Today's(10/1/06) Gospel Reading: Mk9:38-43,45,47-48

  • Thread starter Thread starter Seeks_God
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Seeks_God

Guest
In today’s Gospel reading, the first part says

"At that time, John said to Jesus,
“Teacher, we saw someone driving out demons in your name,
and we tried to prevent him because he does not follow us.”
Jesus replied, “Do not prevent him.
There is no one who performs a mighty deed in my name
who can at the same time speak ill of me.
For whoever is not against us is for us.
Anyone who gives you a cup of water to drink
because you belong to Christ,
amen, I say to you, will surely not lose his reward.”

This is peculiar to me, because, although catholic, I have a hard time believing that people out there that believe in Jesus and truly attempt to follow His will but are not members of the catholic faith, will be condemned.

Is this portion of scripture in honor of those who speak in Jesus’ name, doing good things for Jesus, but “does not follow us”?

SG

Just curious what everyone’s thoughts are…
 
Seeks God,

I also have a hard time believing that people out there who believe in Jesus and truly attempt to follow His will but are not members of the Catholic faith will be condemned. I would emphasize the word “truly” in that statement and also change “are not members of the Catholic faith” to “are not formal members of the Catholic Church.” The Church recognizes God’s working outside the formal boundaries of the Catholic Church and in effect allows for an “honorary membership,” if you will, that people are in some way in communion with the Church without actually knowing it.
  • Liberian
 
This passage cause me some concern recently regarding Church teaching but then this occurred to me

Christ says “Anyone who is not against us is for us.”.

He does not say “Anyone who is not for us is against us.” which what some people (both Catholic and non-Catholic) seem to think the Church teaches.

Also the new priest in my parish, who was ordained just a few months ago, gave a wonderful homily: he pointed out that however we might feel about it we cannot box in God’s love but at the same time emphasised that the fullness of the the Truth is within the Church.
 
Thanks! That certainly shed some light on the subject…

SG
 
Andrew,

Christ says “Anyone who is not against us is for us,” but elsewhere He does indeed say “He who is not with me is against me, and he who does not gather with me scatters.” I think it has to do with circumstances. Early in the ministry, when people were just getting to know Jesus, anybody who was “neutral” was likely to be friendly, to give Jesus the benefit of the doubt. Later, though, when His demands had become clear, people had tried following Him and decided they would rather not, then the “neutral” people were more likely to be unfriendly.
  • Liberian
 
Jesus may have simply tried to instill in the apostles some humility. The prior verses in this narrative say the following:

Mark 9:34-37

"And they came to Caperna-um; and when he was in the house he asked them, “What were you discussing on the way?” But they were silent; for on the way they had discussed with one another who was the greatest. And he sat down and called the twelve; and he said to them, “If any one would be first, he must be last of all and servant of all.” And he took a child, and put him in the midst of them; and taking him in his arms, he said to them, “Whoever receives one such child in my name receives me; and whoever receives me, receives not me but him who sent me.”

The passage in question is not super specific. The apostles may have been making demands of the individual in verse 38 that were improper. Remember, Jesus sent the apostles out two by two and gave them authority to cast out demons[Mark 6:7-12 & Luke 10:1-20]. In these passages Jesus gave them a few instructions. It is possible that the apostles were trying to make the individual described in Mark 9 follow their leadership in a way that was lacking in humility and perhaps charity. I find their sheepishness in verse 34 as it pertains to their discussion of who was the greatest to be somewhat telling.

This of course is simply my take on the passage…I could be way off here.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top