God's Time

I feel a little sheepish (no pun intended) making this post. I feel that way when God gives me an insight into Scripture and suddenly things seem so much clearer. I think, "Why didn't I see that before?"
Let me explain. Yesterday evening at Mass we heard the story of the testing of Abraham by God in Genesis 22. You know the story. "God said: 'Take your son Isaac, your only one, whom you love, and go to the land of Moriah. There you shall offer him up as a holocaust on a height that I will point out to you.'" Abraham prepares to do just that, and at the last moment, when the knife is raised above the terrified boy, the angel of the Lord stops Abraham, saying, "I know now how devoted you are to God, since you did not withhold from me your own beloved son."
This story causes problems for a lot of people, especially parents, who are better able than I am to place themselves in Abraham's position, feel his confusion and anguish, and wonder, "Just what does this reveal about God, and can I really trust such a deity?" It seems cruel to test Abraham, to seemingly ask him to kill his hope in a multitude of descendants, and it leads many people to view the greatest evils in our life as directly willed by God to test our faith.
Yesterday, however, a young woman proclaimed the passage beautifully, and I heard it again for the first time. One passage in particular brought me close to tears.
"Abraham took the wood for the holocaust and laid it on his son Isaac's shoulders, while he himself carried the fire and the knife. As the two walked on together, Isaac spoke to his father Abraham. 'Father!' he said. 'Yes, son,' he replied. Isaac continued, 'Here are the fire and the wood, but where is the sheep for the holocaust?' 'Son,' Abraham answered, 'God himself will provide the sheep for the holocaust.' Then the two continued going forward."
The image of Isaac carrying the wood for the holocaust on his shoulders struck me as a foreshadowing of Jesus, who would carry the cross - the wood of his own holocaust - on his shoulders some two millenia later. This is a beautiful example of the Catholic understanding that all of the Bible must be read in light of Jesus and the events of his life, death, resurrection and ascension. ("The Church, as early as apostolic times, and then constantly in her Tradition, has illuminated the unity of the divine plan in the two Testaments through typology, which discerns in God's works of the Old Covenant prefigurations of what he accomplished in the fullness of time in the person of his incarnate Son. Christians therefore read the Old Testament in the light of Christ crucified and risen." Catechism of the Catholic Church #128, 129)
As soon as the image of Isaac as a "type" of Christ struck me, the response of Abraham, "God himself will provide the sheep for the holocaust." took on a new significance - that of a prophetic and deeply faith-filled statement, rather than simply wishful thinking, or deception.
Indeed, God did provide a sheep for the holocaust, not just the ram caught in the thicket, but the Lamb of God, His only begotten Son of whom he could say, "You are my beloved Son, with you I am well pleased." (Mk 1:11)
The first Adam failed to place himself between the serpent, the most cunning ("intimidating" is another possible translation) of all the creatures, and his wife, Eve. He was not willing to possibly "lay down his life" for her, and the whole narrative thread of Scripture leads up to the second Adam who finally lays down his life for us all, fulfilling the Law in his life, and putting and end to it with his death and resurrection.
God's time, God's infinite patience and wisdom, are revealed in the Scriptures. If we are patient and observe the events of our own life with the eyes of faith, we will undoubtedly find examples of this wisdom being revealed in them as well.

15 Comments:
I had the opportunity to proclaim the first reading yesterday.
For me, the passage(s) that leapt off the page were the times when God spoke, Abraham listened. He heard God and did what he was told (and didn't do what he was told NOT to do). It pays to listen to God! It pays even more to know it's God who is speaking.
Then the Psalm mentioned idols (and, by implication, people) who have ears but don't hear.
The Gospel passage showed how a person paralyzed from the neck down, HEARD Jesus say "Get up, pick up your stretcher and GO HOME!" I could almost imagine a DI issuing an order at full volume. That would be authoritative enough to make me jump.
All that would have made a great homily.
Big question: is such an insight the Holy Spirit trying to make a point or is it just my old brain trying to draw meaning out of random readings? ....or both?
Peace. Ed Keefe
Great post, Fr. I had first heard these facets of the reading drawn out by Jeff Cavins in his bible study program.
It really does change one's reaction to some of the old testament when you begin to recognize the linkages between the old and the new.
Another interesting thought related to Abraham that came from Jeff Cavins' study (or at least where I was exposed to it) is the possibility (speculative, but rooted in some of the context around the verses) that it was daytime when God tells Abraham that his descendents will outnumber the stars.
I hesitated to comment on this because this understanding of Abraham's attempt to sacrifice Isaac had been pounded into my little pea brain by the time I was twelve. (Believe me, in a "substitutionary atonement" culture, no one waits for you to have a sudden "illumination" as a thoughtful adult - I'd heard dozens of sermons on this exact point by the time I was 12. I can't take any credit for it.)
Of course, the Fathers wrote about his a great deal.
My question: is the fact that this wasn't pointed out to you long ago, Fr. Mike, another facet of a Catholic culture that doesn't preach the basic kerygma?
Sherry,
I suspected that might be the case, given my own experience outside of catholicism.
