Tuesday in the Fourth Week of Lent, April 1, 2025

John 5, 1-16

There was a feast of the Jews, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem. Now there is in Jerusalem at the Sheep Gate a pool called in Hebrew Bethesda, with five porticoes. In these lay a large number of ill, blind, lame, and crippled. One man was there who had been ill for thirty-eight years. When Jesus saw him lying there and knew that he had been ill for a long time, he said to him, “Do you want to be well?” The sick man answered him, “Sir, I have no one to put me into the pool when the water is stirred up; while I am on my way, someone else gets down there before me.” Jesus said to him, “Rise, take up your mat, and walk.” Immediately the man became well, took up his mat, and walked.  Now that day was a sabbath. So the Jews said to the man who was cured, “It is the sabbath, and it is not lawful for you to carry your mat.” He answered them, “The man who made me well told me, ‘Take up your mat and walk.’“ They asked him, “Who is the man who told you, ‘Take it up and walk’?” The man who was healed did not know who it was, for Jesus had slipped away, since there was a crowd there. After this Jesus found him in the temple area and said to him, “Look, you are well; do not sin any more, so that nothing worse may happen to you.” The man went and told the Jews that Jesus was the one who had made him well. Therefore, the Jews began to persecute Jesus because he did this on a sabbath.

St. Augustine tells us that the cure in today’s Gospel Reading occurred on the Feast of Passover, this being the second Passover during the Lord’s public ministry.  On the first of the three Passovers he cleansed the Temple of the money changers and those selling animals (cf. John 2, 13-15), and on the third he gave up his life for the sins of the world.  A progression arises from this order: first, the cleansing of sin; second, the doing of good works, third, the Death and Resurrection.  This is the pattern of the life of those who strive to become saints, serving as Jesus has served.

The Sheep Gate was located in the northern wall of the ancient city of Jerusalem.  The Pool of Bethesda lay just outside the city wall, near the Sheep Gate.  The Pool was used primarily to wash sheep which would be sacrificed in the Temple.  Text found in the Old Latin translation of the Gospel and retained by St. Jerome in the Vulgate (and so found in the Douay-Rheims English translation) relates that an angel would stir up the water of the Pool from time to time and that the first person to bathe in the waters at that time would be healed from whatever malady afflicted him.  For this reason, crowds of sufferers camped around the Pool, for that reason.  This is what is behind the lame man’s answer to Jesus: “Sir, I have no one to put me into the pool when the water is stirred up; while I am on my way, someone else gets down there before me.” 

“Do you want to be well?”  Literally, Are you desiring to become whole?  That is, Have you been desiring to become well, not, Do you now wish to become whole?  Jesus is asking about the man’s perseverance in his wish to become healthy.  The lame man does not know who Jesus is and tells how he can never get to the Pool in time.  A tone of frustration or annoyance may have inflected his voice, or perhaps hope in the possibility that this man might help him.  

The scene must have been a dreadful one: several dozen or perhaps a few hundred adults and children lying on mats or on their rags or perhaps naked.  The air would have been foul and the moans of the suffering would have filled it.  Out of all the crowd, the Lord Jesus picked this one man to talk to and heal.  Or, John only records the cure of the one man who answered the Lord’s question and expressed his longing to be healed by obeying the Lord’s command.  Perhaps Jesus picked him because he had suffered the longest of anyone there, so that his cure would be all the more remarkable.

“Rise, take up your mat, and walk.”  We should note the Lord’s concision.  It is a regular feature of his cures: “Little girl, I say to you, arise.”  And, “Lazarus, come forth.”  Many other times he says nothing at all but only lays his hands on the one who seeks a cure.  This contrasts sharply with the attempted cures and exorcisms by Jewish rabbis, who performed elaborate prayers and rituals without success.  The Lord’s concision demonstrates his omnipotence, his supreme power.  Jesus says all that is necessary and nothing more: Rise.  Take up your mat.  Walk.  And the man does just this.  Though he would have felt a sensation of healing as did the woman cured of her blood issue (cf. Mark 5, 29), it took an act of faith for one who had not been able to move his legs for thirty-eight years to rise, let alone walk.  But “immediately”, John reports, “the man became well, took up his mat, and walked.”  He did not stagger, he did not limp, he did not need to be led by the hand.  He walked as well as any healthy human, without any need of therapy or recovery.

