More

Commentary on Mark 8:11-13

The Pharisees, disturbed by what Jesus is saying and doing, demand a “sign from heaven” to indicate that his authority comes from God.  He refuses to acquiesce to their request; they will not get a sign on their terms. 

The irony, of course, is that Jesus’ whole life is a sign, a sign of God’s loving presence among us.  In Mark, the ordinary people can see this clearly.  Only the leaders and (in Mark) Jesus’ own disciples are slow to learn.

In the immediately foregoing passage, Jesus has just fed 4,000 people with seven loaves of bread and a few fish.  The signs are there in abundance, but the Pharisees cannot see because they do not want to see.  Their blindness is a central theme to this part of Mark, as we shall see. We too need to be aware of our own blindness and our failure to see the signs of God’s love operating in our everyday lives.

More

Commentary on Genesis 4:1-15,25

The story of original sin continues with a number of accounts all pointing to the source of people’s pain and suffering—their alienation from the ways of God. Today it is about the all-too prevalent violence and killing which brings death, anger, fear and division into people’s lives.

The New Jerusalem Bible introduces the story in this way:

“This narrative presupposes a developed civilisation, an established form of worship, the existence of other people who might kill Cain, and the existence of a clan that would rally to him. It may be that the narrative originally referred not to the children of the first Man, but to the eponymous ancestor of the Cainites (see Num 24:21). The Yahwistic tradition has moved the story back to the period of the beginning, thus giving it a universal significance: after the revolt against God we now have fratricidal strife; against these two evils is directed the double command that sums up the whole Law—the love of God and of neighbour (see Matt 22:40).”

Now expelled from the Garden, the Man has sexual relations with his wife, Eve, and they have a son who is called Cain:

I have produced a man with the help of the Lord.

The Hebrew name qayin (“Cain”) and the term qaniti (“I have produced” or “I have acquired”, i.e. ‘acquisition’) present a play on words. There are many examples where biblical naming of children or places involves puns on key events. The statement also expresses the delight of the first Woman who, though under the ‘rule’ of her husband, produces what the Man wants, but cannot produce on his own—a son. God is more behind the procreation of the son than her husband.

Cain, then, is seen as a gift from God. There is an element of creation in every act of pro-creation. Cain is soon followed by a brother, Abel. Abel ( meaning “emptiness or futility” in Hebrew folk etymology), is the perfect counterpart of “Acquisition”. In the Scriptures, brother pairs are often seen opposed in temperament, way of life and destiny (e.g. Jacob and Esau).

Abel was a shepherd while Cain was a farmer tilling the ground. The historical opposition of shepherds and farmers is indicated here. God favours the shepherd, but the choice comes to grief in any case. This is the first instance, too, of a common biblical theme—the younger being preferred to the elder (among others, Isaac to Ishmael, Jacob to Esau, Rachel to Leah). Such preferences indicate the freedom of God’s choice, his bypassing earthly standards of greatness, and his regard for the lowly (see Jesus’ teaching to his disciples about who is really great in the Kingdom: Matthew 18:1-5; Luke 9:46-48; Mark 10:35-45).

In the course of time, Cain brought along the fruits of his farming and offered them to the Lord. Abel also brought the first lambs of his flock and offered their fat portions to the Lord. God was pleased with the offerings of Abel, but disregarded those of Cain. This made Cain very angry and resentful. We might be inclined to sympathise, or ask the reason for the discrimination.

Perhaps Cain is being told that what really pleases God is righteousness and good behaviour. This will emerge more clearly in the time of the prophets, where religious rituals are seen only as having value when they are accompanied by a life of concern for the brother and sister, especially those in need.

God asks Cain why he is angry and despondent. If he had done well, would he not have been accepted by God? If he is badly disposed to God’s treatment of him, is not “sin…lurking at the door”? This is something he must overcome, but something he failed to do. He invited his brother to go out to his farm and there Cain killed Abel. The crime is aggravated by the deceit (“Let us go out to the field.”), and being against a blood brother and a good man who had done nothing to provoke such violence.

