much that is wrong in our Church and world today.  We must all pray that the God who loves us so much will show us—shepherd us, into the best ways of being for ourselves and for others.  Amen?

Amen!

Friends, I feel called to begin this homily with a couple of lines from Psalm 90 in today’s Scriptures which address the passage of time through the virtue of wisdom.  “In every age, O’ God, you have been our refuge…make us realize the shortness of life that we may gain wisdom of heart.”  I find myself thinking this way because in the next two months, September and October, our family remembers the passage of time in three birthdays and three wedding anniversaries.  “In every age, O’ God, you have been our refuge.” 

   With the passage of time, as made obvious by the increasing years in both birthdays and anniversaries, reflection upon what the years have been is appropriate and necessary to keep moving ahead.  This past week, the president of our United States of America felt compelled to speak to our nation, challenging each of us, regardless of political party, to strive toward being our best as people in order that we can protect our democracy, a dream that we haven’t yet realized, but one that is currently being threatened by violent extremists intent on their own selfish agenda of having what they want, when they want, regardless of whom is hurt in the process.  He basically told the nation, our nation, that violence is never, ever the way to anything worth having. 

   In the New Testament letter to Philemon, Paul, writing from prison, appeals to his convert in the faith, Philemon, a slaveholder, to give up his old ways.  “I …appeal [to you] in the name of love.”  In other words, just like President Biden stating that violence against the rule of law and its’ defenders has no place in a democracy, Paul in writing to Philemon, clearly says that Christianity and “slaveholding” are incompatible. 

   The first reading from the book of Wisdom today perhaps sheds some more light on the difficulty we humans have at times, doing the right thing, what is, as our president said in his speech, “the work of our better angels.”  The Wisdom writer gives us the following: “For a perishable body presses down the soul and a clay house weighs down the restless mind.” 

   Each of us friends, comes into our human experience hard-wired to love and live out, to the best of our abilities what we have been gifted with by our God.  And into this mix comes that “perishable body,” described as a “clay house” that through our free wills, egos, and self-preservation get in the way “of the good we would do,” as Paul speaks of it, in another place. 

   Continuing in the Wisdom reading for today, the Spirit, that walked with our brother Jesus all the days of his earthly life, has this to say: “The paths on earth have been straightened…”  In other words, as our brother said before leaving this earth, “I will be with you all days.” 

   So friends, it would seem that we, each one of us have all that we need to become our best selves—and not just for ourselves, but for others.  Our gospel today from Luke gives us a hint about what this might look like.  These words from our brother Jesus through the pen of Luke, at first glance, seem rather tough and hard to shallow, and we wonder, can Jesus really be saying that in order to follow him, we must turn our backs on our families—to abandon them? 

   As with all of Jesus’ teachings, we have to remember to not take his meaning literally.  Also, we have to keep in mind that Jesus was operating under a bit of a time crunch, so to speak—he knew his days of life here were short.  We, like our president in this past week’s speech, must realize the urgency of getting the message across. 

   When it comes to being Jesus’ followers, and today, for us, in “forming a more perfect union,” reflecting President Biden’s plea to us in 2022, that does reflect striving toward, “justice for all,” the time to do these grand deeds, both for Jesus and for our president, seems short!

   We know from everything else that Jesus said and did in his earthly life, that he would not advocate for leaving our parents behind and in need.  His point, I believe, is to stress that we get ourselves clear, once we have decided to follow him, there is no turning back—we must strive to do justice wherever and whenever possible, for all or most of the people—we must always do the most loving thing. 

   Practically speaking, we will most likely take care of our families while we are accomplishing the works of peace, justice, mercy, and love.  Amen? Amen!

   My friends, this week’s Scriptures call each of us to a concerted reflection of ourselves and to a renewed vision of who God is for us.  In the 14 years of my priesthood and as your pastor, it seems to me that I have constantly called us, through the Scriptures, “to know ourselves” and, “to walk with our God” who really wants nothing more than that we would enjoy our human experience here, by becoming our best selves, for ourselves, and for others.

   Let’s look first at what today’s Scriptures have to say about who God is.  The writer to the Hebrews seems to be, “setting the record straight” where God is concerned.  The people, in this writer’s mind have the story on God, all wrong as he/she denies that God is “untouchable” or a being of “gloomy darkness.” Further, the writer states that, our God does not speak words that we would rather not hear.

