BY WHAT AUTHORITY?

INTRODUCTION

The title of my homily for this Monday in the 3^rd Week of Advent  is, “By What Authority?”

It’s a question that appears in today’s gospel: Matthew 21:23-27. 

In Advent these readings don’t flow from one day to the next, so it would be important to know what has just happened right before today’s gospel - to trigger the question. Jesus just went into the temple in Jerusalem and overturned the tables of the money changers and the seats of those who were selling doves.

Next - as we heard in today’s gospel - the priests and the elders seeing Jesus doing this asked, the obvious, “By what authority are you doing these things?”

What I wonder about is why this reading is picked for Advent.

After that it got me thinking about the question of authority.

A few questions for you are: Is the question of authority something you think about from time to time? Are you interested in hearing a few words about authority right now? You’re sort of stuck - because I’m at the microphone - but you can tune a speaker out - if you’re somewhere else. Don’t we all do that from time to time?

My task as priest is to come into this temple and at this time after the readings to say a few words on the readings - that is, to preach a homily.

That’s a long introduction - but I hope it gives the reason why I am about to preach a homily entitled, “By What Authority?”

A SCARY QUESTION

To me that’s a scary question.

It’s also a good question at times.

I can’t just come up here to the pulpit and say anything. I have to be responsible. I can’t just overturn tables

So by what authority do I say what I say?

At present, in our Catholic Church the basic rule and regulation is this: ordinarily, the person up here preaching should be a deacon or a priest. Behind that would be education and testing, etc. and then ordination. Moreover, the priest and deacon have to give a promise of fidelity to Church teachings.

So I am responsible for what I say and I have to consider what I am saying.

That doesn’t mean I won’t make mistakes.

There are jokes about a preacher being allowed to make 5 heresies in every homily.

I’ve even heard that from bishops. Now that’s an argument from authority.

I like that joke or comment - because what we say up here has to be kosher and well thought out. And I feel at times I don’t have enough time to look at every implication in what I am saying.

Moreover, I am well aware that I have lots of questions about lots of things in the scriptures - and in theology.  I am called to keep studying, growing, learning, and developing. That is part of the vocation of a rabbi, a deacon and a priest. If I have it right, it entails being a life time student.

I am also aware that it is valuable to have various personalities preaching - and teaching - and speaking from the pulpit - so that you too are helped in growing with the Sacred Scriptures. I assume that would be part of the background of those who want to hear the voice of women from the pulpit as well.

I am also aware that you as listener - also have an obligation to receive the word according to your personality - and your education - and your development and growth and your faith.

I like to say to people: “Please be thinking Catholics - thinking Christians.”

And folks are thinking. I’ve hit wrong buttons at times. I’ve hit confusing buttons at times. And at times people let me know.

So I know from experience that people sit in church listening to a homily and consciously and unconsciously inwardly think and say to themselves the very same question we heard in today’s gospel, “By what authority are you saying these things?”

I also know people are inwardly saying at times, “I don’t agree with you!” Or “I doubt that.” Or, “I have think about that.”  Or “I have to read up about that.” Or “I want to ask for a second opinion.”

So as I said: this is scary stuff.

ST. THOMAS AQUINAS

I am fond of a saying of St. Thomas Aquinas - when he said that authority is the weakest of arguments.

Those who like St. Thomas Aquinas like to say: “Notice that in itself that is an argument from authority.”

Authorities on St. Thomas Aquinas like to add that St. Thomas’ full statement was: “Authority is the weakest of arguments according to Boethius.” 

Boethius was a 6^th Century AD public official and philosopher who wrote a document entitled, “Consolation of Philosophy” - which had a great impact into the Middle Ages.

As I studied St. Thomas Aquinas on the authority question,  I hear him saying that sometimes arguments from authority are good - but often there are better arguments. For example he said that in his various arguments for the proof of God’s existence.

Don’t we do the same thing? A kid starts to play with matches or wants to touch the stove or go out with so and so.  A parent might yell with authority: “No! Don’t go there!”  Later on the kid will know - not from authority - but from experience - my mom and dad were right. “It’s not smart to play with fire.”

THE BIBLE: BY WHOSE AUTHORITY DO YOU INTERPRET IT?

As you know the big issue when it comes to the Bible is how do you interpret it?

By whose authority do you say what you say about a particular passage of the Bible?

This used to be a big Catholic-Protestant flash point.

Times have changed. Now it’s often a Fundamentalist vs. Various Literary Forms “fight”. Better labels could be found or used - but I only have so much time. This is not a lecture, but I am using my time in working on this homily - to pull together some of my understandings and where I want to further go and grow.

As you well know,  we preachers not only preach on the Bible - but reach for other books on our shelves when it comes to studying a Bible text - and to come up with a homily. So I reach for several commentaries on the Bible as well as dictionaries of the Bible - as well as books of sermons and reflections by people like Barbara Brown Taylor,  William Barclay, Paul Tillich, John Shea, Helmut Thielicke, Frederick Buechner, Austin Farrer, Joseph Donders, Denis McBride, to name just a few.