God then asks Cain where his brother has gone. As in the case of the Man and the Woman after their sin, God knows very well what has happened, but he wants to give Cain an opportunity to confess his crime. However, Cain backs off. He says he does not know, and then asks the famous question:

…am I my brother’s keeper?

This is, of course, a rhetorical question in the Scriptures.

God now comes out straight:

What have you done? Listen, your brother’s blood is crying out to me from the ground!

So Cain is cursed from the ground, the very ground which received Abel’s blood from Cain’s hand. From now on, the earth he tills will not be productive, while Cain himself will be a fugitive and a wanderer over the earth. He will enjoy no citizens’ rights, at least in his initial homeland.

Cain’s punishment is to till the ground with great difficulty, and to be condemned to the life of an ever-wandering nomad. This was, in fact, the life of many people in pre-agricultural days, and there are still people living in this way, including the Bedouins of the desert.

Cain feels his punishment is more than he can bear: he has been driven from the soil which provided him with a living and, worse, he must remain hidden from the face of God, while being a fugitive and wanderer for the rest of his life. Anyone who sees him will feel justified in killing him. Faced with his crime, Cain does not express any form of repentance, but is simply filled with self-pity. Ironically, then, he begs God that he not meet the same fate as his own brother, that of being killed.

He has no need to fear, God tells him, because anyone who kills Cain will be punished seven-times more severely. The message is clear: killing, even in revenge is ruled out (see also Jesus’ words on this in Matt 5:21-26). God then put a mark on Cain to prevent anyone from striking him down. This is not a brand of shame, but a protecting sign; it shows that Cain (with Abel) belongs to a clan which will exact blood for blood.

The use of tattooing for tribal marks has always been common among the nomads of the Near Eastern deserts. Also in ancient times, certain criminals were offered limited asylum when uncontrolled reprisals posed a greater social danger than the criminals themselves.

Cain was left in a living hell—neither living nor dying. But what he did was only the beginning of a huge trail of murder and bloodshed in the world’s history. For the authors of Genesis, this was the first recorded murder, but such violence continues now as a reality of life, part of man’s sinfulness from the very beginning. In a verse which is part of this story, but not contained in our reading, Lamech, a descendant of Adam, boasts to his wives, saying:

Adah and Zillah, hear my voice;
you wives of Lamech, listen to what I say:
I have killed a man for wounding me,
a young man for striking me.
If Cain is avenged sevenfold,
truly Lamech seventy-sevenfold. (Gen 4:23-34)

One wonders if Jesus’ answer to Peter about the number of times he should forgive is an echo of Lamech’s boast? (See Matt 18:22).

At the end of the reading, we are told that later Adam again had intercourse with his wife and they bore a son called Seth:

God has appointed for me another child instead of Abel, because Cain killed him.

The Hebrew word for ‘appointed’ (shat) sounds very like ‘Seth’. Abel was dead, and Cain was rejected, so another son was needed for the family line (indeed the human line) to continue. We know very little about Seth except that—in biblical terms—he lived a very long life and had many descendants (Gen 5:6-7).

We live today in a world full of violence and killing. Let us not be instigators of violence in any way—in action, in word or even in thought.

More

Commentary on Isaiah 66:10-14; John 2:1-11

The Gospel is the story of the marriage feast at Cana from John. The passage comes at the end of a week introducing the person of Jesus and his first disciples—a week which recalls the week of creation in the book of Genesis.  On this last day there is a new creation, the creation of the New Covenant between God and his people, who from now on will include people from all over the world.

A wedding is a traditional Old Testament image for people’s relationship with God. Some of the prophets have described God as the spouse of his people, a people who again and again are scolded for their unfaithfulness to their Spouse.

Here at this wedding, we are told that the wine began to run short, a dreadful thing to happen for the hosts, who would have been the bride’s family. The mother of Jesus draws Jesus’ attention to the crisis. And Jesus at first tries to brush it off as none of his business. But his mother ignores his response and goes and tells the servant to go and do what Jesus tells them. He then instructs the servants to fill six large jars, each capable of holding 20-30 gallons, with water and then to bring them to the steward. When the steward was invited to taste, what had now just been water was discovered to be a wine of the very first quality. The steward is amazed. It was the custom to serve the good wine first and then, when people’s palates had been dulled, to serve a lower quality of wine.

