Friday of Week 33 of Ordinary Time – Gospel

Commentary on Luke 19:45-48

Luke tells us very briefly of the scene where Jesus, now in Jerusalem, drives the traders from the courts of the Temple. Says Jesus quoting from Isaiah (56:7) and Jeremiah (7:11), respectively:

My house shall be a house of prayer, but you have made it a den of robbers.

The trading took place in the outer court, also known as the Court of the Gentiles, and, as is not unusual in such situations, prices could be grossly inflated. John speaks of a cleansing at the beginning of Jesus’ ministry (2:13-25), but in the other three Gospels it takes place at the end. Two possible explanations have been given. Either there were two cleansings or, more likely, John moved the story to the beginning of Jesus’ ministry for theological reasons. He wanted to show Jesus as Messiah right from the beginning. However, in the Synoptics, Jesus’ identity as Messiah is only gradually revealed. There are also some differences in the various accounts. John mentions cattle and sheep and has Jesus use a whip made of cords. Matthew (21:12-17) and Luke seem to indicate that the event took place on what we call Palm Sunday, but for Mark it was on the following day (see Mark 11:15-17).

Those coming to the Temple needed to buy animals for the sacrifices and they needed to change their Roman coins into acceptable Jewish currency (shekels) to make their contributions to the Temple. Jesus had no problem about that. What he objected to was that this business was being carried on inside God’s house when it could just as well have been done outside.

We all know how street traders try to get as close to the action as they can. However, there may be hints that priests in the Temple connived at this business and hence would certainly have profited from it as well. But Jesus (and probably others as well) felt that such business was not appropriate in a place dedicated to the worship of God.

It would be hard for us to imagine hawkers being allowed to set up stalls inside our churches, although where Sunday papers are still sold, the vendors still do try to get pretty close to the church doors.

Not surprisingly, the chief priests and the scribes—especially those who might have been involved in what must have been a lucrative business—were plotting how to get rid of Jesus who was upstaging their authority and accusing them of hypocrisy, greed and corruption. The chief priests, as members of the ruling Jewish council, the Sanhedrin, wielded great authority. But it was not going to be easy, as the ordinary people continued to flock to Jesus and, as Luke tells us:

…all the people were spellbound by what they heard.

Jesus is an example of the true prophet. He speaks as a messenger of God and is indeed God’s own Son. He stands as a counter-witness to all that is against truth, love and justice. As such, he inevitably incurs the anger and hostility of those who have power—power based on falsehood, on self-interest, corruption and injustice.

Our Church, in its communities and through individuals, is called on to continue that mission of counter-witness. It will win us the support and admiration of some, but also hostility, anger and perhaps even the violence of others. This is something we should not at all be surprised at, nor something we should try to avoid. Our only concern must be always to speak the truth in love. God will take care of the rest. Because, ultimately, truth, love and justice will prevail.

Read more

Saturday of Week 33 of Ordinary Time – Gospel

Commentary on Luke 20:27-40

Today we move on to the middle of chapter 20 of Luke’s Gospel. In previous passages which are not included in these readings, Jesus had rebutted a challenge to his authority and left his critics literally speechless (Luke 20:1-8). This was followed by his speaking a parable about tenant farmers (Luke 20:9-19). He was clearly referring to his questioners and identifying them with the wicked tenants who abused all the emissaries (the prophets) sent by the owner of the vineyard—an episode which culminated in the killing of his son. The identity of the tenants and of the Son is clear. This is followed by Jesus’ being confronted with a seemingly innocuous question about paying taxes to Caesar which again resulted in the silence of his critics (Luke 20:20-26).

Today another group, the Sadducees, thought they might do better. The Sadducees, among whom were numbered some of the most powerful Jewish leaders, including high priests, restricted their beliefs to the Pentateuch, the first five books of the Bible, reputedly written by Moses and containing the essence of the Jewish Law.

For that reason, unlike the Pharisees, they did not accept some beliefs which occur only in later books of the Old Testament. Among these, for instance, were the existence of angels and the resurrection of the dead.

The Sadducees thought then they could stump Jesus with an unanswerable conundrum. They first quote a prescription from the Law of Moses by which a man was expected to marry the widow of his eldest brother, if there had been no children by the marriage. They then propose an imagined situation of seven brothers. The first brother married, but was childless when he died, so in accordance with the requirements of the Law the second married the widow, then the third and so on. Eventually, all seven brothers married the woman, but there were still no children.

The unanswerable question they proposed was that, if there really was a resurrection after death, which of the seven men would be the woman’s husband in the next life? For them, there was no problem; they did not believe in the resurrection. Death was the end of everything. For one who believed in the resurrection, it was an embarrassing difficulty—or so they thought.

Jesus quickly brushes the problem aside. To begin with, in the next life there are no marriage relationships:

Those who belong to this age [i.e. those who belong to this world] marry and are given in marriage, but those who are considered worthy of a place in that age and in the resurrection from the dead neither marry nor are given in marriage.

In the new life, all live face to face with God in a life that never ends. All are equally children of God—brothers and sisters to each other—taking their life and existence from him. That is now the focus of their relationship and it is through that relationship that they are bound together.

Jesus then goes on to challenge the Sadducees’ unbelief about life after death. He shrewdly quotes from a part of the Bible which they recognise as true. He reminds them of the scene where the voice from the burning bush identifies itself to Moses:

I AM the God of your father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. (Ex 3:6)

God, says Jesus, is the God of the living and not of the dead (i.e. of those who no longer exist). If Abraham, Isaac and Jacob are alive, then the Sadducees’ argument fails. Perhaps we would not be convinced by such an argument, but it clearly worked in this case.