The man walks away from Jesus, perhaps in a bit of a daze.  The Pharisees (whom John merely calls “the Jews”) are enraged that the man seems to be breaking the Sabbath by carrying his mat.  At any rate, he is breaking their idea of the laws regarding the Sabbath.  We can understand the mat as our former selves before we began to live according to our Faith: Jesus wants us no longer to lie in our former condition but always to keep in mind the sinfulness from which he has rescued us, and so we should take very personally the warning, “Look, you are well; do not sin any more, so that nothing worse may happen to you.”

Monday in the Fourth Week of Lent, March 11, 2024

John 4, 43-54

At that time Jesus left [Samaria] for Galilee. For Jesus himself testified that a prophet has no honor in his native place. When he came into Galilee, the Galileans welcomed him, since they had seen all he had done in Jerusalem at the feast; for they themselves had gone to the feast.  Then he returned to Cana in Galilee, where he had made the water wine. Now there was a royal official whose son was ill in Capernaum. When he heard that Jesus had arrived in Galilee from Judea, he went to him and asked him to come down and heal his son, who was near death. Jesus said to him, “Unless you people see signs and wonders, you will not believe.” The royal official said to him, “Sir, come down before my child dies.” Jesus said to him, “You may go; your son will live.” The man believed what Jesus said to him and left. While the man was on his way back, his slaves met him and told him that his boy would live. He asked them when he began to recover. They told him, “The fever left him yesterday, about one in the afternoon.” The father realized that just at that time Jesus had said to him, “Your son will live,” and he and his whole household came to believe. Now this was the second sign Jesus did when he came to Galilee from Judea.

St. John’s account of this healing sounds very similar to an account of healing given in Matthew 8, 5-13.  Both involve an official, a young boy, Capernaum, and a cure from a distance.  Differences are found in that the official here is called “royal”, and in Matthew he is a centurion.  The young boy is said here to be the man’s son, but on Matthew his servant.  The encounter, as John tells it, occurs between Jesus and the official in Cana, while Matthew makes it plain that it took place in Capernaum.  In John, Jesus does not go with the man, but according to Matthew he announces that he will go with him.  

Now, the differences may be reconciled.  A Roman centurion could be described as “royal” inasmuch as he worked for the Empire as a leader of the occupying forces.  The Greek word which Matthew uses for the child means both a young boy and a servant boy.  If we understand it to mean the former, then there is no difficulty in seeing it to mean the man’s son, and certainly a man would travel from Capernaum to Cana to save his son’s life.  Matthew does record that Jesus returned to Capernaum, as John does.  But John records that Jesus was coming back from Jerusalem and Matthew that Jesus was returning from the Sermon on the Mount in Galilee.  However, Matthew is not especially concerned with chronology until his description of the Passion and Death of our Lord.  Rather, he is most interested in grouping the words and deeds of Jesus according to themes.  John, on the other hand, is very much taken up by the need for strict accuracy.  His chronology shows every sign of a strong one.  Therefore, we can see the Lord returning to Capernaum from Jerusalem, and then going out to Cana where the royal official, the centurion, goes to meet him.  John does not mention that Jesus said he would go to the man’s house because he is primarily interested in the miracle itself.  Matthew, though, wants to highlight the faith that even the Gentile centurion possessed in Jesus, surpassing that of the Jews at that time.

St. John calls this action of the Lord’s a “sign”, alongside other signs such as that which he performed at the Wedding at Cana.  If the sign at the wedding in that town indicated that the time of grace had arrived, this second sign shows that the grace is offered not only to the Jews but to the Gentiles too.  For us, we see the Lord pouring himself out in service to all those who call upon him, from his Mother to the leader of a hated enemy of his people.  We should avail ourselves of the grace he offers us now while there is still time.

