May 18, 2013
Saturday, 7th Week of Easter
St. John I
1st Reading: Acts 28: 16- 20; 30-31
Gospel: Jn 21:20–25
Peter looked back and saw that the disciple Jesus loved was following as well, the one who had reclined close to Jesus at the supper and had asked him, “Lord, who is to betray you?” On seeing him Peter asked Jesus, “Lord, what about him?” Jesus answered, “If I want him to remain until I come, does that concern you? Follow me.”
Because of this the rumor spread in the community that this disciple would not die. Yet Jesus had not said to Peter, “He will not die,” but “suppose I want him to remain until I come.”
It is this disciple who testifies about the things he has recorded here and we know that his testimony is true. But Jesus did many other things; if all were written down, the world itself would not hold the books recording them.
D@iGITAL-EXPERIENCE
(Daily Gospel in the Assimilated Life Experience)
Our faith came down to us through the testimonies of eyewitnesses such as John the Evangelist. He testifies in the Gospel he wrote that only some of these testimonies were written down for the practical reason that the world wouldn’t have enough space to accommodate the written materials if everything about Tradition were to be recorded. This is no mere figure of speech. If St. John Bosco had more than twenty volumes of biographical memoirs, how many volumes would Jesus and his Church deserve?
The Bible is not the whole of Tradition and does not reflect the totality of the life of Jesus and the first communities of believers. Those who read the Bible in isolation from the unwritten part of Tradition of the Apostolic Church risk being misled. To get the total picture of the truth about the life of Christ and how the first Christian communities lived their faith, one has to look at Tradition in its totality.
Some religious denominations insist that the Bible should be the sole guide. Consequently they reject teachings that are not written in the Bible. This itself has no Biblical basis, for nowhere in the Bible it is written that one should not believe what is not written therein. On the contrary, we have today’s Gospel reading saying that “Jesus did many other things; if all were written down the world itself would not hold the books recording them.”
Has the unwritten part of Tradition remained unadulterated despite the long process of handing down? Admittedly, no handing down of messages by word of mouth is immune to adulteration unless safety nets are in place. But we are not talking here of mere messages but of a way of life. Moreover, safety nets are not lacking. The Church is there to protect Tradition with her correct interpretation sanctioned by no less than the Bible (Matthew 16:16). Remaining faithful to the official interpretation of the Catholic Church is an assurance that we get the Tradition right. - Rev. Fr. Dan Domingo P. delos Angeles, Jr., DM. Email: dan.delosangeles@gmail.com. Website: www.frdan.org.
Prayer for the day: God our Father, help us preserve our faith until the day we die and be united with you in paradise. Grant this through the same Christ our Lord. Amen.
May 17, 2013
Friday, 7th Week of Easter
1st Reading: Acts 25:13b–21
Gospel: Jn 21:15–19
After Jesus and his disciples had finished breakfast, he said to Simon Peter, “Simon, son of John, do you love me more than these?” He answered, “Yes, Lord, you know that I love you.” And Jesus said, “Feed my lambs.” A second time Jesus said to him, “Simon, son of John, do you love me?” And Peter answered, “Yes, Lord, you know that I love you.” Jesus said to him, “Look after my sheep.” And a third time he said to him, “Simon, son of John, do you love me?” Peter was saddened because Jesus asked him a third time, “Do you love me?” and he said, “Lord, you know everything; you know that I love you.” Jesus then said, “Feed my sheep. Truly, I say to you, when you were young you put on your belt and walked where you liked. But when you grow old, you will stretch out your hands and another will put a belt around you and lead you where you do not wish to go.”
Jesus said this to make known the kind of death by which Peter was to glorify God. And he added, “Follow me.”
D@iGITAL-EXPERIENCE
(Daily Gospel in the Assimilated Life Experience)
A group of professionals asked a group of children aged four to eght years to describe love. Here are some of their answers:
“Love is like a little old woman and a little old man who are still friends even after they know each other so well” (Tommy – age 6). “During my piano recital, I was on a stage and I was scared. I looked at all the people watching me and saw my daddy waving and smiling. He was the only one doing that. I wasn’t scared anymore” (Cindy – age 8). “My mommy loves me more than anybody. You don’t see anyone else kissing me to sleep at night” (Clare – age 6). “I know my older sister loves me because she gives me all her old clothes and has to go out and buy new ones” (Lauren – age 4). “You really shouldn’t say ‘I love you’ unless you mean it. But if you mean it, you should say it a lot because people forget.” (Jessica – age 8) (From the internet).
The last answer by Jessica is a chastisement to Peter who said “I love you” to Jesus three times, but betrayed him three times as well. Perhaps he did not really mean to betray Jesus but was merely scared by the possibility of being tortured by the Jewish authorities for being a follower of Jesus. But isn’t the willingness to suffer for the beloved the most reliable measure of love? Love’s best description, in fact, is laying down one’s life for the beloved.