Some scribes who were listening in were delighted at the refutation of the Sadducees. Most of them were Pharisees and believed in the resurrection. At the same time, after these replies of Jesus to both the Pharisees and the Sadducees:

…they no longer dared to ask him another question.

We, of course, believe in the resurrection not so much because of Jesus’ arguments here, but because of his own resurrection and his promise to share his life with us forever.

Read more

Thursday of Week 33 of Ordinary Time – First Reading

Commentary on 1 Maccabees 2:15-29

Today, we go back to reading from the First Book of Maccabees and continue the story of the persecution of the Jews.

The New Jerusalem Bible comments:

“Persecution produces a revival of religious awareness. Jewish opposition to Hellenism takes the form of physical violence, passive resistance, and ultimately a war of religion under the leadership of Mattathias, but particularly under Judas Maccabeus. Judas had realised that religious and political independence were interconnected: for this reason the struggle continued even after religious freedom had been won. But the shift from the religious to a political ground led to the compromises and party squabbles occupying the last part of the book. These in the end were to oust religious zeal and discredit the Maccabees’ successors, the Hasmonaeans, in the estimation of their devout contemporaries.”

As the reading opens we are told that officials of King Antiochus had arrived in Modein, the town where Mattathias, son of a priest and originally from Jerusalem, had settled. The officials’ task was to force people to abandon their traditional religion and join in the sacrifices of the now official religion imposed by the king. While many of the Israelites complied with the government order and joined in the sacrifices, Mattathias and his sons stood apart.

The officials approached Mattathias and tried to persuade him to change his mind. They used words of flattery and spoke of Mattathias as a great man in the town and a respected leader. Because of his position, they urged him to step forward and give an example which others would then surely follow. Then came the enticements. If Mattathias and sons would step forward for the sacrifice, they would be reckoned as:

Friends of the king, and…[his] sons will be honored with silver and gold and many gifts.

“Friend of the King” was a title of honour and a holdover from the court of Persia. There were several grades. A “Friend” also had free access to the king, who would, from time to time, assign him various responsibilities. In yesterday’s reading, we saw that the youngest of the seven Maccabee sons was also bribed with this honour.

Mattathias responded to the king by saying that even if every nation in the king’s dominions were to conform to his commands, he, his brothers and his sons would remain faithful to the Law and its observances. So they would not obey the king’s command or deviate in any way from their religious beliefs.

Just as he finished speaking, a Jew came forward in the sight of all to offer sacrifice as the king’s edict had laid down, and:

When Mattathias saw it, he burned with zeal, and his heart was stirred. He gave vent to righteous anger; he ran and slaughtered him on the altar.

In these circumstances, the anger against such a flagrant violation of the Law is seen as justified. The killing is another matter.

But things did not stop there. Mattathias went on to cut down the royal commissioner responsible for enforcing the offering of sacrifice and also tore down the altar. In so doing, we are told that he imitated the example of Phinehas against Zimri, son of Salu.

The story of Phinehas is told in the Book of Numbers. Phinehas belonged to the priestly caste and was a grandson of Aaron, while Zimri was a prince of the ancestral house of the Simeonites. When Phinehas saw Zimri bring a Midianite woman (an unclean Gentile from a hostile people) into the camp, presumably with sexual intentions, Phinehas immediately, fired with the same kind of anger, went and stabbed both Zimri and the woman in the alcove where they were ensconced. For this act of zeal for the Law he was commended by Yahweh (see Num 25:6-15).

Mattathias then went through the town calling on all those who, like him, had zeal for the Law and based their lives on the covenant, to follow him and leave Modein. He then fled with his sons into the hills, leaving all his possessions behind. Many people “who were seeking righteousness and justice” did not actually take to the hills, but went out into the desert and remained there. The rebellion had begun.

We certainly admire Mattathias for his zeal, his courage and his total dedication to God’s Law as he understood it. We could hardly—in the light of the Gospel—admire his violence in killing two people.

There is also the danger, in a situation like his, of fanaticism taking over, as has been seen in religion-associated movements of our own time: Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland; Catholics, Orthodox and Muslims in the former country of Yugoslavia; Hindus and Muslims in India; and of course, the great sadness of the Jews and Palestinians in the Middle East. There is no wonder religion is so poorly thought of by some!

A true religion requires fidelity unto death, but it also rejects violence of any kind and respects other religious beliefs held in sincerity and good faith. We might profitably examine our own behaviour for any sign of bigotry, intolerance, prejudice or judgementalism—even against fellow-Catholics.

Read more

Wednesday of Week 33 of Ordinary Time – Gospel

Commentary on Luke 19:11-28

Immediately following the story of the tax collector Zacchaeus comes a parable about the use of what God has given to us. Jesus and his disciples are near Jerusalem where:

…they supposed that the kingdom of God was to appear immediately.

How right they were! It was indeed going to appear in Jerusalem, but not at all in the way they expected—with the political and military defeats of enemies. As the beginning of Acts reveals, they “were hoping” that Jesus was about to restore the political kingdom of Israel. In time, they would learn that a kingdom of far greater significance was coming into being and that they would play an important part in its inauguration.

The parable which follows differs significantly from a similar one of the talents in Matthew (25:14-30). In Luke, too, there may be two parables fused into one—that of the coins and that of a disputed claimant to a royal throne (symbolising Jesus himself).

Jesus begins the parable by saying that a man of noble birth went to a far country to have himself appointed king and then return. This may have reminded his hearers of Archelaus, the son of Herod the Great, who went to Rome in the year 4 BC to get himself appointed king. On his return, he succeeded his father. It may seem a rather unusual procedure, but the Herods used to go to Rome in order to get appointed as rulers over the Jews.

Similarly, Jesus is soon to depart and in the future will return as King. During his absence, his servants are entrusted with their master’s affairs.

