MARY, MOTHER OF GOD

The shepherds went in haste to Bethlehem and found Mary and Joseph,and the infant lying in the manger.

Lk 2:16-21

Luke's exquisite nativity story is compounded of three ingredients—prophecy, history, and symbolism— which are so thoroughly intermingled that it is hardly possible to separate them. He does not claim in so many words that any prophecy was fulfilled; but, just as the prophecies of Mal. 3:1-4:6 and Is. 7:14 underlie the messages of Gabriel to Zechariah and Mary, so here many strands from Mic. 5:2-5 are woven into the fabric of the narrative. This prophecy tells how in t town of Bethlehem a mother in travail is to give birth to a prince of ancient lineage, who will be shepherd of the scattered flock of Israel, standing in the glory of the Lord and extending his authority to the ends of the earth, with a proclamation of peace.

The point in the story that especially captured Luke's fancy was not just that Jesus was born in Bethlehem according to the old prediction, but that this promise of God came true because of an enactment of the Roman government. God was working his purpose out not only through the hesitancy of Zechariah, the exuberance of Elizabeth, and the quiet faith of Mary. Caesar Augustus too, like Cyrus in earlier days (Is. 45:1), had become the unwitting coadjutor of a salvation which would one day encompass his whole empire. For the modern historian the account of the census presents difficulties. But there can be no question about its symbolic value for Luke.

Nor is this the only symbolism in the story. There was no room for the Savior in the common guest-room of the inn, just as later the Son of man had no place to lay his head, the King of the Jews no throne but a cross. His first worshippers, the shepherds, despised by the orthodox because their occupation made them neglectful of religious observance are the forerunners of the multitude of humble folk who were to throng him in his public ministry. The angelic chorus anticipates the jubilation which rings throughout the gospel and especially the joy in heaven which Jesus declared to ensue upon the rescue of the lost sheep. And the wonder with which the shepherds' story was greeted prepares us for the deeper and more abiding wonder to come.


The Mosaic Law provided three ceremonies to follow on the birth of a male child (Lv 12, Ex 13:12, Nm 18:6). The first was circumcision, which took place on the eighth day from birth and was usually the occasion for the giving of the child's name (Jesus is the Greek equivalent of the Hebrew Joshua which means `the Lord is salvation'). Then, in the case of the firstborn, there was the rite of redemption by the payment of a five-shekel offering; this could be done any time after the first month. Finally, after forty days, there was the purification of the mother, who up till then was regarded as unclean and therefore disqualified from any form of public worship. The purification involved the sacrifice of a lamb and a turtledove or young pigeon, but the poor were allowed to substitute a second dove or pigeon for the lamb. Joseph and Mary made the poor man's offering. Luke appears to have confused the second and third ceremonies.

Advisory

I will probably not be  able to put up the usual exegesis for the coming two Sundays (Christmas and Mary, Mother of God).

4th SUNDAY OF ADVENT (B)

Behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son,and you shall name him Jesus.

Lk 1:26-38

This story of the annunciation of the birth of Jesus, which is of the same kind as that of the birth of John the Baptist and which shows many similarities, takes place in far away Nazareth. The mission of Jesus is described at first as that of the traditional Messiah of Is 7:14; 9:6 and 2 Sam 7:14. 16 (vv.31-33), then as that of Son of God par excellence (v. 35; Rom 1:4). The virginal conception is a sign of this unique and mysterious sonship. Comparing the two annunciation stories we see how the superiority of Jesus to that of John is highlighted as well as that contrast between the faith of Mary and the unbelief of Zehariah.

v. 26. In the sixth month, the angel Gabriel was sent from God to a town of Galilee called Nazareth…

Nazareth is unknown in the OT. It is an insignificant small village (Jn 1:46). Luke calls it a city just as he calls the villages of Bethlehem (2:4), Capernaum (4:31) and Naim (7:11).

v. 27. To a virgin betrothed to a man named Joseph, of the house of David, and the virgin’s name was Mary.

The Greek word “parthenos” refers to a young girl (cf. Mt 25:1-13) and implies a virgin. The Mary is a virgin will be made explicit in the following text (v. 34), removing any ambiguity regarding her marriage.

Mary is said to be betrothed (engaged) to Joseph. In reality Mary is legally married to Joseph (see the use of the term in 2:5) but they do not yet live together (1:34). According to Jewish custom in fact a certain amount of time has to pass before the husband brings his wife to his home (Mt 25:1-13).

v. 28. And coming to her, he said, “Hail, favored one! The Lord is with you.”

Hail may be translated as “be joyful” or “be glad”. The imperative in this context is not a common greeting in the Greek world. It may be an echo of the proclamation of salvation made to the daughter of Sion (Zep 3:14; Zec 9:9). It expresses the joy of the good news (1:14).

Favored one: This expression is presented as a name given to Mary. In the Bible the word is not found except in Sir 18:17 and Eph 1:6. It is in relation to the word “grace” that in the OT it means first of all the favor of the king (1Sm 16:22; 2Sm 14:22,16:4; 1Kgs 11:19; Est 2:17, 5:8, 7:3, 8:5 etc.), then it means the love of the beloved (Sg 8:10; Esth 2:17 etc.) (cf. v. 30).

The Lord is with you: These words are often found in vocation stories (Ex 3:12; Jgs 6:12; Jer 1:18. 19, 15:20; cf. Gn 26:24, 28:15).

v. 29. But she was greatly troubled at what was said and pondered what sort of greeting this might be.

The word used to describe the reaction of Mary is stronger than that of Zechariah in 1:12 since the greeting of the angel enabled Mary to catch a glimpse of her singular calling.

Unlike Zechariah Luke does not say that fear came upon Mary as in 1:12; instead Luke presents her as pondering over the message of the angel (cf. 1:34 and 2:19). Mary seeks to penetrate the mystery of this unexpected revelation.

v. 31. Behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall name him Jesus.

As in 1:13 the angel takes up again the birth prophecies of the OT. The nearest text is Is 7:14 (cf. Mt 1:23). The name “Jesus” is not explained here as in Mt 1:21 (God saves), but Jesus shall be called Savior in 2:11 (cf. 1:69. 71. 77; 2:30; 3:6).

v. 32. He will be great and will be called Son of the Most High, and the Lord God will give him the throne of David his father…

Unlike John (1:15), Jesus is undeniably great.

In contrast to 1:35 here the title of “Son (of God)” is the classic name of the king, son of David (2Sm 7:14; Ps 2:7; 89:27).

The name of “Most High”, used frequently for God in Hellenism and in the Greek OT, is used in the NT only by Luke (Lk 1:35. 76; 6:35; 8:28; Acts 7:48; 16:17) together with Mk 5:7 and Heb 7:1.

v. 33. And he will rule over the house of Jacob forever, and of his kingdom there will be no end.”

This nationalistic messianism will be superseded in 2:32.

v. 34. But Mary said to the angel, “How can this be, since I have no relations with a man?”

Mary asks a question like Zechariah in 1:18. But while the question of Zechariah showed his unbelief (v. 20), that of Mary is received by the angel as inspired by faith which seeks understanding (vv. 35-36; cf. v. 45). In this narrative the question served to introduce a more complete revelation of the mystery of Jesus (cf. 35).

I have no relations with a man?: Literally, I do not know man. It is used in the Bible to refer to marital relationship (Gn 4:1. 17. 25; 19:8; 24:16 etc.) Mary, who is married to Joseph, is a virgin (v. 27). The angel announces to her that she is to be a mother (v. 31). As in Jgs 13:5. 8, she understands this at once. Thus she objects that she has had no marital relations with Joseph, and her question introduce the revelation of the angel.

Some suppose that the meaning of Mary’s question is: I do not wish to know any man (that is, I do not wish to have a marital relation with any man). In this case, she expresses her desire to remain a virgin. But the present tense of the verb indicates a state and not a desire.

v. 35. And the angel said to her in reply, “The holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. Therefore the child to be born will be called holy, the Son of God.

One may notice the parallel and contrast with 1:17 where John is invested with the spirit and the power of Elijah. As in the OT to the Spirit is attributed the creative and life-giving action of God (Gn 1:2; Ps 104:30) as well as the investiture of the Messiah (Is 11:1-6).

“Overshadow”: In Ex 40:35; Nm 9:18. 22; 10:34 this expression refers to the effective presence of the Lord among his people (Lk 9:34). This Biblical language is very far from that of pagan stories of divine procreation which are full of eroticism.

“Holy”: This term which means belonging to God in an exclusive way is one of the most ancient expressions of the divinity of Jesus (Acts 3:14; 4:27. 30; cf. 4:34).

