Tuesday of Week 15 of Ordinary Time – First Reading

Commentary on Isaiah 7:1-9

Today’s reading seems to describe mainly a historical situation, but there is a lesson which is brought out at the end. The incident refers to what is known as the Syro-Ephraimite War which probably took place in the years 735-34 BC.  Rezin (or Razon, depending on the biblical translation) was king of Aram (Syria) and Pekah (752-732 BC) was king of Ephraim, another name for Israel or the Northern Kingdom.  Syria and Israel were trying to persuade King Ahaz of Judah, the Southern Kingdom, to join them in an alliance against the powerful king of Assyria who had eyes on land lying to the west of his empire.  Israel was afraid that Ahaz might go into a counter-alliance with Assyria, which was not an unlikely possibility.

When the news reached “the house of David”, i.e. King Ahaz in Jerusalem, that Syria and Israel-Ephraim were on his doorstep:

…the heart of Ahaz and the heart of his people shook as the trees of the forest shake before the wind.

Their fear was justified because Ahaz had earlier been soundly defeated by the Syrian-Israel alliance.

It is at this point that Isaiah is told by God to meet Ahaz at an aqueduct where the king was probably inspecting the city’s water supply (rather important if a siege was in the offing).  Its exact location is not now known.  The “fuller’s (or washerman’s) field” refers to a place where the citizens did their laundry.  Clothes were cleaned by trampling on them in cold water and using a kind of soap (soda) or bleach called ‘fuller’.

With him Isaiah brings one of his sons, Shear-jashub.  Each of Isaiah’s sons was given a symbolic and prophetic name and this one means ‘A remnant will return’.  It indicates a prophecy that one day a small number of Jews would return to Israel and escape the punishment which most of the population has deserved.

Isaiah has words of comfort for Ahaz.  The two countries threatening him, powerful though they seem to be, are merely “smouldering stumps of firebrands”.  Their fire has gone out; only the smoke of dying embers remains.  And, in fact, Damascus, the capital of Syria (Aram), was overcome by Tiglath-Pileser III in 732 BC and Israel, the Northern Kingdom, was badly defeated in the same year.  Isaiah was issuing no empty threats.

Although the Syrian-Israel alliance intends to put the “son of Tabeel” (probably a courtier from Syria) on Ahaz’s throne, it will not happen, says Isaiah.  Tabeel is an Aramaic name sometimes linked with the ‘land of Tob’, on the east side of the Jordan.

Isaiah then proceeds to make a prophecy indicating that the Syrian-Ephraim alliance will not succeed:

It shall not stand,
and it shall not come to pass.

At this time, the capital or ‘head’ of Syria was Damascus and Rezin was the head of Damascus. Samaria was the capital or ‘head’ of Ephraim (Israel) and the “son of Remaliah” was the head of Samaria (Ephraim/Israel). The irony of the words is that mere men head these territories, while the real king of Judah-Jerusalem is not Ahaz, but Yahweh the Lord God. Says God through his prophet:

Within sixty-five years Ephraim will be shattered, no longer a people.

And indeed in the year 722 BC the city of Samaria fell.  Later still, about 670 BC, the Assyrian king settled foreign colonies in Israel.  The intermarriage of these settlers with the Jewish remnant resulted in the “Samaritans”.  The northern kingdom was no longer a separate and distinct nation.

All of this is a warning to Ahaz that the same fate awaits Judah unless he stands firm:

If you do not stand firm in faith,
you shall not stand at all.

The message is clear: Ahaz is to put his firm trust and confidence in the protection of Yahweh, who alone has the power to save him and his people. Unfortunately, the message will not be heeded.

In the prophets, faith is not so much a theoretical belief in the existence and uniqueness of God as it is an attitude of confidence based on God’s choice of Israel: he has chosen Israel, he is Israel’s God, and he alone has the power to save his people.  This unconditional trust, a guarantee of salvation, excludes all reliance not only on human agency, but still more on false gods.

We, too, cannot expect God to stand by us if we do not stand by him. This is not to be interpreted as saying that God is touchy and vindictive and that, if he feels insulted or ignored, he will abandon us or bring some terrible punishment on us.  It means that only when we are fully on his side and his way is fully assimilated into our lives, will we find the life he promises.  If we insist on going our own way, he will not stop us, but he will not be able to help us either.  We will have shut ourselves off from his loving help.

Read more

Tuesday of Week 15 of Ordinary Time – Gospel

Commentary on Matthew 11:20-24

After the apostolic discourse of chapter 10, Matthew goes back to narrative. In the passages preceding today’s Gospel reading, Jesus reassures the disciples of John the Baptist, saying to them:

Go and tell John what you hear and see: the blind receive their sight, the lame walk, those with a skin disease are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the poor have good news brought to them. (Matt 11:4)

In other words, he says that he is indeed “the one who is to come”, the Messiah and Saviour-King.

This is followed by a passage where Jesus complains of those who close their minds to God’s word. John the Baptist led the life of an ascetic in the wilderness, and they did not listen to him. Jesus socialised freely with all kinds of people, and they accused him of being a glutton and a drunkard.

So today Jesus warns three towns where he spent much of his time: Chorazin, Bethsaida and especially Capernaum. If Jesus had done in the pagan towns of Tyre and Sidon what he had done in these predominantly Israelite towns, they would have converted long ago. Even Sodom, the biblical image of the very worst in immorality, would have done better.

It is important for us to realise that in this Gospel, Jesus is primarily speaking to us today. If many non-Christians had been given the opportunities that we have received through our membership in the Christian community, they could very well be living much more generously than we do.

To what extent are we listening to God’s word? How much of it do we try to understand? And how much of it is reflected in our lifestyle? Are we clearly and obviously followers of Christ and his Way?

Read more