The Weekly Francis is a compilation of the Holy Father’s writings, speeches, etc., which I also cross-post on Jimmy Akin’s blog.
This version of The Weekly Francis covers material released in the last week, from 3 August 2023 to 15 August 2023.
Angelus
Speeches
Papal Instagram
Matthew 14:22–33
22 Immediately he made the disciples get into the boat and go before him to the other side, while he dismissed the crowds. 23 And after he had dismissed the crowds, he went up on the mountain by himself to pray. When evening came, he was there alone, 24 but the boat by this time was a long way from the land, beaten by the waves, for the wind was against them. 25 And in the fourth watch of the night he came to them, walking on the sea. 26 But when the disciples saw him walking on the sea, they were terrified, and said, “It is a ghost!” and they cried out in fear. 27 But immediately Jesus spoke to them, saying, “Take heart; it is I. Do not be afraid.”
28 And Peter answered him, “Lord, if it is you, command me to come to you on the water.” 29 He said, “Come.” So Peter got out of the boat and walked on the water and came to Jesus. 30 But when he saw the wind, he was afraid, and beginning to sink he cried out, “Lord, save me.” 31 Jesus immediately reached out his hand and took hold of him, saying to him, “O you of little faith, why did you doubt?” 32 And when they got into the boat, the wind ceased. 33 And those in the boat worshiped him, saying, “Truly you are the Son of God.”[1]
Jesus’s walking on water is mentioned in Matthew, Mark, and in John. In these three cases, time cues point to this happening after the feeding of the 5,000 and the miracle of the loaves and fishes. They also showed it in these three Gospels that Jesus sends the Apostles on their way as he goes to the mountain to pray and is likely to separate himself from those who want to make him king immediately. In the first reading, we also have Elijah go up on a mountain to pray and he also will hear God’s voice in the weather’s turmoil.
Peter Kreeft notes:
Jesus loved company. Even when he was exhausted, he ministered to the crowds that followed him. But he also needed and sought solitude, as he did at the beginning of our story in today’s Gospel, when he went up a mountain to pray in the middle of the night. We need both human company and solitude, and there is something spiritually and psychologically wrong with us if we do not love and seek out both. They enrich each other: if we have no solitude, no inner life, we have nothing precious or powerful to share with others; and if we shun company with others, we can have no healthy company with God, for “whoever does not love a brother whom he has seen cannot love God whom he has not seen” (1 John 4:20).[2]
St. Thomas Aquinas really dives into the mystical aspects relating Jesus going up the mountain to pray and the danger what Apostles faced on the Sea of Galilea, where there were often such storms.
Afterwards, the danger from the time is described, for it was night, and there is greater danger from the sea at night; for that reason, he says: And when it was evening. And His Passion is signified, because in the Passion He ascended alone; “While they looked on, he was raised up: and a cloud received him out of their sight” (Acts 1, 9). But the boat in the midst of the sea was tossed with the waves. By the boat, the Church is signified; and by the sea, the world is signified; “So is this great sea, which stretcheth wide its arms” (Ps. 103, 25). And this Church, when Christ went into it, remained in the sea, and in the world’s dangers. For when some great man attacks the Church, then it is agitated by the waves. “All thy waves thou hast brought in upon me” (Ps. 87, 8). But because Christ prays, it cannot be submerged, even though it toss and be lifted up. “The waters lifted up the ark on high from the earth” (Gen. 7, 17). Likewise, it is agitated by the wind: and this wind is an assault instigated by the devil. “Because a wind came on a sudden from the side of the desert, and shook the four corners of the house” (Job 1, 19); “The blast of the mighty is like a whirlwind beating against a wall” (Is. 25, 4).[3]
St. John Chrysostom:
It should be observed, that when the Lord works a great miracle, He sends the multitudes away, teaching us thereby never to pursue the praise of the multitude, nor to attract them to us. Further, He teaches us that we should not be ever mixed with crowds, nor yet always shunning them; but that both may be done with profit; whence it follows, And when he had sent the multitude away, he went up into a mountain apart to pray; shewing us that solitude is good, when we have need to pray to God. For this also He goes into the desert, and there spends the night in prayer, to teach us that for prayer we should seek stillness both in time and place.[4]
After Jesus prays, he walks on the water. At this point, the disciples are about 4 miles from the shore as the translation of the Gospel of John reports. In Mark we get the tantalizing detail that Jesus had meant to walk past them.
