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.

23rd SUNDAY IN ORDINARY TIME (A)

“If your brother sins [against you]...."

Mt18:15-20

This passage explains how Christians are to fulfill the teaching in what has gone before (18:10-14). There a parable has been told of the sheep that has gone astray. How to bring back the lost sheep is explained beginning with the words: “If your brother sins….” The issue here is not forgiveness but the sin of one member of the community. Every effort is to be made to bring the erring brother to repentance: first in private, then before a few, finally before the whole assembly of disciples. If he is still unrepentant, he must be excluded from the assembly of the new Israel. The decision of the Church will be the decision of God: as he inspires them in making the decision, so he will honor it; and Christ himself will be with them, guiding them and directing them.

v. 15. “If your brother sins [against you], go and tell him his fault between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have won over your brother.

Your brother: another member of the Christian community.

Against you: This should probably be omitted as in some of the most important manuscripts.

If he listens to you: If he pays attention to and acts upon what is said by repentance. Behind this verse lies an OT passage which was frequently quoted by the first Christians: “You shall not hate your brother in your heart, but you shall reason with [same word in Greek as “tell him his faults” in this verse] your neighbor, lest you bear sin because of him. You shall not take vengeance or bear any grudge against the sons of your own people, but you shall love your neighbor as yourself: I am the Lord (Lev 19:17f). Matthew will refer to this passage again in 5:43; 19:19; 22:39.

v. 16. If he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, so that ‘every fact may be established on the testimony of two or three witnesses.’

If a private rebuke fails, then, before the matter is brought before the Church, it must be heard before one or two others, in fulfillment of another passage in the OT (Dt 19:15).

v. 17. If he refuses to listen to them, tell the church. If he refuses to listen even to the church, then treat him as you would a Gentile or a tax collector.

The church: See also 16:18. Here presumably the local congregation. If the sinner refuses to listen (that is, to repent), he is to be treated as a Gentile and a tax collector, that is, he is to be excommunicated from the congregation. A Gentile, because the Church is the new Israel, and so those who are not members of it are now Gentiles. A tax collector because tax collectors were excluded from the old Israel by their trade and their uncleanness.

See also 5:46f for the two words in the same context.

v. 18. Amen, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

Bind and loose: Here they may mean being banished from the community and recall to it. Josephus in “Jewish Wars” uses the words in this way.

“In heaven” means “with God”: God will stand by the decision of the Church.

v. 19. Again, [amen,] I say to you, if two of you agree on earth about anything for which they are to pray, it shall be granted to them by my heavenly Father.

The idea of the relationship between earth and heaven, the Church and God, continues in this verse. The prayer of two who are in agreement will be heard and answered by God, just as the decisions of the Church are his decisions.

v. 20. For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.”

Two or three: See v. 16. Even where there are only two or three gathered to-gether as Christians (in my name, cf. v. 5), Jesus is present with them.

The Jews had a similar saying: “Rabbi Hanina ben Teradion said: ‘When two sit and there are not between them words of Torah, lo, this is ‘the seat of the scornful’, as it is said: ‘Nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful’. But when two sit, and there are between them words of Torah, the Shechinah (that is, the presence of God) rests betweenthem….”

22nd SUNDAY IN ORDINARY TIME (A)

Whoever wishes to come after me must deny himself, take up his cross, and follow me

Mt 16:21-27

v. 21. From that time on, Jesus began to show his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer greatly from the elders, the chief priests, and the scribes, and be killed and on the third day be raised.

“From that time on” marks a new phase in the Gospel; from now until the end of the book there will be a new emphasis on the death and resurrection of Jesus and on his teaching on this (cf. 17:9. 12. 22f; 20:18f. 28; 21:38f; 26:2).

“He must go to Jerusalem”: Behind this necessity (must) is the will of God ex-pressed in Scriptures. See 3:15 and 26:54.

“The elders, the chief priests, and the scribes”: They constitute the Sanhedrin, the supreme court of the Jews in Jerusalem.

“On the third day”: Matthew is more precise that Mark’s “after three days” (Mk 8:31).

v. 22. Then Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him, “God forbid, Lord! No such thing shall ever happen to you.”

Peter, who acted as spokesman of the disciples in the previous paragraph, in which he had declared Jesus’ Messiaship, now acts as spokesman in declaring he does not believe in the necessity for the Messiah’s death and resurrection.

v. 23. He turned and said to Peter, “Get behind me, Satan! You are an obstacle to me. You are thinking not as God does, but as human beings do.”