In that same answer, the eight-year-old Jessica said that if you mean it when you say “I love you”, you should say it a lot because people forget. This, Jesus has done to his beloved flock. As a perpetual repetition of his “I love you” to all of us lest we forget, he left us a memorial of that love in the Eucharist we celebrate. Jesus’ love for us is well defined. How do you define the love you have for your God? - Rev. Fr. Dan Domingo P. delos Angeles, Jr., DM. Email: dan.delosangeles@gmail.com. Website: www.frdan.org.
Prayer for the day: God our Father grant us contrite hearts so that our love for you and for one another may be sincere. Grant this through Christ our Lord. Amen.
May 16, 2013
Thursday, 7th Week of Easter
1st Reading: Acts 22:30; 23:6–11
Gospel: Jn 17:20–26
Jesus looked up to heaven and prayed, “I pray not only for these but also for those who through their word will believe in me. May they all be one as you Father are in me and I am in you. May they be one in us; so the world may believe that you have sent me.
“I have given them the Glory you have given me, that they may be one as we are one: I in them and you in me. Thus they shall reach perfection in unity and the world shall know that you have sent me and that I have loved them just as you loved me.
“Father, since you have given them to me, I want them to be with me where I am and see the Glory you gave me, for you loved me before the foundation of the world.
“Righteous Father, the world has not known you but I have known you, and these have known that you have sent me. As I revealed your Name to them, so will I continue to reveal it, so that the love with which you loved me may be in them and I also may be in them?”
D@iGITAL-EXPERIENCE
(Daily Gospel in the Assimilated Life Experience)
A joke is told of an old woman complaining about four men involved in her life. She said: “Each morning I wake up with Mr. ‘Will Power’, then go to see John. Mr. ‘Art Rhytis’ takes me from joint to joint, and at night, I sleep with a good massage from Mr. Ben Gay.” No she was not talking about real men but real sufferings in her old age.
With time the quality of physical life goes downhill bringing untold sufferings to life. The good news is that Jesus makes all things new (Rev. 21:5), turns our sorrows into joy (Jer. 31:13) and wipes all tears dry even as we continue to suffer (Rev. 21:4). This package of good news came to us with the glory that Jesus passed on to us from the Father (John 17: 22). In what did this glory consist?
The word ‘glory’ assumed the meaning of suffering in Jesus’ conversation with Peter (John 21:15-18). After Peter confirmed his love for Jesus three times Jesus spoke about how Peter would die. He said: “…when you are old you will stretch out your hands, and someone else will dress you and lead you where you do not want to go” (John 21:18). Then John the Evangelist, in narrating this episode, made this parenthetic remark: Jesus said this to indicate the kind of death by which Peter would glorify God (John 21:19).”
‘Glory’ as used in today’s Gospel reading assumes the same meaning of suffering as in that conversation between Jesus and Peter. When Jesus said, “I have given them the Glory you have given me” (John 17:22), he was saying that he has given mankind the possibility of being glorified through sufferings. Let us open ourselves to this kind of glorification so that Christ can make all things new in our lives, turn our sorrows into joy and wipe our tears away. – Rev. Fr. Dan Domingo P. delos Angeles, Jr., DM. Email: dan.delosangeles@gmail.com. Website:www.frdan.org.
Prayer for the day: God our Father, grant us the grace to remain open to redemptive sufferings so that Christ may make all things new in our lives, turn our sorrows into joy and wipe our tears away. Grant this through the same Christ our Lord. Amen.
this site is the best..reading gospel daily is a food to our soul and its really good to take some time for reflection on the gospel reading
I am an avid reader of your column in the Bandera News Paper.In your December 11, 2010 column,you stated that there are five ways God uses problems to the advantages of his followers but you only wrote four.Now im wondering what is no.5 pls email no.5…THANK YOU AND GOD BLESS MORE POWER TO YOUR COLUMN..