Jimmy Akin speculates concerning this detail:
Mark records that “he meant to pass by them,” perhaps intending to arrive ahead of time and playfully surprise them when they disembarked (a similar element of playfulness is indicated in his appearance on the road to Emmaus; see Luke 24:28–31). His plan changes, though, because “when they saw him walking on the sea they thought it was a ghost, and cried out; for they all saw him, and were terrified.” It appears that they do not recognize him the darkness, because he immediately assures them, “Take heart, it is I; have no fear.”[5]
Only in Matthew do we learn of the typical Peter response. A mixture of docility to the Holy Spirit to act and an awkwardness focusing on self and consequences. It really took some chutzpah for him to attempt to walk out towards Jesus. Yet he does not just strike out on his own, he asks Jesus first. None of the other apostles were seemingly tempted by such an impetuous act.
John Bergsma, in his commentary on this passage:
As soon as Peter cries out, Jesus “immediately” (Greek eutheos) reaches out his hand and catches him, suggesting an attentive solicitude for the Apostle’s welfare. The Lord doesn’t sit back and let Peter flounder around in the water awhile to teach him a lesson. Even the rebuke, “O you of little faith, why did you doubt?” we may understand that Jesus said with gentleness, from one who knows the weakness of our condition.[6]
How often do we, in trusting God, start to sink in our doubts? Shift the emphasis from what God can do with us to our own will and human possibilities. The plethora of “Fear nots” we get from Jesus are lost as the wind and waves of life make contact.
Venerable Fulton J. Sheen has a section in his book “Life of Christ” on why Peter began to sink, that includes this:
The deliverance was first; then the gentle rebuke; and that probably with a smile on His face and love in His voice. But this was not the only time that poor Peter would doubt the Master Whom he loved so well. He who then asked to walk upon the waters in order to come quickly to the Lord was the one who would later swear that he was ready to go to prison and even to death for Him. Courageous in the boat but timid in the waters, he would later on be bold at the Last Supper, but cowardly the night of the trial. The scene at the lake was a rehearsal for another fall of Peter.
I find it interesting that it is only after Jesus calms the wind that those in the boat worshiped him, saying, “Truly you are the Son of God.” The recent miracle of the Loaves and Fishes had certainly got them thinking more deeply on who Jesus is. His walking on water would add to this. It was the apostles familiarity with scripture which taught them that only God had control over the wind and the waves. Water was associated with death both mystically and in their daily lives as fisherman. Also, “This is the first of three declarations of Jesus’ divine sonship in Matthew (also 16:16 and 27:54).”[7]
Sources
In today’s First Reading, this section from Numbers struck me, starting with 13:31.
31 Then the men who had gone up with him said, “We are not able to go up against the people, for they are stronger than we are.” 32 So they brought to the people of Israel a bad report of the land that they had spied out, saying, “The land, through which we have gone to spy it out, is a land that devours its inhabitants, and all the people that we saw in it are of great height.
Especially, that they intentionally delivered a bad report. Initially, what I considered was people who talk as if the Catholic faith is too stringent. It is difficult to live the virtues required daily. That this call for perfection is an ideal, but not something to live out. The call to perfection in Jesus’ High Priestly Prayer is just hyperbole and not an actual goal. They deliver a false report since they believe that resisting such temptations is not possible and that they are just too strong to overcome. Taking such advice would also make it difficult for us to enter the Promised Land. Those that present this false report, it seems to me, would see this as acting pastoral according to their lived experience.
“The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting. It has been found difficult; and left untried.” —G.K. Chesterton, “What’s Wrong with the World”
There is a clear lack of faith in God’s ability to enter our lives and change us, despite how slowly it seems on our timescale. While true, we will often fail in pursuing a life of holiness, the saints show us that this is not unobtainable. We need to be encouraged and not presented with false reports exaggerating the danger.
The second aspect I thought about is just how often I also exaggerate the difficulty and present myself with a false report. Pursuing what seems to be more pleasurable over seeking union with God. All those shortcuts instead of seeking God first. Those disappointments in myself that I think I will overcome. The truth is that I will never overcome them by my own will.
