[Untitled]

Issue 70.1 of the Review for Religious, 2011.

Determining Change Making the: Spiritual Exercises ,Growing Spiritually Exploring Religious Life QUARTERLY 70.1 2 0 i 1 Review for Religious fosters dialogue with God, dialogue with ourselves, and dialogue with one another about the holiness we try to live according to charisms of Catholic religious life. As Pope Paul vI said, our way of being church is today the way of dialogue. Review for Religious (ISSN 0034-639X) is published quarterly at Saint Louis University by the Jesuits of the Missouri Province. Editorial Office: 3601 Lindell Boulevard ¯ St. Louis, Missouri 63108-3393 Telephone: 314-633-4610 ¯ Fax: 314-633-4611 E-Maih reviewrfr@gmail.com ¯\Veb site: ~-w.reviewforreligious.org Manuscripts, books for review, and correspondence with the editor: Review for Religious ¯ 3601 Lindell Boulevard ¯ St. Louis, MO 63108-3393 POSTMASTER Send address changes to Review for Religious ¯ P.O. Box 6070 ¯ Duluth, MN 55806. Periodical postage paid at St. Louis, Missouri, and additional mailing offices. See inside back cover for information on subscription rates. ©2011 Review for Religious Permission is herewith granted to copy any material (articles, poems, reviews) contained in this issue of Review for Religious for personal or internal use, or for the personal or internal use of specific library clients within the limits outlined in Sections 107 and/or 1{)8 of the United States Copyright Law. All copies made under this permission must bear notice of the source, date, and copyright owner on the first page. This permission is NOT extended to copying for commercial distribution, advertising, institutional promotion, or for the creation of new collective works or anthologies. Such permission will only be considered on written application to the Editor, Review for Religious. ~ gournal of Ca~hohc ~piri~uah~ Celebrating 70 Years Editor Book Review Editor Scripture Scope Editorial Staff Advisory Board Michael G. Harter sJ Rosemary Jermann Eugene Hensell OSB Mary Ann Foppe Tracy Gramm Judy Sharp Paul Coutinho SJ Martir~ Erspamer OSB Margaret Guider OSF Kathleen Hughes RSCJ Louis and Angela Menard Bishop Terry Steib SVD QUARTERLY 70.1 2011 contents prisms 4 Prisms 6 17 determining change Agents of Change: Six Models Louis M. Savary shares and explains six models of being a change agent that were created by a long ago deceased Jesuit, Joseph Grau. Christ-like Empathy in Those Who Govern John H. Zupez SJ draws on Mark’s gospel to encourage religious superiors and anyone exercising authority to learn from the empathy of Jesus shown towards others. 25 44 making the spiritual exercises The Spiritual Exercises of St. Ignatius: A Path to Virtue James Menkhaus explores the Spiritual Exercises of St. Ignatius, using the language of virtue ethics and emphasizing a new understanding of the virtues of friendship and presence. Reflecting on Readiness to Make the Spiritual Exercises Myree Harris RSJ offers some possible questions and reflections for a better assessment of retreatants’ readiness to enter into the full 30oday Spiritual Exercises experience. Review for Religious 59 growing spiritually Looking at Death from a Christian Perspective Julius D. Leloczky OCist reflects on the contemporary obsession with death and recalls how our Christian faith gives us a life-perspective. Spiritual Direction 101 J. Thomas Hamel SJ reflects on the practice of spiritual direction understood as a dual ministry with the roles of giving and receiving by the director and the directee. 73 84 exploring religious life Looking for Nuns, Finding Women Deacons Phyllis Zagano suggests that in light of the Apostolic Visitation of U.S. women religious the monastic framework proposed applies to the minority of institutes and religious vocations, whereas the larger body of institutes and new vocations are moving to other ways of ministering, presaging the church’s return to the ancient vocation of the diaconate for women. Revisiting Obedience William P. Clark OMI reviews the challenges that contemporary culture has presented to the understanding and practice of religious obedience. departments 95 Scripture Scope: Jeremiah: A Messenger of God Caught between a Rockand a Hard Place 100 Book Reviews 3 70.1 2011 prisms 4 I t seems strange to me to be writing my own farewell as editor. In the 68.4 issue of the 2009 journal, I had written in this space that I had been diagnosed with pancreatic cancer and knew only that I had as long to live here as God wanted. As I write this, my death is not imminent, but I did want to see an orderly transition of my editor’s responsibilities. I have completed 22 years as