In the parable, the king, before leaving, gives ten units of money to each of ten servants and tells them to invest the money until his return. The coins are called ‘pounds’ (or minas in some translations) and were each worth about 100 drachmas, where a drachma was the equivalent of one day’s wages. Each coin then was the equivalent of about three months’ wages. This is a much smaller sum than those in Matthew’s parable. The other difference is that there are ten people and each one gets the same amount. Recall that in Matthew’s parable there are three people who get respectively 10, 5 and 1 talents.

In the parable, we are told that the people despised this man and did not want him as their king. In fact, a Jewish delegation had gone to Rome protesting at the idea of Archelaus becoming king. In the same way, Jesus was soon to go away and return some day as King and Judge. While he is ‘away’, his ‘servants’ will be entrusted to take care of their Master’s affairs. But others will reject him completely.

When he returned, the new king asked each of his servants to give an account of their trading, just as Jesus will do at the Judgement. One had made another ten pounds on his capital of ten, and he was rewarded by being put in charge of ten towns. Another had made five, and was rewarded with five towns. But a third came along with just the capital he had been given (i.e. the original ten pounds). He had not traded the money for fear of losing it, but kept it in a safe place. He was afraid of the king, of whom he said:

…you take what you did not deposit and reap what you did not sow.

The king became angry. He did not dispute his ruthlessness, but he said that the man could at least have lent the money and gotten some interest. He ordered the ten units be taken from him and given to the one who had already made ten—this man was obviously good at business. The lesson of the parable is then spelt out by Jesus:

I tell you, to all those who have, more will be given, but from those who have nothing, even what they have will be taken away.

The last sentence of the parable, in a way, describes a third set of people in the story. The first set consists of those who used their coin well and profitably. The second is the one who kept his ten coins and carefully guarded them. But finally, there are those who did not want this man as king and these are executed:

But as for these enemies of mine who did not want me to rule over them—bring them here and slaughter them in my presence.

They are the greatest losers of all, and it probably points to those Jews who rejected Jesus as King and had their city destroyed, referring to the destruction of Jerusalem in the year 70 AD. The punishment of those who rebelled and actively opposed the king was much more severe than that of the over-cautious servant.

The context of the whole parable is emphasised by the last sentence of today’s reading:

After he had said this, he went on ahead, going up to Jerusalem.

We are coming near the end of our story and the climax to which it is headed.

The parable points to all those who are being called by Christ. It is the final part of one large unit (Luke 18:18—19:28) which includes the story of a rich man with good intentions, but not able to respond to Jesus’ call; a prediction of Jesus’ passion not understood by the disciples; the story of a blind man who, after having his vision restored, becomes a follower of Christ; the story of another rich man who was willing generously to share his wealth with the poor; and ending with the parable of the proper use of what we have.

The first rich man claimed to follow the commandments (the Law), but wanted to keep his money safely in his own possession. He is like the man who buried his money and did not invest it in the love and service of his brothers and sisters, especially those in need. The other, Zacchaeus, generously shared his wealth with the poor. He had invested his money well—he had learned to see. Anyone who can really see where Jesus is has no alternative but to go his Way. Finally, there are those who totally reject Christ and all that he stands for. Their blindness is total.

Today we are asked to reflect on the special gifts that God has given to each one of us and how we are using them for the benefit of brothers and sisters in need. What are our attitudes to money, to property, to professional status, academic or other qualifications or other gifts with which we are endowed? Where do we invest our gifts and our talents, both inborn and acquired?

The message is clear: the more we invest, the more we will gain. We cannot stand still or just cling to what we have. The only way to gain is to let go, to give and to share. Good examples of this would be St Francis of Assisi or St Teresa of Calcutta (Mother Teresa). It is an attitude very foreign to many people’s way of thinking, who feel that life consists of amassing more and more, that security is in having.

But the gospel way is really the only way that makes sense. It is not in collecting, but in sharing that generates wealth, the wealth that really matters—freedom, security and peace.

Read more

Wednesday of Week 33 of Ordinary Time – First Reading

Commentary on 2 Maccabees 7:1,20-31

Today’s reading is another story of fidelity under persecution. It is part of a famous story about the martyrdom of the Seven Maccabees, all brothers, together with their mother. They gave their lives one after the other rather than betray their Jewish faith by eating unclean food.

Having given the example of a venerable teacher of the Law (Eleazar, from yesterday’s reading), the author now gives that of a mother and her sons. We know that the persecution, in which exceptionally savage methods were adopted, did indeed extend to women and children. The story, therefore, has a historical basis, behind the literary elements, such as the speeches ascribed to the characters (a common literary device).

As the reading opens, we are told that seven brothers were arrested together with their mother. King Antiochus tried to force them to eat pork, forbidden by the Law, by torturing them by scourging with whips.

When one of the brothers, in the name of his siblings, stood up and told the king he was wasting his time and that they were prepared to die rather than violate the laws of their ancestors, the king became furious and prepared terrible instruments of torture for them. One by one, six of the brothers were subjected to the most excruciating and inhuman torture in the sight of their mother. As each one died, they had words of defiance for the king. All of this is omitted from our reading.

We pick up the reading again with just the mother and youngest son still alive. Through all the terrible experience of seeing her sons, one by one, subjected to torture and death, she maintained an extraordinary dignity “because of her hope in the Lord”. In fact, she was proud of her sons for their loyalty to God and their Jewish beliefs and their readiness to sacrifice their lives.

Speaking in “the language of their ancestors”—Aramaic—so that the king and the torturers would not understand, she actually encouraged her sons. The author puts a speech on her lips to express her thoughts and feelings. She said she did not know when her children appeared in her womb, nor was it she who gave them the breath of life nor was she the cause of their physical development. But she is confident that the same God will give them back the breath and life because, for the sake of God’s laws, they have had no concern for themselves.