An alternative translation would be: “Therefore, the child to be born will be holy and shall be called Son of God”. For Luke as well as for the OT (2Sm 7:14) the title “Son of God” refers to the Messiah (cf. Lk 4:34 e 41; Acts 9:20 and 22); But Luke also uses it as an expression par excellence of the mysterious relationship which unites Jesus with God. In his gospel, he never puts it on the lips of men (as Mt does in 14:33; 16:16; 27:40. 43.54; and Mk in 15:39). Luke only uses it on the lips of the Father (3:22; 9:35), of an angel (in this case), of evil spirits (4:3. 9. 41; 8:28) and of Jesus (10:22; cf. 20:13). At the end of the message of Gabriel the title “Son of the Most High” is recalled (v. 32) and then superseded by “Son of God” which highlights the new fullness of the divine sonship of Jesus (cf. 22:70).

v. 37. For nothing will be impossible for God.

In Gn 18:14 this expression is used of the miraculous birth of Isaac.

v. 38. Mary said, “Behold, I am the handmaid of the Lord. May it be done to me according to your word.” Then the angel departed from her.

See Ru 3:9 and 1Sm 25:14.

More than an expression of humility, it is one of faith (v. 45) and of love since in the Bible to be a servant of God is a title of glory.

3rd SUNDAY OF ADVENT (B)

He said:“I am ‘the voice of one crying out in the desert. Make straight the way of the Lord.'”

Jn 1:6-8.19-29

v.6. A man named John was sent from God.

John's testimony helped others to believe, but his own belief and therefore his capacity to bear witness to others came by direct inspiration from God. This theme is also recognized in the Synoptics (e.g. Matt. 16'7: `Blessed are you, Simon Bar Jona ! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven.') and in Paul (e.g. 1 Cor. 123).

v. 7. He came for testimony, to testify to the light, so that all might believe through him.

The Greek word for testimony can be almost transliterated into the English word `martyr'. The evangelist recognizes many persons and acts as witnessing to Jesus Christ. By the time this Gospel was written some of the more tragic meanings of `martyr' were already being recognized.

v. 19. And this is the testimony of John. When the Jews from Jerusalem sent priests and Levites [to him] to ask him, “Who are you?”

The Synoptics report no such embassy, though it is highly probable that some report on all such reformers as, the Baptist would be sought by the authorities.

v. 20. He admitted and did not deny it, but admitted,o “I am not the Messiah.”

A typical piece of Johannine style, to give emphasis and weight to what follows, viz. a negative confession of the Christ.

v. 21. So they asked him, “What are you then? Are you Elijah?”* And he said, “I am not.” “Are you the Prophet?” He answered, “No.”

In current Jewish belief it was hoped that Messiah (Christ) would come. Many had apparently thought that John was he. Elijah was expected, on the basis of Malachi as the Messiah's herald. It was further expected that one of the prophets would return (cf. 1 Macc. 4:46; 14:41; 4 Ezra 2:18). It is clear from Mark 8:28 that the appearance of Jesus had caused many to identify him with Elijah, or one of the prophets: it is not therefore surprising, nor in any way impossible, that similar eschatological hopes were raised by the activity of John. But the important point here is the evangelist's removal of the whole Baptist-Christ relationship for interpretation from the realm of such apocalyptic hopes. What is taking place in Christ is not just a scene in a drama, but the coming of the eternal Son into the world of time and history.

v. 23. He said:“I am ‘the voice of one crying out in the desert, “Make straight the way of the Lord,”’ as Isaiah the prophet said.”

For all the impropriety of identifying the Baptist with a figure of apocalyptic Judaism, John now claims before his questioners a significance truly based in the one authority they recognize - the scripture. He is `a voice crying in the wilderness' - one who speaks from a situation in which the fulfillment of God's promise is still future, as Israel's situation in the days of (second) Isaiah long ago. His cry is `Make straight the way of the Lord'. His duty is to prepare for the coming of the Lord - the one God of the Old Testament religion who was shortly to be identified, to the bewilderment of the Jews, with Jesus of Nazareth.

v. 26. John answered them, “I baptize with water; but there is one among you whom you do not recognize….

`I baptize with water': This underlines the relatively insignificant, preparatory, provisional character of John's baptism - and that of Jewish ablutions and purificatory washings. Water cleanses, but temporarily. And in so far as baptism in the water of the Jordan is concerned, neither John nor the Pharisees were of the stature or possessed of the authority to declare any baptism so far practiced as the entry into the life of the new people or Israel of God. All that John and the authorities could do belonged to the stage preparatory to the beginning of the new Israel.

But there is one among you whom you do not recognize….: John, supernaturally enlightened for his mission (1:6 cf. Mark 1:7; Luke 1:15f.), knows that the Son-Messiah is among the Jews, though as yet unmanifested. When he is, then John's true non-significant significance will be evident.

v. 27. …the one who is coming after me, whose sandal strap I am not worthy to untie.

Whose sandal strap I am not worthy to untie.: This service was a performed by slaves, who had no status and no rights. John is saying that he has no status compared with the coming one, and no rights even to be a person with no rights in the New Israel of God.

v. 28. This happened in Bethany across the Jordan, where John was baptizing.

There is textual support for Bethabara, where, according to a local tradition, John baptized. This enables the reader to avoid confusion with the Bethany where Lazarus lived, and whither (according to the evangelist [10:40; 11:6f]) he from the place where John first baptized. But it is as easy to understand the evangelist's statements in 11:1ff as a careful attempt to differentiate for the reader between two places with the same name.

2nd SUNDAY OF ADVENT (B)

And this is what he proclaimed: “One mightier than I is coming after me. I am not worthy to stoop and loosen the thongs of his sandals."

Mk 1:1-8

The first eight verses might seem to be devoted entirely to John the Baptist, but in fact they have much to say about the credentials of Jesus. For they treat John almost exclusively in his capacity as the forerunner of the Mighty One - or Messiah, though he was a considerable person in his own right and St Mark knew a good deal more about him (cf. 2:18 and 11:32).

In verses 2 and 3, passages are quoted from the Old Testament which show that the Messiah would be preceded by a forerunner, and then the subsequent account of John is almost exclusively directed to showing that he was that prophesied forerunner. Thus the point of mentioning that he lived and worked 'in the wilderness' is that he thereby fulfilled the prophecy. St Mark has no interest in locating the wilderness or helping his readers to do so; it is simply the wilderness of the prophecy.

The whole population came out to be baptized by him. This is hardly to be taken literally. The point is that nothing less than a national repentance would constitute the expected messianic preparation.

Even in v.6 the point is not simply historical. It was widely believed, on the basis of Malachi 4:5-6 that the prophesied forerunner would prove to be Elijah returned to earth, and so it is highly significant that the account of John's clothes is an almost exact echo of the account of Elijah's clothing in 2 Kings 1:8.

One historical fact about John which did not immediately tie up with the prophecies was yet too prominent to be omitted, namely the fact that he baptized. Yet even this is brought into conformity with the prophecies, for it is presented as something he “proclaimed” (v. 4). The prophecies had spoken of a 'messenger' or 'proclaimer', 'the voice of one who cries'. It is also noteworthy that when John is heard explaining his baptism, the only point he really makes about it is that it is no more than a preparatory rite, not to be compared with the baptism of the coming ‘mightier one'. That, and the explicit prophecy of the immediate coming of the mightier one, exhaust the teaching of John as reported by St Mark, though in fact John had his own message of social righteousness to proclaim and St Mark almost certainly knew of it. As a result, by the end of v. 8 the reader has the overwhelming impression that the herald of the Messiah has come and so the stage is fully set for the entry of the Messiah himself. Whoever next appears at that place and time must surely be the Messiah. And thus St Mark continues: “It happened in those days that Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee and was baptized in the Jordan by John” (v. 9).

CONTEMPORARY JEWISH BELIEFS

The Jews looked back with yearning to the days of the prophets, for in their own day God seemed in some ways very remote. The Holy Spirit had not been sent since the days of the prophets and the voice of God which had spoken directly to the prophets was no longer. heard direct - even the holiest rabbis were allowed to hear only the echo of it, the 'daughter of the voice' (bath qol) as it was called. In the old days, it was believed, God had been in the habit of piercing through the heavens to come to men's assistance (cf. Pss. 18:9, 144:5, 2 Sam. 22:10), but now, despite entreaties (Is. 64:1), that seemed a thing of the past; the sky had become a fixed barrier between heaven and earth and seemed likely to remain so, as far as the ordinary course of history was concerned. If the Jews were not without hope, that was because, as we have seen, they looked for a decisive deliverance by the hand of God himself. The heavens would once again be rent asunder and the voice and Spirit of God would descend to earth.

EXEGESIS

v. 1. The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ [the Son of God].

In another sensethe beginning is at 1:14.