editor, and it has been for me a privilege to publish so many authors, a call to a continuing learning experience, and an occa-sion of the deepening of my own religious life. I hope and pray that our readers can also identify a learning and deepening for their religious lives as their experience of this journal. As the title page indicates, Father Michael G. Harter SJ is the new editor, beginning with this current volume. Father Harter brings his own rich life experience to this job. He has been involved in religious formation both as assistant novice director and as novice director and director of Ministry Training Services in Denver, Colorado. He has been managing editor of the Jesuit maga-zine America. He has been called to religious leadership as a community superior and as the provincial executive assistant. He has served on the board of Praesidium, the accrediting agency in abuse risk management. He has traveled exten-sively and knows church and religious life from Europe to Africa to India to Australia. In fact, he served as associate editor of Review for Religious for two years before he became novice director Review for Religious for the Jesuit St. Paul novitiate and wrote the single Prisms not under my name. At the same time, I would also like to introduce Rosemary Jermann as our new book editor. Rosemary Jermann also brings a rich experience in editing

she has been a co-editor of Theology Digest up to its last publica-tion in June 2010. Because Theology Digest was sponsored by the Department of Theological Studies at Saint Louis Unversity, Jermann also had the opportunity to teach within the department. She will also contribute her edito-rial skills to the final product of each issue. Any editor is only as good as the staff and board that monitor and support him. I have been extremely fortunate in having a devoted staff identified in Mary Ann Foppe, Judy Sharp, Tracy Gramm, and Jean Read (t), and asso-ciate editors as Iris Ann Ledden SSND, Regina Siegfried ASC, Clare Boehmer ASC, Philip Fischer SJ (t), Michael Harter SJ, Canon Law editors Richard Hill SJ (~’) and Elizabeth McDonough OP, and Scripture Scope editor Eugene Hensell OSB. We as editors and staff have received invaluable help from our past and present advisory board members since 1990: David J. Hassel SJ (~), Mary Margaret Johanning SSND (~’), Iris Ann Ledden SSND, Sean Sammon FMS, Wendy Wright, Suzanne Zuercher OSB, Edmundo Rodriguez SJ, Joanne Wolski Conn, David Werthmann CSSR, Joel Rippinger OSB, Patricia Wittberg SC, Jim and Joan Felling, Kathryn Richards FSp, Bishop Carlos Sevilla SJ, Adrian Gaudin SC (?), Raymond Marie Gerard FSP, Eugene Hensell OSB, Miriam Ukeritis csJ, Lou and Angela Menard, Martin Erspamer OSB, Kathleen Hughes RSCJ, Bishop Terry Steib SVD, Margaret Guider OSF, and Paul 5" Coutinho SJ. My thanks to everyone. Remember me in your prayers. David L. Fleming SJ 70.1 2011 LOUIS M. SAVARY Agents of Change: Six Models determining change We are all called to be agents of change. It is a human calling as well as a Christian call-ing. However, we are not all called to be the same kind of change agent. A dear friend of mine, long ago deceased, Joseph Grau, a Jesuit priest for many years, created a simplified way of identifying the different kinds of change agent styles available. His naming and defining of these six models is a genuine contribution to contemporary spiritual practice, and his insights deserve to be re-presented. I share this article as a tribute to him. The Three Players in Making a Change According to Dr. Grau, there are six mod-els of change agency, each of which has three major players: (I) the People, (2) the Structure, (3) the Change Agent. Louis M. Savary PhD, STD, may be addressed at 3404 Ellenwood Lane

Tampa, Florida 33618. Review for Religious The term "People" refers to the set of persons who want or need change. Included in "People" are the individu-als and groups experiencing treatment that is unfair, unjust, unsafe, abusive, prejudicial, or cruel but who cannot effectively defend or protect themselves from the harmful situation or who cannot change and correct the unwelcome situation by themselves. Certain groups may be enduring racial prejudice, unsafe working conditions, unfair employer demands, denial of human rights, political oppression, gender discrimination, rejection by a church, or unequal treat-ment by institutions such as insurance companies, credit card companies, banks, educational institutions, or law enforcement. Individuals who want or need change might include children who are physically or sexually abused by family members, students being bullied at school, employees being