Monday of Week 18 of Ordinary Time – First Reading

Commentary on Jeremiah 28:1-17

We read today of the dispute with the false prophet, Hananiah. It is nice, of course, to hear encouraging words, but not if they are false and misleading—that is what we see in today’s reading.

Internal evidence seems to indicate that chapters 27-28 were a distinct unit from the rest of the text. They may have formed a special collection for those in exile. The setting is the beginning of the reign of King Zedekiah over Judah, and the year is 593 BC. Zedekiah had been installed by the Babylonians as a puppet king; he would not last long.

The prophet Hananiah addresses Jeremiah, also a prophet, in the Temple. The name ‘Hananiah’ means ‘The Lord is gracious’. It was a fitting name for a prophet who brought soothing, but misleading, promises of the return of the exiles and the temple vessels.

Speaking with the same words of authority that Jeremiah uses (“Thus says the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel…”), Hananiah predicts that in two years’ time, the yoke of King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon over Judah will be broken. Everything that Nebuchadnezzar had carried away, especially the vessels from the Temple, will be brought back. Jeconiah, the exiled son of King Jehoiakim, and all the exiles will also return. Jehoiakim had been taken to Babylon in 597 BC. Saying that all this would take place within two years directly contradicted what Jeremiah had predicted earlier, namely, that the Babylonian occupation would last 70 years (Jer 25:11-12).

Jeremiah then makes a response to Hananiah’s prophecy. In a strongly sarcastic tone he says it would be wonderful if the words of Hananiah were indeed true and that the exiles and the temple vessels could return. Then he gives a warning. In the past (“from ancient times”), prophets normally would forecast war, famine and plague. Very often their prophecies came true because these things were likely to happen anyway. They were the results of the people’s sinfulness and idolatry.

But Jeremiah says:

…the prophet who prophesies peace, when the word of that prophet comes true, then it will be known that the Lord has truly sent the prophet.

In other words, Hananiah’s genuineness as a prophet will only be proved if his prophecy about Nebuchadnezzar is fully realised and peace returns to Judah and Jerusalem. Which, of course, did not happen.

As if to prove his point by a symbolical gesture, Hananiah then removes a wooden yoke from the shoulder of Jeremiah and smashes it. This, he predicts, is how the yoke of Nebuchadnezzar will be broken within two years. By so acting, Hananiah was perhaps symbolically trying to break the power of Jeremiah’s earlier prophecies, which contradicted his own.

At that point, Jeremiah went off, but Yahweh soon had a message for him. Hananiah is to be told:

You have broken wooden bars only to forge iron bars in place of them!

Now, an iron yoke will be placed on the shoulders of all the peoples Nebuchadnezzar has conquered and they will be reduced to servitude, along with their animals. The yoke of the King of Babylon will not be broken until the Lord sees fit to do so. It will, of course, eventually be broken, but the pie-in-the-sky promises of Hananiah will be proved illusory.

Jeremiah then confronts Hananiah. He is no true prophet; he has not been sent by God. Thanks to him the people have been given a false sense of security. Hananiah will be removed and he will be sent to his death within the year. And this indeed happened. Making false predictions was tantamount to rebellion and was punishable by death. He who had predicted restoration within two years himself died within two months.

The fulfilment of this short-term prophecy by Jeremiah gives credibility to his other more important prophecies. It was, in a way, an indication of who was the true and who was the false prophet, and which of their predictions about the future should be believed.

Perhaps Hananiah meant well and he may even have believed what he told the people. On the other hand, he may have been simply seeking popularity and his own advantage. His words were in fact little more than propaganda with little basis in reality.

Jeremiah had earned a great deal of unpopularity in predicting suffering and defeat for his people and in telling them in the plainest words that their difficulties were entirely due to their own failure to follow God’s way. Very often the truth hurts, but we need to hear it. There are times and places for encouragement (the apocalyptic literature is full of it), but there are also times when people need to be brought face to face with reality.

Read more

Monday of Week 18 of Ordinary Time – Gospel

Commentary on Matthew 14:13-21

The announcement of John the Baptist’s death is followed immediately in Matthew by the feeding of the 5,000 in the desert. Matthew says that Jesus, on hearing of his cousin’s tragic death, withdrew by boat to a desert place by himself. He clearly wanted time to reflect. He knew that, if things continued as they were, he too would be facing trouble.

However, the crowds knew where he had gone and followed along the shore on foot and:

When he went ashore, he saw a great crowd, and he had compassion for them and cured their sick.

His own troubles were set aside as he saw the greater need of the people. We have here, of course, an image of our God, filled with compassion for all of us and anxious to bring us healing and wholeness.

As evening comes down, the disciples suggest that the people be sent to neighbouring villages for food. It is the first mention of the disciples’ presence. In Mark’s version of this story, the disciples had accompanied Jesus in the boat at his invitation, so that they could all have a period of quiet away from the crowds. Jesus’ response is simple and to the point:

They need not go away; you give them something to eat.

They reply:

We have nothing here but five loaves and two fish.

This, of course, is a sign of the future. It will be the responsibility of Jesus’ followers to give the people the nourishment they need for their lives. At times, their resources will seem very inadequate, but time will show that wonders can be done with very little. Just look at what St (Mother) Teresa of Calcutta achieved with nothing of her own.

The people are then ordered to sit down on the grass. Jesus takes the loaves and fish, looks up to heaven in the direction of his Father, blesses the food, breaks it and gives it to the disciples, who in turn distribute it among the people. The whole action clearly prefigures the Eucharist and leads up to it.

It is not explained how it all happened, but “five thousand men”, not counting the women and children also present, had their fill. Matthew alone notes the presence of women and children. As Jews did not permit women and children to eat together with men in public, they would have been in a separate place by themselves. And what was left over filled 12 baskets—a perfect number symbolising both abundance, and also the number of the Apostles.

There are two clear lessons. The first is that God takes care of his people. We can read the feeding in two ways. On the one hand, we can simply take it as a miraculous event, pointing to the divine origins of Jesus. On the other hand, there is another possibility with its own meaning. Once the disciples began to share the little food they had with those around, it triggered a similar movement among the crowd, many of whom had actually brought some food with them. When everyone shared, everyone had enough—a picture of the kind of society the Church should stand for. Some might say that this is explaining away the miracle, but it also makes an important point for us to consider in our own lives.

The second lesson is that it was the disciples and not Jesus who distributed the bread and fish. And so it must be in our own time. If the followers of Jesus do not share with others what they have received from him, the work of Jesus and the spreading of the Gospel will not happen.

Lastly, and as already mentioned, there are clear Eucharistic elements in the story—especially the ritualistic way in which Jesus prayed, blessed, broke and distributed the bread. The breaking of the bread (a name for the Mass) is very important because it indicates sharing and not just eating. The Eucharist is the celebration of a sharing community. If sharing of what we have in real life is not taking place, then the Eucharist becomes a ritualistic sham, like:

…whitewashed tombs, which on the outside look beautiful but inside are full of the bones of the dead… (Matt 23:27)

Read more