And I am sure of this, that he who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ. (Php 1:6)
A shocking survey just released from the Jew Research Center (JRC), finds that only one third of the children of Israel fully believe in the Manna given to them by God as they journey to the promised land. The idea of the Manna as the “Bread of Heaven” is central to the children of Israel’s faith and seems to foreshadow something greater to come.
The new JRC survey finds that most self-described Israelites don’t believe this core teaching. In fact, nearly seven-in-ten of (69%) say they personally believe that during the Exodus the Manna is symbolic or possible the secretions of a scale insect feeding on a species of flowering plants. Just one-third of the children of Israel (31%) say they believe that the Manna is miraculous and given to them directly by God.
We can trace much of the decline in belief in the Manna to poor catechesis and an infantilizing of the faith. Instead of saying “The Lord is my banner,” some would carry around felt banners with symbols of food they used to eat in Egypt.
Survey questions on the nature of Manna show the majority have not passed beyond the “What is it” aspect. Interviews conducted after the survey show other misunderstandings such as one responder saying, “If it is really miraculous, why does it have such a short shelf-life? One or two days at the maximum, depending on the day gathered.”
Some protesters of Moses were lamenting “Would that we had meat for food!” or “Hey hey, ho ho, this Manna has got to go.”
31% of the children of Israel who visit the dwelling-place of the Lord once a week or daily, accept Moses’ teaching on the Manna, and give thanksgiving to God for it.
Our exit interview with Moses after the survey found him despondent and of poor mental health. “I cannot carry all this people by myself, for they are too heavy for me. If this is the way you will deal with me, then please do me the favor of killing me at once, so that I need no longer face this distress.”
We asked him about a possible National Manna Revival and he replied: “I am considering appointing able men out of all Israel and make them heads over the people, chiefs of thousands, of hundreds, of fifties, and of tens. Still, I wonder if any revival ever came from a bureaucracy even composed of well-meaning men.”
17 And after six days Jesus took with him Peter and James, and John his brother, and led them up a high mountain by themselves. 2 And he was transfigured before them, and his face shone like the sun, and his clothes became white as light. 3 And behold, there appeared to them Moses and Elijah, talking with him. 4 And Peter said to Jesus, “Lord, it is good that we are here. If you wish, I will make three tents here, one for you and one for Moses and one for Elijah.” 5 He was still speaking when, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them, and a voice from the cloud said, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased; listen to him.” 6 When the disciples heard this, they fell on their faces and were terrified. 7 But Jesus came and touched them, saying, “Rise, and have no fear.” 8 And when they lifted up their eyes, they saw no one but Jesus only.
9 And as they were coming down the mountain, Jesus commanded them, “Tell no one the vision, until the Son of Man is raised from the dead.”[1]
This passage references that this event occurred eight days after the previous passage in In Matthew 15:28 “Truly, I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.”, the parallel passage shows six days. This discrepancy is something some Church Fathers reconcile, but what is important here is how the promise about some of them seeing the kingdom of God is unlocked. Peter, John, and James saw this revealed in the Transfiguration. Each of the Synoptic Gospels provides this time cue to help us connect the dots.
From St. Thomas Aquinas’ Commentary on the Gospel of St. Matthew:
But why is it stated here, After six days, and in Luke (9, 28) it is stated, “After eight days”? It is apparent that Luke numbers the day on which He spoke these words, and also the day of the transfiguration; but Matthew numbers only the intermediate days; for that reason, when the first and the last days have been subtracted, there remain but six days. By six days are signified the six Ages, after which we hope to arrive at the glory to come. Likewise, in six days, the Lord finished His works; and so, the Lord chose to show Himself after six days, because, unless we are raised up to God above all the creatures that the Lord created, we cannot reach the kingdom of God.[2]
There is a lot to digest regarding trying to understand the transfiguration at just the surface layer and, more so, the spiritual depths.