harassed at the workplace, or those in neighbor-hoods that are unsafe because of gang warfare. "People" may also be extended to include animals and other forms in nature, since animals (that is, endan-gered species) and nature (that is, forests, the ozone layer) are often helpless by themselves to change an unsafe or destructive environment caused by humans. The term "Structure" refers to the unjust societal or institutional structure that is in need of change. "Structure" is the generalized term used here .for any existing politi-cal, social, cultural, ecclesiastical, or familial situation or system that allows, promotes, or condones practices that are unjust, unfair, illegal, uncaring, biased, abu-sive, or cruel to individuals or groups who usually can-not defend or protect themselves from such situations. These harmful situations may have been caused or cre-ated by unfair or unjust laws, lack of awareness, corrupt 70.1 2011 Savary ¯ Agents of Change If you choose to be a Change Agent in an unfair situation, you can play at least six different roles-- in helping to effect the needed change. 8 political organizations, racially biased societal norms, prejudicial cultural prac6ces, religious bigotry, oppres-sive government, inadequate social services, or abusive family behavior. The "Change Agent" (CA) is one who chooses to try to change an unsafe, unjust, or unfair Structure in favor of the affected People. The "Change Agent" is usu-ally viewed as an individual but could be a small group of people. If you choose to be a Change Agent in an unfair situation, you can act in at least six different ways--or play at least six different roles--in helping to effect the needed change. 1. The Advocate Agent of Change ~ The most common model of change agent is’the advocate (CA) who personally confronts the Structure on behalf of the People. The Advocate Agent is often inde-pendent of and outside the group of people for whom he or she is advocating. For example, in a class action suit against, say, a pharmaceutical company (the Structure), a lawyer (CA) personally advocates in court on behalf of the consumers who have been treated unfairly or unjustly (the People). Thus, on behalf of the People, the Change Agent tries to affect or influence the Structure: People--> CA--> Structure Lawyers are not the only Advocates. A teacher (CA) can approach the school administration (Structure) to Review for Relig4ous advocate on behalf of students (People) who need spe-cialized care or tutoring. A parent (CA) can approach the local police (Structure) and advocate for protection of children (People) who are being bullied on neighborhood streets. A therapist (CA) can write letters to Medicaid (Structure), advocating for certain patients (People) to receive disability payments. A teacher (CA) can write let-ters of recommendation to colleges (Structure), advocat-ing for certain students (People) to receive scholarships or financial aid. A physician (CA) can contact hospice (Structure) to advocate on behalf of dying patients (People). Pastoral ministers (CA) can approach the prison system (Structure), requesting religious training and other forms of spirituality for inmates (People). 2. The Empowerment Agent of Change In this second model, the Change Agent organizes and empowers the People, who then directly confront the Structure. There is a big difference between the first two models. In the Advocacy model, the CA deals directly with the Structure

in this second model the CA deals directly with the People wanting change, and not with the Structure. In this model, the CA teaches the People how to approach the Structure directly and advocate for themselves. The most obvious example of Empowerment is the community organizer. Empowerment Agents may or may not belong to the community they are empowering, but they obviously have charisma and organizing skills that most others don’t possess. The Empowerment CA teaches people how to get organized, how to formulate and present their request, how to approach the people who representthe Structure