I do wonder if it has something to do with the way in which modern Catholic culture still doesn't promote scripture as it might. It's definitely changed a great deal -- I hear more priests who use the homily as a time to draw out details of the Scriptural readings as part of their preaching. But some of these types of observations just aren't possible unless you are taking time with the bible and working through it slowly (or so it seems to me). Does that relate to a failure to preach the kerygma? I think so, but I think it's a slightly different problem.
Jack:
It would be related to a study of Scripture, of course but *making the connection between the two stories of Abraham and Isaac and Christ's self-sacrifice* is an exegetical point that emerges from meditation upon Christ's sacrifice on the cross for our sins.
Fr. Mike has heard, read, and preached on both stories numerous times but this particular "connection" hadn't occurred before.
The difference: in the religious world I grew up in, this particular interpretation was constantly emphasized and explicated in great detail while in the Catholic world he grew up in, the actual dynamics of the Atonement and Salvation were not discussed (possibly because most Catholics around him were de facto universalists and thought it didn't need to be said).
Yes, didn't mean to suggest in my comment about scripture study as anything relevant to Fr. Mike's situation. Was more thinking of the general Catholic-in-the-pew and why they may not have picked up on that previously, not a dedicated priest who has preached on these passages.
That said, I think, it's emphasized in some fashion in Catholicism. After all, what sacrifice of Abraham is being referenced in the Eucharistic Prayer and why would it be there if not for this understanding of the two passages' connection?
Fr. Mike, very nicely written. I like how you shared when a great connection was made for you in a personal way. When and where in the scripture those "clicks" are made is wonderful in their individuality and timing.
"I know now how devoted you are to God, since you did not withhold from me your own beloved son."
I've always understood this to be a statement about God's love for us--not withholding from us His own Beloved Son.
'God himself will provide the sheep for the holocaust.'
Icky translation. Sheep should be lamb--greater sign value. Behold, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world! vs. Behold, the Sheep of God who takes away the sin of the world! Also, the lamb/ram rhyme, and a person almost misses the fact that the word is not immediately fulfilled. God will provide the LAMB...and then He doesn't in that particular event...it points to the future.
In the Eucharist, The Son Who Is Not Withheld is The Lamb Whom God Will Provide.
Anonymous: Abraham obeyed? What about taking matters into his own hands with Hagar, at his Sarah's urging? That isn't trusting in God's plans, and there has been a terrible price to pay ever since. The Arabs/Muslims claim to descend from Hagar and Abraham. They fulfill the prophecy.
And in this event we are reminded of that sin: God says: Take your son, YOUR ONLY SON...God doesn't even recognize Ishmael as Abraham's son because it wasn't within God's plan.
Just goes to show you, no one had perfect obedience until Christ!
Catholics not proclaiming the kerygma? Are you kidding me? The Liturgy proclaims it! You miss it only if you go into a holy coma as soon as the processional hymn starts.
I especially love EP IV and wish it were used more often!
It's entirely possible that I'd heard the Isaac/Jesus connection before. My scripture classes were pretty good. I tend to be forgetful / obtuse / shallow, and the Lord needs to remind me of the immensity of His plan.
There's so much that can be preached upon with a scripture passage, Ed. On those occasions when I am presented with a passage and think, "Now what can I say about THAT?" I have to realize that the answer is "not much." If I ask, "What might the Lord be trying to tell this congregation today?" then the possibilities abound.
As many of the above comments indicate, paying attention to what is actually said and done in the scriptural stories, and not just thinking, "I've heard / read this before" is absolutely key.
It's like really paying attention to the face, voice, and words of someone you have loved a long time, and realizing that you can still be surprised by their beauty.
Thanks for article!
Thanks for interesting article.
I have a question:
Since God is unchanging and good, never tempting anyone to sin, and through Moses, gave us the LAW where all mankind is forbid to murder (even the thought of murder is considered a grave sin,if I understand Jesus correctly), how am I to properly understand the nature of God's command when He told Abraham to sacrifice Isaac as a holocaust?
At first glance, such a request seems contradictory of God's nature and commandments (which do not or cannot change), i.e., commanding a human sacrifice, and later forbidding it, formally in the LAW.
Is this better left as a mystery? Or, if one can speculate, but all the while ALWAYS trusting in God's goodness, is it permissible to think that the intent or motive behind a physical ACT is where the guilt of sin lies? Thus, a physical ACTION may be objectively hurtful to another (even to the point of causing bodily death to another), but if the motive behind it, i.e., wanting to fulfill the divine will by ACTION (as understood as being commanded by God), versus selfishly and maliciously ACTING for one's own personal glory, might that ACTION be considered free of the guilt of sin, and thus, not contrary to God's nature and commandments?
My limited understanding of Catholic moral teaching is that for an ACT to be considered GOOD, it must be GOOD on three acounts, it is BAD if wrong in any respect:
a)the ACT considered must be good, and have the character of conduct befitting that action; b) the motive of the ACT must be good; and c) the cirucumstances by which the ACT is performed should be conformed to right reason.
Thank you for your help and time.
Glad to read articles like this. Thanks to author!
Excellent website. Good work. Very useful. I will bookmark!
Post a Comment
<< Home