Dr. John Bergsma gives a tight summary of how the Fathers viewed this:
As the Fathers long recognized, the Transfiguration is a foretaste or glimpse of the glory of Christ in his resurrected state. The sight of his glory is given to Peter, James, and John to encourage them to persevere through the difficult times that lay in front of them before they witness Christ’s Resurrection. For us now hearing this Gospel proclaimed at Mass, it is meant to encourage us to persevere not only in Lenten mortification and asceticism until we sacramentally experience Christ’s triumph at Easter, but more broadly in embracing the sufferings of the Christian life until our lowly bodies become like his glorious body (Phil 3:21).[3]
One question I have heard asked multiple times is how did Peter, James, and John know this was Moses and Elijah? My guess would be that Elijah’s clothing and appearance was rather well-known, which is why they recognized John the Baptist as coming in the manner of Elijah. I would also surmise that once they recognized Elijah, it would not take too much effort for them to determine the other figure was Moses. The Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture points out “both figures were associated with Jewish eschatological hopes, for the Old Testament proclaimed the return of Elijah (Mal 3:23–25) and the coming of a prophet like Moses (Deut 18:15–19).”[4] These were two important and dominant figures in salvation history and expected their return in some manner.
There is also a good deal of speculation regarding why Jesus revealed this to Peter, James, and John only? That only they were led up the mountain and witness this overshadowing by the cloud of God’s glory, this theophany. There are many possibilities here regarding God’s wisdom in doing this. Still, we can scratch the surface with some conjecture. For example, I like this take from St. Thomas Aquinas, “And why did He take only three disciples? It was to signify that no one can reach God’s kingdom except in the faith of the Trinity.”[5]
Turning to a Doctor of the Church, St. John of Damascus:
Matthew and Mark indeed say that the transfiguration took place on the sixth day after the promise made to the disciples, but Luke on the eighth. But there is no disagreement in these testimonies, but they who make the number six, taking off a day at each end, that is, the first and the last, the day on which He makes the promise, and that on which He fulfilled it, have reckoned only the intervening ones, but He who makes the number eight, has counted in each of the two days above mentioned. But why were not all called, but only some, to behold the sight? There was only one indeed who was unworthy to see the divinity, namely Judas, according to the word of Isaiah, Let the wicked be taken away, that he should not behold the glory of God. (Isai. 26:10 LXX.) If then he alone had been sent away, he might have, as it were from envy, been provoked to greater wickedness. Henceforward He takes away from the traitor every pretext for his treachery, seeing that He left below the rest of the company of the Apostles. But He took with Him three, that in the mouths of two or three witnesses every word should be established. He took Peter, indeed, because He wished to shew him that the witness he had borne to Him was confirmed by the witness of the Father, and that he was as it were to preside over the whole Church. He took with Him James, who was to be the first of all the disciples to die for Christ; but He took John as the clearest singer of the sacred doctrine, that having seen the glory of the Son, which submits not to time, he might sound forth, In the beginning was the Word. (John 1:1.) [6]
There are other intriguing reasons that display the depth of parallelism that the Holy Spirit breathes into sacred scripture.
Dr. Brant Pitre brings up this example:
but he brings up Peter and then James and John who were also brothers just like Nadab and Abihu. Why does he bring these three up? Because he’s preparing them for an experience like Moses had. When Moses went up the mountain to meet God, he brought Aaron, Nadab and Abihu; Jesus brings Peter, James and John up the mountain for the same reason.[7]
Jesus is transfigured in his glory “and his face shone like the sun, and his clothes became white as light,” Peter has his typical reaction of engaging tongue before engaging his brain. As Mark 9:6 says regarding Peter’s reaction, “For he did not know what to say.” This is a lesson for all of us. How often when we have a partial glimpse of God’s glory and his action in our life that our first response is not well-considered? I can certainly think of all of my superficial responses when I have encountered this in my life. We have a tendency to want to condense mystery into a soundbite. To transform it into bullet points, we could present. It is good for us to draw this in and to make sense of it. To make initial conclusions, but to take the time to realize how little of the picture we see and instead to draw this out in contemplation in awe and wonder. Sometimes in the face of recognizing God’s glory, our proper response is to do as these apostles did, “they fell on their faces and were terrified.” It is an act of love and humility to be overwhelmed by God’s glory, we were made for his glory, to recognize our own sinfulness, and how much we want to please God by repenting of this.