The meaning is clear. Those six jars of water are the heart of the story. They represent a traditional Jewish custom, according to the Law, of purifying oneself on entering the house and, by implication, the whole of the Mosaic Law, whose observance was the core of serving God. 

For John, numbers are important. The perfect number is seven—for instance, there are seven ‘signs’ which Jesus gives in this Gospel; there are seven ‘I AM…’ statements. But here there are only six jars, short of perfection. They are now replaced by the high class wine of the New Covenant, of which Jesus is the sign. In fact, the passage ends with:

Jesus did this, the first of his signs, in Cana of Galilee and revealed his glory, and his disciples believed in him.

In a way all this happened because Mary told Jesus what he should do. So here, as we honour Our Lady of Lourdes, we see Mary now telling Bernadette what she should do. And that is just how Bernadette responded, so that today literally millions of people go on pilgrimage to Lourdes in search of peace and healing.

The First Reading, which is from the prophet Isaiah, speaks of Jerusalem as the source of peace for the Jewish people of the time. Here it is applied to what Lourdes means for so many people.

I will extend prosperity to her like a river…As a mother comforts her child, so I will comfort you…

In the passage, they are the words of God, but here it is through the Mother of Jesus that the promise is made. And many have discovered that it is really true.

More

Commentary on Romans 5:1-5; Mark 16:15-20

The Gospel comes from the very end of Mark, a section that some scripture scholars hold does not really belong to the original text, but was added later and, in fact, it echoes passages from the other Gospels, especially Matthew (the original Mark Gospel predates that of Matthew).

Nevertheless, one can see why it was chosen as the Gospel for today’s feast.  The first part of today’s reading is said to contain words spoken by Jesus while eating with his disciples in the Upper Room after the Resurrection.  The Apostles receive their mandate from Jesus to go out to the whole world and proclaim the Good News to “the whole creation”.  It is reminiscent of similar words found in Matthew where they are spoken just before the Ascension.

Jesus then promises that belief in him and his message will bring signs:

…by using my name they will cast out demons; they will speak in new tongues; they will pick up snakes, and if they drink any deadly thing, it will not hurt them; they will lay their hands on the sick, and they will recover.

In the second part, we are told that the Lord Jesus then ascended to his Father and, as his followers carried out his commands, the things he promised did indeed take place as a confirmation of the truth of their message.

The relevance to Blaise is clear.  Many miracles and wonders were attributed to him—the healing of the sick and being able to live safely in the company of wild animals. The Lord continues to work wonders today although they are not often literally miraculous events, but experiences which may even be more influential in the lives of people.  Perhaps we have had or seen such experiences ourselves.

The First Reading is a lovely passage from Paul’s Letter to the Romans.  He reminds his hearers of all the wonderful graces that have come through living their lives in faith and hope:

…our hope of sharing the glory of God.

He even tells them to rejoice in their sufferings, not because they are pleasurable, but because suffering properly accepted teaches endurance and inner strength.  Endurance shows that we have risen to the test, the test of our faith in the Lord Jesus.  And our ability to do this is the basis for our hope, a hope that will one day be vindicated.

And it is not an empty hope:

…because God’s love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit that has been given to us.

This is a passage which was lived by Blaise, who faced every kind of torment and, in the end, did not hesitate to give his life, following the example of his Lord.

More

Commentary on Zechariah 9:9-10; Romans 8:9.11-13; Matthew 11:25-30 Read Sunday of Week 14 of Ordinary Time (Year A) »

More

Commentary on 1 Kings 19:9, 11-13; Romans 9:1-5; Matthew 14:22-33 Read Sunday of Week 19 of Ordinary Time (Year A) »

More

Commentary on Isaiah 55:10-11; Romans 8:18-23; Matthew 13:1-23

There are three distinct parts in today’s Gospel: parable, interlude, and explanation of the parable. A way of looking at this division is to regard the parable as being close to the actual words of Jesus. This is followed by a theological ‘interlude’ on “hearing” and finally there is an interpretation of the parable possibly emanating from the early Church and, in effect, producing a related but distinct lesson or message.

