More

Commentary on Luke 13:10-17

Last Saturday we saw Jesus telling people that they should not be distracted from their own obligations by getting caught up in tragedies which happened to others. Rather than wonder about the eternal salvation of others, they should pay more attention to their own situation. Today we have an example of people so busy criticising what others are doing that they are totally unaware of the emptiness in their own lives.

We are told that Jesus was teaching in a synagogue on a sabbath day. In the congregation was a woman who was suffering from what seems to be curvature of the spine for 18 years. There is a certain symbolism in the fact that she was badly stooped and was not able to stand up straight. Spiritually speaking, is that not also our problem too? So many of us are bowed down with the burdens and worries of our lives.

In fact, nearly all the healings done by Jesus can be seen as symbolic of deeper afflictions from which all of us can suffer, and even at the same time! For example, we might be deaf (we can’t hear God speaking to us), blind (we cannot see the truth or understand the Word of Jesus in the Gospel), mute (we can’t or won’t proclaim our faith), or paralysed and have other crippling afflictions (we are not able to do the things we ought to be doing). We might suffer from leprosy (we are cut off from relating with others or we cut other people off), or be possessed by evil spirits (in the grip of various compulsions and addictions).

Jesus saw the woman, called her to him and told her she was free from her affliction. Her affliction was seen as caused by an evil spirit and Jesus had liberated her. He laid his hand on her and immediately she stood up straight and began thanking God.

One might expect that everyone present would also start thanking and praising God for what had happened to the poor woman. But alas no, the chief of the synagogue was indignant that the healing had taken place on the Sabbath because medical services were not allowed on the day of rest. He said, “There are six days on which work ought to be done; come on those days and be cured and not on the Sabbath day.”

The ruler of the synagogue was not a priest. He was responsible for conducting services, inviting people to read the Scriptures and preach, and in general maintaining order. He was a layman who also had administrative duties such as taking care of the building. Normally, only one person held this post, but sometimes it could be simply an honorary position.

In a way, of course, the ruler was perfectly right. A woman who had lived with this kind of ailment for 18 years could easily have waited for just one more day to be cured. But that was not the point, as Jesus made perfectly clear. He accused the synagogue head and his like of pure hypocrisy:

Does not each of you on the Sabbath untie his ox or his donkey from the manger and lead it to water? And ought not this woman, a daughter of Abraham whom Satan bound for eighteen long years, be set free from this bondage on the Sabbath day?

They put the needs of animals before that of a human being. All the synagogue head could see was the letter of the law. He could not marvel at the healing power of Jesus and the deep compassion behind it. He could not see that he was in the presence of God’s very power.

It would be like someone at Mass criticising the brevity of a lector’s dress while being totally oblivious to the Word of God she was reading—perhaps this very text!

There is also the sinister possibility, which was the case on other similar occasions, that the woman had been put there deliberately to see whether Jesus would violate the Sabbath. It was not the Sabbath that some of the religious leaders were concerned about, but rather the gathering of evidence to convict Jesus of heresy. The story is an example of taking the beam out of our own eye before dealing with the speck in someone else’s, or of none being so blind as those who refuse to see.

In the end, we are told that Jesus’ critics were “put to shame”, while the ordinary people, often with far more insight than their religious leaders were:

…rejoicing at all the wonderful things being done by him.

More

Commentary on Ephesians 5:21-33

In today’s reading Paul begins speaking about family relationships and, specifically, about the relationship between husband and wife. As we go through the first part of the reading we will feel a certain level of discomfort as it, in part, certainly conflicts with attitudes which prevail in our contemporary society. Two points must be made.

First, the reading reflects the prevailing attitudes of Paul’s day, and it could not be otherwise. We certainly do not have to accept all of these attitudes now. Second, the reading must be taken in its entirety and, under the cultural overlay, we have to discern the very deeply Christian ideal which Paul proposes and which, in many respects, represents a major step forward in the concept of married life.

Paul’s central message is right there in the opening sentence. He writes:

…[be] subject to one another out of reverence for Christ.

Marriage is built on a deep, mutual respect of each partner for the other. Paul will show how, in each relationship, each partner can have a conciliatory attitude that will help that relationship. The phrase “be subject to one another” was probably not originally part of the traditional material that follows, but derives from the author.