One benefit of the Lenten season is taking stock of the barnacles and accretions we have accumulated and allowed to take hold on us. To fall on our face so that ultimately we can see the face of God. That terror at our own sins is rectified when we do as God the Father says here regarding to Jesus, “listen to him.” Jesus approaches the apostles who have prostrated themselves by saying, “Rise, and have no fear.” We properly pursued holiness with humility along with the recognition that Jesus has called us to sonship, that he has called us friends. We should be filled with gratitude and thankfulness for what he has done in our lives and the grace he is giving us to be more like him. As St. Paul writes, “that he who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ. (Philippians 1:6)”
“And when they lifted up their eyes, they saw no one but Jesus only.”
This event was overwhelming for Peter, James, and John. Seeing Jesus transfigured along with the appearances of Moses and Elijah would have been pointing them to fulfillment of the Kingdom of God and all the eschatological aspects this entailed. Was all this culminating in the end of the world? We all see signs in the ages in which we live. What do all these world events portend? Jesus lifts these fears when we fix our eyes on him and see “Jesus only.”
From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:[8]
555 For a moment Jesus discloses his divine glory, confirming Peter’s confession. He also reveals that he will have to go by the way of the cross at Jerusalem in order to “enter into his glory.”[9] Moses and Elijah had seen God’s glory on the Mountain; the Law and the Prophets had announced the Messiah’s sufferings.[10] Christ’s Passion is the will of the Father: the Son acts as God’s servant;[11] the cloud indicates the presence of the Holy Spirit. “The whole Trinity appeared: the Father in the voice; the Son in the man; the Spirit in the shining cloud.”[12] (2576, 2583; 257)
You were transfigured on the mountain, and your disciples, as much as they were capable of it, beheld your glory, O Christ our God, so that when they should see you crucified they would understand that your Passion was voluntary, and proclaim to the world that you truly are the splendor of the Father. [13]
One final thought regarding the transfiguration brought out by the Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture.
The transfiguration scene serves as “a twin of sorts” to the execution narrative in 27:32–54. Davies and Allison beautifully note the parallels. “In the one, a private epiphany, an exalted Jesus, with garments glistening, stands on a high mountain and is flanked by two religious giants from the past. All is light. In the other, a public spectacle, a humiliated Jesus, whose clothes have been torn from him and divided, is lifted upon a cross and flanked by two common, convicted criminals. All is darkness. We have here a pictorial antithetical parallelism, a diptych in which the two plates have similar lines but different colors.” The parallel scenes highlight the horror of Good Friday and the splendor of Jesus’ love for us. It is no ordinary man that will be crucified on Calvary, but the beloved Son of God revealed in glory at the transfiguration. This same glorified Son will freely submit himself to utter humiliation in order to redeem the human family (see Phil 2:5–11).[14]
The Weekly Francis is a compilation of the Holy Father’s writings, speeches, etc., which I also cross-post on Jimmy Akin’s blog.
This version of The Weekly Francis covers material released in the last week, from 29 June 2023 to 3 August 2023.
Angelus
Apostolic Letter
Homilies
Letters
Messages
Speeches
Papal Instagram
24 He put another parable before them, saying, “The kingdom of heaven may be compared to a man who sowed good seed in his field, 25 but while his men were sleeping, his enemy came and sowed weeds among the wheat and went away. 26 So when the plants came up and bore grain, then the weeds appeared also. 27 And the servants of the master of the house came and said to him, ‘Master, did you not sow good seed in your field? How then does it have weeds?’ 28 He said to them, ‘An enemy has done this.’ So the servants said to him, ‘Then do you want us to go and gather them?’ 29 But he said, ‘No, lest in gathering the weeds you root up the wheat along with them. 30 Let both grow together until the harvest, and at harvest time I will tell the reapers, “Gather the weeds first and bind them in bundles to be burned, but gather the wheat into my barn.” ’ ”
31 He put another parable before them, saying, “The kingdom of heaven is like a grain of mustard seed that a man took and sowed in his field. 32 It is the smallest of all seeds, but when it has grown it is larger than all the garden plants and becomes a tree, so that the birds of the air come and make nests in its branches.”
33 He told them another parable. “The kingdom of heaven is like leaven that a woman took and hid in three measures of flour, till it was all leavened.”
34 All these things Jesus said to the crowds in parables; indeed, he said nothing to them without a parable. 35 This was to fulfill what was spoken by the prophet:
“I will open my mouth in parables;
I will utter what has been hidden since the foundation of the world.”