what their legal rights are, what to do in the face of resistance, how to develop a Plan B. 9 70.1 2011 Savary ¯ Agents of Change The Empowerment Agent works directly on the People, organizing and training them, so that the People are prepared to approach the Structure directly. Thus, CA--> People --> Structure In one of the social ministries at our parish, a min-istering couple (CA) trains unemployed people (People) in how to get jobs in the business world (Structure) by teaching them how to write effective resumes, how to answer questions in a job interview, how to dress prop-erly, how to network with other job seekers, and other skills useful in landing a job. Some professionals (CA) teach groups of unfairly treated workers (People) how to form labor unions in their workplaces (Structure) or how to demand safer working conditions. The Empowerment Agent knows how to generate "people pressure" to change a situation on behalf of cer-tain groups. Some years ago in Washington, DC, when natural childbirth procedures were becoming popular among mothers but not among doctors and hospitals, workshop leaders (CA) told expectant mothers (People) that they had a legal right to demand natural childbirth in a hospital (Structure). Although obstetricians pre-ferred to deliver babies through chemically-induced childbirth, the mothers’ repeated demands for natural childbirth practices in hospitals prevailed. 3. The Lifestyle Agent of Change Grau’s third model of change agency is the Lifestyle Agent. Here, the CA is one of the People and acts as one of them. Thus, the CA belongs to the very group of those seeking their rights or some concession they believe to be rightfully theirs. A common example is a group of college students (People) protesting some policy of the college (Structure) that they wish to change. Each of the protesting students is a CA. Or, to put it another way, Review for Religious the group of students as an entity (the People) is the CA. Although you or I as specific students in that group seem to be merely one of the protesting students, nevertheless, you and I are legitimately called CAs. In this scenario, People (CA) People --> Structure The most common forms of Lifestyle Agents include the protest march, the worker strike, the sit-in, the let-ter- writing campaign, and the political campaign. In each case, groups of people (who are both People and Change Agents) coordinate, organize, and mobilize their time, money, and efforts to change an unjust situation (Structure). During the 1960s, there was much resistance to racial integration of African Americans into white public institutions such as schools, churches, restaurants, and clubs. Two white couples in a Southern state desired to live a non-racially-prejudiced lifestyle. To an exclu-sive private school their own children were attending (Structure), they (CA) gave scholarships for a number of academically qualified African American children (People), whose applications the school could not reject. The same two couples invited African American cou-ples (People) to dine with them (CA) at their favorite exclusive "white" restaurant (Structure). The restaurant owner could either welcome the African Americans or lose the business of two wealthy white families who were regular and generous customers. The owner chose to keep earning money. 4. The Direct Service Agent of Change In some cases, the Structure (that is, the local gov-ernment) is incapable of meeting the needs of a group of People, such as the poor, the hungry, the homeless, or immigrants, because of a lack of funds or personnel. So, someone must step up and directly meet those needs. 70.1 2011 Savary ¯ Agents of Cl~ange 12 The Saint Vincent de Paul Society in church parishes is a Direct Service Agent, as are people who work in soup kitchens, who deliver food to shut-ins, or who tutor children who wouldn’t otherwise ever learn to read. What is interesting about this model is its inde-pendence of the Structure. The Structure may refuse to meet the needs of such People, may be ignorant of those needs, or may even enact laws that outlaw such help. In this case, the Direct Service Agent provides direct service to the People in need, whether or not the Structure approves. Thus, CA--> People Structure Although the schema shows no arrow going from the People to the Structure, there is inevitably an effect produced on the Structure. Sometimes, the Structure is relieved and very grateful for the Direct Service CA, as was India (Structure) in the case of Mother Teresa (CA) and her service of the poorest and lowest classes (People). In other cases, as when those in church min-istry (CA) care for the needs of illegal immigrants (People), the CA may be acting in opposition to a civil ordinance (Structure). 