More

These weekday commentaries are not meant to be homilies for preaching, rather they are intended to give some background to the daily readings to help both the homilist and the faithful have a sense of continuity as we go through the readings each day. The elements of this reflection are as follows:

The arrangement of the Scripture readings
Weaknesses in the arrangement
Towards a better understanding
Our purpose
The Liturgy of the Word
Role of the Reader

It is possible for each day’s commentaries to be considered as separate and stand-alone. There are always people in a weekly congregation who do not come to daily Mass, or if they come, perhaps only occasionally. But in many parishes, there are a regular number of people who attend every day. I believe it is helpful to walk with them through the passages of the different books of the Bible as they are read each day. And, there will be other people, those who cannot get to daily Mass, who will hopefully want to visit this site every day. The commentaries can be view as an introductory course to the Bible as well as a source of personal prayer.

The arrangement of the Scripture readings
For Sunday readings during the three-year cycle (A, B and C), we read the Gospel according to Matthew in Year A, Mark in Year B and Luke in Year C. John’s Gospel is scattered through the seasonal feasts of Advent, Christmas, Lent and Easter – and especially during the Sundays of the Easter season. On Sunday, the First Reading (except during the Easter season) is normally taken from the Old Testament, and the theme of the reading normally has some relationship to the Gospel. The Second Reading is taken from letters in the New Testament. The letters are read through continuously. For example, parts of the Letter to the Romans will be read in sequence on a number of Sundays and then on the following number of Sundays the readings will be from, say, the Letter to the Ephesians. Usually, there is no direct link between the Second Reading and the other two.

Weekdays readings follow a different pattern and have a two-year cycle, Cycle I and II. In each cycle, we read through the whole of the Gospels, but the Infancy and Resurrection narratives are kept for the Christmas and Easter seasons, respectively. Mark, Matthew and Luke follow one another in that order. Readings from John’s Gospel are scattered through the ‘non-Ordinary Time’ weeks of the liturgical year, especially during the Easter season. The First Reading is taken from either the Old or the New Testament in a two-year cycle. Old and New Testament books tend to alternate, and not in the order in which they appear in the Bible. Generally too, during the Ordinary Time weeks there is no intended connection between the First Reading and the Gospel. The two sets of readings run parallel to and largely independent of each other. However, during the seasons of Advent, Lent and Easter there is normally a link between the First Reading and the Gospel.

Weaknesses in the arrangement
If there is a weakness in the present arrangement of the Scripture readings it is in the Sunday readings. On the Sundays during the year, the Gospels are pretty well covered and they are read in sequence. The New Testament letters are also covered and read in some sequence but the Old Testament loses out. As I said, the Old Testament text is usually chosen with a theme which correlates with that of the Gospel reading. But this means that the Old Testament texts are picked at random and out of context. A person going regularly to Sunday Mass and listening carefully to the readings would not get much understanding of the content and structure of the Old Testament. And it is not surprising that many Catholics (unlike many Protestants) have a very poor acquaintance with the Old Testament beyond some well-known stories, especially those featured in movie epics like Cecil B. DeMille’s ‘The Ten Commandments’.

With the weekday readings the situation is rather different. A person going to daily Mass will hear sections of Old Testament books read in sequence over the two-year cycle. However, we have to realise that, in spite of the many readings, we still only dip into what is there. Only selected passages can be chosen and, after one’s appetite is whetted, it is for each one to read the whole text of the book being read.

And, unfortunately, even when the celebrant does give a reflection at Mass, the First Reading, and especially the Old Testament, tends to get put aside. In fact, because the two weekday readings are not related, most celebrants concentrate on the Gospel reading which is more familiar to most people and rated more important.

Towards a better understanding
The purpose of these commentaries, then, is to suggest a way by which all the weekday readings get a little more attention and help both Mass goers and those who use these notes for personal reflection to have a better understanding of the whole Bible.