As she spoke thus to her son, Antiochus, who could not understand what she was saying, thought she was speaking insulting words about him. With this last son, the king tried a different approach. He promised to make the boy rich and happy if only he would abandon the traditions of his ancestors. He would even make him a “Friend and entrust him with public affairs”. ‘Friend’ was a title of honour, a survival from the court of Persia and there were various grades. ‘Friends of the King’ had free access to the sovereign who from time to time assigned them certain tasks.

When the boy paid no attention to these tempting offers, the king turned to the mother to urge her to advise the young man to save his life. After the king had pressed her for a while in this manner, she finally agreed to persuade her son. She then quietly spoke to the boy in the language that only they could understand.

She begged her son to have compassion on her. She had looked after him lovingly from his earliest days in her womb and brought him up to the age he was now. She asked him to look at the world around him and consider how God had made everything out of nothing. This is, in fact, the first explicit allusion to creation ex nihilo (Latin, ‘out of nothing’) in the Old Testament. Namely, that God made all things solely by his omnipotent will and his creative word. In Genesis, the world is not so much created as formed from a pre-existing Chaos; order is brought into what had been pure disorder.

The mother then urges her youngest son not to be afraid of his executioner, but to prove himself as loyal as his brothers and accept death. Then “in God’s mercy”, she will receive all of them back again in the life that is to come.

The mother had hardly finished speaking, when the young man called out to Antiochus and the executioners:

What are you waiting for? I will not obey the king’s command, but I obey the command of the law that was given to our ancestors through Moses.

As for the king himself, he will not escape the hand of God for the terrible things he has done against the Hebrews.

Our reading stops at this point, but the son’s speech continues in the same vein for several verses. The king was enraged at the young man’s words, which he had not expected to hear. The outcome was that this last brother was subjected to even more cruel tortures, but remained loyal to his God to the end. And, after all seven brothers had been martyred, the mother too was executed.

The cult of the ‘Seven Maccabaean Brothers’ spread into Europe, where it clearly made a great impact in a church which had its own share of Christians dying painful deaths for the sake of Christ and the gospel. Several churches were dedicated in their honour, for instance, in Antioch, Rome, Lyons, and Vienna. Also, a composition known as the Passion of the Holy Maccabees became widely distributed and served as model for several Lives of Martyrs.

It is, on the face of it, a tragic and cruel story. But it is clearly meant to be an inspiration to all Jews to put their faith in their God above all other considerations, including their own lives, in times of oppression. It is a message which many Jews have followed and one also followed by thousands of Christians down the centuries, people who chose to be faithful to the call of Christ even at the cost of their own lives. And there have been some outstanding examples in recent times.

Each one of us needs to ask to what extent we have ever compromised our faith in order to cling to something of lesser value. What price are we ready to pay to see that the values of the gospel are upheld?

…therefore, none of you can become my disciple if you do not give up all your possessions. (Luke 14:33)

And these “possessions” may include our life. Am I ready for this?

Read more

Friday of Week 33 of Ordinary Time – First Reading

Commentary on 1 Maccabees 4:36-37,52-59

Today’s reading recalls the institution of one of the most important feasts on the Jewish calendar, the Feast of Dedication. Judas Maccabaeus and his brothers had been waging a guerrilla war against the Syrian occupation of their land. Eventually they defeated and drove out the gentile forces. Having defeated their enemies, Judas Maccabeus, a son of Mattathias whom we saw in yesterday’s reading, called on his followers to go to Jerusalem to purify and dedicate the Temple, which had been desecrated by having the “Abomination of Desolation” (see Matt 24:15 in the King James Bible)—that is, a statue of Baal or Zeus Olympus erected on it.

The New Jerusalem Bible notes:

The Temple was one of the principal objectives of the rebels, as the centre of Jewish religious life, without which the Law could not be observed in its fullness. The Gentiles had sacked and profaned it; now, as soon as the first victories are won, it is purified and re-consecrated. The death of Antiochus Epiphanes, which our author mistakenly places after the expeditions against the Idumaeans and Ammonites (in chap 5), doubtless had something to do with it too. The concept of the holiness of the Temple will be a dominant theme in Second Maccabees. (edited and text references omitted)

In passages immediately preceding the main part of our reading, we are told that Judas and his followers found the Temple in a state of total desolation—there was no one there, the altar desecrated, gates burnt down, vegetation growing freely as it might in the middle of a forest. Judas and his companions were devastated at the sight. He ordered the purification of the site by priests specially chosen for their impeccable credentials and faithfulness to the Law. It was then decided that the original altar should not be repaired, but because of its contamination by pagan rituals, should be pulled down and removed. A new altar was built in its place and other furnishings, like lamps, vessels, altar of incense and the table were installed.

Now we can pick up our reading:

Early in the morning on the twenty-fifth day of the ninth month, which is the month of Chislev…

That is, the 14th December, 164 BC, and the third anniversary of the first sacrifice offered to Zeus, a sacrifice was offered on the new altar. Thus was the new altar dedicated to the sound of all kinds of musical instruments. It was exactly the same day and the same time of the year when it had been originally desecrated by the Syrians. The people prostrated themselves and praised Heaven (this book sedulously avoids using God’s name) for all that had been achieved.

The dedication was celebrated for eight days altogether with holocausts, sacrifices of deliverance and thanksgiving sacrifices. Further adornments were added to the restored building. There was no end of rejoicing because the humiliation brought about by the Gentiles had been obliterated.

Judas, with his brothers and the whole assembly, then laid it down that the days of dedication of the altar should be joyfully celebrated at the proper season for eight days every year, beginning on this 25th day of Chislev.