Some MSS. (manuscripts) omit the words “the Son of God”, and it is hard to decide whether they are original. But the question is not of great importance, since St. Mark certainly believed that Jesus was the Son of God and that belief underlies the whole Gospel.

vv. 2-3. As it is written in Isaiah the prophet: “Behold, I am sending my messenger ahead of you; he will prepare your way. A voice of one crying out in the desert: ‘Prepare the way of the Lord, make straight his paths.’”

“In Isaiah the Prophet”: In fact verses 2 and 3 are a composite prophecy taken from Mal. 3:1 and Is. 40:3. The mistake may have arisen because the Malachi quotation was added later, or possibly St Mark took the texts, already combined, from a testimony-book, i.e. a collection of passages from the Old. Testament put together by the early Church as throwing light on the life and work of Christ.

In the Old Testament it was God himself for whom the forerunner was to prepare, and certain small changes have been introduced into the texts to make the quotations refer to Christ. This should not be taken as a sign of dishonesty or intention to deceive. Neither Christians nor Jews approached the Old Testament along the lines of modern historical or critical study. Both agreed that such passages as these referred to God's eschatological intervention, and if in the event, as Christians believed, God had chosen to intervene in the person of his Messiah, then it was right to rephrase the prophecy so as to put its precise application beyond doubt. It was their way of doing what we should perhaps do by means of an exegetical note.

vv. 4ff. John [the] Baptist appeared in the desert proclaiming a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins. People of the whole Judean countryside and all the inhabitants of Jerusalem were going out to him and were being baptized by him in the Jordan River as they acknowledged their sins.

There is no need to attempt here the full account of John that St Mark does not attempt. Suffice it to say that he was certainly a historical character, famous for his powerful moral teaching. See Mt. 3:1ff, Luke 1:5-80, and the Jewish historian Josephus (Antiquities, XVIII, 5, 2).

Despite Josephus, it is probably true that his life and teaching were controlled by expectations of the imminent coming of the kingdom of God (cf. Matt. 3:1). What he promised was that, if men would truly repent of their sins, his cleansing of their bodies in water might be an effective sign of the cleansing of their souls from guilt, so that they could become members of the New Israel, cleansed and ready for the coming judg ment.

Where the Christian tradition may perhaps have exaggerated was in suggesting - St Mark does not actually say it - that already at this early stage John identified Jesus as the coming one he was expecting. The Church may also have sharpened somewhat the contrast John drew between the messianic baptism and his own. Perhaps in fact he merely faced people with the choice: “Either my ‘water baptism’ now for forgiveness, or, very soon, the Messiah's ‘fire-baptism' - i.e. the painful prospect of (condemning) judgment.

v. 4. John [the] Baptist appeared in the desert proclaiming a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins.

“Repentance”: The Greek word (metanoein) means literally 'to change one's mind', but as it is used in the New Testament, it comes very near to the Old Testament word shubh (' to turn back', cf. e.g. Joel2:12-13), implying a coming to one's senses, a deliberate turning away from one's sinful past towards God, with the corollary of a change in conduct. A. Richardson (A Theological Word Book oj the Bible, p. 192) states that 'in its New Testament usage it implies much more than a mere" change of mind"; it involves a whole reorientation of the personality, a "conversion".'

v. 6. John was clothed in camel’s hair, with a leather belt around his waist. He fed on locusts and wild honey.

“Wild honey”:Honey from wild bees, though some think a plant product is meant.

Advisory

I will be away for several days. That means I won't be able to put up anything for Nov. 20 and 27. You may, however, find something for those Sundays by going back to the previous years (Christ the King and First Sunday of Advent - Year B).

33rd SUNDAY IN ORDINARY TIME (A)

You wicked, lazy servant! Should you not then have put my money in the bank so that I could have got it back with interest on my return?

MT 24:14-30

Next Sunday will be the Solemnity of Christ the King. It is the last Sunday of the Liturgical (or Church) year. This will be followed by the First Sunday of Advent, the beginning of the New Liturgical Year.

Last Sunday’s gospel was about the Parable of the Ten Bridesmaids. It is reminder to be prepared for the Parousia (Christ’s second coming) which also marks the end of time and the transformation of all creation.


This Sunday the gospel is about the Parable of the Ten Talents. Talent here refers to money and not ability. The first two servants gained more money for their master. The third earned nothing at all. The religious use of the word “gain” means winning converts. We may, therefore, interpret the parable as working for the spread of the Kingdom of God.

In Confirmation, we have received the responsibility of working for the spread of the Kingdom of God. We often think of this as referring to work in mission lands. But it is not limited to that. It must also take place in our families, our communities, our work place, our countries.

What does “spreading the Kingdom of God” mean? When we pray the Our Father, we pray “Your kingdom come. Your will be done on earth as it is in heaven.” That’s it. God’s Kingdom spreads when more and more people accept and live by God’s will. That is why the Kingdom of God is better translated as “the Reign of God”. And where God reigns, the people there is “maka-Diyos”.

The lesson then of the parable is responsible use of the goods of the earth in order to make our families, our communities, our work place, our countries “maka-Diyos”.

EXEGESIS

This parable continues the theme of rewards and punishments. It also explains more fully what is meant by watchfulness or readiness. It is not an inactive condition, but involves work - trading. There are again two classes of servant: those who use their master’s property, and those who do not. When the master returns to settle accounts with them, one group will be rewarded, the other punished. So it will be when the Son of man comes at the last day: those who have used his gifts faithfully will enter the life of the age to come and reign with him. Those who have not done so will be cast into hell.

This parable is preserved in three forms: Matthew's version, Luke's (Luke 19:12ff.), and the version in the later non-canonical Gospel of the Hebrews. Matthew's is probably nearest to the original, though Luke's may contain some less-developed features than Matthew's, together with some elaborations and additions of his own.

The original context may have been the crisis produced by the ministry of Jesus rather than the future parousia. The parable may have been part of Jesus' denunciation of the scribes, who had 'buried' the Law under the mass of their traditions and regulations.

v. 14. “It will be as when a man who was going on a journey called in his servants and entrusted his possessions to them.”

The day and the hour of the last judgment (v. 13) will be like a day of reckoning (v. 19).

“A man going on a journey”: It will mean, in Matthew's allegorical understanding of the parable, the ascension of Jesus to heaven. His servants will mean the Christians (cf. 24:45ff where also the Christians are spoken of as servants). His property may be the gifts of the Holy Spirit.

v. 15. To one he gave five talents; to another, two; to a third, one—to each according to his ability. Then he went away.

The talent was originally a measure of weight, then a unit of coinage; it was the highest currency denomination (cf. 18:24). This talent is probably worth P20,500.00 today.

It should be strongly emphasized that to Matthew and his readers the word would not carry any of the associations which it has for us (natural endowments, or abilities).

v. 16-17. The one who received five talents went and traded with them, and made another five. Likewise, the one who received two made another two.

“Made (ekerdesen) five talents more ... made two talents more”: Is it possible that Matthew understood this to mean made converts for the Church? The same word is used in this sense in 18:15 and in 1 Cor. 9:19-22, where R.S.V. translates it as “win”.

v. 18. But the man who received one went off and dug a hole in the ground and buried his master’s money.

Hiding money or treasure in the ground was a common method of preserving it in first-century Palestine. Cf. 13:44.

v. 19. After a long time the master of those servants came back and settled accounts with them.

“After a long time” will refer to the delay in the return of Christ; see also 24:48 and 25:5.

“Settled accounts with them”: The last judgment is likened to a day of reckoning in 18:23.

v. 21. His master said to him, ‘Well done, my good and faithful servant. Since you were faithful in small matters, I will give you great responsibilities. Come, share your master’s joy.’

“I will give you great responsibilities”: See 24:47. The reward which Christ will give to his disciples is to share with him in the reign of God over the world.

“Joy” may mean a festive dinner or banquet. See 8:11; 22:2ff; and 25:10 where the kingdom is compared to a feast.

vv. 29-30. For to everyone who has, more will be given and he will grow rich; but from the one who has not, even what he has will be taken away. And throw this useless servant into the darkness outside, where there will be wailing and grinding of teeth.’

These verses are probably Matthew's own additions to the parable. Verse 29 repeats 13:12.

“And throw this useless servant into the darkness outside” is a typically Matthean sentence (cf. 8:12, 22:13).

“Where there will be wailing and grinding of teeth”: See 8:12; 22:13; and 24:51.

32nd SUNDAY IN ORDINARY TIME (A)

Therefore, stay awake, for you know neither the day nor the hour.

MT 25:1-13

The idea of separation which will be made at the Last Judgment was first in-troduced into this section of teaching at 24:37ff.: Noah and the rest; the two men and the two women; the faithful and wise servant and the wicked servant. This distinction dominates the remainder of the discourse - the parables of the bridesmaids, the servants, and the sheep and the goats. (Cf. the similar contrasts at the end of the first section of teaching, 7:13-27.)