I feel strongly that, all things being equal, no Mass should ever be celebrated without some kind of reflection, however brief, on the readings of the day. I always experience a certain sadness when I see a priest turn away after reading the Gospel without saying anything. It is probably true also that, among those celebrants who do say something, they are inclined to speak only about the Gospel. And, part of the reason for that, we might have to confess, is that even priests are not as familiar with the other New and Old Testament readings as we might be.

Our purpose
Part of the purpose of these commentaries is to help celebrants be able to say something about the first reading and the Gospel, though not necessarily in the same homily. Weekday homilies normally should be fairly brief! Because the two readings are often on very different subjects, it can be somewhat forced to squeeze both of them into one short reflection.

I have found that people can be very appreciative of being given a “thought for their day”. In the long term, where one is celebrating Mass for the same community every day, a better picture of the whole Bible can begin to emerge if all of the readings are given an ‘airing’. It is a small step towards drawing Catholics into a better appreciation and a greater familiarity with the Bible from the Book of Genesis to Revelation. In time, it should to creating an appetite for a deeper understanding by attending Scripture courses or forming Bible-sharing groups.

The Liturgy of the Word
I am a strong believer in the importance of the Liturgy of the Word as a genuine source of nourishment for our people. But the Word of God does, like the eucharistic bread, need to be broken open so that those, who are very often not very familiar with large portions of the Scripture, can be fed.

Some parishes have developed the excellent custom where people bring along their own Bibles and read from that. While it is, in a sense, better to listen to rather than read the readings, using one’s own Bible helps one to become familiar with its “geography”. I am frequently amazed at how many otherwise well-informed Catholics are totally lost when a Bible is put into their hands.

I believe that, if we had to make a choice between having either the Liturgy of the Word or the Liturgy of the Eucharist, but not both, there would be a strong argument for choosing the Liturgy of the Word. Effective participation in the Liturgy of the Eucharist depends very much on who Christ is for us. As St Jerome is supposed to have said many centuries ago, “ignorance of the Scripture is ignorance of Christ”. And, if I have only a very imperfect understanding of who Christ is, what happens when I go to receive him in Communion?

Unfortunately, some often tend to rush through the readings, drop any thought of a homily, so that we can get to the “real” part of the Mass, the Consecration and the Communion and the Real Presence of Christ. But we must realise there is also a real presence of the Lord in the Scriptures. At the end of each reading we say: “The Word of the Lord.” It is not the reader we have been listening to, but it is the Lord himself who is speaking to us.

Role of the Reader
Which raises another issue – the importance of the Reader being able effectively to communicate, to proclaim the Word. When the nearest available person is called on to read and, though they may be well-intentioned, they are sometimes difficult to hear. Sadly, we tend to be very tolerant of low standards in this part of the liturgy. But the Scripture Reader is a ministry and a minister should be chosen for his/her aptitude and ability to effectively proclaim the Word of God.

As St Paul wrote to the Christians at Rome a long time ago:

For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved.” But how are they to call on one in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in one of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without someone to proclaim him? And how are they to proclaim him unless they are sent? As it is written, “How beautiful are the feet of those who bring good news!” (Rom 10:13-15)

Let us then pay greater attention to God’s Word, listen carefully to what it says, try to understand its meaning in the context of our present lives, and then to share our experience of the Good News with those we meet.

Finally, let me emphasise that aim of these commentaries is to whet your appetite to have a deeper understanding of the Word of God, to go to the original sources and also to consult the many other commentaries which are available. And, better still, to join or set up a group which will study the Word of God together with the help of the many guides which are available.

More

If you are familiar with word processing, cutting and pasting and filling in online forms, then all you will be able to help Sacred Space. All you will need are the detailed instructions that we will provide. Just fill out the form below and we will be in touch with you to let you know what is involved. Read Help Living Space »

More

You can make comments on the new layout of LivingSpace below. This presentation is intended to make the material more accessible. As more material is added in this format you will find that the search facility will become more useful to you. Other tools will be made available in time. Read Your opinion »

More

Commentary on Matthew 13:24-30

Today’s passage from the Parables of the Kingdom is found only in Matthew’s Gospel. It is about the planting of seed, but the concern is quite different, and it again reflects the experience of the early Church.

