The Scripture readings for Wednesday of the 5th
week of Lent (A)(Daniel 3:14-20, 91-92, 95; John 8:31-42) are about freedom. It
is about freedom of choice in facing a conflict of interest dilemma and freedom
as a result of a wise choice.
The first reading (Daniel 3:14-20, 91-92, 95) is
about making a good choice in response to a conflict of interest resulting in
enjoying the protective shield of God, exemplified by three young Jewish men in
Babylonian exile: Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego. Of course, their choice was
guided by their unshakable faith in God.
These three young Jewish men of faith were among the
Jewish captives taken into the exile in Babylon, after the Babylonian seize of
Jerusalem. Being deported from Jerusalem by the invaders to the invader’s land,
the Jews, who survived the invasion and destruction were put in exile, leaving
behind the ruined Jerusalem. In Babylon, they were forced to obey the decrees
of Nebuchadnezzar, king of the Babylonian Empire, as they had to live a
humiliating life, perhaps, as it was so when their ancestors were slaves in
Egypt.
With this background, today’s first reading touches
on a challenge from inevitable conflicts of interests: who to follow – God of
Israel or Nebuchadnezzar, where and when there is no freedom of religion. It
was the land of Nebuchadnezzar, and therefore, everyone in his land had to
worship the deity that of king Nebuchadnezzar’s choice. And, Nebuchadnezzar
elected a 90-ft-high statue of his god and issued a decree to bow down to this
idol that the king of Babylonia elected. But, news reached Nebuchadnezzar that
three young Jewish men disobeyed. And it greatly angered him. Today’s reading
starts with Nebuchadnezzar summoning the three to verify if the news about them
was true to punish with death in blazing fire.
To king’s inquiry, the three young Jewish men of faith,
Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, did not argue with him. And, they responded to
king’s threat of death that they needed no defense for themselves in defying
the king’s order because God of Israel is their defense. To this,
Nebuchadnezzar ordered his soldier to bundle Shadrach, Meshach , and Abednego,
and throw them into the blazing fire, which was seven times hotter than usual.
The fire should have destroyed Shadrach, Meshach,
and Abednego, altogether and reduced them into ashes, as it consumed them immediately.
However, to Nebuchadnezzar’s utter surprise, these young Jewish men of faith
were unbound and walking and unharmed while the consuming fire was blazing. What
surprised Nebuchadnezzar was not only that but also that he saw four men in the
fire, though three men bundled and thrown into the fire. And the fourth man,
whom Nebuchadnezzar saw in the fire, looked like a son of God (Daniel 3:92, cf. “a
god”(NRSV), “a son of the gods”(NIV) in 3:25 of non-Catholic Bibles). In fact,
this seemed to have convinced Nebuchadnezzar that God of Israel, whom these
three young Jewish men believed in, was not only real but more powerful than
any other gods, including the god, for which he elected a golden statue. Nebuchadnezzar
called Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego “servants of the Most High God” (Daniel
3:93), and there is an indication of Nebuchadnezzar’s conversion to believe in
God of Israel, after this, in Daniel 3:39-4:34, the narrative of a letter
written by him.
To those who are not with God, the fire is powerful
enough to consume, and these three men should have been dead immediately. Yet,
to those who are with God through steadfast faith, as that of Shadrach,
Meshach, and Abednego, even such fire cannot consume, evoking the fire of the
burning bush that Moses encountered (Exodus 3:2). And the fact that these three
faithful Jewish young men were protected from the Nebuchadnezzar’s blazing fire
also reminds what God’s protection is, as sung in Psalm 91.
God’s protection, which Shadrach, Meshach, and
Abednego, enjoyed is a result of their exercises of free will in line with
their faith in God. They made a free choice out of their own conscience to what
their steadfast faith dictates, and it boded well with God’s will. And, God
honored their free choice with His protection in the blazing fire. The
protection as a result of their wise free choice in line with faith also means
freedom – freedom from harms that evil imposes.
In our Fatima prayer, we pray, “O my Jesus, please forgive us our sins, save us from the fires of hell,
lead all souls to heaven, especially those most in need of your mercy”, especially
when we complete each decade of the Holy Rosary. “Save us from the fires of
hell” – Save us, O, Lord from the fires of hell, as you have saved Shadrach,
Meshach, and Abednego from the fires of hell, made by Nebuchadnezzar.