In the parable itself, the emphasis is on God (the sower) who works and produces results. The interpretation of the parable puts the emphasis more on us (the soil) and the ways in which we can respond. The interlude or comment in between gives the key to our response and subsequent fertility of the seed.

God’s munificence
The parable has strong links with the First Reading from Isaiah. In both we are told that God shares his abundance with us and his plans will not be frustrated. God’s creative and nurturing work is compared with rain and snow falling on the earth and not returning until it has given moisture,

…making it yield and giving growth to provide seed for the sower and bread for the eating.

In the parable, it is true that the seed falls many times on inhospitable soil, but some will undoubtedly fall on rich soil and produce an abundant harvest. Says the Lord in Isaiah:

So, the word that goes from my mouth does not return to me empty, without carrying out my will and succeeding in was it was sent to do.

This is clearly a message of hope for communities which may at times be discouraged by the meagre results of their evangelisation efforts. We are reading here from Matthew 13. The whole chapter consists of “parables of the Kingdom”. They all say in different ways that the Kingdom of God, in spite of its tiny and weak beginnings, will be established for it is “like a treasure hidden in a field” or “a pearl of great price”. Once discovered, all else is given up in order to be part of it.

In the whole of Scripture, God’s word is not just a spoken word. It is a doing word, a creating, life-giving word. It is like a life-bearing seed. Where do we encounter that word? If we are sufficiently sensitive, we encounter it unceasingly in every experience of our lives, whether that experience is joyful or sad, a success or a failure, pleasant or painful.

For us, there is one place in particular where God’s word is more clearly experienced, and that is in Jesus Christ. For Jesus is the Word of God. Everything that Jesus said, everything that Jesus did, was God communicating to us through him. Not just his teaching but his whole life, from the hidden years of Nazareth through his public life to his death and resurrection – in all of this Jesus was, and is for us today the Word of God.

Barren soil
And yet, as in the parable, much of that Word fell on barren soil. Many refused to hear or to see (hence so many cases of deafness and blindness in the Gospel). Even Jesus’ closest disciples did not provide, at first, very promising soil. Jesus’ life and mission seemed to end in tragic and dismal failure. There was not a single disciple in sight. His enemies laughed and mocked him. And yet…it was precisely at that moment as the seed “fell into the ground and died” (see John 12:24), that the Word of God began to take root in people’s hearts. At that moment, like the tiny mustard seed, like the small amount of yeast in a large batch of dough, the seed, the Word of God, began to grow and flourish against all odds.

The word that goes from my mouth does not return to me empty, without carrying out my will and succeeding in what it was sent to do.

As with Jesus himself, so too is it with us today – we need to be reminded that God’s plans will not be frustrated, that the Kingdom will be established.

Listen, anyone who has ears!

Why speak in parables?
The part that follows contains some apparently alarming words. Is Jesus saying that he spoke in parables so that only his inner circle would understand and that the rest be left in darkness? That hardly makes sense. It does provide a bridge to the interpretation of the parable to follow. There seems, especially in the quotation from Isaiah, a heavy sarcasm. Those who see, but never understand; those who hear, but never get the message. Why? Not because they are stupid, but because they basically do not want to. If they saw, if they really heard, they might be converted, they might have to change their ways radically – and that is the last thing they want to do. In the context of Matthew’s gospel, these words seem particularly directed at those of his people who rejected Jesus, but it applies to all who close their ears in prejudice and fear.

But to his disciples and followers Jesus says:

Happy are your eyes because they see, your ears because they hear!

Many before Jesus’ time longed to see and hear, but never had the privilege of Jesus’ followers. The key word today is ‘hear’. It is a very scriptural word and contains essentially four elements:

Blessed are the pure in heart for they shall see God

One can listen, but not understand, one can understand without accepting, and one can accept without implementing. All four are necessary for conversion and healing. All four are necessary for full hearing.