Matthew has softened Mark’s “he rebuked Peter” (Mk 8:33).

“Get behind me, Satan”: The same expression is found at the end of the Temptation in the wilderness (Mt 4:10). To oppose God’s will is to be an agent of Satan.

Obstacle is “skandalon” (stumbling-block). It is he who cause others to sin, that is, a teacher of wickedness. (13:41).

“You are thinking not as God does, but as human beings do.”: The literal translation is “You are not intent upon God’s affairs, but upon men’s.” And therefore, a more accurate paraphrase would be: “For you are not on the side of God but of men.”
To be on the side of men is to be opposed to God and that would be the same as being on the side of Satan. See 12:30.

v. 24. Then Jesus said to his disciples, “Whoever wishes to come after me must deny himself, take up his cross, and follow me.

“Whoever wishes to come after me”: The meaning is “whoever desires to” or “whoever wants to”.

“Deny himself”: The same word is used of Peter denying Jesus (26:34f. 75). A similar word is used in 10:33; 26:70ff.

It is clear that the word means “to disown somebody” or “to disclaim any connection with somebody”.
The cost of discipleship is therefore, the breaking of every link which ties a man to himself. See 1Cor 6:19.

“Take up his cross and follow me.”: The Romans crucified rebels and the world will execute those who go over to the other side (see v. 23).

The first mention of taking up the cross is found in 10:38. There worthiness of Jesus involves willingness to give up honor and life.

v. 25. For whoever wishes to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake will find it.

“For whoever wishes to save his life will lose it.”:There is no possibility of be-ing both a disciple and preserving one’s life. Those who want to save their lives will not enter the kingdom, but will be condemned at the judgment.

“Whoever loses his life for my sake will find it.”: The disciple who follows Je-sus will lose his life for his sake but will have it restored at the resurrection and judgment.
For many disciples this meant martyrdom.

v. 26. What profit would there be for one to gain the whole world and forfeit his life? Or what can one give in exchange for his life?

Gaining the whole world may also be found in the last temptation of Jesus (4:8f). Regarding the blessings of poverty, see 5:3.

Gain in this age; loss in the age to come. Poverty in this age; riches in the age to come.

“What can one give in exchange for his life?”: This is a proverb and it means “a man’s life is more valuable to him than anything else. Therefore, it is worth his while to lose anything, if by this means he gains his life; and the paradox is that he must lose his life in order to gain it.

v. 27. For the Son of Man will come with his angels in his Father’s glory, and then he will repay everyone according to his conduct.

The reason why the disciple must act in this way is because Jesus, who speaks of himself here as the Son of Man, is coming in glory, with his angels, to repay every man for what he has done (an allusion to Ps 62:12).
See also 13:41ff.

21ST SUNDAY IN ORDINARY TIME (A)

I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

Mt 16:13-20

v. 13. When Jesus went into the region of Caesarea Philippi* he asked his disciples, “Who do people say that the Son of Man is?”

Philip, the son of Herod the Great (2:1) and the half-brother of Archelaus (2:22) and Antipas (14:1), ruled over the district north and east of Galilee from the death of his father (2:19) in 4 BC until his own death in AD 34.

He is mentioned in this gospel at 14:3. He rebuilt Paneas and called it Caesarea in honor of the emperor; and Philippi to distinguish it from the sea-port also called Caesarea.

While in Mark the questions was: “Who do men say that I am?”, in Matthew it is “Who do men say that the Son of man is?”

Matthew has used “the Son of man” not as the title of a peson other than Jesus, but as Jesus’ description of himself (8:20); in this gospel, it has almost ceased to be a title, and become a name in the same way that Christ became another name for Jesus and ceased to be used as a title of his office.

v. 14. They replied, “Some say John the Baptist, others Elijah, still others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.”

Some say John the Baptist: Herod Antipas had said this (14:2).

Others Elijah: If John the Baptist was believed to be Elijah returnd from heaven (11:14 and 17:10ff), and if Jesus was believed to be John resurrected, then he would in fact be Elijah.

Jeremiah has been added by Matthew and thee is some evidence that some Jews expected Jeremiah (and other prophets) to return at the end of the world.

v. 15. He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?”

In Greek the word “you” is emphatic (hymeis de), and contrasts the opinions of men (vv. 13f) with the faith of the disciples which is based on divine revelation (v. 17).

v. 16. Simon Peter said in reply, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.”