   No, the writer to the Hebrews says, “our God is one of celebration,” a God who has come in the person of Jesus, who, “mediates a new covenant” with us.  So where did the Hebrew people get a view of God as “untouchable” or consisting of “gloomy darkness?” 

   Before I attempt to answer this question, a look at the Wisdom literature of Sirach, which serves as our 1^st reading today, is perhaps helpful.  The Sirach writer tells us to, “be gentle in caring out [our] business” and that, “the greater you are, the more you should behave humbly.”  Now if you were looking for a pattern on which to frame your life, you could certainly do worse. 

   This Old Testament wisdom is paired well today with the wisdom of our brother, Jesus.  Through a parable depicting guests at a wedding feast choosing the best seats for themselves, only to later be asked to give up the coveted seat to someone of more importance, Jesus wisely says, “For they who exalt themselves will be humbled” and the opposite is true as well. 

   So friends, it would seem that our basic stance in life should be that of “humility.”  It would seem that if we as humans could better realize who we are and who we are not, coming to know who God is would be so much easier.  I believe that any God worth following would be one who “shows us the way,” as opposed to being one who tells us that we must act in a certain way and that this same God doesn’t act likewise. 

   Jesus, the face of God in human form certainly never asked us to be or do anything that he was not also willing to do himself.  In fact, while with us, he said, “When you see me, you see my Abba God too!”  So again the question, why did the Hebrew people have such a skewed view of who God might be? Why would they need to be told that their God was not “untouchable” and “gloomy” and perhaps one to fear unless they themselves were this way? I believe, my friends, and this is often true for us as well, the Hebrews framed their God in their own image, expecting “less” rather than “more” because if God is “untouchable” and “gloomy,” then they don’t have to expect anymore from themselves.  But, if as Jesus told us again and again throughout his earthly life, our God loves and cares for us in “an over-the-top” way, in stories like the Prodigal and the Good Shepherd, then much more is expected of us as well. 

   The psalmist today seems to understand this too, praying, “God, in your goodness, you have made a home for the poor.”  The psalmist continues, [our God is] “a protector of the weak,” and “in your goodness, you provided for the needy.” 

   So friends, not only do we hear confirmation from the psalmist that our God is good and caring, but that our God has a special interest in the poor and the downtrodden.  Our mission becomes clear then—we cannot be “gloomy” or “untouchable” ourselves, because God is not; and further, we must face our world as Jesus, our brother did his, with love, mercy, and justice.

   And finally, we can’t just hear these Scriptures as “nice stories” about our “loving God” and in particular about Jesus, but must hear them as our call, to do the same. 

   Friends, we live in different times than that of the Hebrews, the psalmist and of Jesus, but the needs are basically the same.  People are still, “poor”—hungry and discriminated against, truth doesn’t stand for much in our present day—mistrust of government, the press, and of each other is more rampant than ever.

   And into this mix we find ourselves and we are called to do our part—to speak our truth when we hear lies, to call for humility in those who want to lead us, whether in Church or State and to demand morality in those same leaders.  Within ourselves, we have to believe that hope and goodness are stronger than lies and selfishness and all the rest of “the gloom,” because if we don’t, then we can never attain a better world. 

   I will end with a wonderful message that was given to our grandson Elliot and his third-grade classmates this past week by their teacher, Mrs. Ratz, as a bit of hope and encouragement for us all, and I will paraphrase.  When you think, “I can’t do this, I don’t want to do this—or in groups, we can’t, they won’t—any of these negative, defeatist words, invite in the word, “yet” to help bring growth.  So, when you feel like, “I can’t make a difference in all that is wrong in our world, think, “yet!”   We are always called to more and together, can do it!  Amen? Amen!

    My friends, as I indicated in the bulletin for this week, the tone of today’s readings is somewhat “threatening,” but that we can still, “hope,” because that seemingly, threatening tone is basically calling us to become our best.  Our God, through Jesus, and the other prophets—today, Isaiah, is asking, as any good parent would, that we will live our lives in “fullness”—not just for ourselves, but for others too.  And when we are in need of “reprimand,” God, as any good parent, will give it.