Different responses
All of this leads naturally into the third part: an interpretation of the parable on the level of different kinds of hearing. Some seed falls on the path. There is no soil here. There is no prospect of the seed taking root. Ears and eyes are closed and unreceptive to the Word of God.

The seed falls on rocky ground in the field where there is a thin layer of soil. The seed takes root and begins to grow, but soon gets burnt up by lack of water and the heat of the sun. It is like those Christians who, after baptism or after a retreat or some spiritual experience, have a great rush of enthusiasm for God but, under the slightest pressure, soon run out of steam and fall away. Probably there was no real hearing, no real understanding and hence no real commitment. This group, in the text, may be referring to people who became baptised Christians in the early Church, and were full of enthusiasm until faced with persecution for their faith. They caved in and gave up.

Some seed also falls on soil where there are many weeds and thorns. As it grows, it gets smothered by the competing plants. This we might call the “having your cake and eating it” response. I do want to be a good Christian, but I also want to have all the things that the world around me thinks important, even if they are in conflict with the Gospel vision. It won’t work. We cannot at the same time totally serve God and be a part of the materialistic, consumerist, hedonistic, “success”-hungry world. Probably a very large number of us, in varying degrees, belong in this category. As a result, the Church’s work in building the Kingdom is severely hampered.

Finally, some of the seed falls in rich, nutritious soil. This soil is like the:

…man who hears and understands [the Word of God]

He is the one “who yields a harvest” in varying degrees of abundance.

What is my response?
In the long run, as we said at the beginning, the work of God cannot be frustrated either by threats from society or from within the Christian community. But what matters for me as I hear this Scripture is to be aware that I, as this individual, can refuse to provide the fertile patch of soil for God’s Word to take deep root. God’s plan as a whole will succeed, but it is up to me to be part of that plan. I personally can say No or Not yet or Yes, but…I can, like many of the people that Jesus knew, resist the radical change of view that conversion entails. In the process I will also miss out, of course, on the deep healing that the Word of God can bring into my life and, with the healing, a sense of liberation, happiness and peace.

More

Commentary on 1 Kings 3:5,7-12: Romans 8:28-30; Matthew 13:44-52 Read Sunday of Week 17 of Ordinary Time (Year A) »

More

Commentary on Isaiah 5:1-7; Philippians 4:6-9; Matthew 21:33-43

Today’s parable is linked to last Sunday’s about the two sons sent to work in their father’s vineyard. One promised to go and work there, but he did not actually go. The other at first refused but later relented and went. The message of Jesus is clear (especially in the context of Matthew’s Gospel).

God’s people had disappointed their God. It was the formerly sinful Gentiles who took on the task of building the Kingdom. This should not be understood as anti-Jewish. On the contrary, this was being written by Christian Jews for Christian Jews and it must have been a painful thing for them to see and accept.

Poor tenants
Today we have a parable saying more or less the same thing. Strictly speaking, it is not a parable, but an allegory. A parable normally presents one lesson and the details are not relevant; while, in an allegory, each detail of the story has a symbolic meaning.

The message clearly is that God’s people have been poor tenants in the Lord’s vineyard. However, we read this not to sit in judgement on certain people in the past. We must be careful to be aware of the relevance of this parable for our own situation. We are not reading it for historical reasons but for reflection on our own lives and behaviour.

The Lord’s vineyard
Both the First Reading and the Gospel focus on the Lord’s vineyard, that is, the place where God’s people are to be found. At first, Jesus chose the Israelites to be his own people. He was with them on their wanderings in the desert on the way to “a land flowing with milk and honey”. The Lord asks in the First Reading:

What more was there to do for my vineyard that I have not done in it?

But the response of the people/tenants in the vineyard was far from the expectations of the master of the vineyard:

When I expected it to yield grapes, why did it yield rotten grapes?

In Jesus’ story, the owner sends his servants to collect the harvest. Instead, the tenants seized, beat, stoned and even killed the owner’s messengers. This happened again and again. The message is clearly understood by Jesus’ hearers. The Lord had sent his prophets to remind his people of their duty to serve, to be a fruitful people. Yet, one by one, God’s messengers were rejected.