5. The Ideological Agent of Change Most parents, teachers, counselors, and health pro-fessionals exemplify the Ideological Agents of change. Ideological Agents are shaping the minds and souls of the People in their care. Such CAs are working at a much more fundamental level than the Empowerment Agents are. Empowerment Agents typically organize and train a group of people to encounter the Structure on a specific issue, such as better treatment of gays in the community or requesting representation or a voice at a university’s Board of Directors meetings. By contrast, the Ideological Agent is shaping the minds of people at a more general level. For example, Review for Religious religious teachers train students to think rationally and ethically, no matter what issue may arise in the future. Parents may instruct their children in proper social behavior--how to show gratitude, how to ask for things, how to play cooperatively. An English teacher may instruct students in how to communicate effectively through the written word and how to appreciate good writing. A history - - teacher may show students how to learn and grow wise from the study of history and the successes and failures of great men and women. A math teacher equips students for dealing with the financial and scientific dimensions of life. The counselor and health profes-sional help people deal with their basic emotional and physical issues so that they can be productive members of society. Financial advisors teach people how to man-age their money. Workshop leaders can teach people how to create the lives they desire. The work of the Ideological CA is, above all, foun-dational in nature. The CA is preparing persons (People) not only to live in society or in the church (Structures), but also to become intelligent and contributing members of such groups. In effect, the work of the Ideological CA is to prepare people to become effective agents of change themselves. Symbolically, CA--> People --> Structure In one sense, the effects the Ideological Agent has on the Structures of society or the church are mostly The effects the Ideological Agent has on the Structures of society or the church are mostly indirect, ~b~ut yet very powerful. 13 70.1 2011 Savary ¯ Agents of Change 14 indirect, but yet very powerful. Persons who have not learned to think for themselves, or who have little or no control over their emotions or instincts are not likely to become the best agents of change in society. The role of the Ideological Agent is therefore crucial for the development of society and of the church. Also not to be forgotten among the Ideological Agents are editors of newspapers and newsletters and writers of books, professional articles, and how-to pam-phlets. Many people today have websites or blogs that provide inspiration, give helpful hints, or steer people in the right direction. 6. The Institutional Agent of Change The sixth and final model is called Institutional. In this approach, the Institutional Agent (CA) is part of the Structure. Thus, in the church (Structure), a priest or bishop who is a part of that Structure can be an Institutional Agent (CA) if he works to change the Structure so that it benefits the People by meeting their need(s). A truly Institutional CA is always con-sciously thinking of the People and how he or she can make things better for the them. Structure (CA) --> Structure --> People Institutional CAs would also include elected politi-cal representatives, school officials, academic adminis-trators, mayors, governors, civil officials, ranking law enforcement officers, members of boards of directors, business managers, hospital supervisors, and officers of professional organizations. More Than One Style Most people use more than one style of change agency in their life and work. Some get to use all six. In the life of Jesus, we can find examples of most styles. Review for Religious He was certainly an Advocate (1) for the People when he spoke to the scribes, Pharisees, and priests. He was an Ideological CA (5) in the ways he taught people to live their lives. He used Direct Service (4) in healing the sick. As an Empowerment Agent (2), he trained his apostles and disciples on how to go among the people to preach and heal. Since he was neither a scribe nor a priest, he could not use the Institutional model. Members of Alcoholics Anonymous combine Lifestyle Agency, Direct Service Agency, and Ideological Agency in their various ways of working. They are affecting many layers of social and religious Structures, since they (and others in related twelve-step groups) are turning individuals, who were burdens on society and their families, into productive, income-producing, tax-paying citizens, good parents, and upstanding church members. What Are Your Preferred Styles of Change Agency? Dr. Joseph Grau, a student of the writings of French Jesuit Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, wrote his doctoral dissertation (as yet unpublished) on the ethics of Teilhard. In much of traditional Christian spirituality, Grau wrote, we are seen as independent persons, each seeking our own individual salvation by avoiding serious