The feast of Dedication is still celebrated by Jews and known by its Hebrew name, Hanukkah. It is one of the ‘youngest’ feasts in the Jewish calendar. During the feast, the Hallel (see Psalms 113-118) was sung and leafy branches and palms were carried. Second Maccabees emphasises the similarities with the feast of Tabernacles or Shelters, which itself commemorated the inauguration of the Temple of Solomon.

The lamps lit at Dedication soon gave it its other name, ‘Feast of Lights’. The fact that these lamps, symbolising the Law, were placed not only in the Temple, but in private houses, assured the survival and popularity of the feast long after the desecration of the Temple in 70 AD. It is given great prominence in Second Maccabees. It is mentioned in John’s Gospel, where we read:

At that time the Festival of the Dedication took place in Jerusalem. It was winter, and Jesus was walking in the temple, in the portico of Solomon. (John 10:22-23)

Today’s reading reminds us to remember the dedication of our own parish church and of the care and respect with which it should be maintained. Many communities have spared no expense and spent long years to build a church they felt worthy of being God’s house. We see the magnificent churches, say, of the Gothic or the Baroque period in Europe which took generations to be completed. And in some of these, too, we see magnificent liturgies of celebration on the great feasts of the year.

At the same time, we must never forget that the real Temple, the real dwelling place of God for us is his people. Paul says:

Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, which you have from God…(1 Cor 6:19)

We must remember always that the building, however magnificent, is for the people and not the other way round. When the building becomes poorly attended, an empty shell, just a work of art or a museum—or even a warehouse, it says something about the people by whom and for whom it was built.

Read more

Thursday of Week 33 of Ordinary Time – Gospel

Commentary on Luke 19:41-44

Jesus is now on the last stage of his mission. He approaches Jerusalem, which will be the scene for the last great act of his life—his passion, death and resurrection. From here too, will rise up the new community founded in his name, commissioned to continue the work he had started.

As he approaches the city he weeps over its tragic end. He implies that, if the city had received him as Lord and King, it might not have met the fate that was in store for it:

If you, even you, had only recognized on this day the things that make for peace! But now they are hidden from your eyes.

The second half of the word ‘Jerusalem’ (i.e. -salem means ‘peace’; in Hebrew it is shalom). The city had not known the “the things that make for peace” which, of course, was the path that led to Jesus—the Prince of Peace and the source of all peace in our lives. Jerusalem has hardly known peace since that time—neither for the Jewish nor the Palestinian people.

The rest of the passage is a prophecy of what in fact is going to happen to the city. We know that it was besieged by the Emperor Titus in the year 70 AD. However, Jesus’ words are built up from many Old Testament references and seem to refer rather to the destruction of Jerusalem in 587 BC as much, if not more, than that brought about by the Romans. And as none of the distinctive features of the Roman siege are mentioned, the words seem to date from before that time.

But of course, subsequently, it was the Romans who destroyed the city and its huge Temple. One of the wonders of the ancient world was reduced to ruins. The Temple was ransacked and its most precious ornaments, including the seven-branched candlestick, were carried off. All of this is sculpturally recorded in the triumphal Arch of Titus erected in Rome to commemorate his victory, and which can be seen in the Forum to this day.

All this will take place, Jesus says:

…because you did not recognize the time of your visitation from God.

So many failed to recognise Jesus as Messiah, as God coming to visit them—they rejected him.

With the destruction of the Temple, the Jewish faith was dealt a serious blow, from which, it may be said, it has never fully recovered. No temple has ever taken its place, for it is believed it can only be on the same sacred site in Jerusalem. But unfortunately for the Jews, the Al-Aqsa mosque stands on the site today and is not likely to be removed. All that is left of Herod’s Temple is the Wailing Wall, where Jews go to pray and lament their lost glory.

For us Christians, there is no exclusively holy place, although certain places are of special significance. But as Paul reminds us, each baptised person is a Temple of the Spirit and is to act as such and be respected as such:

For where two or three are gathered in my name, I am there among them. (Matt 18:20)

Such a gathering may be at a solemn papal Mass in the magnificent basilica of St Peter’s in Rome, or it may be oppressed Christians gathering secretly in prayer in a labour camp—it does not matter. It is the closeness to Christ and to each other that matters and not the place.

Read more

Tuesday of Week 33 of Ordinary Time – Gospel

Commentary on Luke 19:1-10

Today we have one of the most delightful stories of Luke and indeed of the whole Gospel. It follows immediately—and not by accident—after the healing of a blind man as Jesus enters the city of Jericho, to the northeast of Jerusalem.

The central figure is Zacchaeus, who, Luke tells us, was a “chief tax collector” and a rich man. This is the only reference in Scripture to a ‘chief tax collector’. It probably means he was responsible for a district or region with other tax collectors answerable to him. The region at this time was prosperous, so more tax collectors were needed.

Knowing he was a chief tax collector, it was hardly necessary to mention that he was wealthy. Tax collectors were studiously avoided and despised by their fellow-Jews. They made contracts with the Roman authorities to collect taxes and made sure that they got from the public what today we might call generous ‘commissions’. After all, it was a business and they had to make a living. And if an ordinary tax collector could do well, it is easy to imagine how much a chief tax collector might earn.

Apart from forcing people to part with their hard-earned money, tax collectors were seen as traitors to their own people by taking their money and giving it to the pagan Roman colonialists occupying their country. One can see how Jesus could cause great offence to the religious-minded by sitting down and eating with such a despised person.

Zacchaeus heard that Jesus was in town and he was very curious to see what Jesus was like. Already we have here an echo of yesterday’s story, because Zacchaeus too wants to “see”. However, at this stage, it seems to be only a kind of curiosity. He just wanted to get a glimpse of a person of whom he undoubtedly heard people talk. Maybe he had even heard that Jesus had a name for mixing with people like himself.

