Tuesday, April 15, 2014


Then Simon Peter came, following him, and went into the tomb; he saw the linen cloths lying, and the napkin, which had been on his head, not lying with the linen cloths but rolled up in a place by itself.

John 20:1-9


EXPLANATION: The accounts of Christ's resurrection on Easter morning as given by the four Evangelists vary in details but agree on the essential points. Some women, the leader amongst them being Mary Magdalene, came to the tomb early on Sunday morning to anoint the dead body with spices, in order to help preserve it. This anointing had been done very hastily on the Friday because of the Sabbath which began at sundown. The tomb was found open and empty. The first thought of the women was that somebody had stolen the corpse. This shows how far resurrection was from their minds. They went in haste to tell the disciples. Peter and John ran to the tomb. Later that day Christ appeared to Mary Magdalene, to ten of the Apostles, to Peter separately (according to St. Paul, 1 Cor. 15: 5), to two disciples on the road to Emmaus (Lk. 24: 13); and, later on, he appeared often to the Apostles and disciples in Galilee, for a period of days.
First day of the week: The Sabbath was the last day of the Jewish week, so the first day corresponds to what is now called Sunday.

Mary Magdalene: John mentions only Magdalene by name but the " we don't know " in verse 2 implies there were others with her.

stone had been moved away: The tomb was raised above the ground and its entrance was closed by rolling a large stone, cut for the purpose, across the entrance (see Mk. 16: 3).

they . . . the Lord: This was Magdalene's only possible explanation of the absence of the body.

Peter and the other disciple: Peter and John ran to the tomb. When they found the winding sheet and the cloth that covered the head lying there, they realized that the body had not been stolen or taken away: why should the linen coverings have been removed?

He saw and believed: That Peter had been the first to believe and then John, seems the meaning here, not that John believed in contrast to Peter.

as yet they did not understand: Until this moment they had not understood the scriptures which had foretold his resurrection. In fact neither had they believed Christ's own prophecies of his resurrection---it seemed to be something which could not happen.  

Thursday, April 10, 2014



Tuesday, March 25, 2014


I am in the world, I am the light of the world.
Jn 9: 1-41

Click to go to << 4th Sunday of Lent (A) 2011 >>
Click to go to << 4th Sunday of Lent (A) 2008 >>

Thursday, March 20, 2014


A woman of Samaria came to draw water. Jesus said to her, "Give me a drink."
Jn 4:5-42

Click to go to << 3rd Sunday of Lent (A) 2011 >>
Click to go to << 3rd Sunday of Lent (A) 2008 >> 

Tuesday, March 11, 2014


And he was transfigured before them; his face shone like the sun and his clothes became white as light.
Mt 17: 1-9

Click to go to << 2nd Sunday of Lent (A) 2011 >> 
Click to go to << 2nd Sunday of Lent (A) 2008 >>

Tuesday, March 04, 2014

Tuesday, February 25, 2014


No one can serve two masters. He will either hate one and love the other, or be devoted to one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon. 
Mt 6:23-34

The parallels to these verses in Matthew are spread out in three different chapters of Luke: Mt 6:22-23 =  Luke 11:-35; Mt 6:14 = Luke 16:13;  Mt 6:25-34 = Luke 12:22-31. 

v. 22-23. The lamp of the body is the eye. If your eye is sound, your whole body will be filled with light; but if your eye is bad, your whole body will be in darkness. And if the light in you is darkness, how great will the darkness be.

We have already been reminded that the lamp gives light to all in the house (5:15); similarly, the eye gives light (insight) to the whole body:  whether you are a seeing man or a blind man depends entirely on your  eyes. In what sense is Matthew using this parable? “Sound” is “haplous”, which as we have seen means both single and generous; “not sound” is  “poniros”, and “the evil eye” means “grudging”, “mean”, “stingy”.  If the disciple is generous towards God, he will be full of light (perfect, as his heavenly Father is perfect 5:48). If he is mean, he will be full of darkness  (like the devil). The next saying expounds the other sense of “haplous” =  single or simple. The disciple must keep his eye on one master, not on two.

v. 24. No one can serve two masters. He will either hate one and love the other, or be devoted to one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon.

The man with the eye which is not sound is attempting the impossible—to serve two masters; the man with the sound eye has chosen God.  Mammon is an Aramaic word, meaning “wealth”, “property”. Devotion to God cannot be combined with devotion to mammon, because, as we have seen already, there will be occasions when the former will demand  the sacrifice of the latter (5:29. 30. 40). A choice is therefore necessary between God and mammon; or between faith and anxiety (see following verses).

v. 25. Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat [or drink], or about your body, what you will wear. Is not life more than food and the body more than clothing?

The disciple who is told not to serve mammon may well reply, “But I must have enough to live and to clothe myself. To this, Jesus replies that God who has made life and the body will certainly look after those things which are less than these - viz. food and clothing.

v. 26. Look at the birds in the sky; they do not sow or reap, they gather nothing into barns, yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are not you more important than they?

Moreover, he feeds the birds: how much more will he feed men.

And anxiety cannot increase a man's span of life (or stature [margin], “helikia” can mean both). Cf. 5:36 for our inability to control the colr of our hair. These things are in the hands of God.

vv. 28-30. Why are you anxious about clothes? Learn from the way the wild flowers grow. They do not work or spin. But I tell you that not even Solomon in all his splendor was clothed like one of them. If God so clothes the grass of the field, which grows today and is thrown into the oven tomorrow, will he not much more provide for you, O you of little faith?

The same type of argument as that in v. 26 above is used with regard to  anxiety about clothing. God clothes the lilies, even better than man can  clothe himself; the lilies are of less value than man: therefore God will  take care of man's clothing. To think otherwise is to be men of little  faith (“oligopistoi”, a rare word, which Matthew uses four times: here and  8:26, 14:31, 16:8; the only other occurrence of it in the New Testament is  Luke 12:28, the parallel to this passage: did Luke take it from here?).

v. 31. So do not worry and say, ‘What are we to eat?’ or ‘What are we to drink?’ or ‘What are we to wear?

Repeats v.25 in order to round off' the passage - an example of  Matthew's use of inclusio.

v. 32. All these things the pagans seek. Your heavenly Father knows that you need them all.

The Gentiles (who live without faith in God, cf. 5:47) are anxious about  these things. The disciples, on the other hand, are to trust God as the Father who knows all their needs before they ask (cf 6:8).

v. 34. Do not worry about tomorrow; tomorrow will take care of itself. Sufficient for a day is its own evil.

The final futility is to be anxious about tomorrow: tomorrow is completely outside our possible control today (cf. 5:36 and, 6:27). There is a possible set of verbal links common to vv. 33, 34, and vv. 10, 11 in the Lord's Prayer: kingdom, righteousness, tomorrow, this day; kingdom, [God's] will, this day, and tomorrow.