36 Then he left the crowds and went into the house. And his disciples came to him, saying, “Explain to us the parable of the weeds of the field.” 37 He answered, “The one who sows the good seed is the Son of Man. 38 The field is the world, and the good seed is the sons of the kingdom. The weeds are the sons of the evil one, 39 and the enemy who sowed them is the devil. The harvest is the end of the age, and the reapers are angels. 40 Just as the weeds are gathered and burned with fire, so will it be at the end of the age. 41 The Son of Man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all law-breakers, 42 and throw them into the fiery furnace. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. 43 Then the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father. He who has ears, let him hear.[1]
We continue from last week’s Gospel passage, where Jesus is preaching near Capernaum, a series of parables.
There is much wisdom in what Peter Kreeft writes here:
When it comes to the sayings of Jesus, the more words he speaks, the fewer words we have to speak. Here is a long and complex parable that we do not need to explain or expound because Jesus himself explains it very clearly and unmistakably, in each detail. The best way to interpret it is to reread it.[2]
In the Parable of the Sower, Jesus consequently explains that he is the one planting good seeds. He also explains that the devil spreads the bad seeds. Aquinas, in his commentary on Matthew, focuses on the men who were asleep allowing this to happen.
On the part of the guards, He says, But while men were asleep, etc., meaning the rulers of the human race who were appointed to guard, were asleep, namely, through the sleep of death. These rulers are holy men, namely, the Apostles, who knew that the heretics mixed themselves in with the wheat; hence, Paul says, “I know that after my departure ravening wolves will enter in among you, not sparing the flock” (Acts 20, 29).[3]
He further classifies how the bad seed spread:
What is sown is cockle, which is similar to wheat, and is called darnel. What is signified by the cockle? It signifies wicked children who love iniquity, especially heretics. There are three kinds of wicked men: bad Catholics, schismatics and heretics. Bad Catholics are signified by chaff, concerning whom it was said above: “The chaff he will burn with fire” (3, 12). Schismatics are signified by ears of grain that have rotted. Heretics are signified by cockle. They are sown, therefore, in a field, meaning in this world. Similarly, cockle has a resemblance to wheat, and in this way, these men feign the appearance of good men, as it is stated: “Desiring to be teachers of the law: understanding neither the things they say, nor whereof they affirm” (I Tim. 1, 7).[4]
We learn from the Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture that:
This parable describes a real scenario from the first-century agricultural world: there were even Roman laws that specifically forbade the sabotaging of crops by planting darnel. … Though darnel could destroy a crop, it did have one positive use: it could be burned for fuel. The householder alludes to this when he tells the servants that the harvesters will collect the weeds and tie them in bundles for burning.[5]
John Bergsma has some important insights into the nature of the Church regarding this parable:
In Matthew 13, Jesus tells seven parables about the kingdom of heaven. All of them are important to ponder because they teach us about the nature of the Church. The Church is both the kingdom of David (since ruled by Jesus, the Son of David) and the kingdom of God and heaven (since ruled by God). The Parables of the Kingdom help us to understand that the kingdom is truly present in the Church, despite appearances to the contrary.
One of the reasons we may disbelieve that the Church is the manifestation of the kingdom of heaven is the presence of hypocrites and other willful sinners within the visible Church. In the Parable of the Weeds and the Wheat, Jesus addresses and explains why God permits this to be the case. God permits sinners within the Church to allow them the opportunity of repentance. Were he to execute judgment in this age, some destined for repentance would be judged prematurely. The Church Fathers typically understood this parable as counseling against too quickly and rashly condemning the imperfect believer:[6]
The best antidote to being scandalized by the current state of the Church is to be familiar with the Acts of the Apostles and further Church history.
As I said above, the Church Fathers understood this parable to speak about the presence of hypocrites in the Church. Many schismatics throughout Church history have denied this sense of the text and insisted that the visible church had to be pure.Typically, these schismatics break off with like-minded followers and establish a group aggressively regulated according to the mindset of the founding leader. A certain visible moral rectitude is maintained in such a manner for perhaps a generation or so before the schismatic group loses its momentum and begins to tolerate dissent and diversity within its own ranks. Countless “reform” groups have broken off the Church in this manner through history.[7]
We should remember that we do not divide the Church up into the wheat and the tares as a kind of permanent state. People within the Church can process through either state. I hope I am in the wheat-state now, but I was once a tare-able person. “But the one who endures to the end will be saved.” (Mt 24:13–14) “if we endure, we will also reign with him; if we deny him, he also will deny us; ”(2 Timothy 2:12).