The Fourth Sunday of Lent, March 30, 2025

Luke 15, 1-3; 11-32

Tax collectors and sinners were all drawing near to listen to Jesus, but the Pharisees and scribes began to complain, saying, “This man welcomes sinners and eats with them.” So to them Jesus addressed this parable. “A man had two sons, and the younger son said to his father, ‘Father, give me the share of your estate that should come to me.’ So the father divided the property between them. After a few days, the younger son collected all his belongings and set off to a distant country where he squandered his inheritance on a life of dissipation. When he had freely spent everything, a severe famine struck that country, and he found himself in dire need. So he hired himself out to one of the local citizens who sent him to his farm to tend the swine. And he longed to eat his fill of the pods on which the swine fed, but nobody gave him any. Coming to his senses he thought, ‘How many of my father’s hired workers have more than enough food to eat, but here am I, dying from hunger. I shall get up and go to my father and I shall say to him, “Father, I have sinned against heaven and against you. I no longer deserve to be called your son; treat me as you would treat one of your hired workers.”’ So he got up and went back to his father. While he was still a long way off, his father caught sight of him, and was filled with compassion. He ran to his son, embraced him and kissed him. His son said to him, ‘Father, I have sinned against heaven and against you; I no longer deserve to be called your son.’ But his father ordered his servants, ‘Quickly, bring the finest robe and put it on him; put a ring on his finger and sandals on his feet. Take the fattened calf and slaughter it. Then let us celebrate with a feast, because this son of mine was dead, and has come to life again; he was lost, and has been found.’ Then the celebration began. Now the older son had been out in the field and, on his way back, as he neared the house, he heard the sound of music and dancing. He called one of the servants and asked what this might mean. The servant said to him, ‘Your brother has returned and your father has slaughtered the fattened calf because he has him back safe and sound.’ He became angry, and when he refused to enter the house, his father came out and pleaded with him. He said to his father in reply, ‘Look, all these years I served you and not once did I disobey your orders; yet you never gave me even a young goat to feast on with my friends. But when your son returns who swallowed up your property with prostitutes, for him you slaughter the fattened calf.’ He said to him, ‘My son, you are here with me always; everything I have is yours. But now we must celebrate and rejoice, because your brother was dead and has come to life again; he was lost and has been found.’ ”

This Parable is customarily called that of The Prodigal Son, “prodigal” meaning “spendthrift”.  Because most of the attention in the Parable falls on him, he seems to be the main character and the story is all about him.  Recently, sermons have begun to focus on the character of the father, who loves his errant son unconditionally.  This leaves the older son, the third character in the Parable, as an unnecessary detail.  That is, if the sin and repentance of the younger son is the subject of the story, or if the father’s love is, the older son comes as a diversion from the main point.  In fact, the way the Lord tells the Parable, the situation of the younger son and the position of the father hinge on what the older son decides.  Will he forgive his brother for the shame he has brought upon his family, not to mention the sizable financial loss it has incurred through him?  His lack of forgiveness would deeply wound his father and at the same time foreshadow the penury and homelessness of the younger son when the father dies.  And no one could blame the older son for his refusal to forgive.

The Lord ends his Parable without a real conclusion.  No hint of the older son’s decision is to be found in the Parable itself.  Not even examining its context helps, for the first three verses of the Gospel Reading pertaining to a completely different Parable in which Jesus addresses the complaint of the Pharisees, “This man welcomes sinners and eats with them.”  Jesus leaves us to consider the question for ourselves.  Do we side with justice by allowing the younger son to deservedly suffer the consequences of his terrible choices, or do we side with a spendthrift mercy that the younger son is in no way owed?  And it is a “spendthrift” mercy to reconcile with the younger son, going far beyond the ordinary bounds of mercy, which might include the provision that the son be allowed to stay as a servant.

Perhaps even the Apostles felt uncertain as to the right decision for the older son’s to make until the Sacrifice of the Lord Jesus on the Cross and coming face to face themselves with indescribable mercy.

Saturday in the Third Week of Lent, March 29, 2025

Luke 18, 9-14

Jesus addressed this parable to those who were convinced of their own righteousness and despised everyone else. “Two people went up to the temple area to pray; one was a Pharisee and the other was a tax collector. The Pharisee took up his position and spoke this prayer to himself, ‘O God, I thank you that I am not like the rest of humanity - greedy, dishonest, adulterous - or even like this tax collector. I fast twice a week, and I pay tithes on my whole income.’ But the tax collector stood off at a distance and would not even raise his eyes to heaven but beat his breast and prayed, ‘O God, be merciful to me a sinner.’ I tell you, the latter went home justified, not the former; for everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and the one who humbles himself will be exalted.”

The Lord Jesus speaks here of two distinct ways of looking at oneself and at God.  The Lord identifies the first man in the parable as a Pharisee.  He need not have done this.  He could have left the man unidentified as to his religious party and attained the same basic result in his parable.  He chooses to identify him as a Pharisee, though, in order to show the weakness of their theology and its essential uselessness in aiding a person to become truly righteous.  The Pharisee in the parable does everything the Pharisees taught was necessary for righteousness: the proper fasting and tithing, and the avoidance of the ritual impurity which they believed sinners such as tax collectors contracted by their sins.  He also observes that he is not “greedy”, “dishonest”, and “adulterous”.  What he highlights, however, are merely outward actions in which he is not engaged.  To look at the Greek text, the man thanks God that he is not an extortioner, which is translated here as “greedy”.  He also is pleased that he is not an “unjust” or “unrighteous” man, translated here as “dishonest”.  And he rejoices that he is not an adulterer, translated here as “adulterous”.  He may very well be greedy, dishonest, and adulterous, but he has kept these vices to himself.  As far as appearances go, he is in a righteous state: he is a good Pharisee.