It is debated whether the exhortation is applicable only to the section on wives and husbands, or also includes the passages on the mutual relationship between parents and children, or masters and slaves from Colossians (Col 3:18-23).

The opening statement, (“[be] subject to one another out of reverence for Christ”) at first seems to be contradicted by the way Paul immediately speaks of the way the wife should respect her husband. She is to look on her husband as the head of the household similar to the way that Jesus is Head and Lord of the Church. And the wife should “be subject” (‘submit’ or ‘be subordinate’ in some translations) to her husband in the same way that Church is subject to Jesus her Lord (in Paul’s time, wives sometimes addressed their spouse as “lord”).

To ‘be subject’ means giving up some of one’s own rights to another. If the relationship called for it, as in the military, the term could connote obedience, but that meaning is not what’s called for here. In fact, the word ‘obey’ does not appear in Scripture with respect to wives, though it does with respect to children and slaves. In context too, this subjection (submission) is seen as primarily given to God through the husband, just as we say that we love God by loving those around us, or for the Religious, obeying God by obeying their superiors.

Certainly this way of speaking reflects the prevailing ethos of Paul’s time (and we should not forget that it still prevails in many societies in our own day), but it has increasingly become unacceptable in Western society. As it is presented here, it appears that the wife is in an inferior position to her husband. More contemporary views see the roles of husband and wife in marriage as being different and complementary, but not unequal.

In a sense, too, while Paul seems to use the relationship of Jesus with the Church as an example of the relationship of the husband to the wife, in fact, it is the love of Christ for his Body, the Church, which is the very model of Christian marriage. And Paul’s emphasis is not on obedience and subjection, but rather on a mutual, self-giving love.

Paul then turns to the husband and what is expected of him. The total picture probably goes far beyond what the average gentile husband of the time would have found acceptable. Paul begins by saying that:

…the husband is the head of the wife just as Christ is the head of the church, and is himself its Savior…

The Church does recognise Jesus Christ as Lord, but it also knows that that Lord gave his life in love and service for each one of us. There is a very nuanced concept of ‘head’ here. As the husband is seen having a kind of authority over his wife just as Jesus has over his Church, there is also a sense of responsibility for the well-being of the partner. Wives should be subordinate to their husbands as the Church is to Christ. But the Christ we submit to is one who forgives and loves and nurtures, and who takes care of our needs through his Body, the community.

By drawing a parallel between a human marriage and the marriage of Christ to his Church, these two concepts are made to illumine each other. Christ is the spouse of the Church because he is her head and because he loves the Church just as a man loves his own body when he loves his wife. The model of the husband’s love for his wife is the love that Christ showed for the Church by giving his life for it to make it holy. The wife has certainly not been asked to love her husband to that degree. The analogy between the relationship of Christ to the Church and that of the husband to the wife is basic to the entire passage.

Speaking of the Church as the bride of Christ, Paul says that he (Christ) made:

…her holy by cleansing her with the washing of water by the word…

This would seem to point to the sacrament of Baptism. So that when Christ took the Church to himself it was:

…without a spot or wrinkle or anything of the kind, so that she may be holy and without blemish.

It was customary in the Middle East, at the time this letter was written, for the ‘sons of the wedding’ to escort the bride to her husband after she had bathed and dressed. As applied mystically to the Church, Christ washes his bride himself in the bath of baptism, and makes her immaculate (note the mention of a baptismal formula) and introduces her to himself.

Husbands, then, are to love their wives in exactly the same way, with the same degree of care and tenderness. They are to give the same love to their wives as they do to their own bodies. And, in fact, in loving their wives in this way, they are also loving themselves. And just as healthy men care for their own bodies, Christ loves his Body, the Church, of which we are its ‘living parts’.

Finally, Paul, quoting from the book of Genesis, sums up the reality that is a true marriage: where a man leaves his parents, becomes joined to his wife and the two “become one flesh”. It is clear that, in spite of the impression given in the first part, Paul sees marriage as a totally reciprocal relationship. The basis for such expressions of self-giving love is the quotation from Genesis. If the husband and wife “become one flesh”, then for the man to love his wife is to love one who has become part of himself. Paul also makes this Genesis text a prophecy of the marriage of Christ and the Church: a mystery, like that of the salvation of the pagans, that has been hidden, but is now revealed.