For me, the question is no longer Catholic-Protestant reflections on the Bible - but the reflection of this particular person I’m reading on a Biblical text.

As a Catholic - I rely on our on Tradition and Theology - Catechisms and Church Documents - the Fathers of the Church - and lots of theology books by people like Karl Rahner and Bernard Haring and so many others. They are rooted in the Bible and our Tradition and our History. So I am rooted in the Bible - post-college 4 years of theology and Biblical Studies  in the seminary - plus studies for two more master’s degrees in theology that I got after I was ordained and years after our seminary training years.

TODAY’S FIRST READING

Now, let me take today’s first reading from the Book of Numbers [24:2-7, 15, 17a] and make a few comments. It  gives some utterances from Balaam - a character in the Bible. He is a seer - that is one who sees what others don’t see. A seer is one who has visions and makes pronouncements from God about them.

I assume Baalam is mentioned in today’s first Advent reading  because one of his pronouncements was about the Star of Jacob.

We can ask,  “By what authority Balaam are you making your pronouncements?”

We can also ask how true is his story - and his comments?

Here is where I go to authorities - so called, “Biblical Scholars.”

That’s an area of the authority - big time authority - these so called, “Biblical Scholars”.  They have to do a lot of study in various fields to get their doctorates.

In his Biblical Dictionary, John L. McKenzie notes the following about Balaam with a comment by an authority named, William Albright, “Albright has argued from the language and the grammatical and syntactical characteristics of the poems that they are as ancient as the 12^th or the 11^th century, the period to which Balaam belongs in tradition. The same writer has shown that the ‘Star of Jacob’ [Numbers 24:17] should actually be translated, ‘When the stars of Jacob prevail.”

Reading that I assume that the section of Numbers we heard today at this Mass has traditions and strains and stories that go way, way back.  I was taught that those traditions came down in spoken form first - so they would change and become reformed in each situation to help people in each situation to be better people or follow such and such a religious practice or what have you.

Take the example, when it comes to Balaam, of his famous talking ass. It’s mentioned right there in the Book of Numbers - Chapter 22 - two chapters before today’s first reading. 

Now I don’t believe in talking donkeys - but I know that also is one of those pulpit jokes - about preachers - from time to time.

I also assume that the story was preserved because it’s funny, memorable, and could be used by a speaker or a preacher in cute ways.

Did the donkey talk? Did the snake talk in Genesis?

I was trained in Scripture in a Catholic seminary - so I got what was the current teaching between 1962-1966. I have also read a lot since.

Catholic teaching on the Bible has changed in the past 200 years - and its official pronouncements right now are that that the Bible contains lots of various types of literature. Fundamentalist Biblical thinkers think otherwise - so right there a thinking Catholic might have a dilemma - and a question: “Whom can I believe?”

So I was taught that we have in the Bible lots of different types of literature. And in lots of literature, for example, Aesop’s Fables, animals talk and the fables teach a people lots of good stuff. 

Another type of literature is exact science literature. We hope a doctor, an engineer, a physicist, any science reader - will get the best information - to make the best decisions for his field.  If the facts in a science book are proved to be untrue, improve the text - till we get the facts as correct as possible. Obviously.

If you read the Bible you are often reading it in light of the science at the time it was spoken and written. If you look up in the sky any bright day, it looks like the sun is moving across the sky. In the Bible it’s described as doing just that - like a chariot. When Galileo said we are the one going around the sun, the Catholic Church and many others knew he was wrong.

Surprise - sunrises and sunsets can be deceiving…. if one is self centered - that everything revolves around our world.

Appearances can be tricky. I was once at a window seat in a restaurant in Algiers - right on the Mississippi River on the other side of New Orleans. At one point in our meal, I thought our table was moving. A gigantic tanker went right by our window. Appearances can be deceiving.

Experience - checking things out - good science - discovery - testing - are all important when it comes to understanding our realities. There was a rift between Church and Life - when the Church didn’t advance with the Enlightenment. I remember my first assignment as a priest. An older priest said what was laughed at when we studied the Bible. He said the world was 6000 years old - that was what he was taught. I said that they have stones that are 4 to 6 billion years old.  He said: “Well God made them old.”

At that I became quiet - realizing - we in two different worlds.

CONCLUSION

I didn’t know it then, but I learned that day - that not everyone sees how I see. And slowly I realized there are many issues in life - and there are lots of authorities out there - and who’s right and who’s wrong - is it really worth arguing many things. Time will tell some things - and eternity may tell the rest of the story. Amen.

O O O O O

NOTES:

I didn't give this sermon as it appears here. It needed a lot of work and so I worked on it - and made it twice as long - in the present draft - and I'll do some more work on it - when I have more time. It's an important topic and I'd like to be clearer.