But that is all he is, a good Pharisee.  In his concern for outward righteousness, he has neglected the inward righteousness essential for salvation.  He has, in effect, chosen the easy way.  He has stayed away from unbecoming conduct without the conversion of heart all of us must have in order to serve God.  Furthermore, the pride to which he feels entitled insulates his innermost self from making a correct appraisal of himself.  Even when he does sin outwardly, his pride will prevent him from noticing, or will provide him a ready excuse for his deed, while looking for a way to blame others.

The tax collector, on the other hand, goes into the Temple (which indicates that he is in Jerusalem for one of the holy days) and he simply prays from his heart for mercy.  He recognizes himself as a sinner, makes no excuses or speeches, and is abject enough to allow us to think that he will make amends as best he can and avoid sin in the future.  Jesus says that this man “went home justified”, or, “having been made righteous”.  That is, by God.  While the Pharisee did no more than confirm for himself his feeling of being righteous — free from uncleanness — the tax collector was actually made so by God.  The Pharisee did not pray to God to be made righteous, but the tax collector did, though not daring to put it in so many words, and God answered his prayer.  In this way, too, the Lord showed how true righteousness differed from how the Pharisees understood it: it is a matter of freedom from sin, inward and outward, and not merely the avoidance of breaking the Law in outward actions.

“Everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and the one who humbles himself will be exalted.”  The one who humbles himself before God will be lifted up by God and the one who lifts himself up will be cast down, for the Lord will not hold him up, and he will not think he needs God’s help.

Friday in the Third Week of Lent, March 29, 2025

Mark 12, 28-34

One of the scribes came to Jesus and asked him, “Which is the first of all the commandments?” Jesus replied, “The first is this: Hear, O Israel! The Lord our God is Lord alone! You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your mind, and with all your strength. The second is this: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. There is no other commandment greater than these.” The scribe said to him, “Well said, teacher. You are right in saying, He is One and there is no other than he. And to love him with all your heart, with all your understanding, with all your strength, and to love your neighbor as yourself is worth more than all burnt offerings and sacrifices.” And when Jesus saw that he answered with understanding, he said to him, “You are not far from the Kingdom of God.” And no one dared to ask him any more questions.

The scribe in the Gospel reading for today’s Mass is not asking his question because he himself does not know the answer.  He is asking in order to start at the very foundation with Jesus in order to understand who he is and what he is teaching.  He does what anyone should do when discussing a matter with someone with a possible different understanding of a subject: he defines his terms.  Here, he does this by asking a fundamental question.  The Lord replies by presenting the commandment in its form at the head of the Torah, the Law.  These are the most important words in Judaism.  They are at once a prayer and a creed.  Answering in this way, Jesus firmly identifies himself as a Jew.  Having established that basis for further dialogue (in the classical sense), he proposes the second law: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.”  Indeed, the Ten Commandments are composed of laws pertaining to the love and honor of God, and the rest to the love and honor of one’s neighbor.  And this is true through the whole Mosaic Law.  The actual words of what the Lord calls “the second commandment” are not found directly after the law of the love of God but much later, in Leviticus 19, 18, and they take the form of a comment on a series of laws regrading the treatment of other people.  That the Lord would choose these words to sum up the laws regarding one’s neighbor and to posit this as the second commandment, complementary to the first, is nothing short of genius, and displays an astounding understanding of the law.  Those witnessing this, other scribes and Pharisees, must have realized that this man had to be something far more than an illiterate carpenter from Nazareth.

For his part, the scribe bestowed a rare compliment on the Lord.  His reply, building on the Lord’s answer, shows him to be a man of rare perception, especially for a Pharisee, which he almost certainly was: “And to love him with all your heart, with all your understanding, with all your strength, and to love your neighbor as yourself is worth more than all burnt offerings and sacrifices.”  The scribe goes beyond the Pharisaical notion that nothing came before the worship in the Temple, nothing had greater importance than the correct burnt offerings and sacrifices, as according to the Law.  In doing this, the scribe lands himself squarely into the Law as fulfilled by the Lord Jesus.  Perhaps in his enthusiasm he did not see what he had done, that he had spoken with “understanding”, but the Lord points it out to him: “You are not far from the Kingdom of God.”  By speaking with the Lord openly and honestly, the scribe had moved from thinking as a Pharisee to thinking as the Lord.  It stunned him to discover this, and it may well have led him to make a serious reexamination of what the Pharisees held.