All of this, it would seem, proposes a degree of love and intimacy and care for the wife which went far beyond the customary demands of the time. There would be little problem in a wife ‘subjecting’ herself to such a tender and caring husband. It is, in fact, a call for a total giving of the one to the other. Both give and receive all the love that each can give and receive.

Paul calls it a “great mystery” and indeed it is a reality which we can never fully understand. The profound truth of the union of Christ and his ‘Bride’, the Church, is beyond unaided human understanding. It is not that the relationship of husband and wife provides an illustration of the union of Christ and the Church, but that the basic reality is the latter, with marriage a human echo of the relationship.

A Christian marriage, then, is a living out of the union of Christ with his bride, the Church. And nowhere else in our human experience do we see the love of Christ for his Bride more clearly exemplified.

Paul then concludes the passage by summing up that the husband:

…should love his wife as himself, and a wife should respect her husband.

The reciprocal is also true—the husband is to respect his wife and she is to love him as she loves herself. More than two thousand years after this was written, we could hardly express it better.

More

Commentary on Ephesians 4:32-5:8 Read Monday of Week 30 of Ordinary Time – First Reading »

More

Commentary on Ephesians 6:1-9

Paul continues speaking about relationships in the home. Today he speaks of children and slaves. (The Latin word familia includes the whole household: parents, children and servants, who all lived under one roof.)

Children are to obey their parents—in the Lord. This means that they hear in their parents the voice of God; in obeying them, they obey the Lord. This, of course, presumes that what parents tell their children to do is in accordance with truth, love and justice. Children are not bound to follow immoral instructions; on the contrary, they should reject them.

The Fourth Commandment is:

Honour your father and mother.

Paul says of it:

…this is the first commandment with a promise—”so that it may be well with you and you may live long on the earth”.

The promised reward to filial obedience of long life is a reference to the book of Deuteronomy (5:33) where the “promise” was the ultimate occupation of the land of Palestine, the Promised Land. Here, “earth” refers to the life without end that Christ brings. It is the same meaning as in the Beatitude:

Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth.
(Matt 5:5)

“Earth” here also refers (as it does in the rest of the Beatitudes) to the Kingdom.

Parents, too, are reminded that there is a limit to their authority. That limit is set by the love and respect that the Gospel calls for in all human relationships. They are told:

…do not provoke your children to anger…

Children will not always be happy with the decisions of their parents, but where there is clearly a genuine care for their well-being, long-term resentment will not be a problem. Children do have a great sense of justice and fairness.

Next, Paul addresses slaves. We come to a practice which to us, now, is completely unacceptable. We need to remind ourselves that it has been only in the relatively recent past that the institution of slavery has been seen as morally unacceptable. Up to that time, it was practiced as a perfectly normal arrangement by nearly every society. Even the Church did not address it as a problem for a long time. The question in Paul’s time was not the existence of the institution of slavery, but rather what both the Old and New Testaments taught about the proper treatment of slaves.

It needs to be said that some slaves even in ancient times would have been treated well and seen as integral parts of the household. They would have been given a level of love, respect and care. Even so, the idea behind slavery, that people could be reduced to the level of animals or objects to be bought and sold, and to be the property of other human beings, should be seen as anathema—a violation of personal dignity.

Paul calls on slaves to be totally obedient to their “masters”. As stated in the Jerusalem Bible:

“The Greek for this word [‘masters’], from which our English term ‘despot’ is derived, indicates the owner’s absolute authority over his slave. Roman slaves had no legal rights, their fates being entirely in their masters’ hands. Slavery was a basic element of Roman society, and the impact of Christianity upon slaves was a vital concern. Guidance for the conduct of Christian master and their slaves was essential.”

For Paul, the slaves are to see the person of Christ in their masters and so they behave well, not just to please their employers, but because, as Christians themselves, they are—like all other Christians—slaves of Christ.

Everyone, be they slave or free, will find the same reward for all the good they do. A slave might be recognised as such by his status, but in practice, he was to be loved as a brother in Christ. We see Paul express this attitude in his letter to Philemon (Phil 1:8-21), which deals with the treatment of Onesimus, a slave who has run away.

There is a word, too, for the masters. Once again, as with husbands and wives, children and parents, Paul emphasises that there are mutual responsibilities on both sides:

Stop threatening them, for you know that both of you have the same Lord in heaven, and with him there is no partiality.