sin. In contrast, for Teilhard, as for St. Paul, all humanity (and the rest of creation) is living in the Cosmic Christ, who is daily growing, changing, and evolving toward his ultimate completion. In this perspective, Christians are not primarily isolated individuals, each independently seeking to save their own souls, but we are all inextricably interconnected in this great God Project. In St. Paul’s words, we are the hands and feet, the eyes and ears of Christ on earth today, helping bring this Cosmic Christ to 70.1 2011 Savary * Agents of Change his fulfillment as destined by the Creator. Thus, we see the need for all to become effective change agents. Therefore, our spirituality today cannot be focused simply on avoiding sin. Rather we must be focused on consciously choosing actions that are designed to make a positive difference in the world. For Teilhard, we are all called to be Agents of Change in helping the Structures of our world become more just, kind, and caring for all those in need (People). We consciously choose to become Agents of Change so that Christ may be all in all. To accomplish this will require a lot of change and improvement in our world. What part will you play in the great God Project? Personal Reflection / Group Discussion Savary raises the question for our reflections: What are my preferred styles of change agency? Why are these my preferred styles? How is it helpful to reflect on the different models of change agency? Review for Religious JOHN H. ZUPEZ Christ-like Empathy in Those Who Govern One might address this topic through a study of "Paternal/Maternal Governance as an Ideal in Religious Communities." But that could get us into arguments over whether it is overstating the type of governance called for by our constitutions, or whether such governance is realistically possible. So I choose to focus on Jesus’ way of dealing with people as an ideal and as inspiration for all followers of Christ, whether they be in a religious congregation or not. In religious congregations new challenges have arisen to experiencing empathy from those who gov-ern. Such empathy has suffered on several fronts in our times: the sophistication of relationships with those out-side our immediate circle of friends

the administrative burden of major superiors which puts more burden on the local superior

the diminishing pool of prospects for appointment as superior. You can probably think John H. Zupez SJ wrote for us on prayer in 1992 and 2009. He is currently pastor of Corpus Christi Church

1005 N.E. 15th Street

Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73117. 17 70.1 2011 Zupez * Christ-like Empathy in those Who Govern of other reasons why relations between religious and their superiors become strained. Empathy in superiors is most important since their community has no choice but to relate to them. These reflections may also help in keeping relations among community members from becoming strained. Empathy Wikipedia on the Internet has a long article on empa-thy that begins with the following description, involv-ing various aspects. It seems suitable to our purposes. Empathy is a "feeling of concern for other people that creates a desire to help them, experiencing emotions that match another person’s emotions, knowing what the other person is thinking or feeling." This is a good description of Jesus’ approach to people. Even if his keen intelligence and sensitivity bordered on the mirac-ulous at times, his dealings show his desire to get inside the mind and heart of those he addressed, to experi-ence and know from their perspective before trying to help them, at times with reproof.. It didn’t rule out an ever-sharpening critique of some religious attitudes he wanted to correct. But one never gets the idea that he missed the point, that he judged too harshly or without sufficient empathy for what others thought and felt. His empathetic way of understanding how people thought and felt typically led to his sympathetic and caring way of ministering to them. Reflecting on ways Jesus exhib-ited empathy in the gospel accounts can help us follow him more closely in this regard. Not all instances are equally illustrative, but together they show Jesus’ great sensitivity as a model for his followers. References will be to Mark’s Gospel. Even if some of Jesus’ sayings here originated in the early church, Review for Religious they reflect a consistent personality trait of Jesus that was well-remembered by his followers. In Mark’s Gospel ¯ In Mark’s Gospel only Jesus hears his vocation call at the Jordan, after which he immediately goes "on retreat" and doesn’t begin his ministry until John’s