The bridesmaids are waiting at night for the bridegroom to come so that they can go with him to the bride's house, and then go with them both to his house, where the ceremony will take place. Five are ready when he comes, but five are not ready and so they miss the marriage feast.

The point of the parable, in its present context, is that the disciples are to be prepared, and be ready when the Lord comes and thus enter the kingdom.

The parable as it stands has no parallel in the other Gospels, but there are sayings in Luke 12:35ff and 13:23ff which are similar.

Matthew has certainly adapted the parable for its present context: the state-ment in v. 5 (that they all slumbered and slept) does not go well with the conclu-sion of the parable (Cf. v. 13. Watch therefore ….). It may be that as in the case of other parables the original reference was to the crisis caused by the ministry of Jesus, and the Church or the Evangelist has applied it to the second coming.

v. 1. Then the kingdom of heaven will be like ten virgins who took their lamps and went out to meet the bridegroom.

Then (tote): It refers to the last judgment, as also in 24:40, 25:31.

The kingdom of heaven shall be compared to ten maidens: The phrase does not mean that the kingdom is like the bridesmaids, but that the situation at the last judgment will be like the situation in which these maidens found themselves: some ready for it, some not ready.

To meet the bridegroom: The meeting place would be at his house. They would then accompany him to fetch the bride from her home.

v. 2. Five of them were foolish and five were wise.

For the distinction wise and foolish, compare the end of the first teaching sec-tion, 7:24ff (the parable of the wise man and the foolish man who each built a house).

vv. 3f. The foolish ones, when taking their lamps, brought no oil with them, but the wise brought flasks of oil with their lamps.

In the original parable, the emphasis may have been on those who had oil, and those who had none.

Oil is a symbol for repentance: cf. 6:17, “anoint your head”, i.e. repent of your sins.

v. 5. Since the bridegroom was long delayed, they all became drowsy and fell asleep.

See 24:48 and 2Pt 3:4.

v. 10. While they went off to buy it, the bridegroom came and those who were ready went into the wedding feast with him. Then the door was locked.

Those who were ready: Cf. 24:44.

Into the wedding feast: Cf. 22:2ff and Rev 19:7.

The door was shut: Cf. 7:7f. 13f.

v. 11. Afterwards the other virgins came and said, ‘Lord, Lord, open the door for us!’

Lord, Lord: Cf. 7:21f, and notice especially, “On that day many will say to me, Lord, Lord…”

v. 12. But he said in reply, ‘Amen, I say to you, I do not know you.’

“I do not know you” is an Aramaic formula meaning “I will have nothing to do with you”; cf. 7:23. “I never knew you.”

v. 13. Therefore, stay awake, for you know neither the day nor the hour.

The verse repeats the refrain of 24:36. 42. 44. 50.

Prayers for Undas

You might find this useful to make our Todos Los Santos not just a social event but a prayerful event as well.

The prayers below were taken here and there in the internet.

VISIT TO THE CEMETERY

INTRODUCTION
Reader 1:
Let us all understand that death is not an eraser. It does not remove the deeds or the meanings that existed in anyone's life. It does not make poor men rich or great men fallible. And when death comes, let us not romanticize its presence nor the person it takes from us. Let us see death for what it really is: a border that we all must cross; a border that, more than any other, defines the lives we are able to lead. Do not mourn for those who cross over. Rather, reflect on the definition they've left behind. It is the only truth we are able to know here on earth. When the definition is great, then celebrate it. When it is lacking, then learn from it and improve on it. And use it to make your own definition more truthful and loving and miraculous. (from 'Gideon' by Russell Andrews)

OPENING PRAYER
All:
Lord Jesus, our Redeemer, You willingly gave Yourself up to death so that all people might be saved and pass from death into a new life. Listen to our prayers; look with love on Your people who mourn and pray for their dead brothers and sisters.

Lord Jesus, You alone are holy and compassionate; forgive them their sins. By dying You opened the gates of life for those who believe in You; do not let them be parted from You, but by Your glorious power give them light, joy, and peace in heaven where You live forever and ever. Amen.

READING

Reader 2:
A reading from the book of Wisdom. (Wis 4: 4-15)

The virtuous man, though he die before his time, will find rest. Length of days is not what makes age honourable, nor number of years the true measure of life; understanding, this is man’s grey hairs, untarnished life, this is ripe old age. He has sought to please God, so God has loved him; as he lived among sinners, he has been taken up.

He has been carried off so that evil may not warp his understanding or treachery seduce his soul; for the fascination of evil throws the good into the shade, and the whirlwind of desire corrupts a simple heart.
Coming to perfection in so short a while, he achieved long life; his soul being pleasing to the Lord, who has taken him quickly from the wickedness around him.

Yet people look on, uncomprehending; it does not enter their heads that grace and mercy await the chosen of the Lord, and protection, God’s holy ones.

This is the Word of the Lord.

All:
Thanks be to God.

CONCLUDING PRAYER
All:
God our Father,
Your power brings us to birth,
Your providence guides our lives,
and by Your command we return to dust.

Lord, those who die still live in Your presence,
their lives change but do not end.
I pray in hope for my family,
relatives and friends,
and for all the dead known to You alone.

In company with Christ,
Who died and now lives,
may they rejoice in Your kingdom,
where all our tears are wiped away.
Unite us together again in one family,
to sing Your praise forever and ever.

Amen.

In the name of the Father….

31st SUNDAY IN ORDINARY TIME (A)

The scribes and the Pharisees have taken their seat on the chair of Moses.Therefore, do and observe all things whatsoever they tell you, but do not follow their example.

Mt 23:1-2

Jesus warns the crowds and his disciples not to follow the example of the scribes and Pharisees. They increase the duties of religion for others, but do not practice any charity; they are ostentatious in the performance of religious practices, and look for honor and reward from men in the present, rather than from God in the future. The true way is the opposite of this: to be a servant and humble in the present, and so to be exalted by God in the age to come.

Matthew has used Mark 12:37bff. as the occasion for this much longer denunciation of the scribes and Pharisees; but he has also made use of some of the Marcan wording in vv. 1f., 6f. Verse 4 is similar to Luke 11:46. Vv. 11f. may be alternative versions of sayings in Mark 9:35, Luke 18:14, etc. Verses 3, 5, 8ff. have no parallel in the other Gospels.

v. 1. Then Jesus spoke to the crowds and to his disciples….

Cf. the first section of teaching, which is -given to the disciples in the presence of the crowds (5:1f, 7:28).

v. 2. Saying, “The scribes and the Pharisees have taken their seat on the chair of Moses.

The chair of Moses is not just a- figurative expression, meaning 'have the teaching authority of Moses'. Moses' seat is the name of a piece of furniture in the synagogue, the seat from which the teacher delivered the sermon. Cf. Luke 4:20ff.

v. 3. Therefore, do and observe all things whatsoever they tell you, but do not follow their example. For they preach but they do not practice.

Their teaching is to be followed, but not their example. Cf. 7:21ff. for the antithe-sis between saying and doing.

In “they preach but do not practice”, “preach” is an unfortunate translation of the Greek word (legein): in Matthew, preach is a different word (kerussein) and it means to proclaim the coming of the kingdom; the word used here means 'speak', 'talk'.

It is difficult to believe that Jesus really commanded obedience to the teaching of the scribes and Pharisees; this seems to have been the attitude of Matthew or of one of his sources. See 5:19.

v. 4. They tie up heavy burdens [hard to carry] and lay them on people’s shoulders, but they will not lift a finger to move them.

They tie up heavy burdens: See 16:19, 18:18 for binding and loosing, i.e, making regulations and exceptions. The charge against the scribes and Pharisees here is that they increase the regulations; contrast what Jesus says of his own teaching, My yoke is easy, and my burden is light (I1:30); and the two commandments on which all the law and the prophets depend (22:40). '

They will not lift a finger to move them: The meaning of this may be that they have nothing positive and constructive to say to those who have broken the laws.

v. 5. All their works are performed to be seen. They widen their phylacteries and lengthen their tassels.

A different charge begins in this verse - the charge of religious ostentation. It is a repetition of 6:1ff. “Beware of practicing your piety before men in order to be seen by them”. Examples of this follow.

They widen their phylacteries: This is the only place in the New Testament where phylacteries are mentioned. Apparently they were texts written on parchment and worn on the forehead and forearm at times of prayer, perhaps to ward off demons.

And lengthen their tassels: The Israelite was obliged to wear 'tassels' on the four corners of his outer garment, according to Num. 15:38f. and Deut. 22:12. See also 9:20 and 14:36. The Marcan parallel is: Beware of the scribes, who like to go about in long robes (Mark 12:38). Matthew may be explaining what long robes means.

v. 6. They love places of honor at banquets, seats of honor in synagogues….