They are to treat their slaves well and with respect. Both master and slave are serving the very same Master, who is not in the least impressed by social status.

We have here, in this comment of Paul, already the seed of the end of slavery—the equal and inviolable dignity of every person. Freedom is everyone’s right; no one can ever belong, as a piece of property, to another person.

In reading this passage, we need to reflect on the way we treat our children today. In some ways, the challenges facing parents in modern society are far greater than in the past, but the basic principles remain the same.

We do not have—at least in most societies now—slaves in the strict sense, but there are still great gaps in the social status of people. There is still a huge level of exploitation within countries and between countries over people who are employed to work for us. There are still countries who subjugate some groups of people to forced labor. As well, we have the enormous problem of child labour and what sometimes is tantamount to slavery involving thousands of people. Economic and sexual abuse are rampant. The ‘sex trade’ involves the abduction and slavery of thousands of young boys and girls. The main reason for its existence is the market which so-called ‘free people’ provide. In many ways, we have little cause to criticise the society of Paul’s day.

More

Commentary on Phil 1:1-11 Read Friday of week 30 of Ordinary Time – First Reading »

More

Commentary on Luke 13:22-30

The Gospel today speaks in terms of predestination, of those who will ultimately be saved.

Jesus is steadily making his way to Jerusalem, passing through many towns and villages. It seems that at this time he is in the region of Perea, on the east side of the Jordan, on his way to Jericho and Jerusalem. He is approached by a man who wants to know if only a few will be saved. One has the feeling that he expects the answer to be ‘Yes’ and that he regards himself as being among the chosen ones.

Jesus does not answer the question directly. Rather, he implies that those who are saved are not necessarily those who regard themselves as God’s chosen ones, but those who walk a certain path in life. That path, of course, is precisely what he is proposing through his own life and teaching. It is a “narrow door”, he says, which many will not be able to enter:

Once the [Master] of the house has got up and shut the door, and you begin to stand outside and to knock at the door, saying, ‘Lord, open to us,’ then in reply he will say to you, ‘I do not know where you come from.’

Those on the ‘outside’ will counter by saying:

We ate and drank with you, and you taught in our streets.

But still the Master says:

I do not know where you come from; go away from me, all you evildoers!

Jesus was often accused of eating and drinking with sinners, but it did them no good unless, as a result of their contact with him, they changed their way of living.

It is clearly not enough to be just in Christ’s company or to have heard his teaching. For example, just being a baptised Catholic or routinely fulfilling a few religious obligations (like being physically present at Sunday Mass) is not the same as really being a part of what is going on. To go in the “narrow door” is to be actively committed to living the gospel in one’s daily life.

Jesus’ next words are directed to some of the Jews, but to Christians also:

There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth when you see Abraham and Isaac and Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God, and you yourselves thrown out.

They will see them enter the Kingdom, not because of their status, but because of their commitment to serving God.

On the other hand, many of Jesus’ hearers will be rejected because they relied only on their ethnic and religious origins. But that is not enough. In the meantime:

…people will come from east and west, from north and south, and take their places at the banquet in the kingdom of God.

They will see these gentile outsiders from the four corners of the earth, people they rejected and despised, going ahead of them into the Kingdom, again because these people heard the call of God and entered by the “narrow door” that leads to life.

This was already being realised in the early Church as more and more Gentiles heard the gospel message, were baptised and many died as martyrs. Jesus even says, at the end of today’s reading:

Indeed, some are last who will be first, and some are first who will be last.

It would be wrong for us to read this Gospel as of mere historic interest—it is addressed directly to each one of us. It is vital that we, as Catholics, do not think that, simply on the basis of our membership in our Church, we are somehow on an inside track and that, if the worst came to the worst, we could always get a confession or a final anointing to set things straight. That would be very presumptuous and very dangerous on our part. We could very well be in a position to hear those terrible words:

Truly I tell you, I do not know you. (Matt 25:12)

Each day and every day of our lives we have to walk through that narrow door, that door of faith and trust and love for Jesus and our brothers and sisters. Only then will we find ourselves joining the patriarchs, the prophets and all the saints in that life of unending happiness and union with our God for which we were made.