Because he was a small man (in more ways than one?), he could not see over the large crowd of people surrounding Jesus. So he ran on ahead and climbed into the branches of a sycamore tree to get a better look. A sycamore tree can grow to a height of 10 to 15 metres, with a short trunk and spreading branches and hence easy to climb and easily capable of carrying a grown man.

Zacchaeus wanted to see Jesus, but he did not expect that Jesus would see him. He must have practically fallen out of the tree from surprise when he heard Jesus look in his direction and say:

Zacchaeus, hurry and come down, for I must stay at your house today.

What beautiful words! And yet it is a self-invitation that Jesus constantly extends to us:

Listen! I am standing at the door, knocking; if you hear my voice and open the door, I will come in and eat with you, and you with me. (Rev 3:20)

Is my house ready? Is my door open to let him in?

Zacchaeus could hardly believe his ears. He rushed down and delightedly welcomed Jesus into his house. Immediately, those around began to grumble:

He has gone to be the guest of one who is a sinner.

Of all the people in Jericho, Jesus picks the house of the one person in the town who was regarded as a social and religious outcast.

But as usual, Jesus sees beyond the public image to the real person. Zacchaeus may be a chief tax collector, but he is ready to give half of his property to the poor and, if he has cheated anyone, he promises to pay them back four times what they lost. Fourfold restitution was demanded by Jewish law, but in one case only, for the theft of a sheep (Ex 22:1). Roman law demanded such restitution from all convicted thieves. Zacchaeus, however, promises to pay in any case of injustice for which he has been responsible.

Some commentators read the passage as saying that Zacchaeus has already been making these forms of restitution and sharing his wealth with the poor. If this is the case, it shows that Jesus is able to see beyond the stereotype that makes Zacchaeus the tax collector an outcast. He was not going to the house of an unrepentant sinner, but to that of a good man. Jesus always sees the real person and goes beyond the label. Can we claim to do the same?

Whatever the interpretation, we can see that, though Zacchaeus may have belonged to a discredited profession, his heart was in the right place, in the place of compassion and justice.

And so Jesus tells Zacchaeus that “salvation”, wholeness and integrity has come to his house. In spite of his despised profession, he is “a son of Abraham” because his behaviour is totally in harmony with the requirements of the Law, and in fact goes well beyond it. For Jesus, too, no social status closes the door to salvation. For this is what it means to be a “son of Abraham”, namely, to be a loving, caring person full of compassion, with a sense of justice, and not just a keeper of ritualistic observances.

Zacchaeus, who had originally just wanted to have an external glimpse of Jesus, has now come to ‘see’ Jesus in a much deeper sense. This ‘seeing’ changed his whole life as it did that of the beggar in yesterday’s story.

Further, in answer to the accusation that he has entered the house of a sinner, Jesus says:

…the Son of Man came to seek out and to save the lost.

As Jesus said on another occasion:

Those who are well have no need of a physician but those who are sick; I have not come to call the righteous but sinners to repentance. (Luke 5:31-32)

Jesus is the Good Shepherd leaving behind the well-behaved ninety-nine and going in search of the single one that has gone astray.

As we read this story, there are a number of things we could reflect on. We too want to see Jesus in the deepest possible sense. Only then can we truly become his disciples. We need to hear him saying to us: “I want to stay in your house today.” Let us open the door and welcome him in.

And we need to be careful in judging people from their appearance, or their social position, or their occupation. As a Church, we could spend a lot more time looking for those who are lost instead of concentrating on serving the already converted. In fact, Christ himself invites us to be active evangelisers, both through our actions and through our words.

Read more

Tuesday of Week 33 of Ordinary Time – First Reading

Commentary on 2 Maccabees 6:18-31

For today’s and tomorrow’s readings we go to the Second Book of Maccabees. It is not a continuation of the first book and covers only part of the same period (180-161 BC) seen from a more religious, less historical, angle. However, chronologically speaking, today’s and tomorrow’s readings fit in here.

Today and tomorrow we will be reading of the heroic martyrdoms of people who refused to compromise what they regarded as fundamental principles of their Jewish faith and sacrificed their lives as martyrs. The story of Eleazar and of the mother and her seven sons (tomorrow’s reading), among the earliest models of martyrdom, were understandably very popular among the Christians of the early centuries. Written originally to encourage God’s people in time of persecution, they add gruesome details to the record of tortures and place long speeches in the mouths of the martyrs.

Today we read about Eleazar, who was one of the leading teachers of the Law. He was elderly and a man of great dignity and presence. When he was forced to eat a piece of pork, something completely forbidden by the Law, he spat it out, ready to die with honour rather than to live on in disgrace among his fellow-Jews.

Those who had known him for a long time and had the greatest respect for him wanted him to go through the motions of eating the forbidden food without actually breaking the Law rather than see him lose his life. They urged him, during the lengthy preparation of the ritual meal, to have a kind of meat brought, prepared by himself, which he could legally eat and just pretend to eat the meat prescribed by the king.

By availing of this help provided by friends, he could escape death. But Eleazar, having lived a life of total integrity since he was a boy and followed the Law with the utmost fidelity, told his friends to send him at once to Hades, the place of the dead. What his friends were suggesting might save his life, might not involve a literal breaking of the law, but would have given the appearance that he had conformed to the demands of the idolatrous king. Not only the letter, but the spirit of the Law had to be maintained. And then there were the effects it might have on others, especially the young and impressionable.

Eleazar said to his well-meaning friends:

Such pretense is not worthy of our time of life, for many of the young might suppose that Eleazar in his ninetieth year had gone over to a foreign way of life, and through my pretense, for the sake of living a brief moment longer, they would be led astray because of me, while I defile and disgrace my old age.