See Mark 12:39. The seats of honor in the synagogues were those on the bench in front of the ark where the scrolls were kept, facing the congregation.

v. 7. … greetings in marketplaces, and the salutation ‘Rabbi.’

Greetings in the marketplaces (from Mark 12:38): The rule was that 'a man must salute his superior in the knowledge of the Law'; therefore to love salutations is to love to be, or to be recognized as, superior to others.

And the salutation ‘Rabbi.’: The word rabbi originally meant 'great' and so, 'lord, master, teacher'. In this Gospel, Jesus is addressed as rabbi only by Judas Iscariot (26:25. 49).

v. 8. As for you, do not be called ‘Rabbi.’ You have but one teacher, and you are all brothers.

“As for you” is emphatic in the Greek. The disciples are to be different from the scribes and Pharisees. Cf. 20:26.

You have one teacher: i.e. Jesus.

And you are all brothers: The word 'brother' was used of members of the Church; cf. 1Cor. 8:11. The idea of brothers leads on to the idea of father in the next verse.

v. 9. Call no one on earth your father; you have but one Father in heaven.

Call no one your father on earth: The title' abba', father, was used of the patriarchs and great Jewish teachers of the past.

You have but one Father in heaven: The fatherhood of God is more frequently mentioned in this Gospel than in the others; and Matthew is particularly fond of the antithesis on earth ... in heaven.

v. 10. Do not be called ‘Master’; you have but one master, the Messiah.

This verse repeats v. 8; the word master (kathegetes) means 'teacher', possibly 'interpreter'.

v. 11. The greatest among you must be your servant.

Notice the play on “rabbi” (great) in v. 8. The saying appears in different forms elsewhere in the Gospels.

Some translations have “shall be your servant”. This is then to be taken as a warning of what will be the punishment for pride, rather than the way of humility as the means to greatness.

v. 12. Whoever exalts himself will be humbled; but whoever humbles himself will be exalted.

The passive voice (will be humbled, will be exalted) refers to the punishment and reward that God will give at the judgment.

30th SUNDAY IN ORDINARY TIME (A)

You shall love the Lord, your God, with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.You shall love your neighbor as yourself.

Mt 22:34-40

The Pharisees plan another attack on Jesus, when they hear that their rivals, the Sadducees, have been silenced. One of them asks Jesus the question which was frequently discussed among the rabbis, Which is the great commandment in the Law? Jesus replies that the first and great commandment is the commandment to love God; and that there is another like it, to love your neighbor as yourself. Both of these commandments are quotations from the Old Testament: the first is part of the words which every Jew was expected to recite every day, the Shema. The second is like an answer which a rabbi had given to a similar question, 'What thou hatest for thyself, do not to thy neighbors.' It is possible, though not certain, that the commandments to love God and to love your neighbor had been brought together by the Jews in pre-Christian times.

Matthew here considerably shortens Mark 12:28ff, omitting Mark 12:32-34. There are agreements here with Luke 10:25ff, and it has sometimes been thought that Matthew and Luke had in addition a source other than Mark for this section.

v. 34. When the Pharisees heard that he had silenced the Sadducees, they gathered together….

In Mark, the question is asked by a scribe. Matthew brings back the Pharisees.
They gathered together (synechthesan epi to auto) is a quotation from Ps. 2:2 [(The rulers) take counsel together] which Matthew uses again at 26:3.

v. 35. And one of them [a scholar of the law] tested him by asking…

A lawyer (nomikos): This is the only place where Matthew uses this word. Luke uses it six times. Mark never. Even here in Matthew it is omitted by a small group of authorities, and may be a later addition, from Luke 10:5.

To test him: Matthew adds these words; cf. 22:18.

v. 36. “Teacher, which commandment in the law is the greatest?”

Teacher is another Matthean addition, to make the introduction to this question conform to the introductions to the two previous questions, vv. 16 and 24.

v. 37. He said to him, “You shall love the Lord, your God, with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind."

The quotation is from Dt. 6:5.

This verse is part of the “shema”, the basic and essential creed of Judaism, the sentence with which every Jewish service opens and the fist text which every Jew-ish child commits to memory.

v. 39. The second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself.

“The second is like it” has the sense of “the second is equally important”. The two commandments are equally important but NOT interchangeable. Loving one’s neighbor does not mean you don’t have to mind loving God anymore and loving God does not require you to love your neighbor anymore.

The quotation is from Lv. 19:18; it has been quoted before in this Gospel at 5:43 and 19:19. “As yourself” means loving one’s neighbor totally, that is with your whole heart etc. The second commandment is not a recommendation to love oneself first and then one’s neighbor. It does not also counsel loving one’s neighbor in the same way as you love yourself.

v. 40. The whole law and the prophets depend on these two commandments.”

Mark had “There is no commandment greater than these”; Matthew changes it, to say that all the law and the prophets can be deduced from these two commandments; cf. 7:12. This was the teaching of the Jewish rabbis, and Matthew is here bringing Jesus into line with them.

29th SUNDAY IN ORDINARY TIME (A)

Repay to Caesar what belongs to Caesar and to God what belongs to God.

Mt 22:14-21

The rest of this chapter describes the questions which the Jewish leaders ask Jesus, and the question which he puts to them. Their aim is to trap him, so that they may have a charge to bring against him before the council of the Jews, and before the Roman governor.

First come the Pharisees with the Herodians: they begin with a flattering introduction, and then ask whether it is lawful for the Jews to pay the Roman taxes. Jesus perceives the reason why they ask this question: it is a test question, to see whether Jesus will declare himself on the side of the zealots who refuse to pay, or on the side of those who collaborate with the Romans.

Jesus says that the money for the tax bears the emperor's portrait and name, and is therefore his; so it should be paid to him. But then he goes beyond the terms of the question, and demands that the Jews should also return to God what belongs to him; and we recall here that in the parable of the vineyard the Jews were accused of not rendering to God the fruit which was his (21:33ff).

v. 15. Then the Pharisees went off and plotted how they might entrap him in speech.

To entangle (pagideuein): The word is rare in Greek, and is only used here in the New Testament. It is a hunting term, meaning to 'snare' or 'trap'.

v. 16. They sent their disciples to him, with the Herodians, saying, “Teacher, we know that you are a truthful man and that you teach the way of God in accordance with the truth. And you are not concerned with anyone’s opinion, for you do not regard a person’s status.

Their disciples: Disciples of the Pharisees are only mentioned here and in Mark 2:18. The word 'disciples' implies a teacher, and the Pharisees were not teachers, except for those of them who were also scribes.

The Herodians: They were the supporters of Herod the Great and of his family; they favored collaboration with the Romans, who were ruling Palestine with the Herods as their puppet-kings. The Herodians would have been in favor of paying taxes to Caesar; the Pharisees would not.

v. 17. Tell us, then, what is your opinion: Is it lawful to pay the census tax to Caesar or not?”

Tell us, then, what is your opinion: It is a Matthean addition. Cf. 17:25.

v. 18. Knowing their malice, Jesus said, “Why are you testing me, you hypocrites?

Aware of their malice ... you hypocrites: Possibly Matthew has in mind the attack on the hypocrisy of the scribes and Pharisees in Chapter 23
.

v. 19. Show me the coin that pays the census tax.” Then they handed him the Roman coin.

As in I7:24ff., it seems as though Jesus and his disciples have no money.

v. 20. He said to them, “Whose image is this and whose inscription?”

Whose likeness and inscription is this? The denarius would bear a portrait of the emperor Tiberius (A.D. 14-37) and this inscription: Ti[berius] Caesar Divi Aug[usti] F[ilius] Augustus.

v. 21. They replied, “Caesar’s.” At that he said to them, “Then repay to Caesar what belongs to Caesar and to God what belongs to God.”

Render (apodote) is a different word from pay (literally, 'give', didonai) which was used in v. 17; the change in words may mean, The taxes are not a gift; but a debt. The same word, render (apodidonai) was used in 21:41 of the tenants who would render to God his fruit.

28th SUNDAY IN ORDINARY TIME (A)

He said to him, ‘My friend, how is it that you came in here without a wedding garment?’ But he was reduced to silence.

Mt 22:1-14

THE PARABLE OF THE INVITATIONS TO THE WEDDING

Matthew inserts two more parables: the marriage feast and the wedding gar-ment. The first (marriage feast) has been highly allegorized. A king knvites guests to his son’s wedding feast, but they refuse to come. So he sends other servants, and they still refuse to come, and ill-treat and kill the servants. So the king sends his army and burns their city. Then the king sends the servants to find other guests - as many as they can find, both bad and good. .