   The truth is my friends, the message of these readings is something that we truly, “have to get right!”  Our brother Jesus, probably more than any other spiritual being living out their human experience, realized how living in “fullness,” can, at times, be most difficult.  He says in today’s gospel from Luke, “try to come in through the narrow door.”  To me, this simply says, that being our best will not be easy. It won’t be easy because sometimes the very people that we are called to love, drive us absolutely, crazy! 

   Jesus our brother, came among us to show us the way, the truth, and that which would give us true life.  Humanity’s basic condition is to take care of ourselves.  Now this is not to say that we aren’t capable of more—only that when tired, discouraged, frustrated, or simply selfish, caring for ourselves is the most natural and easiest thing to do. 

   Yet, our brother Jesus lets us know that one day the tally will be added up and those who have been last for most of their lives, will then be brought to the front of the line and the opposite is true as well.

   Now, I am not saying that you should be “just” with the gifts in this life because it will pay off in the end, even if this may be the case—no; only that you will be living up to what is best in humanity and as a spiritual sister or brother of Jesus.  And for me, at least, this is a more satisfying way to live. 

   Isaiah furthers the message that our God truly wants us to get when he says, “I am coming to gather the nations of every language.”  The psalmist too, in 117 tells us to, “Go out to all the world and tell the Good News.”  And the writer to the Hebrews seals the deal.  “We are [all] God’s children.” 

   Now, you will notice that there is no exclusion in any of the quoted passages above.  If our God does not exclude, why do we who claim to be religious or spiritual in any way?  Why does our Catholic church, in its hierarchy claim to be, “the one true Church” when our inclusive God showed the Divine Face not only to us, in Jesus, but to the followers of Buddha, Mohammed, and the Great Spirit, to name just a few?  Perhaps it might be because we have been satisfied to shape our God in too small of a box. 

   Why do we as a Church, in our hierarchy teach that “only certain body parts,” designate a call to service at our altars, to preach the Word, or to give pastoral mercy and care through the sacraments of our Church?  Why does this same hierarchy claim that “love is love” and “commitment in marriage” is only valid for heterosexual couples?  Why does the hierarchical Church teach us to mistrust and deny the sexual identity that people claim for themselves when our God made the differences to show the expansiveness of our great God?  The writer to the Hebrews seems to give us a piece of the hurtful truth, saying that, “suffering [will be] part of [our] training. To me, this says, we must rise above our human tendency to be, “black and white” when our God loves in technicolor. 

   Friends, I would like to end these thoughts by sharing parts of an article included in Sojourner Magazine this week by Adam Russell Taylor, entitled, Offering Lament and Thanksgiving for the Inflation Reduction Act.  It struck me, as I feel it did the author, that the Congress was truly capable of so much more in face of the fact that nearly 9 in 10 claims to be Christian and voted against even the pared-down measures from the original, Build Back Better initiative of the Biden administration. 

   So, the bitter and the sweet.  Because I choose to “look up” more than, “look down,” as a rule, first the “sweet:” the bill that passed includes the largest investment Congress has passed to date to combat climate change, it will lower health care and drug costs, and this bill will be paid for by taxing large corporations and wealthy individuals to pay closer to their fair share. 

“The bitter:” In order to get the above, much of the vision of the original bill had to be cut out—a vision significantly shaped by the Congressional Black Caucus, creating an economy in which all American families would better be able to flourish—such things as renewing the Child Tax Credit, medical leave, child care, pre-K education, housing assistance, maternal health and more. 

   And Jesus’ words must yet again ring for those in positions of leadership in Congress, “the last will [one day] be first!”  and we must remember that the opposite is true as well!  It seems to have always been so and thus, the lament.  The author tells us too, to be thankful for the good this Congress did manage to give us. 

   My personal prayer is that we would, as a country care as much for the down-trodden among us as we do for those with enough—that seems to be the message of today’s Scriptures and one that this Congress take seriously if they continue to claim, “Christianity” in their lives.  Amen?  Amen!

Dear Friends, 

As you know we met on the farm for our annual day to remember Mary Magdala and all women. Our misty morning drove us into the house for Mass but we were able to eat outdoors afterward. Nineteen of us enjoyed this gathering and we learned more of the story of this wonderful woman, Mary Magdala! Thanks to all who could make it and blessings to all others who for one reason or another could not be with us. 

Peace and love, 

Pastor Kathy

__________________________________________________________________________________________

   My friends, looking back, this appears to be our 11^th Mary of Magdala celebration!  We started in 2010, two years after we became a parish, and we missed only 2015, when Robert and I were gone to Alaska and 2020 when in lockdown due to COVID. So, what have we learned in these years? 