He might, by the suggested ruse, escape physical death, but he would never escape from his accountability to God. By showing his readiness to die, he will prove himself worthy of his old age. In addition, he would leave behind:

…to the young a noble example of how to die a good death willingly and nobly for the revered and holy laws.

He then proceeded to walk straight to the torture wheel (or “rack”) on which he would be lashed. But those who just now had been encouraging him to save his life now turned against him. They thought his decision sheer madness. But Eleazar, just before he died under his executioner’s blows, spoke his last words of testament:

It is clear to the Lord in his holy knowledge that, though I might have been saved from death, I am enduring terrible sufferings in my body under this beating, but in my soul I am glad to suffer these things because I fear him.

In dying this way, he left a striking example of nobility and goodness not only for the young, but for the greater part of the nation. He died both a hero and a martyr.

The lesson of this story is important in our age when so much attention is given to image. Appearing to be rich is more important than actually being rich. What people think about you is more important than what you really are. People go to great lengths for image, status, reputation, ‘face’. They surround themselves with the trappings of the consumerist society—the right car, the right house, the right mobile phone, the right restaurants, clothes, cosmetics and even hair styles.

Sometimes, for the sake of ambition and ‘success’, they will not hesitate to compromise religion and morality. Eleazar’s lesson is not so much about his bravery in the face of death, but his integrity, his refusal to compromise on vital issues. With the help of his supporters, he could easily have escaped suffering and death. They thought he was mad not to do so.

For them it was only a question of a few pieces of meat; for Eleazar his loyalty to his God and his own conscience was at stake. He would not have been able to live with himself if he had followed their advice. There are some values which are more important than life itself. It is a lesson much needed in our time.

Origen and some of the Church Fathers, notably Ambrose, Gregory Nazianzen and Cyprian, praise Eleazar as a pre-Christian martyr. This narrative, like the next (which we will read tomorrow), is of the same literary type as many of the Acta of the martyrs.

Our Church should be proud that in every single century since its foundation, there have been people ready and willing to give their lives as an expression of loyalty to Jesus Christ and the way of life for which he stands.

The word ‘martyr’ comes from a Greek word meaning ‘witness’. Not all of us will be required to die for our faith, but it is absolutely certain that we are called on to give witness to Jesus Christ and his mission to build the Kingdom of God in the world—a Kingdom of truth, love, fellowship, justice, freedom and peace. It is important to reflect on the question: How do I give witness?

Read more

Monday of Week 33 of Ordinary Time – First Reading

Commentary on Revelation 1:1-4; 2:1-5

As we come to the end of the liturgical year, these two weeks will be devoted to readings from the Book of Revelation (also called Apocalypse). This is probably the book of the New Testament which causes the most puzzlement to many Christians. Its strange, obscure language seems outrageous and difficult to make sense of. For Christians of some denominations, it is an endlessly fertile ground for all kinds of speculation and interpretation about what is going in our world today.

Although it claims to be written by someone called “John”, it is not now believed that this is John the son of Zebedee and one of the 12 Apostles. Nor is the author necessarily to be identified with the writer(s) of John’s Gospel and the three Letters of John. Most probably he was a Palestine-born Jew who had fled into exile, a prophetic figure known to the churches in the Asia Minor region of what is today western Turkey.

There is conflicting internal evidence about the date of writing of the Book of Revelation. Many have come to the conclusion that it was composed in stages over a considerable length of time. The early section on the letters to the churches is also thought originally to have been a separate document. In any case, it is believed that the book was written during a period of persecution for the Church. Whether that was a systematic persecution by the Roman authorities (e.g. over insistence on worship of the emperor as a sign of loyalty), or simply the result of harassment by Jewish and non-Christian neighbours, is not clear. But the purpose of the book is to boost morale and hope in God for a brighter future that will certainly come.

What causes most difficulty is the apocalyptic style, also found in parts of the Old Testament, most notably in the book of Daniel, but also in the prophecy of Ezekiel (and, not surprisingly, these books are regularly quoted in Revelation). This style uses a great deal of symbolism, some of it rather bizarre to our way of thinking, as it promises the punishment of enemies and a glorious future for God’s people.

There is no way a contemporary reader can make any sense of this book without the help of a good commentary. Even then, some of the symbolism is still lost to us. At the same time, we should not be put off nor concentrate our attention too much on the difficulties of the symbolism. Some of the most beautiful spiritual passages in the whole New Testament can be found in this book, and some of them will appear in our readings. Unfortunately, they remain hidden to many people who are put off by the general language of the book.

Today’s reading consists of two parts: part of the prologue to the book, and part of the first of seven letters to churches in the region.

Prologue
The book begins by stating its purpose and intent. It is a “revelation”. This is a translation of the Greek word apokalypsis from which we get the other English title of the book ‘Apocalypse’. It is a revelation coming from Jesus Christ and directed to his “servants” concerning events which are going to take place among God’s people. These servants may be fellow-prophets of the author, or may include evangelists and martyrs, or simply all the baptised in the community.

The receiver of the revelation calls himself John, and the message, whose veracity the author guarantees, comes from an “angel”. The word ‘angel’ means ‘messenger’ (from the Greek angelos), so it may indicate someone sent by Jesus, or the Messiah himself sent by God the Father. The word ‘angel’ appears more than 70 times in Revelation.

Blessed is the one who reads the words of the prophecy, and blessed are those who hear and who keep what is written in it, for the time is near.

In essence, this is the first of seven beatitudes which are spread through the text of Revelation.*

The word ‘blessed’ is also translated as ‘happy’, or ‘fortunate’, but means much more than being in a good mood. The Greek adjective makarios includes also the idea of being blessed with good fortune. Not only the present, but a future, enduring happiness is also implied.