A man has sown good seed in his field but, unknown to him, an enemy has come and planted weeds among the wheat. As the plants come up the farmer sees the weeds growing all through his wheat. His slaves want to pull them out, but the farmer tells them to wait until the harvest time. The wheat and the weeds are similar in appearance in the early stages and it will be much easier to differentiate them as they mature. In the meantime, let both grow side by side.

This is a picture of the Kingdom and also of the Church which is trying to be part of it. For the early Church, more distressing in many ways than persecution from outside, must have been betrayal and shortcomings on the inside. There would have been a strong temptation immediately to get rid of such people. But wiser heads prevailed: “Wait…let God be the judge and, in any case, people can change”. The sinner of today may be the saint of tomorrow.

This has been a problem all through the history of the Church and today is no exception. There is always a strong temptation among those who feel themselves more committed to living out the Gospel to adopt an elitist approach to the faith. This can take two forms, either: 1) members who are seen as falling short of the Church’s requirements in faith and behavior are gotten rid of, or 2) and perhaps more commonly, those who see themselves more committed form a relatively closed group, i.e. a church within a church. There has been a certain amount of tension over such situations with the appearance of a number of Catholic movements in recent times.

Today’s parable reminds us of something very important, namely, that the Church is, and always will be, a Church of sinners and for sinners. Our Church is, as Paul puts it, “a vessel of clay”, leaking and easily broken. At the same time, we have been called to help bring about the Kingdom in our world and we have constantly to try to do that. But we need to distinguish between the vessel and its contents—the weeds and the wheat—to distinguish between the Christian vision and the Church which tries to communicate it.

Some have been disturbed by the scandals of our age (and scandal has existed all across the time of the church) and have left the Church because of them. To do so is to not understand today’s parable. These scandals, far from undermining the Christian vision, only affirm it. That vision remains a shining ideal. But the Church, which is not to be identified with the vision, is the flawed and fragile bearer of that vision. It has always been so and always will be. The Church is called to proclaim the Kingdom, but it has to struggle to realise that Kingdom in itself also. Today’s parable is a call for tolerance, patience, compassion and understanding while not compromising on the vision that comes to us from Jesus.

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 Genesis 37:3-4,12-13,17-28

There is a strong parallel between the stories of Joseph and Jesus in today’s readings. In both cases the words quoted from the Psalm apply:

The stone that the builders rejected
has become the chief cornerstone. (Ps 118:22)

Joseph is the favourite of Jacob’s twelve sons, the sons who would later become the patriarchs of God’s people. His brothers became jealous of him and grew to hate him. They hated him even more for the dreams he told. In one of these, he said he had a vision of the family bringing in the harvest. In the dream, all his brothers’ sheaves bowed down before Joseph’s sheaf. This, of course, did happen later when the brothers came to Egypt during a time of famine in search of food. Unknown to them at first, Joseph was the grand vizier of Egypt in whose presence they paid homage.

In today’s reading, when Joseph, at the instructions of his father, went to visit his brothers in the fields, they conceived a plot to kill him. However, one of the brothers, Reuben, intervened and suggested instead that Joseph be thrown down a dry well, hoping to give him back to their father later. Reuben was the eldest son, but later fell out of favour after committing incest with his father’s concubine. Judah subsequently took over leadership of the family. The other brothers agreed to Reuben’s suggestion because they did not want to have the blood of their own brother on their hands. Perhaps they remembered what happened to Cain.

Eventually Joseph is either sold to Ishmaelites on their way to do business in Egypt or discovered in the well by Midianites and sold for 20 pieces of silver to traders on their way to Egypt. In later times, this sum was the value of a male of Joseph’s age who had been dedicated to the Lord (see Lev 27:5). The father is later told that his son has died from an attack by animals and is given back, as proof, the famous multi-coloured coat stained with (goat’s) blood.

Joseph should have ended up in obscurity as a slave in Egypt, but thanks to his ability to interpret dreams, he was to win the favour of the Pharaoh and become the chief minister in Egypt and ultimately the saviour of his own people from famine—a famine which Joseph had foretold and helped to prepare for.