The Lord’s words to the man, “You are not far from the Kingdom of God”, silenced all those around the Lord: “And no one dared to ask him any more questions”, which might more clearly be translated as, “And no one was so bold as to question him further.”  The scribes and Pharisees saw what honesty and openness could do and they dreaded it.  They would rather stick with their interpretation of the Scriptures with its smoky sacrifices than breathe the fresh air of the freedom of the children of God.  This reminds us how necessary it is to know the Gospels as they are so we may have the mind of Christ, that one day we may not hear merely, “You are not far from the Kingdom of God”, but “Come, ye blessed of my Father, possess the kingdom prepared for you” (Matthew 25, 34).

Thursday in the Third Week of Lent, March 27, 2025

Luke 11, 14-23

Jesus was driving out a demon that was mute, and when the demon had gone out, the mute man spoke and the crowds were amazed. Some of them said, “By the power of Beelzebul, the prince of demons, he drives out demons.” Others, to test him, asked him for a sign from heaven. But he knew their thoughts and said to them, “Every kingdom divided against itself will be laid waste and house will fall against house. And if Satan is divided against himself, how will his kingdom stand? For you say that it is by Beelzebul that I drive out demons. If I, then, drive out demons by Beelzebul, by whom do your own people drive them out? Therefore they will be your judges. But if it is by the finger of God that I drive out demons, then the Kingdom of God has come upon you. When a strong man fully armed guards his palace, his possessions are safe. But when one stronger than he attacks and overcomes him, he takes away the armor on which he relied and distributes the spoils. Whoever is not with me is against me, and whoever does not gather with me scatters.”

“Every kingdom divided against itself will be laid waste and house will fall against house.” The Lord’s words apply to any kingdom, nation, or organization, including the Church.  While the Church has endured heresies and schisms, these have been recognized as such and fought against through preaching and prayer, and the Church has remained one.  If a competing set of beliefs was maintained by a bishop or a group of bishops and this situation was tolerated by the Pope, the Church would be divided against itself and would fall apart.  Although this has not happened, we ought to pray regularly for the unity of the Church, for as long as the Church exists on earth, the devil will seek to undermine and destroy it.

“When a strong man fully armed guards his palace, his possessions are safe. But when one stronger than he attacks and overcomes him, he takes away the armor on which he relied and distributes the spoils.”  The Lord warns the Church and its members — the “strong man” — to keep constant vigilance, for its goods are attractive to the wicked and its “despoiling” would lead to the loss of very many souls, as well as to the final wreck of what remains today of civilization.  The Church indeed is strong through its holiness; the spread of its doctrine throughout the world; its apostolic origins, which are clear for anyone to see; and its unity in Christ.  This unity can be lost through the embrace of false teaching by the Church and by the defection of its members into lives dedicated to sin.  By our personal holiness and conformity to the doctrine taught by Jesus through the Church, each of us contributes to the unity and strength of the Church.  The “strong man” fails not because someone becomes stronger, but because the strong man becomes weak.

“Whoever is not with me is against me, and whoever does not gather with me scatters.”  We see here our need to “gather” with the Lord.  He teaches us how to do this and he gives us the grace so that we can do this.  By “gathering” he means spreading the Gospel through our deeds and words, and especially by our prayers for the conversion of the world.  In carrying this out, we will ourselves be gathered to the Lord to be with him forever.

Wednesday in the Third Week of Lent, March 26, 2025

Matthew 5, 17-19

Jesus said to his disciples: “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place. Therefore, whoever breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do so will be called least in the Kingdom of heaven. But whoever obeys and teaches these commandments will be called greatest in the Kingdom of heaven.”

Jesus tells his disciples that he has not come to abolish the Law or the prophets but to fulfill them, that is, to complete them.  The Law of Moses told the Jews how God wanted them to live in a world before grace.  Thus, the Law was but a sign of the Law that was to come with Christ.  The Lord Jesus completed the Law by surpassing its literal requirements.  For example, he fulfilled the commandment against murder by stating, as the Lawgiver, that we are not to become enraged with one another, or to call one another names.  For us to do so is to murder a person in our hearts.  Likewise, the law regarding adultery was completed by injunctions against lust, and the law of the Sabbath was completed by the example of the Lord doing good works on it. By fulfilling or completing these tenets it would seem that he makes it more difficult for anyone to obey them, but through his Passion and Death he won grace for us, and it is by this grace that we can obey them.

“Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place.”  The general meaning of this verse is that the Law will remain in its fulfilled form until “all things” which he describes in chapters 24 and 25 of St. Matthew’s Gospel, take place.  The verse is about the firmness of the Law.  It will not change or break down or become irrelevant despite wars, famines, turmoil in the heavens, earthquakes or anything else.  It is a sign of God’s love for us and is a sure guide to eternal life.  “Not the smallest letter” is better translated from the Greek as, “Not an iota”, which is the smallest Greek letter: ι.  Our letter i is equivalent to it.  “Nor the smallest part of a letter”, that is, the Greek κεραία, which we can think of as an apostrophe, in terms of its size.  

“Will be called least in the Kingdom of heaven.”  That is to say, the tiniest in the Kingdom of heaven, a way of saying not present in the Kingdom of heaven.   heaven, for not only has a person not obeyed the Law himself, but he has taught others to disobey it as well.  This was directed at the Pharisees who self-righteously were passing off their interpretation of the Law as authentic.  It is also directed at anyone who would attempt to justify his own sins by reinterpreting the Law of God and teaches this to others.

We are also called to “fulfill” the Law, not simply to carry out its letter, but to surpass its requirements by carrying out the commandments with love.  

The Solemnity of the Annunciation of Mary, Tuesday, March 25, 2025

Luke 1, 26–38

The angel Gabriel was sent from God to a town of Galilee called Nazareth, to a virgin betrothed to a man named Joseph, of the house of David, and the virgin’s name was Mary. And coming to her, he said, “Hail, full of grace! The Lord is with you.” But she was greatly troubled at what was said and pondered what sort of greeting this might be. Then the angel said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. Behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall name him Jesus. He will be great and will be called Son of the Most High, and the Lord God will give him the throne of David his father, and he will rule over the house of Jacob forever, and of his Kingdom there will be no end.” But Mary said to the angel, “How can this be, since I have no relations with a man?” And the angel said to her in reply, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. Therefore the child to be born will be called holy, the Son of God. And behold, Elizabeth, your relative, has also conceived a son in her old age, and this is the sixth month for her who was called barren; for nothing will be impossible for God.” Mary said, “Behold, I am the handmaid of the Lord. May it be done to me according to your word.” Then the angel departed from her.

The first indications of this Feast are found in homilies in the mid 400’s.  It probably arose after the Council of Ephesus in 431 at which the Blessed Virgin Mary was defined as The God-Bearer.  This declaration opposed a heresy of the day which held that Jesus Christ was two distinct persons — one divine and one human.  Consequently, the Virgin Mary was the mother only of the human person of Christ.  However, the Council pointed out that this attempt to explain “The Word was made flesh” fails since it means that only the human person died on the Cross, which does not redeem mankind.  The Council reaffirmed the true teaching, that Jesus is a divine Person with two natures — one divine and one human.  The whole Person of Christ died on the Cross, and it was this that effected the Redemption of the human race.

A way to appreciate the holiness of the Blessed Virgin Mary is to consider her affection on others.  In Matthew 1, 19-25, St. Joseph is thinking hard about what to do regarding his marriage with Mary.  A close reading of the Greek text reveals what the Fathers of the Church also saw, that Mary had disclosed to him the news of her virginal conception of the Son of God through the overshadowing of the Holy Spirit.  In light of this, Joseph resolves to separate himself from her as in her account of the visit by the Angel Gabriel, he was not mentioned.  Knowing himself to be unworthy of sharing in their mystery he sees his duty now to bow out, entrusting her to God who had chosen her out of all women.  In no way does he suspect her of adultery, as many English translators seem to assume.  In fact, his experience of her holiness was such that, as St. Jerome writes, it was easier for him to believe that she had conceived by the Holy Spirit than that she had sinned.  

This is worth pondering.  St. Joseph, himself a holy man, hears Mary his spouse tell him of the incredible, miraculous, unprecedented conception of God’s Son in her womb, and his mind turned not to suspicion but to belief, and his belief was based not on the testimony of an angel — which had not yet happened — and not by anything he himself had witnessed, but on the clear knowledge of Mary’s holiness.  Free from any taint of sin, her will aligned with that of Almighty God, and always seeing herself as his lowliest servant, the effect of her presence must have been felt very deeply by those around her.  

