Rev. Fr. (Dr.) Osmond Anike

Readings:

First Reading:2 Samuel 7:1-5, 8-12, 14, 16 – Your House and your sovereignty will always stand secure before me

Responsorial Psalm: Psalm 88(89):2-5, 27, 29 – I will sing for ever of your love, O Lord.

Second Reading:Romans 16:25-27 – The mystery is revealed that was kept secret for endless ages.

Gospel: Luke 1:26-38 – I am the handmaid of the Lord.

In Ethics or Moral Philosophy, distinction is often made between what is referred to as “act of man”, and, “human act”. In their simplest distinction, “act of man” refers to the natural act of vegetative and sense faculties, i.e., the involuntary or reflex actions such as the beating of the heart, bodily reaction, indigestion, falling asleep, visual or auditory perceptions, etc., that a person does. These actions do not involve the use of intellect or will. “Human act” on the other hand, refers to those actions carried out voluntarily and with conscious decision. These are free acts that proceeds from a deliberate will. Behaviours are generally judged morally good or bad on the bases of human act alone. Act of man are mostly not ascribed the qualities of good and bad. They are simply amoral (not to be confused with immoral) actions. However, in Moral Theology, what constitutes human act is not necessarily the completed action in itself but the intention to actualize such action. In this regard, if somebody aims a gun at an antelope in the bush and the bullet mistakenly hits a human being and subsequently kills him, the shooter is not considered to have committed a sin of murder. But, if he aims to kill a person and the would-be victim miraculously escapes the bullet and survives unscathed, the shooter is considered to have already committed a sin of murder even though nobody was killed (remember, I am not talking from legal standpoint but rather from moral theological perspective).

God is not so much interested in a completed act as in the intention to perform that act. One’s intention to perform an act is of such a consequential nature that based on it alone, God “punishes” and “rewards” accordingly. In the first reading of today, it was precisely because of David’s intention to build a befitting house for the Lord that he got rewarded eternally. David didn’t actualize that intention, but it was already enough for God that he intended it. David had numerous shortcomings as we all know. He was an adulterer and a killer – sleeping with Bathsheba, the wife of Uriah, and killing Uriah to cover his track. However, that singular intention to build a house for God covered his multitude of sins. Having already promised to secure his house and sovereignty and establish his throne for ever, God could not renege on his promise even when David was later found wanting. He always had in the back of His mind, that David’s intention to build Him a house and the subsequent promise He made to him. And it was in fulfilment of that promise that Jesus the Son of the Most High God, who was from David’s stock, was born, and whose reign shall have no end.

God doesn’t wait for us to concretize our good intentions. It is good to concretize such intentions if we have the opportunity. But the mere fact of genuinely intending to perform such act is enough for God. The question for us today as we meditate on this issue is: What are our own intentions – to build a house for God or to destroy God’s house? The community of God’s people is the house of God. Think deeply about the numerous ways we’ve tried to destroy that community by sabotaging it! Sometimes, we just superficially think of God’s house as a building. We tend to forget about the human beings that occupy such building (and we hardly ever think about those “outside” the building). But all these are essential parts of God’s house which we must strive to build and not destroy. David’s house stood secure forever because he intended to build a house for God. If we intend to destroy God’s house, our own houses might as well stand destroyed forever.

The Gospel narrative recounts the Annunciation to Mary by the Angel Gabriel about what God intended to use her to achieve, namely, the ultimate fulfilment, through the birth of Jesus Christ, of that Davidic promise. The angel delivered a four-fold message to Mary: that she will give birth to a son whom she must name Jesus; that the child will be the Son of God and will occupy forever the throne of David; that the child will be conceived through the instrumentality of the Holy Spirit; and, finally, to demonstrate the truthfulness of his message, the angel informed Mary that her relative Elizabeth was equally pregnant even in her old age. It was in humble obedience that Mary accepted the will of God in her life even though she was not particularly sure of how that will be realized. By doing so, she has taught us the need to accept the will of God in our own lives.

There are a lot of things happening in our lives that we do not understand. But there is equally limit beyond which human understanding cannot reach. When we reach such limits, it is futile to continue insisting on understanding things before we eventually accept them. Surely one is not expected to just swallow things hook, line and sinker. God gave us rationality to use it to comprehend the depths of the universe. However, anyone insisting on perfectly understanding the complete makeup of the soil underneath his feet before putting down his two feet will spend the rest of his life standing on one foot. Mary’s reaction to the message of the angel is a reminder to us that in our relationship with God, we can ask some questions (just as she did), but we do not insist on having the answers laid bare to us in languages comprehensible to our limited human intellect before we accept what God wants for us in our lives. Our ejaculatory prayer must always be the prayer of our mother Mary: Behold the handmaid of the Lord, let it be done to me according your will.