The Christ is a title, the Greek translation of the Hebrew word “Messiah”, meaning “anointed” and thus “king”. Matthew has aleady used it in the genealogy (1:1 and 16f), and in 1:18 and 11:2. It is equivalent to “King of the Jews” in the mouth of Herod (2:4).

Its use by Peter marks a new step in the revelation of Jesus, but iti not to be made known until after his resurrection (v. 20).

Matthew has added “the Son of the living God”, a title which he had put into the mouth of the disciples at 14:33. See also 2:15; 3:17; 4:3. 6; 8:29; 27:40. 43. 54.

v. 17. Jesus said to him in reply, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah. For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my heavenly Father.

Peter’s answer shows that he a recipient of divine revelation. Cf. 11:25f where Jesus says that the Father reveals the coming of the Kingdom “to babes”. Peter is, therefore, the object of the Father’s gracious will, and is therefore “blessed” (5:3ff; 11:6; 13:16; 24:46).

Simon is a Greek name; the disciple’s Jewish name was Simeon, but Matthew does not use this form (contrast Acts 15:14).

Bar-Jona means son of Jonah; Simon’s father is mentioned by name again in the NT only in the fourth Gospel (Jn 1:42; 21:15ff).

Flesh and blood means man over against God, man in his weakness, and without the help and inspiration of the Spirit; e.g. Paul says that after his conversion “he did not confer with flesh and blood”, i.e. with “mere men” (Gal 1:16).

v. 18. And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it.

“You are Peter (Petros)”: There is no evidence that anyone had the name Peter before Christian times, either in its Greek form or in Aramaic (Cephas). In fact it is not a name at all, but a nickname, and it should really be translated “Rock”.

There are a number of examples in the OT of people receiving a new name which will describe their future life; e. g. “no longer shall your name be Abram (that is, exalted father), but your name shall be Abraham (here taken to mean father of a multitude); for I have made you the father of a multitude of nations (Gn 17:5).

“And on this rock I will build my church: The pun on the words Peter and rock goes back into Aramaic, Kepha and Kephas. For the idea of building upon rock, see 7:24f. Simon, to whom God has revealed who Jesus is, will be the foundation of the church which Jesus is to build.

The future tense, “I will build”, looks forward to the time after the crucifixion, when the disciples will be sent out to baptize and to teach (28:19f). For the idea of the new Israel as made from a rock, compare Is 51:1f and the rabbinic comment on this: “When God looked upon Abraham who was to arise, he said, ‘Behold, I have found a rock on which I can build and found the world’.

“My church” (mou ten ekklesian): The Greek word used here had been used in the Greek translation of the OT for “the people”, “the assembly”, “the congregation”.

The community of the disciples of Jesus is, therefore, to be the true Israel, the “children of Abraham” (3:9).
Aramaic scholars do not agree what Aramaic word lied behind the Greek translation in Matthew, but one of the suggestions is the word “kenishta’” which could be used both fo the Church as a whole (ekklesia) and for the local congregation (synagoge, synagogue).

“And the power of death shall not prevail against it”: The purpose of the building upon a rock in the parable at the end of Chapter 7 was to ensure the permanence of the house (7:24f); in much the same way here, the Church which is to be built upon the rock will withstand “the powers of death”, a phrase which is literally “the gates of Hades” and means that Hades, the place of the dead, cannot close its gates to imprison the members of Jesus’ congregation, the new Israel. In Chapter 10 Jesus promised that they will share in his sufferings (10:38), now he promises that they will share in his resurrection.

v. 19. I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

“I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven”: The kingdom is here pictured as a place to be entered, as in 7:21. See also 7:13f where the narrow gate leads to life, that is, the kingdom. Peter is, therefore, given authority to admit, or refuse admittance, to the kingdom. “The kingdom of heaven” is not used here as an equivalent for the Church, but the Church is the community of those who wait and pray for the coming of the kingdom (6:10).

“Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven”: There are two equally possible meanings of binding and loosing: (1) Laying down rules and granting exemption from rules; and (2) condemning and acquitting, i.e. the power to forgive sins which Jesus claimed in 9:6, and now grants to Peter also. Both interpretations mean much the same in the end: Peter has authority in the Church to make pronouncements (whether legislative or disciplinary) which will be ratified at the last judgment. Much the same authority had been given to all the Twelve in 10:13-15. See also 18:18; Jn 20:23.

“In heaven”: here is a periphrasis for “in the sight of God”; and the future tenses (shall be bound and shall be loosed) refer t to the last judgment.

v. 20. Then he strictly ordered his disciples to tell no one that he was the Messiah.