The story prepares us for the coming of Jesus, who is clearly the son in the parable featured in today’s Gospel. Jesus, too, was a ‘man of dreams’, with a vision of life which was rejected by many close to him. He, too, was sold into the hands of enemies precisely because of that, to become the saviour of his own people.

More

Commentary on Matthew 23:27-32

We come today to the last two of the seven ‘Woes’ which Jesus throws against Pharisaism.  Again it is an attack on hypocrisy and he gives two examples:

6. …you are like whitewashed tombs… (vv 27-28)

On the one hand he compares the Pharisees to “whited sepulchres” (“whitewashed tombs” in the NRSVue translation), a phrase (like many others) that has found its way into everyday English through the King James version of the Bible. In other words, they are like the tombs that people in Palestine could often see spotlessly clean in their whitewashed stones, but which inside were full of the decaying and rotting bodies of the dead. 

One reason they were whitewashed was because a person who unwittingly stepped on a grave became ritually unclean.  Whitewashing made them more visible, especially in the dark. The Pharisees put on an external show of religious perfection down to the tiniest detail, but inside, their hearts and minds were full of pride and hatred and contempt for their fellow man.  It was epitomised in the story that Jesus told of the Pharisee and the tax collector who went to the Temple to pray.  The sanctimonious prayer of the Pharisee was:

God, I thank you that I am not like other people: thieves, rogues, adulterers, or even like this tax collector.
(Luke 18:11)

It was, of course, to some extent true, but it closed his mind to a different kind of sin altogether—his pride and imagined self-sufficiency.  As Jesus will say in another place, the greatest sin of the pharisaical is their sheer blindness, the inability to see themselves for what they really are. This, I suppose, is the most dangerous sin of the pious in any age, and yet the one least likely to be confessed and repented. And it can happen to any of us.

7. …you build the tombs of the prophets and decorate the graves of the righteous… (vv 29-32)

On the other hand, mention of tombs leads Jesus to comment on the Pharisees’ pride over the tombs they have built in memory of the prophets and other holy people. They congratulate themselves that, if they had been present, they would never have partaken in the actions which brought persecution and death to the prophets.  Yet here is Jesus, the prophet of all prophets, whom they are preparing to kill. 

In the last verse of our reading, Jesus tells them to go ahead and complete the murdering of the prophets, referring to what is going to happen to himself.  This is another classic example of the blindness of the self-righteous. The more committed we are to our Christian faith and to the behaviour that it expects, the greater the danger that we, too, can fall into the same trap and see ourselves on a higher level than others whose behaviour we deplore and perhaps even attack. 

Whole groups of such people have been appearing in recent years, people who claim to know the Church better than the Pope, who still deplore the ‘heresies’ of the Second Vatican Council, or who close themselves off into elitist groups afraid of being contaminated not only by the ‘world’, but even by other Catholics!

More

Commentary on Joshua 24:14-29

This is the last of our readings from the book of Joshua. It is an immediate continuation of the previous passage (vv 1-13) as Joshua gives his final words to the tribes gathered at Shechem. Today’s reading consists of the second and third parts of the whole passage.

In part two of the reading (vv 14-24) all the people declare for Yahweh and renounce pagan gods, and in part three (vv 25-29) a covenant is adopted and its statutes committed to writing.

Having reminded them of all that Yahweh did for them from time immemorial down to the present, Joshua urges the people to “fear” the Lord and to serve him truly and sincerely. ‘Fear’ here means to trust, worship and serve in a spirit of deep respect for the immensity of God. There is no place for fear in the ordinary sense before our loving God:

There is no fear in love, but perfect love casts out fear; for fear has to do with punishment, and whoever fears has not reached perfection in love. (1 John 4:18)

They are to get rid of the gods their polytheistic ancestors served those days long beyond the Euphrates, in Mesopotamia and later in Egypt. In Ur and Haran, Abraham’s antecedents, Terah’s family, would have been exposed to the worship of the moon-god, Nanna(r) or Sin. The sin of building the golden calf at the foot of Mount Sinai was primarily that of making an image of Yahweh, but it probably was also influenced by Apis, the sacred bull of Egypt.