Fortunate are those, then, who listen to the author’s “prophecy”. ‘Prophecy’ is less a matter of forecasting future events than of communicating a message or teaching from God. That teaching may include a warning about the way God’s people are misbehaving, but it can also be a message of hope for a brighter and happier future—one much needed by those hearing this message. The reason for the hope is that the “time is near”—that is, the day of Jesus’ return.

Let us, too, listen to what this book has to say. Although it was written at a particular place and time in the history of the Church, it continues to have a message valid for every age.

Letters to the seven churches
The author (‘John’) now addresses seven churches or communities in seven different cities in the Roman Province of Asia (present-day western Turkey). These churches were located about 80 km (50 miles) apart from each other, and formed roughly a circle around the city of Ephesus on the coast. The cities which gave their names to these churches are: Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia and Laodicea. We will just read sections from the letters to Ephesus, Sardis and Laodicea. It seems the whole text of Revelation was sent to each of these churches (see Rev 1:11). But it also seems that this section of Revelation began life as a separate piece of writing because, unlike the rest of the book, it is not apocalyptic in style.

John begins with an address and a greeting which makes use of many Old Testament allusions suggesting the glorious return of the King-Messiah and his future reign over God’s people in fulfilment of the promise made to David. This is essentially what the whole book is about. Only part of this greeting is included in our reading.

He opens with a traditional form of greeting, wishing the churches:

Grace to you and peace…

He only uses the word “grace” (charis) twice in the book, while Paul uses it more than 100 times in his letters. ‘Grace’ is that gratuitously-given love of God as experienced in our lives.

The greeting comes from:

…from him who is and who was and who is to come…

This is a common title in Jewish literature developed from the words spoken by Yahweh to Moses from the burning bush: “I AM WHO I AM” (Exod 3:14-15).

The letters are more like proclamations from a Persian king or Roman emperor in that each follows the same pattern and, unlike the rest of the book, are highly didactic.

Each proclamation consists of seven common characteristics:

1. destination;
2. the command to write;
3. the archaic “thus says” formula (“these are the words of”);
4. titles of Christ (largely based on the vision in Rev 1:9-20);
5. the “I know” narrative;
6. the proclamation formula (“let anyone who has an ear listen”); and
7. the victory formula (“everyone who conquers” and similar phrases).

Moral exhortation, usually absent from apocalypses, permeates these proclamations. The general pattern in the letters is commendation, complaint and correction.

Although the letters are clearly addressed to specific churches in Asia Minor, some see in the seven letters a preview of church history in its downward course towards the tepidity of the church at Laodicea. Others interpret them as characteristic of various kinds of Christian congregations that have existed from John’s day until the present time. And certainly, each local church today could do well to see whether what is said here applies to them.

What is significant in these letters is that they reveal churches which have both their strengths and their weaknesses, quite similar to the situation in our own day. The Church has never, at any stage in its history, been anything but flawed. And it will never be otherwise.

Letter to the church at Ephesus
Our reading now jumps to chapter 2 and takes up the letter to the Christian community at Ephesus. It is presented, not as a personal message from John, but as a message from God, which John is simply handing on. It is addressed “to the angel of the church in Ephesus.” Here the word angel may mean the personification of the prevailing spirit of the church.

Ephesus was the biggest of the seven cities and capital of the province. The message comes from:

…him who holds the seven stars in his right hand [the Son of Man], who walks among the seven golden lampstands [the seven churches]…

The phrase reminds us of Jesus’ admonition that the Christian community be like a lamp on a lampstand (and not hidden away) to give light to those around it (see Matt 5:14-16).

Following a pattern found in all the letters, John begins by praising the Ephesians. He commends the way they have endured hardships in living their faith and praises their exposing of false teachers posing as apostles. This could refer to a group known as Nicolaitans. They belonged to a now unknown Christian sect in Ephesus and Pergamum. They may also be connected with a ‘Jezebel’ and her followers mentioned in the letter to the church at Thyatira (see Rev 2:18-28).

However, John also regrets that the Ephesians now show less love than before. This includes both their love for Christ and their love for each other. He concludes by exhorting them to go back to their first fervour:

Remember, then, from where you have fallen; repent and do the works you did at first.

They should remember the earlier sinful state from which they had come, and return to the high standards they had set themselves at the time of the first conversion.

John tells them:

I will come to you and remove your lampstand from its place, unless you repent.

Their “lampstand” here refers to their status as a Christian community. If they continue as they are now, they are no longer shining the light of Christ to the world around them.

We, too, can point to the heroism of our predecessors in maintaining the faith through many trials and sufferings. It is because of them that we have the faith today. But in these easier times, our commitment to Christ and the Gospel can weaken. It is not difficult to drop out, and no one will be very shocked. People do not care very much whether we are “religious” or not.

We have lost much of that vision which inspired our predecessors, but it can be recovered. It needs to be recovered if our church is to be truly a lampstand giving light to its surroundings.

_________________________________________

*For convenience, the complete list of seven Beatitudes are given here. However, only one of them, the 6th, appears in our liturgy readings.

The seven beatitudes in Revelation are:

1. Blessed is the one who reads the words of the prophecy, and blessed are those who hear and who keep what is written in it, for the time is near. (Rev 1:3)
2. Blessed are the dead who from now on die in the Lord. (Rev 14:13)
3. Blessed is the one who stays awake and is clothed [with the teaching of the Gospel], not going about naked and exposed to shame. (Rev 16:15)
4. Blessed are those who are invited to the marriage supper of the Lamb. (Rev 19:9)
5. Blessed and holy are those who share in the first resurrection. (Rev 20:6)
6. Blessed is the one who keeps the words of the prophecy of this book. (Rev 22:7)
7. Blessed are those who wash their robes [keep his commandments] so that they may have the right to the tree of life and may enter the city by the gates. (Rev 22:14)

Read more