We should notice first the similarities between this parable and the parable of the vineyard which it follows in Matthew: in both, two groups of servants are sent; those to whom the servants are sent refuse to do what the servants say, and kill some of them; those who have refused to obey are themselves destroyed; and they are replaced by others, who make up for what the first have failed to do.

Matthew clearly means his readers to understand the two parables in the same way: he is describing God's dealings with the Jews, their disobedience to him, and the new covenant which will include the gentiles.

The allegorical elements in the story, which strike the reader as strange and unnatural, e.g. the killing of those who bring an invitation to a wedding, the de-struction of guests, and burning of a city while a meal is waiting to be served, are no doubt additions, made by the Church or the Evangelist to an earlier and more straightforward parable. To some extent these additions show the influence of the parable of the vineyard in its Matthean form (e.g. 22:4 repeats words in 21:36).

Moreover, there is a similar parable in Luke 14:16ff. which is in some ways less allegorized, in other ways more developed - e.g. the reasons why the guests do not come are given more fully.

It is difficult to reconstruct the original parable of Jesus out of Matthew’s al-legory, but the purpose of it may have been to defend his fellowship with the tax collectors and sinners on the grounds that the Pharisees had refused his invitation to repent and to join him at his table, which was the anticipation of the messianic feast.

Matthew inserts this parable, and the parable which follows, between .Mark 12:12 and Mark 12:13 (= Matthew 22:15). It is usually thought that this parable, and the parable in Luke I4:6ff. are independent expansions of an original shorter parable; but it may be that here too Luke has used Matthew.

v. 1. Jesus again in reply spoke to them in parables, saying,

This verse is Matthew's composition, to introduce the two parables which he is inserting here.

v. 2. “The kingdom of heaven may be likened to a king who gave a wedding feast for his son.

The kingdom of heaven may be likened to: This method of introducing a parable is a translation of an Aramaic expression, and it means “It is the case with…as with…”. The kingdom is not like a king but a wedding feast.

A king: The king here is God, as in 5:35 (Jerusalem is the city of the great King), 18:23(a king who wished to settle accounts with his servants). In other places in this Gospel, Jesus himself is the King, e.g. 25:34.

A marriage feast: The kingdom is compared to a marriage feast again at 25:10, and in Rev. 19:7ff.

v. 3. He dispatched his servants to summon the invited guests to the feast, but they refused to come.

Cf. the first group of servants sent for the fruit of the vineyard in 21:34f.; perhaps Matthew means the former prophets in both places.

v. 4. A second time he sent other servants, saying, ‘Tell those invited: “Behold, I have prepared my banquet, my calves and fattened cattle are killed, and everything is ready; come to the feast.”’

Cf. the second group of servants in 21:36. One would expect these to be . the latter prophets, though it has been suggested that the apostles are meant, and their mission to Israel, 10:5ff.

vv. 5 &6. Some ignored the invitation and went away, one to his farm, another to his business. The rest laid hold of his servants, mistreated them, and killed them.

The story is inexplicable unless we recall the interpretation - the refusal of Israel to repent, and the persecution of the prophets (or of the apostles).

v. 7. The king was enraged and sent his troops, destroyed those murderers, and burned their city.

Cf. 21:41.43. The city stands for Jerusalem, destroyed by the Romans in A.D. 70.

v. 8. Then he said to his servants, ‘The feast is ready, but those who were invited were not worthy to come.

Those invited were not worthy: Cf. the instructions to the apostles in 10:13ff.

v. 9. Go out, therefore, into the main roads and invite to the feast whomever you find.

Go therefore (poreuesthe oun): Cf. the words with which Jesus sends the apostles to the Gentiles: Go therefore and make disciples of all nations (poreuthentes oun) 28:19. The new mission of the servants corresponds to the mission to the Gentiles which begins after the resurrection.

v. 10. The servants went out into the streets and gathered all they found, bad and good alike, and the hall was filled with guests.

Both bad and good anticipates the next parable, in which a 'bad' guest is cast out of the wedding hall.

THE PARABLE OF THE WEDDING GARMENT

The second parable continues the story of the first: the king who has invited the guests comes into the hall to inspect them, and finds one who has no wedding garment: the king commands him to be thrown out. Again the parable has been allegorized - the outside of the hall is described as the outer darkness, where men will weep and gnash their teeth; that is, the hall is the life of the age to come, and outside it is hell. Also, it is clear that originally this was a separate parable; how could a guest be blamed for not being correctly dressed for a wedding, when he had been brought in in the manner described at the end of the previous parable?

There is a similar parable attributed to a rabbi who lived about the year A.D. 80, which describes a king sending invitations to a banquet, but giving no time. The wise attired themselves, while the foolish went on with their work. Suddenly the summons came, and those who were not dressed in clean clothes were not' admitted to the banquet. If Jesus' parable was originally used for the same pur-pose, then it taught readiness, that is, repentance; cf. 25:1ff.

Matthew uses it to show that it is not enough to hear the preaching: there must be a response to it, in good works: Bear fruit that befits repentance (3:8); compare the seed sown on the good soil, he who hears the word and understands it; he indeed bears fruit… (13:23). Matthew says that many are called - that is, invited into the kingdom by the preaching of the gospel; but few are chosen - that is, few will respond, and are worthy. The Jews themselves have demonstrated this principle: it will operate among the Gentiles also; they will be judged at the end of the world (see 25:31ff.). Cf. also the parable of the net (13:47ff.) for the idea of good and bad together in the Church.

These verses have no parallel in the other Gospels; and the latter part is full of Matthean expressions.

v. 11. But when the king came in to meet the guests he saw a man there not dressed in a wedding garment.

When the king came in to look at the guests: This is the last judgment; com-pare the parables in Chapter 13 (e.g. weeds of the field, the net). and in Chapter 25 (the ten bridesmaids, the talents. the sheep and the goats): in all of these there is a division or sorting out of the bad and the good.

A man who had no wedding garment: The wedding garment was not, apparently, a special garment, but ordinary clean clothes. It stands for the new life of good works which is to follow the preaching of the gospel. The fine linen is the righteous deeds of the saints (Rev. 19:8).

v. 12. He said to him, ‘My friend, how is it that you came in here without a wed-ding garment?’ But he was reduced to silence.

Friend (hetaire): A word used only by Matthew in the New Testament, and always of people who are in the wrong; see 20:13.

How did you get in here without a wedding garment? The only demand which John and Jesus make is that men should repent in order to enter the king-dom (3:2, 4:17). This repentance expresses itself in a life of good works, or chari-ty. The man has tried to enter without this new life, and therefore he is condemned.

He was speechless: The Jews thought of good works as 'intercessors' before God; e.g. 'He who fulfils a command gains for himself an intercessor'. Cf Acts 10:4. The man has done no good works. Therefore, he is silent and there is no one to speak for him.

v. 13. Then the king said to his attendants, ‘Bind his hands and feet, and cast him into the darkness outside, where there will be wailing and grinding of teeth.’

The attendants: A different word in the Greek from the servants in the pre-vious parable. They stand for the angels; Cf. 13:39ff.

Bind him hand and foot: Cf. the command to the servants in the parable of the weeds of the field, Gather the weeds first, and bind them in bundles to be burned (13:30).

Cast him into the outer darkness; there men will weep and gnash their teeth: For the same expression; see 8:12 and cf. 13:42. 50; 24:51; 25:30.

v. 14. Many are invited, but few are chosen.

For many are called, but few are chosen: The word called (kletoi) is from the same root as the word translated invited in vv. 3ff.

Chosen (eklektoi) means chosen by God for the life of the kingdom; the chosen or elect will be gathered into the kingdom by the angels (24:31). The saying may be a Jewish proverb; and it means that though many are offered the gospel by the preaching of the prophets and apostles, few will respond to it by repentance and good works.

27TH SUNDAY IN ORDINARY TIME - A

There was a landowner who planted a vineyard, put a hedge around it, dug a wine press in it, and built a tower. Then he leased it to tenants and went on a journey

Mt 21:33-43

MATTHEW 21:33-41

The parable is an allegory of God’s dealings with his people. The description of the vineyard at the beginning quotes a passage from Isaiah, in which the prophet spoke of Israel in terms of a vineyard, and her disobedience in terms of wild grapes. The servants stand for the prophets, and the son and heir for Jesus himself. The tenants are the chief priests and other leaders of the Jews, as they themselves recognize (21:45). The son is killed, the tenants will be put to death, and the vineyard will be let out to other tenants, just as Jesus will be crucified, Jerusalem destroyed, and the Gentiles will replace the Jews as God’s people.

Matthew follows Mark again (12:1-9). Matthew, however, makes small changes to Mark’s text in order to bring the allegory into line with the history of God and Israel.

v.33. Hear another parable. There was a landowner, who planted a vineyard, put a hedge around it, dug a wine press in it, and built a tower. Then he leased it to tenants and went on a journey.