With a slight touch of mockery, Joshua tells the people that, if they find serving Yahweh is not a good thing, let them make up their minds which gods they want to serve, whether those of their ancestors in Mesopotamia or those of the Amorites, in whose land they are right now. There is a suggestion that they are not totally committed.

As far as Joshua and his family are concerned, they will continue to serve Yahweh. Joshua publicly makes his own commitment, hoping to elicit a similar commitment from Israel.

With one voice, the people affirm their allegiance to Yahweh:

Far be it from us that we should forsake the Lord to serve other gods, for it is the Lord our God who brought us and our ancestors up from the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery, and who did those great signs in our sight.

It was Yahweh who kept them safe among all the different people through whom they passed. It was Yahweh, too, who drove out all the nations so that they could take over the land. They conclude:

Therefore we also will serve the Lord, for he is our God.

Joshua, however, is somewhat sceptical of their promises and warns them that they will, in fact, not be able to serve Yahweh. He is warning them of over-confidence. Fidelity to God’s service is not easy, and therefore those who take such solemn obligations on themselves must be ever vigilant against human weakness. Time will show just how attractive the Canaanite gods were to the Israelites.

They must remember that Yahweh is a holy God, a jealous God who will not tolerate their misdeeds and sins. If they desert Yahweh and turn again to the gods of other peoples:

…he will turn and do you harm and consume you, after having done you good.

But again the people insist:

No, we will serve the Lord!

To which Joshua replies:

You are witnesses against yourselves that you have chosen the Lord, to serve him.

They cry out with one voice:

We are witnesses.

In that case, retorts Joshua:

Then put away the foreign gods that are among you, and incline your hearts to the Lord, the God of Israel.

This was a direct challenge. It was likely that some of them did have around them other gods represented by idols of wood and metal, which could easily be thrown away and destroyed—if they were really sincere.

But once again the people make their pledge:

The Lord our God we will serve, and him we will obey.

Our reading concludes with the third part of the verses where Joshua makes a solemn covenant between God and the people and lays down a statute and ordinance for them there in Shechem. This consisted of the pledges they had agreed to and the decrees and laws from God. All was solemnly recorded in the Book of the Law of God and a large stone set up as a memorial.

Joshua set it up under the oak tree in Yahweh’s sanctuary at Shechem. Finally, he said to the people:

See, this stone shall be a witness against us, for it has heard all the words of the Lord that he spoke to us; therefore it shall be a witness against you if you deal falsely with your God.

The stone was set up as a witness to the covenant renewal that closed Joshua’s ministry. It will be the seventh memorial in the land to remind Israel of what the Lord had done for them through his servant. To these memorials were added the perpetual ruins of Jericho (Josh 6:26). This refers to the famous occasion when Joshua and the Israelites marched round the walls of Jericho blowing trumpets, causing the walls of the city to collapse (see Josh chap 6).

Thus the promised land itself bore full testimony to Israel (seven being the number of completeness)—how she had come into possession of the land, and how she would remain in the land only by fulfilling the covenant conditions. The land shouted its own story.

Joshua then dismissed the people, everyone to their own heritage. Joshua’s work was done and he was ready to go. He died at the venerable age of 110, just 10 years short of his superior and mentor, Moses. Ancient Egyptian records indicate that 110 years was considered to be the ideal life span. It was also the age at which Joseph died.

Joshua was buried at Timnath-Sera, which lay in the highlands of Ephraim, north of Mount Gaash (and about 30 km north of Jerusalem).

We are also told in this passage (though not in the reading) that the mummified remains of Joseph, which had been brought all the way from Egypt at the time of the Exodus, were now buried in Shechem, near the borders between the two Josephite tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh and:

…in the portion of ground that Jacob had bought from the children of Hamor, the father of Shechem (Josh 24:32)

This fulfilled a final request Joseph had made before he died (see Gen 50:25).