More

Commentary on Ephesians 6:10-20

There is a cosmic sweep to this Letter which goes right through it and it is on that note that we conclude our readings from Ephesians today. Paul describes the spiritual and Christian life as a battle not only against the realities of this world, but also against spiritual powers which are alien to God. We cannot deal with these powers on our own. Rather, we can only do so with the help and support of God’s invincible power. He says:

…be strong in the Lord and in the strength of his power…

Paul’s vision throughout the Letter has been cosmic. He has referred constantly to the unseen world, which was very real to people living in a world whose cosmology was very different from ours. He now sees the Christian life as a battle with these:

…the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places.

He says that one should:

…put on the whole armor of God, so that you may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil…

Isaiah describes God as arming himself against his enemies and it is with these arms that Christians, too, are to equip themselves. The reason is that our real enemies are not ” blood and flesh”, creatures of the earth, but powerful spiritual beings in the world that we cannot see.

They are the source of darkness in our world. They are “cosmic powers” who were thought to move the stars and, consequently, the universe. The Jerusalem Bible comments:

“They live in ‘the heavens’ or in ‘the air’, that is, the space between the surface of the earth and the heaven where God lives… They disobeyed God and want to enslave the human race to themselves in sin… If Christians are armed with the power of Christ, they will be able to fight them.”

Against such forces only the “armour of God” is effective:

…so that you may be able to withstand on the evil day and, having prevailed against everything, to stand firm.

The image is not that of a massive invasion of evil, but of individual soldiers resisting an assault.

Although our modern world does not see the cosmos as filled with such superhuman creatures (although they still live in our science-fiction movies), the weapons that Paul will recommend are just as practical now as they were then.

What exactly is the armour he is thinking about? First, there is truth (“belt your waist”) and integrity—”the breastplate of righteousness”. These are indeed powerful weapons. With truth, we are on the side of God. The evil spirit is the “father of lies” (John 8:44). With integrity, there is perfect transparency and no shadow of deceit or dissimulation. What the evil spirit dreads is to have light shone on the darkness where he hides. These are truly effective weapons.

The “breastplate of righteousness” is another effective defence against evil. God himself is symbolically described as putting on a breastplate of righteousness when he goes forth to bring about justice.

He put on righteousness like a breastplate
and a helmet of salvation on his head;
he put on garments of vengeance for clothing
and wrapped himself in fury as in a mantle. (Isa 59:17)

Also needed are feet on which you:

…lace up your sandals in preparation for the gospel of peace.

While the feet of those who bring good news in Isaiah are seen running barefoot, here the image is more of the strong shoes of the Roman soldier enabling the wearer to cover long distances. What is called for here is an eagerness or zeal to proclaim and spread the Gospel and a strong faith in God and Christ. Faith is seen as a protective shield which, when soaked in water, can easily quench the flaming arrows of the enemy.

God’s saving work in us is our “helmet of salvation”, and the “word of God” (the Scriptures) is the sword of the Spirit with which to fight the enemy. The helmet both protected the soldier and was a striking symbol of military victory. And in a way, most important of all, is to:

Pray in the Spirit at all times in every prayer and supplication.

We need to pray night and day for each other. And Paul also asks especially that they:

Pray that I may declare it boldly, as I must speak.

Paul requests prayers for himself, so that even in captivity he can continue to uncover to others the mystery of the Good News.

The “sword of the Spirit” and the need to pray are reminders that we are engaged in a spiritual battle to be fought in God’s strength boosted by the Word of God and prayer. We, too, need to arm ourselves with the protecting qualities mentioned here so that we can live an effective Christian life in an environment where there are so many threatening influences. We need to pray for each other and give each other the support we need to remain faithful to the spirit of the Gospel. Above all, we need some of Paul’s courage to speak out boldly and not be ashamed to share our faith.

More

Commentary on Luke 13:31-35

Today Jesus is warned by some Pharisees to leave the area where he is teaching. The reason they give is that Herod is after him. This is Herod Antipas, a son of Herod the Great, whom we have already met. The region of Perea was part of his territory as tetrarch. The warning could, of course, have been just a ploy on the part of the Pharisees to get rid of Jesus by frightening him in this way.

At the same time, there could have been something in the threat because Herod had already executed John the Baptist, although there is no evidence that Jesus spoke against Herod in the same way that offended Herod’s second wife.