The command to keep silence is frequent in Mark. Matthew retains a few of them but omits the majority (9:30; 12:16; 16:20; 17:9).

20TH SUNDAY IN ORDINARY TIME (A)

O woman, great is your faith! Let it be done for you as you wish.

Mt 15:21-28

Before this incident there was the question of what defiles? In this section, the subject is the relation between Jews and Gentiles. The connection between the two sections is the belief of the Jews that Gentiles are a cause of defilement for them. This is the reason why Jews keep themselves separate from the Gentiles. Jesus Christ has broken down this dividing wall which enabled the Church to accept Gentiles on equal footing with the Jews (Eph 2:11-22).The incident in today’s gospel reading looks forward to that time when this will happen.

It is also possible that this story of the Gentile woman was being circulated among Christians when the debate regarding the admission of Gentiles into the Church was raging. Certain details seem to confirm this.

• The disciples asks Jesus to send the Gentile woman away much as some Jewish Christians had opposed preaching to the Gentiles and contact with them (Acts 11:1ff).
• Matthew reports Jesus as saying that he was sent only to the lost sheep of the House of Israel. This may support those who say that Jesus himself had not gone outside Israel during his ministry.
• There is a delay between the coming of the woman and the granting of her request. This delay corresponds to the interval between the ministry of Jesus and the time when Gentiles were admitted into the Church.

v. 21. Then Jesus went from that place and withdrew to the region of Tyre and Sidon.

Withdrew is a favorite word of Matthew. He uses it when the rejection of God’s word in one place leads to the preaching of it in another place (4:12). In this section, the use of the word may point to the future when the rejection of the good news by the Jews leads to its offer to the Gentiles as personified by the Gentile woman.

Tyre and Sidon are on the coast of the Mediterranean sea and it is the farthest north that Jesus is said to have gone. The two towns have been mentioned before in 11:21f.

v. 22. And behold, a Canaanite woman of that district came and called out, "Have pity on me, Lord, Son of David! My daughter is tormented by a demon."

Mark describes the woman as “Greek, Syrophoenician by birth”. There is some evidence to show that Canaan and Canaanite were used of Phoenicia and also of the countryside as opposed to the Greek towns.

The woman was not only a Gentile. She was a Canaanite and these were the ancestral enemies of the Jews. Even at the time of Josephus, he could assert: “Of the Phoenicians, the Tyrians have the most ill-feeling towards us.”

Jesus is frequently addressed as Lord in Matthew’s gospel. Son of David is also a characteristic title of Jesus in this gospel (1:1).

v. 23. But he did not say a word in answer to her. His disciples came and asked him, "Send her away, for she keeps calling out after us."

“Send her away” may either mean “dismiss her” or “Do what she asks and so let her go away”. The latter is probably what is meant.

v. 24. He said in reply, "I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel."

Jesus has given the same command to the Twelve in 10:6.

Matthew sees the time before the crucifixion as the time when the Gospel is offered to the Jews and the time after the Resurrection as the time for preaching to the Gentiles (28:19).

v. 26. He said in reply, "It is not right to take the food of the children and throw it to the dogs."

The children are the Jews, God’s people; the dogs are the gentiles. The Jews used to call the Gentiles dogs and the Christians, claiming to be the true Jews, in turn called the unbelieving Jews dogs (Phil 3:2f).

The Greek used for dogs was “kunaria” which is the diminutive of dogs. The word is not used for street dogs (askal in Pilipino) but of the household pets and this is why the woman could say what she did in v. 27.

Bread is used here as a symbol of salvation as in the feeding miracles (14:13ff and 15:32ff).

See also 7:6.

v. 27. She said, "Please, Lord, for even the dogs eat the scraps that fall from the table of their masters."

The faith of the woman is heightened by the admission that the Jews are mastes over the Gentiles.

v. 28. Then Jesus said to her in reply, "O woman, great is your faith! Let it be done for you as you wish." And her daughter was healed from that hour.

We see the woman’s faith in her address to Jesus. She began with “Son of David” which was a popular but political title. She sees Jesus as possessing only earthly power. But she ended by calling him “Lord”, a divine title.

In v. 25 “homage” may also be translated as “falling on one’s knees” and “worship”. “Worship is an act of faith.“Falling on her knees” is a posture of prayer. She began with a request and ended with a prayer.