St. Isidore of Pelusium offers an interesting explanation of the parable of the weeds and wheat: The sinners, represented by the weeds, are not to be immediately pulled and burned in order to give them time to repent. God forbids the angels to gather up the evildoers, “lest they uproot the good wheat together with the tares, that is, so that the sinner may not be cut off while in his mind there is yet a possibility of repentance.” St. Isidore goes on to give examples of God’s patience with great sinners who eventually repent and become instruments in God’s plan of salvation: God did not “slay Matthew, who had given himself to the exacting of the tribute, so that He might not thus impede the preaching of the gospel. Neither did He destroy the harlots who served lust and immodesty, lest models of repentance might be wanting. He avenged not Peter’s denial, because already He beheld his burning tears of repentance. Nor did He strike down with death the persecuting Saul, lest the ends of the earth be deprived of salvation.”[8]
Moving on to the Parable of the Mustards Seed. We are so familiar with the Parable of the Mustard Seed that we don’t realize how odd it is. Brant Pitre points out what should surprise us:
Well this parable is a really surprising one right from the beginning. So the first twist is the very first line, “a man took a grain of mustard seed and sowed it in his field.” Now if you do a little study about mustard seeds and mustard trees, especially if you look at some of the commentaries that scholars have written on that today, what you will find out is that a mustard tree is basically a weed. It is not a desirable plant. Nobody makes a field full of mustard trees to harvest them. If you want a kind of visual equivalent, if you have ever seen a tumbleweed in the American West or in Texas, that is what a mustard tree looks like. It’s ugly. It’s invasive. If you get mustard seeds into your field or into your yard, they are going to grow and you are never going to be able to stamp them out. So the first surprise in this particular parable is why would anybody ever sow a mustard seed in his field? And why would Jesus compare that to the kingdom of God? But it keeps going because he says that the mustard seed is the “smallest of seeds”, and that is true. Proverbially in Judaism in the first century A.D., if you wanted to say something was really small you would say it is like a mustard seed. It was kind of a proverbial image for something that’s really, really tiny.
Okay, so what’s the message of this parable? Well the meaning is really clear if you focus on the twists. The point is this, the kingdom starts out small and it ends great, but it doesn’t look like what you are going to expect it to look like. It’s kind of ugly. It’s kind of like a field with weeds and wheat in it. It doesn’t look like the kind of thing you think God would do when he brings his kingdom. So it starts small, but it ends great. It doesn’t look like you expect it to. But also notice that the mustard tree, and the mustard seed as well, it’s invasive. In other words, once it gets in, it keeps growing and it spreads and it grows and it spreads. And this would make you think of the Old Testament image in Daniel 2 of the kingdom of God. Because in Daniel 2, Daniel saw this vision of the kingdom that starts out as a little bitty stone, but then it grows into a great mountain that fills the whole earth. This is a very, very similar kind of riddle because mountains might turn into little stones over time as they break down over time, but little stones don’t become mountains. So it’s the same kind of imagery here, Jesus is using the language of the prophets to show the disciples that the kingdom is a mysterious reality. You have to go beyond the visible, which doesn’t look like what you expect it to look like, say 12 guys from Galilee, a couple fishermen and tax collectors. On the outside it might not look like much, but if you let it get rooted, it’s going to grow and it’s going to spread and it’s going to become a great tree so that the birds of the air will want to come and make their nest in its branches.[9]
There is so much in these parables from Jesus to encourage us. It should not surprise us that the Church is not yet “On Earth as it is in Heaven.” We should be joyful that our own faults have not yet condemned us and also hopeful in how God’s love will manifest in other’s lives. The Church does not look like we think it should look because we do not have God’s vision.
There is a well-known quote, “I have a mustard seed, and I’m not afraid to use it.” Attributed to Joseph Ratzinger, but it is not his, although I believe he would appreciate it. It was actually said by David P. Goldman in an essay referring to Ratzinger.