In any case, Jesus is not moved. He knows that his life is part of a larger plan. He will do his work, including the healing of people and their liberation from evil forces. When the time is ripe, and not before, he will face his passion and death. He will “finish [his] work”—a double meaning about both the end of his life on earth and his being brought to perfection through his suffering and death—an idea explicitly put in the letter to the Hebrews (10:36-38).

Further, it has been ordained that he will face his death in Jerusalem and nowhere else. Herod is not going to change any of that.

Then, Jesus goes on to pray for the city that will be the scene of his death. It is a city that has many times in the past mistreated and killed those sent by God to bring his message. Jesus speaks tenderly:

Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to it! How often have I desired to gather your children together as a hen gathers her brood under her wings…

But they reject him, as they rejected so many prophets before.

He foretells something that must have seemed to his hearers both blasphemous and impossible:

…your house [the Temple] is left to you desolate.

Yet, just 40 years after Jesus’ death, the Temple will meet its destruction, never again to be rebuilt.

Finally, he tells them that:

…you will not see me until the time comes when you say, ‘Blessed is the one who comes in the name of the Lord.’

This could refer to his triumphal entry into Jerusalem at the beginning of Holy Week or to his final coming as Judge and Lord of all.

Our lives too are in God’s hands and nothing will happen to us which is in conflict with God’s wishes and God’s plans. Ultimately, everything is for our well-being. But, let us be on the alert to recognise the Lord coming into our lives often in very unexpected ways and through very unexpected people. Some of those we reject may be bringing—even unknown to themselves—a message from God that we need to hear and follow.

More

Commentary on Luke 14:1-6

Today we enter a series of four teachings from Jesus, all connected with meals. It begins with another example of a confrontation between Jesus and some religious leaders on a Sabbath. Altogether there are seven Sabbath healings recorded in the Gospels, of which Luke mentions five. The other two are in John—the healing of the paralysed man at the Sheep Gate (see John 5:10 and following) and the healing of the man born blind (John 9:14 and following).

Jesus had apparently been invited to have a meal in a Pharisee’s house on a Sabbath day. We have mentioned before that the word ‘Pharisee’ means ‘separated one’. They numbered about 6,000 and were found all over Palestine. They taught in synagogues, saw themselves as religious paragons, and were self-appointed guardians of the Law and its observance. They regarded their interpretations of traditions to be virtually as authoritative as Scripture (see Mark 7:8-13). The scribes studied, interpreted and taught the Law, both written and oral. Most of them were also Pharisees and hence they are often paired in the Gospel.

It certainly looks as if the invitation was what is known as a ‘set up’ because, we are told, “they were watching him closely”. And there right in front of him (what a coincidence!) was a man suffering from edema, an accumulation of fluid in the body caused by some other illness (this is the only place in the original Greek of the New Testament where the term Luke uses for this sickness is found).

Far from being put on the defensive, Jesus immediately throws down a challenge:

Is it lawful to cure people on the Sabbath or not?

Strictly speaking, according to the letter of the Law as interpreted by the scribes and Pharisees present, it was not lawful. Because ‘curing’ involved medical work and it could take time and energy. By asking them his question before the healing, Jesus made it difficult for them to protest afterwards. And in fact they dared not give him an answer. To say ‘yes’ could make them seem lax in their interpretation; to say ‘no’ would seem cruel to the man.

So Jesus took the man, healed him on the spot and sent him off. He then turns to his critics with another question:

If one of you has a child or an ox that has fallen into a well, will you not immediately pull it out on a Sabbath day?

They had no answer because no answer was necessary or possible. What Jesus had done was unlawful only according to rabbinic interpretations, but not according to the Mosaic Law itself.

Their mindset was revealed and it was not the mindset of Jesus. For them people came second to legalities. For Jesus the law was there for people. Jesus was moved by compassion and the well-being of people. Sometimes that meant the law had to be put aside—a principle which they also recognised as proved by the examples that Jesus gave.

How many times have we become the victim of our desire for human ‘respect’—of failiing to go to the help of a person because we were afraid of what people might say or how they might judge us? They may even throw Church ‘rules’ and ‘commandments’ in our face as criticism. But no one who acts out of genuine love for others can go far wrong. No truly loving act can be sinful.

More

Commentary on Philippians 1:18-26 Read Saturday of Week 30 of Ordinary Time – First Reading »