Compare the words of Jesus to that which he uttered to the Gentile centurion in 8:13.

19th SUNDAY IN ORDINARY TIME (A)

Immediately Jesus stretched out his hand and caught him, and said to him, "O you of little faith, why did you doubt?"

Mt 14:22-33

JESUS WALKS ON THE SEA

The emphasis here is the separation of the disciples from Jesus and their terror and fear which are not removed until Jesus miraculously comes to them. The signficance of the story for the Church may have been that although Jesus is apparently separated from the, since the crucifixion, yet he is praying for them, and will come to them again as the Son of man; they are to take heat and have no fear, although they are beaten by waves of persecution.

v. 22. Then he made the disciples get into the boat and precede him to the other side, while he dismissed the crowds.

Jesus compelled his disciples to leave. Why? Jn 6:15 gives us a clue. After the miraculous multiplication of the bread, the crowd wanted to take him by force and make him king. The disciples were also at that point thinking of Jesus as king in terms of earthly power. Their presence may complicate things further. It was best that he handle this potentially explosive situation alone.

v. 23. After doing so, he went up on the mountain by himself to pray. When it was evening he was there alone.

The other references to the mountain in Matthew may be found in 4:8; 5:1; 15:29; 17:1. 9. 20; 28:16.

Interestingly it is only here and at Gethsemane (26:16ff) that Matthew says that Jesus prayed.

vv. 25-26. During the fourth watch of the night, he came toward them, walking on the sea. When the disciples saw him walking on the sea they were terrified. "It is a ghost," they said, and they cried out in fear.

The Romans divided the time between 6pm and 6am into four equal period called watches: 6pm to 9pm, 9pm to 12am, 12am to 3am and 3am to 6am. The event occurred at 3am. They could see each other because the moon would probably be full.

In verse 25 it says that Jesus was walking on the sea. The Greek is “epi ten thalassan” which may be translated in two ways: “over the sea” and “towards the sea”.

In verse 26 it says that the disciples saw Jesus walking “on the sea”. The Greek is “epi tes thalasses” which is translated as “on the sea”. But Jn 21:1 uses the same phrase to mean “by the sea shore”.

The event may, therefore, be understood in two ways. The first is that Jesus ac-tually walked on the water. This would be a miraculous feat. The other is that Jesus walked through the surf (not on the water) and came so suddenly upon the disciples that they were scared to death upon seeing him.

PETER’S DOUBT AND HIS RESTORATION

The Church for which Matthew wrote had a particular reverence for Peter as the first of the apostles and the rock on which the Church is built (10:2 and 16:18). Nevertheless, this reverence did not prevent Matthew from presenting Peter’s denial of Jesus during the Passion (26:29ff). Here also Matthew presents Peter as a man of little faith, a doubter. Peter’s failure here and his restoration may be an anticipation of Peter’s failure during the Passion and his restoration after the Resurrection.

v. 28. Peter said to him in reply, "Lord, if it is you, command me to come to you on the water."

Peter asks Jesus’ permission to do what Jesus is doing; in the Passion he will also attempt to follow Jesus (26:58).

v. 30. But when he saw how (strong) the wind was he became frightened; and, beginning to sink, he cried out, "Lord, save me!"

Compare Peter’s fear, fall and cry with his denials of Jesus and weeping (26:69ff).

v. 31. Immediately Jesus stretched out his hand and caught him, and said to him, "O you of little faith, why did you doubt?"

Jesus restores Peter but also reproves him. Little faith (6:30; 8:26; 16:8; and 17:20) and doubt (28:17) are favorite Matthean expressions.

Peter’s restoration after the Resurrection is not recorded in Matthew. This episode may have been intended to fill that gap.

For other evidence of Peter’s restoration, see 1Cor 15:5 and Mk 16:7 and Jn 21:15ff.

v. 32. After they got into the boat, the wind died down.

In 8:23ff Jesus had already revealed himself as Lord over the winds and the sea by commanding them to obey him.

v. 33. Those who were in the boat did him homage, saying, "Truly, you are the Son of God."

The confession of faith of the disciples is similar to that of the centurion after the death of Jesus (Mk 15:39).

“Did him homage” = “worshipped him” = “knelt before him”.

Worship is another favorite word of Matthew. It will be used twice in his last chapter for the worship of the women and of his disciples after the Resurrection (28:9 and 17).

It may be found in 2:2. 8. 11; 4:9. 10; 9:18; 14:33; 15:25; 18:26; 20:20; 28: 9. 17.