{"id":16039,"date":"2026-09-20T00:00:36","date_gmt":"2026-09-19T23:00:36","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/tad.scot\/?p=16039"},"modified":"2026-09-20T10:23:36","modified_gmt":"2026-09-20T09:23:36","slug":"25th-sunday-in-ordinary-time-14","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/tad.scot\/?p=16039","title":{"rendered":"25th Sunday in Ordinary Time"},"content":{"rendered":"

\u201cWork from home,\u201d once reserved for a relatively small group, became widespread during the Covid pandemic, when the entire population was effectively confined to their homes. Despite the many downsides of lockdowns, they helped many office workers realise how much time they used to spend commuting to work, and that they could be just as effective from their kitchen table, bedroom, or hastily arranged home office. The pandemic and associated restrictions are thankfully a distant memory, but their impact on our society and way of life left a long-lasting legacy. One is the \u201cwork from home\u201d arrangement, now treated as standard, default or preferable by many employees and employers. At the same time, some companies try to limit or completely abandon the practice, and their workers return to the office. What started as a necessity forced by the turn of events has become a political, societal, and economic battleground, now involving British government officials and offering legislative solutions. The US President Ronald Reagan once famously said: “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: I’m from the Government, and I’m here to help.”<\/em> Experience teaches us that shortsighted, quick-gain political decisions always have long-lasting, impactful unintended consequences. However, to a great extent, the \u201cwork from home\u201d battle is a political sideshow for those who cannot consider it an option because of the nature of their jobs, like the workers for hire in today\u2019s gospel.<\/p>\n

The parable is an immediate follow-up to Jesus\u2019 exchange with a man who sought his answer to the question that troubled him: \u201cTeacher, what good thing must I do to achieve eternal life?\u201d<\/em> In response, Jesus first raised his eyebrows: \u201cWhy do you ask me about what is good? There is only one who is good\u201d,<\/em> and then instructed him to keep the commandments. In return, the man claimed he had been doing so and pressed further, \u201cIs there anything more I must do?\u201d<\/em> Jesus, having realised the man\u2019s possessive attitude, challenged it: \u201cIf you wish to be perfect, go, sell your possessions, and give the money to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.\u201d<\/em> As a result, the man \u201cwent away grieving, for he possessed great wealth.\u201d<\/em> Jesus\u2019 comment on the outcome: \u201cIt is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of heaven\u201d<\/em> greatly disturbed his disciples: \u201cWho then can be saved?\u201d<\/em> The parable we heard in today\u2019s gospel was Jesus\u2019 descriptive answer.<\/p>\n

The conclusion of it was no less shocking than his earlier \u201ccamel and the eye of a needle\u201d<\/em> comment because it challenged his audience\u2019s and also our own sense of fairness. It\u2019s so deep that we tend to apply such a mercantile or plutocratic attitude to spiritual matters. A priest once told my friends that he would get a better \u201cmansion\u201d in heaven because of the sacrifices he had made by responding to and accepting his priestly vocation. Twisted thinking, laughable and scary in equal measure. The value of the kingdom of heaven isn\u2019t quantifiable; there isn\u2019t more or less of it. This is symbolised in the parable\u2019s agreement between the landowner and the hired men as a daily, not hourly, rate. At the end of the day, the landowner honoured the agreement, while the firstcomers questioned it, feeling they were treated unfairly. In economic terms, we would understandably rather take their side. However, Jesus wasn\u2019t presenting a model of employment for businesses to implement literally. This parable was another example of a different logic governing \u201cthe<\/em> kingdom<\/em> of<\/em> heaven\u201d<\/em>: the logic of generosity of spirit, mind, and heart, a pattern Jesus repeated so many times in his words and deeds to embed it deeply in his disciples’ minds and subsequently affect the way they would carry out his mission. The ultimate expression of this logic came when the crucified Christ promised paradise to a repentant criminal dying beside him.<\/p>\n

Isn\u2019t such generosity corrupting? Every now and then, we might come across or hear of people who, having lived carefree lives filled with sinful pleasures we deny ourselves on moral grounds, turn to God and religion late in life, sometimes on a deathbed. Some Christians of \u201clong and distinguished service to God and the Church\u201d<\/em>, confronted with such \u201clatecomers\u201d<\/em>, consider it unfair. At the heart of this begrudging attitude is a misunderstanding of those latecomers’ views of their previous lives. The burden of grief, guilt, and regret over past misdeeds, mistreatment of others, and sins often weighs heavily on their conscience for the rest of their lives. They don\u2019t see it as having their cake and eating it, but as a chunk of life wasted and impossible to recover. More worryingly, such a begrudging attitude suggests that in the hearts of those \u201cgood Christians\u201d<\/em> lies a desire to commit sins, held in check only by lack of opportunity or fear of unwanted consequences. If that\u2019s the case, we must remember the warning spelt out by Jesus: \u201cWhat comes out of the mouth originates in the heart, and this is what defiles a person.\u201d (Matthew 15:18)<\/em> Mercifully, we still have a chance to change our hearts, because, as we prayed in today\u2019s psalm: \u201cThe Lord is kind and full of compassion, slow to anger, abounding in mercy. How good is the Lord to all, compassionate to all his creatures.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

\n

Image by Rizwan Ullah<\/a> from Pixabay<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

\u201cWork from home,\u201d once reserved for a relatively small group, became widespread during the Covid pandemic, when the entire population was effectively confined to their homes. Despite the many downsides of lockdowns, they helped many office workers realise how much time they used to spend commuting to work, and that they could be just as effective from their kitchen table, bedroom, or hastily arranged home office. The pandemic and associated restrictions are thankfully a distant memory, but their impact on our society and way of life left a long-lasting legacy. One is the \u201cwork from home\u201d arrangement, now treated as standard, default or preferable by many employees and employers. At the same time, some companies try to limit or completely abandon the practice, and their workers return to the office. What started as a necessity forced by the turn of events has become a political, societal, and economic battleground, now involving British government officials and offering legislative solutions. The US President Ronald Reagan once famously said: “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: I’m from the Government, and I’m here to help.” Experience teaches us that shortsighted, quick-gain political decisions always have long-lasting, impactful unintended consequences. However, to a great extent, the \u201cwork from home\u201d battle is a political sideshow for those who cannot consider it an option because of the nature of their jobs, like the workers for hire in today\u2019s gospel.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":16036,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_feature_clip_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[5,7],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-16039","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-sermon","category-year-a"],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/tad.scot\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/09\/rezwan0305-laptop-6948268_1280.jpg","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/tad.scot\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16039","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/tad.scot\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/tad.scot\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/tad.scot\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/tad.scot\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=16039"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/tad.scot\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16039\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":16041,"href":"https:\/\/tad.scot\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16039\/revisions\/16041"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/tad.scot\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=16039"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/tad.scot\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=16039"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/tad.scot\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=16039"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}