With the death of Joshua, the great epic of the Exodus is complete and the people are in their Promised Land, committed to serving Yahweh faithfully as his people forever. As we shall see, it will not quite work out like that.

More

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.

More

Alberto Hurtado Cruchaga was born on 22 January, 1901, in Viña del Mar, Chile. With his father’s death in 1905 when Alberto was only 4, the family found itself in financial difficulties, forcing his mother to start selling off land owned by the family. Thanks to a scholarship, Alberto was able to study from 1909-17 at the highly respected Jesuit school of St Ignacio in Santiago. From 1918 to 1923, he attended the Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile as a law student and doing his thesis on labour law.

However, rather than becoming a lawyer, Alberto entered the Jesuit novitiate in 1923. He was sent to Barcelona in Spain for his philosophy and theology studies. In 1932, he was banished together with Spanish classmates, and completed his theology studies in Leuven, Belgium from 1932 to 1934. He was ordained priest there on 24 August, 1933. While pursuing his theological studies, he also worked on a doctorate in Psychology and Pedagogy at the Catholic University of Leuven.

From the early days of his studies in labour law and even before becoming a Jesuit, Hurtado was keen on tackling social issues and problems. Before returning to Chile, he visited social and educational centres in Germany, France, Belgium and The Netherlands.

After returning to Chile in 1936, Alberto turned to serving the poor of Chile, concentrating on disadvantaged children, teenagers and young adults. He was a teacher of religion and formed future teachers in the Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile. He was also active in spiritual direction and gave retreats according to the Spiritual Exercises, helping people in the process to discover their vocation in the service of Christ.

In 1940, he was appointed diocesan director of the Catholic Action youth movement and in the following year became its National Director (1941-44). Also in 1941, he produced a book entitled: Is Chile a Catholic Country? Laying open a number of unpleasant realities, the book was heavily criticised by more conservative Catholics, who even accused Hurtado of being a Communist.

Mindful of his own origins and the help his family received in times of difficulty, Hurtado became very active in social issues. He set up an organisation called Hogar de Cristo (Christ’s Home). His shelters took in children in need of food and shelter, whether they were abandoned or not. He bought an old green van and checked out the streets at night on the lookout for young people who could be helped. His special charisma drew many helpers and benefactors and the movement was highly successful. In time, the shelters multiplied all over the country. It is estimated that between 1945 and 1951, more than 850,000 children received help from the movement.

In 1947, Hurtado entered the labour movement to give support to Chilean workers. Inspired by the social teaching of the Catholic Church, he set up the Chilean Trade Union Association, whose aim was to train union leaders in Christian values. To this end, he wrote the three books: Social Humanism (1947), The Christian Social Order (1947) and Trade Unions (1950). To spread the social teaching of the Church and help Christians reflect and act on the serious social problems faced by the country, in 1951 he founded a periodical called Mensaje (Message). He himself published numerous articles and books on labour issues, seen from the side of the Catholic faith. His attractive personality and consistently optimistic and joyful attitudes attracted people of all kinds—young and old, intellectuals and workers alike.

In 1952, after being rushed to hospital in great pain, he was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer. His last days were monitored by the national press and, even before his death, he had become a national hero. True to his nature, he gracefully accepted the inevitable. He died in Santiago on 18 August, 1952, just 51 years old.

Alberto Hurtado was beatified on 16 October, 1994, by Pope John Paul II and canonised by Pope Benedict XVI on 23 October, 2005. He was one of the first to be elevated to sainthood during the papacy of Pope Benedict XVI and is the second Chilean saint, after Saint Teresa of the Andes.

An indication of his enduring popularity was the presence on the day of his canonisation of a very large contingent of Chileans in the Vatican’s St Peter’s Square, led by President Ricardo Lagos and a number of high ranking Chilean politicians who had been Alberto Hurtado’s students.

The Hogar de Cristo he founded still exists and, through its fight for social justice, it has become one of the biggest charity groups in Chile.

Alberto Hurtado is remembered as deeply spiritual and untiring in his work for workers and the young, combining intellectual reflection and practical action.