Hear another parable: See 13:18 for a similar introduction.

There was a landowner: Mark simply says: “A man”. Matthew uses “land-downer” for God in other parables (20:1).

Who planted a vineyard, put a hedge around it, dug a wine press in it, and built a tower: This is a quotation from Is 5:2.

He leased it to tenants: The lease is the covenant which God made with Israel at the time of the Patriarchs and again after the Exodus.

And went on a journey: Many estates in Galilee in the first century were owned by absentee foreign landlords.

v. 34. When vintage time drew near, he sent his servants* to the tenants to obtain his produce.

When vintage time drew near: Literally: “When the season of fruit drew near.” The words are similar to Mark’s words at the beginning of his Gospel: “The time (or “season”) is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God has drawn near (or “is at hand”)” (Mk 1:15).

His servants: Matthew is thinking of the prophets

His produce: Or “his fruit”. Matthew of thinking of all that is due to God from man.

v. 35. But the tenants seized the servants and one they beat, another they killed, and a third they stoned.

Another they killed, and a third they stoned: Matthew added “stoned another” in order to recall the persecution of the prophets in Israel (cf. 23:37). The only prophet whose stoning is recorded in the OT is Zechariah, the son of Jehoiada (2 Chron 24:20f). It is possible that there were apocryphal lives of the prophets (for ex., The Martyrdom of Isaiah) which recorded the killing of the prophets. See also Heb 11:37.

v. 36. Again he sent other servants, more numerous than the first ones, but they treated them in the same way.

Other servants, more numerous than the first ones: Matthew’s second and larger group may correspond to the “latter prophets”. Mark has a third servant being sent but Matthew omits it perhaps in order to fit the Jewish distinction between the “former prophets” and the “latter prophets”. In later Jewish literature, the “former prophets” were from Joshua to 2 Kings (which were thought to be the works of Joshua, Samuel and Jeremiah) and the “latter prophets” were from Isaiah to Malachi, omitting Daniel.

v. 37. Finally, he sent his son to them, thinking, ‘They will respect my son.’

Contrast this to Mark’s “He had one other to send, a beloved son”. It is not clear why he has chosen to omit the word “beloved” which he has used at the baptism and transfiguration (3:17. 17:5) and in the quotation from Isaiah in 12:18.

v. 38. But when the tenants saw the son, they said to one another, ‘This is the heir. Come, let us kill him and acquire his inheritance.’

If the landlord was a foreigner living abroad, the tenants would have hoped that if he had only one son then at the death of the son and of the owner, they would be able to take possession of the vineyard.

v. 39. They seized him, threw him out of the vineyard, and killed him.

Matthew has re-arranged Mark in light of the death of Jesus outside Jerusa-lem. Mark’s order was more natural. See Mk 12:8.

v. 40. What will the owner of the vineyard do to those tenants when he comes?”

As in vv. 25 and 31, Jesus forces the Jewish leaders to answer the question for themselves and thus condemn themselves. In Mark the question is rhetorical and Jesus answers it himself.

v. 41. They answered* him, “He will put those wretched men to a wretched death and lease his vineyard to other tenants who will give him the produce at the proper times.”

He will put those wretched men to a wretched death: Mark simply writes: “He will come, put the tenants to death.” Matthew is more conscious of the wrath of God against the Jews and may have in mind the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70.

And lease his vineyard to other tenants who will give him the produce at the proper times: Matthew expands Mark’s “and give the vineyard to others”. If the first covenant was suggested by the first lease (v. 33), then this second lease will suggest a new covenant (26:28). Then the other tenants would be the Church, the faithful, from both the Jews and the Gentiles, who give the fruit of their good works to God.

MATTHEW 21:42-43

The parable of the vineyard tells in allegorical form the main events in the dealings of God with his people: covenant, prophecy, the coming of Christ, the crucifixion, the Church. One notable event is absent – the Resurrection. This is now made good by the addition of an OT quotation, which foretells the reversal of men’s judgment by God. And just as men’s rejection of Jesus will be reversed by God, so alsothe plan of the tenants to acquire the vineyard will be forestalled by him, and he will give it to others.

v. 42. Jesus said to them: “Have you never red in the Scriptures….”

This is a quotation from Ps 118:22f. The same verses are quoted in Act 4:11, 1 Pt 2:7. See also Mt 21:9 and 23:19. The stone is Jesus and the builders are the Jewish leaders.

Cornerstone: Or also “keystone”. It is a position of importance. Jesus’ resurrection will be marvelous in the eyes of both the Jews and the Christians.

v. 43. Therefore, I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people that will produce its fruit.

Already in v. 41 Matthew emphasizes that the kingdom of God (vineyard) belongs to God and not to man and therefore, he can give it to whomever he wills.

And given to a people that will produce its fruit: Produce is the word which is also translated “bear” (3:8 and 10). The Christians are thought of as fruitful trees (Ps 1:3).

26th SUNDAY IN ORDINARY TIME (A)

A man had two sons. He came to the first and said, ‘Son, go out and work in the vineyard today.’

Mt 21:28-32

In Mt 21:18-22 the question of Jesus revealed the unbelief of the Jewish leaders in John the Baptist. This unbelief is pressed home in the parable of the two sons: one of them obeys the father and the other does not. This is applied to the tax collectors and prostitutes who obeyed John, and the Jewish leaders who did not.

As in other places in the Gospels, a parable of Jesus seems to have been used here for a different purpose from that which Jesus himself had used it. The origi-nal parable (vv. 28-30) was probably used to illustrate the difference between saying and doing. Compare it to 7:21 and 12:50. This kind of teaching may have been the original setting of the parable.

v. 28. “What is your opinion? A man had two sons. He came to the first and said, ‘Son, go out and work in the vineyard today.’

“What is your opinion?”: This is a Matthean introduction. See 17:25.

Vineyard: See v. 33 where vineyard stands for Israel. In 20:1 working in the vineyard means serving God in this age, for a reward in the age to come.

v. 29. He said in reply, ‘I will not,’ but afterwards he changed his mind and went.

He changed his mind (metameletheis): He repented. Only Matthew among the four evangelists uses this word. See 27:3.

v. 30. The man came to the other son and gave the same order. He said in reply, ‘Yes, sir,’ but did not go.

Yes, sir. “Sir” here is the word which is also translated “Lord” (kyrie). It is the son who does not go who say “Lord”. See 7:21 where it says that it is not eve-ryone who says “Lord, Lord” who does the will of the Father.

v. 31. Which of the two did his father’s will?” They answered, “The first.” Jesus said to them, “Amen, I say to you, tax collectors and prostitutes are entering the kingdom of God before you.

Tax collectors and prostitutes. They believed and obeyed John. Therefore, they precede the chief priests and the elders (v. 23) into the kingdom.

Kingdom of God. This is unusual in Matthew who prefers kingdom of hea-ven. See 12:28; 19:24; 21:43.

v. 32. When John came to you in the way of righteousness, you did not believe him; but tax collectors and prostitutes did. Yet even when you saw that, you did not later change your minds and believe him.

This verse explains v. 31.

You did not later change your minds: The same expression was used in v. 29.

25th SUNDAY IN ORDINARY TIME (A)

Am I not free to do as I wish with my own money? Are you envious because I am generous?

Mt 20:1-16

Matthew inserts a parable at this point to illustrate the teaching about rewads in the kingdom which is also the subject of the previous paragraph (19:23-30).

The parable is the story of an owner of a vineyard who employed men at different times of the day and at the end of the day paid them all the same wage. Matthew understands the owner as being God and the payments as his reward, which is eternal life.

He also relates the parable to the saying about the last and the first which precedes (19:30) and follows (20:16) it. The men who are employed first are paid last and those who are employed last are paid first.

The parable came to Matthew from a non-Marcan source and so it probably came to him without any context in the teaching and ministry of Jesus. And so it was Matthew who chose this to be the context of the parable.

The order of paying the workmen is of no real significance in the story. It merely permits those who worked first to see how much those who worked after them received. This gives them reason to suppose that they would get more in wages.

Secondly, as all the workmen received the same payment, the parable does not illustrate the meaning of the saying about first and the last which according to Matthew was the different rewards that God would give to different people.

The original emphasis of the parable probably may be found in the saying of the owner: “I chose to give to this last as I give to you” (v. 14). God is not answerable to man for what he does with his rewards. He can do as he pleases with his gifts and his generosity is not something that men can complain about.

If we would interpret the parable in light of the ministry of Jesus, the setting would probably be the controversy of Jesus with the Pharisees over his treatment of tax collectors and sinners. He welcomes them. He eats and drinks with them. He invites them to the kingdom because God who sent him is generous with his forgiveness and mercy. Those who complain are the Pharisees who, like the older brother in the parable of the Prodigal Son, claim more from the Father because of their good works (Lk 15:11ff).