No respect even for the son
Finally, the owner’s own son was sent. The owner said:

They will respect my son.

But no. He also was seized, thrown out of the vineyard and killed. They could now take over the vineyard for themselves. It reminds one of the arrogance of our first parents who thought the knowledge of good and evil would give them power over God; of those who tried to build a tower that would reach right to the heavens. And the killing of the son “outside the city” is a clear reference to Jesus dying on the cross outside the walls of Jerusalem.

Called to the Lord’s vineyard
Today, we are God’s people. We are the tenants in the vineyard. Now he expects us to produce fruit, fruit that will endure. The obvious question for us to ask ourselves today is: How are we doing? Are we any better than the chief priests, the elders, the Scribes and the Pharisees? We are specially privileged, by baptism, to be called to work in the Lord’s vineyard. Each week we are invited to gather together to hear the Gospel message and to make it part of our lives. We are all called to be members, active members of the Body of Christ, the Christian community, the Church.

Many martyrs
How do we see this call? Do we find it a privilege, a blessing, or a troublesome burden? How well have we received the message of the Lord?

Over the centuries, how many prophets in our Christian communities have been rejected, abused and even killed? We think of Joan of Arc, Thomas More, Oliver Plunkett and, in our own recent times, Bishop Oscar Romero, Martin Luther King, the countless victims of violence all over our world.

All these martyrs have one thing in common. They were killed not by pagans, but by fellow-Christians, tenants in the Lord’s vineyard. We can hardly feel superior to the people Jesus is criticising in today’s Gospel. Isaiah’s words in the First Reading are so true. The Lord:

…expected justice but saw bloodshed; righteousness but heard a cry!

In so many parts of the world, we do not have to go far to see the relevance of those words.

What kind of grapes?
Even so, we may feel we have not personally been part of any of this. Yet, what kind of grapes do we as a parish community produce? Are they sweet and luscious, or are they pinched and sour? Is our parish a real sign of Jesus’ presence and love in this part of our city? What kind of impact do we have?

Are we living out the words that Paul proposes to the Christians of Philippi in today’s Second Reading:

Finally, brothers and sisters, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is pleasing, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence and if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things.

And he goes on:

As for the things that you have learned and received and heard and noticed in me, do them…

These last words are quite a challenge for all of us. But if we can live them out, then, says St Paul:

…the God of peace will be with you.

Parish vineyard
Our parish community is our vineyard. It must not produce sour grapes that no one can eat. It must be open to the various ways the Lord speaks to it, whether those people are Church leaders or prophetic voices which may sometimes say things which are painful to hear.

There is always a temptation for a parish to become a security blanket for those who do not want to face up to the challenges facing every society. When that happens, it tends to cling to old, fixed ways of doing things and to resist change. People who propose changes that are necessary in serving a constantly changing society may be resisted and resisted very strongly. Each parish can find itself producing its core of “chief priests and elders” (who, by the way, may not be the clergy) who will make sure that prophetic voices (who may or may not be the clergy) and people with real vision will be effectively blocked.

It is just as easy for us in these times to fail to recognise the voice of God in the messengers he sends us, just as the Jewish authorities of Jesus’ time failed to recognise the Word of God in him. More than 100 years ago, Cardinal Newman said:

To live is to change; and to be perfect is to have changed often.

If we are not really making sure that our vineyard produces rich grapes, not only for us but for others, too, to enjoy, then we are falling short as “tenants”. It may well happen that the Lord would ask others to come and take our place.

If our church was closed down, sold off and turned into a dance hall, what real difference would it make to our district? Of course, we who come here regularly would miss it, but what of others who never step inside? Are we really concerned about that impact or do we think more of our own personal religious obligations and needs? Do we measure the quality of our parish by what goes on in our church building or by what happens when we leave it? Obviously, both are important but there cannot be one without the other.

More

Commentary on Isaiah 45:1,4-6; 1 Thessalonians 1:1-5; Matthew 22:15-21 Read Sunday of Week 29 of Ordinary Time (Year A) »