Today’s first reading actually circumvents the
insertion of the Prayers of Azariah and the Songs of the Three Jews in Daniel
3:24-90, a Psalm-like poetic writing on steadfast faith and faith-driven hope. However,
some are in today’s responsorial Psalm (Daniel 3:52, 53, 54, 55, 56). Note that
each beatitude stanza ends with doxological phrase of “praise and glory to God”,
similar to how each stanza of Psalm 136 ends with “God’s chesed (mercy, covenant love) endures forever”. This responsorial
Psalm, therefore, reminds that Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego kept praising
and glorifying God as they walk around the blazing fire in Nebuchadnezzar’s
execution furnace, and remained free from any harm, shielded by God.
Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego – these young Jewish
men in the Babylonian exile were in freedom from the Nebuchadnezzar’s evil
pressure to bend down to the idol that he elected. They did not give in to
Nebuchadnezzar’s imperative demand, even threatened by death in blazing fire,
steadfastly believing that God is their defense. Maintaining this freedom
amidst of the pressure resulting in a conflict of interest that these three
young Jewish men of faith exemplified in today’s first reading is actually akin
to Viktor Frankl’s existential concept of taking personal responsibility to
what we have control even amidst of seemingly uncontrollable circumstances.
While he was in Nazi concentration camps, Frankl never lost his freedom of
conscience, as his personal and existential responsibility to keep the Nazi’s
evil from denigrating his dignity, shielding him from the quagmire of
existential crisis, which he calls the “tragic triad”(guilt, suffering, and
death). Perhaps, the kind of freedom
that Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, maintained through their steadfast faith
in facing the evil pressure of Nebuchadnezzar, even with death threat, reminds
that our faith-driven freedom of choice, resulting in freedom from
contamination of evil, even in pressuring conflict, is our existential
imperative, as well, in connection to Viktor Frankl’s empirical concept of
existential freedom and responsibility.
Freedom to chose – choose for the freedom. This
theme drawn from the first reading is addressed by Jesus in today’s Gospel
reading (John 8:31-42), which begins with these words of Jesus:
If
you remain in my word, you will truly be my disciples, and you will know the
truth, and the truth will set you free (John 8:31-32).
Jesus cast these words to those who were eater to
kill him in their ongoing argument with him about who Jesus really was. The
above statement of Jesus suggests that those who were trying to kill Jesus were
not free because they are ignorant of the truth about who Jesus really was.
Later, Jesus will reveal that he is the truth, as well as the life, to the
disciples at the Last Supper (John 14:6), to ensure that those with him are
free as they remain in his word of truth and the truth itself.
Because Jesus is the truth, and the word he speaks
is the truth as he speaks the word of the Father (John 12:49; 17:17).
Therefore, Jesus was saying in John 8:31-32 that remaining in his word means
remaining in the truth. And it is a mark of the discipleship and being free. It
is free to be a disciple of Jesus by remaining in the truth, which is the word
the Father that he speaks faithfully.
To Jesus’ argument here, what is opposite to the
discipleship, which means freedom, is the slavery to sins. So, Jesus continued
to argue against slaves of sin, who wanted to kill him:
A
slave does not remain in a household forever, but a son always remains. So if a
son frees you, then you will truly be free (John 8:35-36).
Through these words, Jesus tells us that the freedom
also means being in his household permanently. It means that our discipleship
is not temporary or on contract. Our discipleship is based on the mutually
loyal covenant between the Father and us through the Son, Jesus.
Nobody forces us to be in covenant relationship with God the Father, though it is His desire that all of us, created in His image, return to Him through the new covenant through His Son, Jesus Christ. It has been His desire to bring us back into the new covenant ever since Adam and Eve lost Eden, separated themselves from Him as a consequence of their Original Sin. God has issued multiple covenants with our forefathers, including Abraham (cf. Genesis 12:1-9), promising His providence in exchange for our faithfulness to Him. And, the covenant established on Mt. Sinai during Exodus through Moses, in the stone tablets, were kept in the Ark of the Covent (Exodus 25:16). And, even before Jesus, God the Father had expressed His desire for a new covenant (Jeremiah 31:31–34), and it was fulfilled by Jesus at the Last Supper in institution of the Eucharist (i.e. Matthew 26:26-29//Mark 14:22-25//Luke 22:19-20).