On the other hand, Matthew and the church has taken this parable to teach about the judgment at the end of this age.

v.1. The kingdom of heaven is like a landowner who went out at dawn to hire laborers for his vineyard.

The formula does not mean that the kingdom is like a landowner, but that it is like the reckoning which the landowner makes at the end of the day.

For the idea of the judgment as a time of reckoning of accounts, see 18:23 and 25:14ff.

At dawn = early. About 6am.

v. 2. After agreeing with them for the usual daily wage, he sent them into his vineyard.

Usual daily wage. A denarius a day was ‘a workman’s average daily wage’.

v. 3. Going out about nine o'clock, the landowner saw others standing idle in the marketplace….

Nine o’clock = third hour. That is between 8 and 9 am.

Standing idle. Perhaps “sit about idly gossiping”.

v. 4. And he said to them, 'You too go into my vineyard, and I will give you what is just.' So they went off.

It is important to notice that the sum of money to be paid for the work done is only fixed beforehand with the first group of workers (v. 2). The landowner is silent regarding the wage of the other groups. This accounts for the situation at the end of the parable.

v. 5. And he went out again around noon, and around three o'clock, and did likewise.

Noon = sixth hour. Between 11 am and noon.

Three o’clock = ninth hour. Between 2 and 3 pm.

v. 6. Going out about five o'clock, the landowner found others standing around, and said to them, 'Why do you stand here idle all day?'

Five o’clock = eleventh hour. Between 4 and 5 pm. The work was urgent if the owner took on more laborers so late in the day. It was vintage and the work must be done before the rains came.

Why do you stand here idle all day?. Note the commentary on v. 3. Perhaps the landowner intended this to be a reproach. There would be plenty of work at this time of the year.

v. 7. They answered, 'Because no one has hired us.' He said to them, 'You too go into my vineyard.'

This may be an excuse to cover up their laziness, rather than tell the truth.

v. 8. When it was evening the owner of the vineyard said to his foreman, 'Summon the laborers and give them their pay, beginning with the last and ending with the first.'

The owner of the vineyard. The word translated “owner” is the Greek word often used for God (kyrios = Lord).

Their pay (ton misthon). Perhaps the usual daily wage (denarius) mentioned in vv. 2 and 9f. The same word is translated as “reward” in 5:12.

Beginning with the last and ending with the first. This may mean no more than “Pay them all, including the last”. In any case the order of payment has no special importance except that it allowed the situation which follows to develop. Matthew has related it to the sayings in 19:30 and 20:16.

vv. 11-12. And on receiving it they grumbled against the landowner, saying, 'These last ones worked only one hour, and you have made them equal to us, who bore the day's burden and the heat.'

If the parable originally referred to the Pharisees and their grumbling at Jesus’ treatment of the sinners, then this will mean that Jesus is treating sinners with the same mercy as that which he has for those who have “borne the burden” of the Law.

For the idea of the Law as a burden, see Acts 15:28 and 11:28.

v. 13. He said to one of them in reply, 'My friend, I am not cheating you. Did you not agree with me for the usual daily wage?”

Friend (hetaire). The word as used in Matthew implies reproach. See 22:12 and 26:50.

v. 14. Take what is yours and go. What if I wish to give this last one the same as you?

There may be a contrast here between “what belongs to you” (that is, what you have earned and is therefore now yours) and the gift of the vineyard owner (to give to this last). The denarius was paid as a wage to the first group, but was given as a gift to the last group.

The same as you. The emphasis is on the choice of the owner: “I wish to give and there is no appeal against my decision because I am the master of my own property.”

v. 15. Or am I not free to do as I wish with my own money? Are you envious because I am generous?'

God’s mercy revealed in Jesus welcoming sinners is inexplicable to the Phari-sees, but it is undeniable that God is free to do as he wishes. See Rom 9”14ff.

“Are you envious because I am generous?”. Literally, “Is your eye evil because I am good?” An evil eye is “one that looks with envy or jealousy upon other people.” Mark had used it for envy in Mk 7:22.

v. 16. Thus, the last will be first, and the first will be last.

The verse repeats in the reverse order of members the saying in 19:30.

24rd SUNDAY IN ORDINARY TIME (A)

So will my heavenly Father do to you, unless each of you forgives his brother from his heart.

Mt 18:21-35

VV. 21-22

Chapter 18 of Matthew contains teachings regarding life in the Church. In last Sunday’s gospel, Matthew gives instruction on what is to be done with an erring member of the Church. Peter now raises the question of sin between brothers, that is, between fellow Christians. Jesus says that there is no limitation in granting forgiveness. The individual Christian is in no position of authority to determine where to draw the line.

v. 22. Jesus answered, “I say to you, not seven times but seventy-seven times.”

The numbers “seven” and “seventy-seven” are used in Genesis 4:24 regarding vengeance, which is the opposite of forgiveness which is being taught here.

The Greek word used may be rendered as “seventy times seven” and “seventy-seven times”. But the meaning is the same: unlimited forgiveness.

The motivation is explained in the next paragraph. What the disciple has to forgive is minute compared with what God has already forgiven him.

VV. 23-35. THE PARABLE OF THE UNFORGIVING OFFICIAL

This parable is found only in Matthew.

The section regarding the relations between Christians ends with this parable. A court official had been shown great mercy by the king. Yet this same official failed to show mercy to one of his equals over a much, much smaller matter.

Jesus says that this is the situation in which the disciples find themselves. God has forgiven them their sins which are innumerable. But at the last judgment this remission will be revoked, if they have not shown mercy to one another in the Church – not mercy in word, but “from the heart”, that is, in reality.

v. 23. That is why the kingdom of heaven may be likened to a king who decided to settle accounts with his servants.

That is why = Therefore: This parable is linked to the answer given by Jesus to Peter regarding forgiveness. But probably the parable of the unforgiving official is not connected to the teaching of unlimited forgiveness because this is not the point of the parable. This parable probably belonged to the series of teachings regarding the last judgment. Cf. Mt 25:31ff.

The kingdom of heaven may be likened to a king…. The judgment which comes before the kingdom begins is like the settling of accounts. Note the petitions on the kingdom and the forgiveness of sins in the Our Father (6:10. 12). See also the settling of accounts in the parable of the talents (25:19).

v. 24. When he began the accounting, a debtor was brought before him who owed him a huge amount.

A debtor was brought: The debtor was probably a governor of a province, re-sponsible for the payment of taxes. It is understood that he was brought from prison.

A huge amount: P 205,173,532.00

v. 25. Since he had no way of paying it back, his master ordered him to be sold, along with his wife, his children, and all his property, in payment of the debt.

The sale would not even realize a fraction of the debt owed. Therefore, it is a punishment.

v. 26. At that, the servant fell down, did him homage, and said, ‘Be patient with me, and I will pay you back in full.’

It is clear that the official has no way of fulfilling this pledge. The point here is that the sin of man against God is a debt (16:12) which cannot be wiped out by man.

v. 27. Moved with compassion the master of that servant let him go and forgave him the loan.

The king does not take up the pledge of repayment of the official. He forgives the debt completely.

For pity or compassion on the part of the king, see 9:16; 14:14; 15:32; 20:34.

The works of Jesus have been signs of this diving forgiveness.

v. 28. When that servant had left, he found one of his fellow servants who owed him a much smaller amount. He seized him and started to choke him, demanding, ‘Pay back what you owe.’

A small amount: P 136,782.00. Compare this to P 205,173,532.00.

v. 29. Falling to his knees, his fellow servant begged him, ‘Be patient with me, and I will pay you back.’

The official repeats the request made by his fellow official before the king.

v. 30. But he refused. Instead, he had him put in prison until he paid back the debt.

Because the sum is too small, there is no question of selling the debtor. See 5:24ff.

v. 31. Now when his fellow servants saw what had happened, they were deeply disturbed, and went to their master and reported the whole affair.

Probably “shocked” would be the better word. See 17:23.

v. 33. Should you not have had pity on your fellow servant, as I had pity on you?

The question asked of the official is really the question being asked of the hearers of the parable and which they have to answer for themselves.

v. 34. Then in anger his master handed him over to the torturers until he should pay back the whole debt.

Torturers: The official might have hidden part of the money.

Until he should pay back the whole debt: He will never be able to raise so large a sum. Therefore, his imprisonment will be for life.

v. 35. So will my heavenly Father do to you, unless each of you forgives his brother from his heart.”

This is probably a Matthean application of the parable: God will revoke the remission of sins at the last judgment in the case of those who have not forgiven one another.

From his heart: Not merely in words but sincerely, really. See 15:8.