   First and foremost, women theologians, primarily, and some male historians and authors, have uncovered the truth about this “Mary.”  Unlike we all learned originally, she was not a prostitute that Jesus saved, but in actuality, she was a prophet and a priest, in the sense that any man was a prophet and a priest at the time she lived! But probably the most enduring character trait of this “Mary” was that she was a most loyal friend and follower of Jesus of Nazareth. 

   Over the years, at these gatherings where we have attempted to reclaim her true identity, I have shared some of our sorry Church history that let us know that a certain pope, Gregory by name, in the 6^th century, took it upon himself to, “throw,” for lack of a better word, all the “Mary’s” mentioned in Scripture, except for Jesus’ mother into a composite that reflected one character trait, and one trait alone—that of “a sinful woman,” –a prostitute, and we know that women who are prostitutes do that all by themselves! Right?!     But more so, that naming of the “Mary’s” incorrectly is the greater sin as it took from them their integrity, their honor, and any reason to take them, and by extension, any woman, seriously.  And for us in present times, this is most important in making the case for women being ordained in our Church.

   These celebrations then are meant to set the record straight!   And we need to do this because the Church belongs to women as well as men and because women have gifts to give our Church in the unique way that women do this, that our Church so badly needs today.  And believe it or not, men in our Church would be so much better because of it too—when truth is told, all is better, no matter which issue we are discussing! This is why I always open up my homilies to all of you because the Spirit of our brother Jesus speaks to your hearts, as to mine, when the Scriptures are proclaimed and we are all better, when all the voices are heard.

   Recently, I came upon some new, exciting exegesis—study of ancient texts concerning our “Mary of Magdala” that I wanted to share today.  I learned this “news” to me, through a friend who shared a 40-minute talk given by Christian author, Diane Butler Bass, who has several books to her credit, Freeing Jesus, Christianity after Religion, Christianity for the Rest of Us, and more. I won’t share all that she said in this talk, but if you are interested in hearing it in its entirety; I would be happy to share it with you. 

   But for today—just the highlights:  1) It seems that in early maps in the time of Jesus, a town or city of “Magdala” cannot be located—the place that our “Mary” is said to be from.  2) New study done in the last several years (2017) by Elizabeth Schrader, then a master’s candidate in New Testament, studying the Greek, Aramaic, and Coptic languages, made a most interesting discovery! She felt called to “know” more about Mary of Magdala and that was why she pursued the Masters in New Testament degree. 

   In her study, she received access to the earliest texts available and in one such text, Papyrus 66, from approximately 200 A.D., she discovered evidence that in the gospel of John, chapter 11, in the story of Mary, Martha and Lazarus, that “Martha” may have been an addition to the story.  A similar story from the gospel of Luke, chapter 10: 38-42 was used recently for the 16^th Sunday in Ordinary Time. Now, all of us assume that the two stories are the same and about, Mary, Martha, and Lazarus.  Evidence now shows that this is not the case and here is why. 

   The first line from the Luke selection says it all: “Jesus entered a village where a woman named Martha welcomed him to her home.”  Now, what should have jumped out for all of us was the fact that Martha would not have had a home as women did not own property if they had a father, brother or husband.  The reading goes on— “she had a sister named Mary.”  No mention is made of a brother Lazarus in this selection. 

   Let’s go back to Chapter 11 of the gospel of John. What Elizabeth Schrader discovered in the earliest text of John, Papyrus 66, is that it had been changed by someone in the 4^th Century.  “Mary” in the Greek appears like “Maria” in English.  The “i” in Maria is the Greek letter, “iota.”  Upon close inspection, as Elizabeth zoomed in on the text, she discovered that the “i” was changed to “th” or “theda” in the Greek, giving us “Martha” instead of “Mary.”  Thus, this text was changed from Lazarus having one sister, “Mary,” to two sisters, Mary, and Martha.  Why was this done?

     Elizabeth Schrader makes the case that this was a way to solve an early Church “problem” of leadership—was it Peter or Mary, or perhaps both, who were called by Jesus to lead?  Think what this would mean if the men involved had recognized, as did Jesus, Mary’s ability to lead! Just as Pope Gregory had found it advantageous to “throw” all the Mary’s into a composite that was “unflattering,” basically, silencing them, and their valuable work in the Church, someone in the 4^th Century tried to do the same. 