We stand in awe of the staggering act of mercy which the Son of God undertook in coming to us himself in order to save us from our sins, and at the purity of will with which the Blessed Virgin Mary received him in her womb.

Monday in the Third Week of Lent, March 24, 2025

Luke 4, 24-30

Jesus said to the people in the synagogue at Nazareth: “Amen, I say to you, no prophet is accepted in his own native place. Indeed, I tell you, there were many widows in Israel in the days of Elijah when the sky was closed for three and a half years and a severe famine spread over the entire land. It was to none of these that Elijah was sent, but only to a widow in Zarephath in the land of Sidon. Again, there were many lepers in Israel during the time of Elisha the prophet; yet not one of them was cleansed, but only Naaman the Syrian.” When the people in the synagogue heard this, they were all filled with fury. They rose up, drove him out of the town, and led him to the brow of the hill on which their town had been built, to hurl him down headlong. But he passed through the midst of them and went away.

In the Gospel Reading for today’s Mass we see the Lord Jesus on his only visit during his Public Life to his childhood home.  St. Luke gives much more detail to the event than Matthew and Mark do in order to show why the Lord made Capernaum his home base rather than Nazareth, a question which must have puzzled those to whom Luke was writing.  The way this episode is cut up in the lectionary, we do not see how the Lord entered the synagogue at Nazareth, read from the Prophet Isaiah, and was initially received favorably: “And all spoke well of him, and wondered at the gracious words which proceeded out of his mouth.”  But as the people in the synagogue continued to talk, they began to grow more critical.  “And they said, ‘Is not this Joseph’s son?” And he said to them, ‘Doubtless you will quote to me this proverb, Physician, heal yourself; what we have heard you did at Capernaum, do here also in your own country.’ ”  From this point, we have the words for today’s reading.  The subsequent riot results not from the Lord’s teaching on Isaiah, but from the objection, “Is this not Joseph’s son?”  That is to say, Does he not belong to us?  The people wanted him to “do here also in your own country” all the wonderful things they had heard him doing first in Capernaum.  The Lord reminded them of the need for faith for the healings they demanded, and gave the examples of Naaman and the widow in the land of Sidon as examples of faith that even the Gentiles could possess.  But for his former neighbors and friends, it was too late.

The residents of Nazareth turned on the Lord because they saw him as preferring other towns to his home town.  It came down to pride,  and their pride was so outraged that they tried to throw Jesus over the side of the hill on which their town was built.  The Lord left them, then, and never returned.  For the next two to three years the countryside rang with his praises and stories of the wonders he had worked.  But Nazareth stood by as a mere spectator and had no share in his glory.

The Third Sunday of Lent, March 23, 2025

Luke 13, 1-9

Some people told Jesus about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mingled with the blood of their sacrifices. He said to them in reply, “Do you think that because these Galileans suffered in this way they were greater sinners than all other Galileans? By no means! But I tell you, if you do not repent, you will all perish as they did! Or those eighteen people who were killed when the tower at Siloam fell on them— do you think they were more guilty than everyone else who lived in Jerusalem? By no means! But I tell you, if you do not repent, you will all perish as they did!” And he told them this parable: “There once was a person who had a fig tree planted in his orchard, and when he came in search of fruit on it but found none, he said to the gardener, ‘For three years now I have come in search of fruit on this fig tree but have found none. So cut it down. Why should it exhaust the soil?’ He said to him in reply, ‘Sir, leave it for this year also, and I shall cultivate the ground around it and fertilize it; it may bear fruit in the future. If not you can cut it down.’ ”