The household of Jesus, the Son, is the household of
the Father. And it is the freedom in the covenant that Jesus has reaffirmed and
fulfilled. It is his desire that we are in this covenant as one with him as he
is so with the Father (John 14:20), and therefore, the covenant is unity that Jesus
desires (John 17:23).
Jesus has been arguing with those who desired to
kill him. They wanted to prove that Jesus had committed blasphemy or violated
either the Jewish Law or the Roman Law. They desire to arrest and kill Jesus
because they were not free, since they were slaves to their sinfulness. Because
of this, they remained as slaves and
blind to the truth in Jesus’ word and him, who is the truth.
Those who began to believe in Jesus, because they became able to see the truth in him and his word, they were free – as they were becoming eligible to enter the new covenant with him, with the Father through him, and through the Holy Spirit, as well. And, this freedom, characterized with the truth, not only means the new covenant itself but also the household of God, as well as the oneness that Jesus desires. Furthermore, this freedom that Jesus wants us to enjoy shall shield us from all evil forces that try to make us slaves.
In regard to this freedom as the necessary shield, as Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, exercised and benefited amidst Nebuchadnezzar’s fire, these words from Paul’s Epistle speak well:
Finally, draw your strength from the Lord and from his mighty power. Put on the armor of God so that you may be able to stand firm against the tactics of the devil. For our struggle is not with flesh and blood but with the principalities, with the powers, with the world rulers of this present darkness, with the evil spirits in the heavens. Therefore, put on the armor of God, that you may be able to resist on the evil day and, having done everything, to hold your ground. So stand fast with your loins girded in truth, clothed with righteousness as a breastplate, and your feet shod in readiness for the gospel of peace. In all circumstances, hold faith as a shield, to quench all [the] flaming arrows of the evil one. And take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God. With all prayer and supplication, pray at every opportunity in the Spirit. To that end, be watchful with all perseverance and supplication for all the holy ones. (Ephesians 6:10-18).
Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego did not choose to be slaves to Nebuchadnezzar’s evil demand to apostatize for the idol that he imposed. Because of their freedom to remain in their covenant with God, Nebuchadnezzar’s evil attacked them with hellish fire. During the intense attack, they kept praising and praying. And, they were in the freedom as they were free from any harm, wearing the armor of God through their steadfast faith.
In arguing with the slaves of sin, who desired to kill
him, Jesus made a contrast between those who are in him – in covenant with him
and those who are not. Those who are in are free, while those who remain as
slaves.
Perhaps, when Lenten journey started on Ash Wednesday, you were more like a
slave to sin. Now, in the 5th week on the journey, have you found
the freedom as you are already in the truth, the Christ? And, are you confident
of the freedom from any harm from evil forces, including temptations?
The bottom line lines in how we exercise free will
in our decision-making for our choice of action, especially in facing a great
conflict of interest – virtue or vice. Viktor Frankl, speaking from his own
experience in a hell of the Nazi, also attests to the freedom as “spiritual
freedom”, as well as “independence of mind”, yielding to make a choice of
virtue as your own choice in line with faith and God’s will.
The
experiences of camp life show that a man does have a choice of action. There
were enough examples, often of a heroic nature, which proved that apathy could
be overcome, irritability suppressed. Man can preserve a vestige of spiritual
freedom, of independence of mind, even in such terrible conditions of psychic
and physical stress. We who lived in concentration camps can remember the men
who walked through the huts comforting others, giving away their last piece of
bread. They may have been few in number, but they offer sufficient proof that everything
can be taken away from a man but one thing: the last of the human freedoms—to
choose one’s attitude in any given set of circumstances, to choose one’s way.
The way in which a man accepts his fate and all the suffering it entails, the
way in which he takes up his cross, gives him ample opportunity—even in the
most difficult circumstances—to add a deeper meaning to life. Viktor Frankl, “Man’s Search for Meaning”
(1984) pp. 86-87
No comments:
Post a Comment