   Further study by Elizabeth Schrader demonstrated clearly that the John text, in its earliest form had Lazarus having one sister, Mary and that she, and not Martha was the one who proclaimed that, “Jesus was the Christ, come into the world” –a text similar to the account in the gospel of Matthew where Peter proclaims the same belief.  You will recall that Jesus then called Peter, “the Rock.” 

   Even Tertullian, Church father from the 2^nd century, labeled by Diane Butler Bass as one of the most misogynist of his time, stated that Lazarus had one sister and that was, Mary.  So what are we to make of this? 

   We get some help if we go back to our key figure of today’s celebration, “Mary of Magdala.” Earlier I stated that at the time of Jesus, there was no town or city of “Magdala.”  So why do we assume that the two words written together mean that “Magdala” was where our Mary was from? 

   The women wanting to understand this have dug deeper and found that, “magdala” in the Greek, rather than a “place” was in fact, “a title.”  In the Greek, “magdala” means, “tower,” thus, Mary the Tower, and she was most likely given this title, it is thought, because of her faith— “her tower of faith.”  It would seem that our celebration going forward will need a new name!

    It is thought then by many trying to unearth the truth, a few things:  1) The Luke story and the John story are about two different groups of people—John’s story is about Lazarus and his sister Mary who proclaims just like Peter in the gospel of Matthew that, “Jesus is the Christ.”  2) It is thought that this “Mary” is the Mary we celebrate today—not Mary from Magdala, but Mary, the Tower (of faith) by which we can all stand!  3) It is this same Mary, formerly “Mary of Magdala,” now reclaimed as “Mary the Tower of Faith,” who was faithful to the end, at the cross, and who was the first to witness the Resurrection, and proclaim it to the men.

   Now, I think you can see that if Mary was lifted up as a “Tower of Faith” –given this title because of her actions following Jesus, this will be a problem for the men in the years after Jesus lived who wanted to control the narrative and uplift Peter’s confession over Mary’s –which again, we must remember, was the same! 

   And uplifting Peter and downplaying Mary was accomplished by blending the John and Luke texts to be a nice story about one family, Martha, Mary, and Lazarus and can more easily recede into history.  If “Martha” confesses that Jesus is the Christ and Mary is seen as an impressionable, starry-eyed, young woman who merely sits at Jesus’ feet, we cannot easily “connect the dots” to see Mary instead as a strong, prophetic, and courageous woman who assisted Jesus throughout his ministry, followed him to the cross and witnessed the Resurrection. Nor can we clearly see Mary, or any woman called by our brother, Jesus, the Christ, as natural-born leaders, called to serve at our altars, because they too image God every bit as clearly as any man does!

  Thinking about the changing of Scripture to accommodate men makes me believe even more firmly in Scripture scholar, Sandra Schneider’s statement that, “Scripture was written by men, about men and for men!”

   Now if you are still skeptical about this news, I would want you to know that Elizabeth Schrader wrote her master’s dissertation on her research of the true Mary, and it was picked up by Harvard Divinity School and a professional article followed.  Additionally, Nestle Aland Theology Group in Germany, known for being very “stuffy” read Schrader’s work and simply said, “We might need to change something here.”

   So, there you have it friends, you know what I know, and I would simply conclude by sharing Diane Butler Bass’ reaction to her friend, Elizabeth Schrader’s research when she first shared it with her over coffee at Starbucks.  Diane said that she knew instinctively, upon hearing her friend’s words, that she was hearing the truth!”  And she cried for having had this knowledge kept from her and all women so long. And this was the same reaction of many women when they first saw a woman presiding at the altar—I know it was mine because instinctively, we all knew it was right and true. 

   And friends, I too believe this new exegesis to be so, whether the Scripture texts are ever changed or not, as it has been my experience and that of many other women called to ordination within our Church that our God, shown so beautifully to the world in the person of Jesus of Nazareth, one who was constantly turning things on their heads, had no problem seeing women as the image of the divine, nor should we!

   Finally, think what our Church could be if, rather than, “built on Peter the Rock,” which seems to be more about him and others following him, doing their bidding, it was built upon, Mary, the Tower of Faith and all, each of us standing with her.  Amen? Amen!