The literal Greek, “And there were present, at that very time, some that told him of the Galileans, etc.”, indicates that those who told the Lord of this event had witnessed it themselves.  The event sounds horrendous in these words, yet no contemporary outside reference is found for it.  Many scholars assume that this corresponds with a massacre that the Jewish historian Josephus describes, but the many differences in detail between the two makes this very unlikely.  It seems as if this massacre took place while the Lord traveled to Jerusalem for the last time.  From what we are told here, a group of Galileans — pointedly, not Judeans — were slaughtered in the Temple area as they were bringing their sacrifices to the altar or while the sacrifices were proceeding.  No explanation for the killing is given.  This raises the questions of why Pilate’s forces in the Temple area at all, and whether the murders were committed by Pilate’s direct order.  At least one of the Fathers, Cyril of Alexandria, thought that the Galileans here were followers of Judas the Galilean, mentioned in Acts 5, 37.  There may be something to this.  Judas began an uprising around the time of the Lord’s Birth in reaction to the census of Quirinius.  He did not engage the Romans directly, but only those whom he considered to collaborate with them — by registering for the census, for instance.  It is not clear when he died, but his sons were said to have been killed in 46 AD.  Josephus blames the Jewish insurrection against the Romans on the movement he founded.  Cyril postulates that those who told Jesus about the massacre were in fact trying to see how he would react.  It seems also possible that Pharisees were telling him this, seeking to enrage him at this slaying of his fellow countrymen so that he would lead his followers in an attack the Romans in vengeance, but before he was fully ready to do so, as they supposed.  They would have thought to rid themselves of Jesus easily in this way.

The Lord seizes on this news in order to teach, not to stage an uprising.  “Do you think that because these Galileans suffered in this way they were greater sinners than all other Galileans?  By no means!”  Far from praising or even condoning the actions of the Galileans, whatever they might have done, Jesus refers to them as “sinners”.  He could be approaching the subject from the Jewish point of view that something as terrible as this could have happened only to sinners.  Whatever the case, he does not speak of the Romans or Pilate, but of the Galileans.  He points out that they were no different, in terms of sin, than other Galileans.  This could have happened to anyone, in essence.  Then he says, “But I tell you, if you do not repent, you will all perish as they did!”  He teaches about spiritual death by speaking of physical death.   He seems to indicate here that the Galileans in some way could have avoided getting killed, for he tells the crowd that if they repent of their sins, they may yet escape damnation.

“Or those eighteen people who were killed when the tower at Siloam fell on them.”  The fact that Luke recounts the episode of the Galileans and this one with the tower of Siloam in such detail tells us that these events must have still been remembered and talked about at the time he was writing his Gospel.  Since he was writing it for Gentiles in Syria, the effects of these catastrophes must have been felt beyond Israel.  We have no information of the disaster involving the tower.  It may have been part of a fortress, but not even its location in Jerusalem is certain.  While the killing of the Galileans was murder, an accident seems to account for this loss of life.  The Lord’s point remains the same: we are all sinners and we must all repent or suffer eternal death. 

Luke informs us that the Lord next told a parable, and it directly connected to what he has just taught.  He speaks of a farmer who went out to a fig tree which he owned, and: “He came in search of fruit on it but found none.”  The farmer knows when it is the season for figs, and so he went to the tree in full expectation that he would find some hanging on the tree’s branches.  He then registers his frustration with a handy employee, who is actually a vine-dresser, not a “gardener”: “For three years now I have come in search of fruit on this fig tree but have found none.”  He gives a command: “So cut it down.”  By way of explanation, the farmer says, “Why should it exhaust the soil?” which literally means, from the Greek: “Why does it bring the earth to nought?”  That is, the tree fights against the purpose of the earth, which is to bring forth fruit.  Why does it do this?  In the farmer’s mind, it seems to have deliberately chosen to thwart the purpose for the earth’s creation.  

“Sir, leave it for this year also, and I shall cultivate the ground around it and fertilize it.”  The vine-dresser, who has no stake in the existence of the fig tree, intercedes on its behalf.  He will take on additional work in order to attempt to get fruit on it.  He will dedicate himself to this.  He lays out for the farmer the specific measures he will take.  It may bear fruit in the future.  If not you can cut it down.”  The Greek says, “You shall cut it down”.  The vine-dresser is not telling the farmer what he can or cannot do; he is saying what he knows he will do.  The farmer is the Lord Jesus.  The vine-dresser is the Church of the Gentiles.  The fig tree signifies the Jewish people, just as the cedar tree signifies the people of Lebanon.  The Lord is saying that for three years he has searched for “fruit” — faithful people — among the Israelites and has found “none” (a slight hyperbole, since a few — the Virgin Mary, St. Joseph, the Apostles, and others — followed him).  The Gentile Church pleads with the Lord to give it time to preach to the Jews.  We do not hear from Jesus what the “farmer” decided, but we know from history that this was the case.  Gentile Christians like Luke did preach to the Jews, but to little avail.

We can learn from these verses how necessary repentance is for our salvation, and that we must repent now while we can, for we do not know how long we have.  The fig tree was utterly oblivious to how close it came to its absolute end, and that only earnest pleading saved it — for a short time, unless it changed.