arrest (1:10- 14). If we attribute greater historicity to this account than to the other Gospels, it shows great sensi-tivity on the part of Jesus to the feelings of the Baptist and -- complete appreciation for John’s ministry, even though this would contribute to the survival of the Baptist move-ment alongside Christianity. ¯ Jesus calls James and John to follow him, leaving their father Zebedee alone with the hired hands (1:20). Scholars point to this as one of many signs that Jesus saw the end-time as imminent, for otherwise he would have shown more sympathy for the father who was left without his sons’ help. ¯ Many times in the Gospels Jesus attributes ill behavior not to the free choice of persons but to unclean spirits that have taken possession of the persons (1:25). Can we see this as a case of empathy, of Jesus’ most merciful judgment? ¯ When his disciples disturb his morning prayer, he doesn’t reproach them but agrees with them that they rightly understand his mission (1:35-38). Again and again Jesus attributes his cures to the patent faith he perceived in those to whom he ministered. 19 70.1 2011 Zupez ¯ Christ-like Empathy in those Who Govern ¯ Jesus healed the leper and fed crowds that were hungry and "without a shepherd," being "moved with pity" or compassion (1:41, 6:34, 8:2), knowing how they felt. He also began his ministry showing great sensitivity toward the temple priests, allowing them to profit from the effect of his cures (1:44). ¯ Again and again Jesus attributes his cures to the patent faith he perceived in those to whom he minis-tered (2:5), and he "perceived in his spirit" the lack of faith in those who "questioned in their hearts" (2:6, 8). ¯ Jesus’ only mention of fasting in Mark’s Gospel came in order to defend the Baptist who required his disciples to fast (2:18-20). ¯ Jesus gave an opportunity for Jewish leaders to defend their traditions, feeling "anger" when they "were silent" and refused to communicate with him (3:4, 5). ¯ When Mark says that Jesus appointed 12 apostles not just to proclaim his message but "to be with him," he shows the intimate community that would help them to see deeply into one another (3:14). ¯ Many of Jesus’ parables were addressed to the Jewish leaders whom he so much wanted to bring on board his movement. He carefully fashions suasive argu-ments to move these intelligent adversaries, and only after rejection by them does he conclude that they have simply closed their hearts to God’s Spirit (3:23-29). ¯ When his family thinks him "out of his mind," he gives an inclusive description of who his family is, knowing that they also "do the will of God" (3:21, 35). ¯ He shows himself a careful observer of nature and of human behavior, distinguishing between ways his word goes unheeded in people. The faith of some is rootless, in some it is destroyed by others, in some it is choked out by the cares of this world (4:15-19). Review for Religious ¯ He commends those who are translucent, who let the light within them shine out clearly for all to see: "nothing is hidden but will be disclosed" (4:21-22). ¯ He intuits the concern of his listeners over the smallness and hiddenness of the kingdom in his ministry and responds with the parables of hidden growth and of the mustard seed (4:26-32). ¯ Sympathy for Jairus leads Jesus to put up with the ridicule of the crowd, and when he had cured Jairus’ daughter he mentions the hunger of the girl: "give her something to eat" (5:43). This last touch must have struck Mark as typical of Jesus’ thoughtfulness of oth-ers, and so merited inclusion in his Gospel. ¯ When Jesus is rejected by the people of his own hometown, he makes up a good excuse for them, rather than blaming them

"Prophets are not without honor except in their hometown" (6:4). Then he anticipates how people would feel if his apostles went house-hop-ping, looking perhaps for a nicer place to stay. He advises them to stay with whoever first welcomes them (6:10). Jesus also perceives the fatigue of the work for his apostles and invites them to "come aside and rest awhile" (6:31). Then, respecting their close feeling for him, he "goes up the mountain to pray" only "after say-ing farewell to them" (6:46). ¯ When the Jewish leaders criticize his disciples for not washing their hands before eating, Jesus doesn’t dis-miss their objection lightly but defends the disciples by quoting at length Jewish. traditions (7:5-15). He can also quickly correct his response to a person when he perceives a need for self-correction, as in his change from rejecting to commending the Syrophoenician woman (7:2 7-2 9). ¯ Jesus took the deaf man with a speech impediment "away from the c