Below are the five ways God uses problems to the advantage of his followers:
1. God uses problems to DIRECT us. Like locomotives of old we need God to light a fire under us to keep us moving. Problems often lead us to the new direction God would like us to take. “Trust in the Lord with all your heart; and lean not unto your own understanding. In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he will direct your paths” (Proverbs 3:5-6)
2. God uses problems to INSPECT us. We are like teabags. It is only when we are in hot waters that our true color comes out. What do problems reveal about us? “When you have many kinds of troubles, you should be full of joy, because you know that these troubles test your faith, and this will give you patience.” (James 1:2-3)
3. God uses problems to CORRECT us. Some lessons we learn only through pain and failure. It’s likely that as a child your parents told you not to touch a hot stove. But you probably learned by being burned. “It is good for me that I have been afflicted; that I might learn thy statutes.” (Psalm 119:72)
4. God uses problems to PROTECT us. People might think we are already the most unfortunate person because of the crisis we are facing. In reality, however, such crisis is a blessing as it interrupts a comfortable journey that leads to damnation. “You intended to harm me, but God intended it for good” Genesis 50:20
5. God uses problems to PERFECT us. “We can rejoice when we run into problems… they help us learn to be patient. And patience develops strength of character in us and helps us trust God more each time we use it until finally our hope and faith are strong and steady.” Romans 5:3-4
So the next time others make us suffer, we rejoice at the thought that the Lord is at work in us. – Rev. Fr. Dan Domingo P. delos Angeles, Jr., DM-HRM. Email: dan.delosangeles@gmail.com. Website: http://www.frdan.org.
i like reading this daily gospel
May God reward you for liking his Word. Remember that the Word of God is like the rain that never returns to the heavens unless it has nourished parched land. -frdan
Re: October 5 Reflection
Hi, Fr. Dan!
I get to read your reflection almost everyday as a friend is so keen to send me your daily reflections to my email. And I appreciate your voice as you seem genuine and sincere and I concur to your opinion most of the time. Yet it is only now that I have come to disagree with your thoughts on having less/more kids.
First you said that having 1 or 2 kids now could possibly spell bleak for a parent in his old age when both may die before him. And that having more than a few kids would somehow ensure that the “harvest won’t be disappointing at the twilight of your life“.
That to me is a flawed reasoning. Because instead of focusing on the quantity or the number of kids a parent should raise, it is how the children are raised that actually determines how they would become as they mature. Yes, you may have 5 or so kids whom you can depend to take you on when you get older but what if you missed out on guiding them well that they have become irresponsible and a burden on society instead. Is that situation preferable to just having a few kids wherein you’d be able to give ample time towards their needs? I am quite aware that kids could go either way despite how might their parents have raised them but it was what you said that I just couldn’t accept.
You also mentioned about how a child from a family na maykaya could miss [out on] the advantage that hard life offers to character formation. Again, that to me is questionable. We cannot just generalize how kids from rich families are being raised by their parents. For all we know, their parents expect too much from them in terms of school work or accomplishments or that their parents actually take them for granted that early on they’re able to live as independently as possible. On the other side of the coin, there are also kids from poor families that are being coddled by their parents. Some do not even know how to do their household tasks because their parents would often do those for them thinking they’re doing their children a favor.
For me, what is more important than the numbers is the quality of parenting. I come from a poor to middle class family (in Filipino terms) and I can say that while my parents succeeded in raising us as best as they could, they also missed out on the other aspects of our needs. Because they didn’t earn much then, they had to work really hard and were sometimes not emotionally available. While I don’t entirely blame them, but for a child, it could have been better if they were there whenever we needed them. And to think it was just me and my sister. I don’t know what would have happened to us if there were more kids in the family.
So in conclusion, I’d say that would-be parents should be trained or made to go through a series of seminars on good parenting, and yes, family planning could be part of that. While part of me believes that the Philippines needs to impose a reasonable, humanistic and proactive population control, a part of me also believes that it is an individual’s choice or in this case, a couple’s choice of having kids or not or how many should they want.
Thank you so much for the opportunity in airing out my thoughts. Good day!
Dear “The Traveling Reader”:
From your feedback it seems that you and i agree that upbringing is the key to quality family life. Congratulations, you got it right and i couldn’t agree more. The Church is never advocating large families. To do so without considering the capacity of couples to bring their children up in dignity after God’s will that all of us should live our lives to the full would be irresponsible. The Church too, like the State, is advocating responsible parenthood but both institutions part ways in the medium. The Church observes the moral principle that the end does not justify the means. The end of having manageable number of children is noble, yet no matter how noble this will never justify using contraceptives because contraceptive use is immoral in the light of the ultimate goal of the sexual act aligned with God’s purpose. Thank you for your feedback and thank your for the insight. God bless you and your family. -Frdan
Dear the traveling reader:
From your feedback it appears we are in agreement that the key to solving this controversy is upbringing. Agree. That is why the Church is never advocating wanton begetting of children to a number beyond the capacity of married couples to rear with dignity. The Church and the State are advocating responsible parenthood; they part ways only as to the method. The Church respects the moral principle that the end does not justify the means. The end of limiting children so they can be raised as better Christians and responsible citizens is good but no matter how good, it will never justify the use of contraceptives because in the light of God’s purpose for which he made people procreators, contraceptive use is immoral. Thank you for the insight. God bless. -frdan