I was thinking more about this part of The Pillar’s interview with Archbishop Victor Manuel Fernandez.
Veritatis splendor is a great document, powerfully solid.
Obviously, it denotes a particular concern — to set certain limits. For this reason it is not the most adequate text to encourage the development of theology. In fact, over the last decades, tell me how many theologians can we name with the stature of Rahner, Ratzinger, Congar or Von Balthasar?
Not even that which they call “liberation theology” has theologians at the level of Gustavo Gutiérrez.
Something has gone wrong.
There were controls, [but] not so much development.
Today perhaps a text will be needed that, collecting everything valuable from Veritatis splendor, has another style, another tone, which at the same time allows for encouraging the growth of Catholic theology, as Pope Francis asks of me.
I have read Veritatis Splendor (6 August 1993) | John Paul II a couple of times, and should be seen as a source of nourishment, not deprivation. It should be further mined, not undermined. Still, what I fundamentally disagree with here is that it has caused theological stagnation.
I invoke Chesterton’s brilliant line in Orthodoxy “Catholic doctrine and discipline may be walls; but they are the walls of a playground.”
There is so much room within the Church’s theological playground to play in to be concerned. Plus, I don’t understand being concerned about the current stature of theologians within the Church. Even if true, was there ever a time of continuously having a posse of theologians of great stature? That any seeming lull indicates that “something has gone wrong.”
Now I am just another convert and one that started with zero understanding/belief of Christianity. As an autodidact I have had a succession of foolish teachers, so I have no competence to evaluate the current state of theology within the Church. My caveat would be that after seeing the interviews Larry Chapp has done with theologians, I think we have much to learn from them as they have learned from those who went before them.
The domain of my website is http://www.splendoroftruth.com, which is a homage to this encyclical.
Matthew 13.1–23 ESV – Bible Gateway
At the start of this section, the reference he went out of the house is likely a reference to St. Peter’s house in Capernaum. He teaches a series of 8 parables, with the first parable of the sower being presented in this Gospel passage.
There is a large crowd present and Jesus gets into a boat, sits down, and teaches them. Some have wondered, “How could one be heard by ‘a large multitude’ without the benefit of some sort of sound amplification?”
Archaeologist Cobbey Crisler, together with acoustic engineer Mark Myles conducted tests near Tell Hum, site of ancient Capernaum.[1]
Among several coves near Capernaum, there is one that has recently been found to have such sound characteristics of a natural amphitheater. It is located around mid-way between Capernaum and Tabgha, amongst the major areas of Jesus’s Galilean ministry. Acoustical tests were carried out on this site to show that ‘a great multitude’ of some five thousand to seven thousand people could indeed have clearly heard a person speaking from a boat located at a spot near the cove’s center.”[2]
We are used to Jesus’ teachings in parables, so the disciples’ question can be confusing..
From the Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture:
But there is a dramatic shift in Jesus’ teaching method: he spoke to them at length in parables. This is the first time Matthew specifically uses the word parables to describe Jesus’ teaching. While Jesus occasionally spoke in parables before, here he suddenly addresses the crowds “at length” in parables, giving several in rapid-fire succession. This movement from teaching the crowds primarily in a straightforward manner (Matt 5–7) to a new emphasis on parables (Matt 13) surprises Jesus’ own disciples, who ask, “Why do you speak to them in parables?” (13:10).[3]
This commentary also mentions that “For the ancient Jews, a parable was a cryptic saying or story intended to stimulate thought.”[4] As Brad Pitre often references, Jesus parables often involved a twist, something unexpected.
Jesus’ reply to the disciples can also seem puzzling with both his answer and referencing to Isaiah.
St. Thomas Aquinas into his commentary on Matthew, remarks on this:
The reason is twofold. One reason is that, by parables of this kind, sacred things would be hidden from the unbelievers, lest they blaspheme: for it was said above, “Give not that which is holy to dogs” (7, 6). Therefore, because many men were blaspheming, for that reason, He wished to speak in parables. Hence, “To you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God; but to the rest in parables” (Lk. 8, 10). The second reason is that uncultured men are taught better through parables of this kind. Hence, men, namely, the uncultured, when divine things are explained under similitudes, comprehend and retain them better. For that reason, the Lord wished to speak in parables, so that they might be better committed to memory. For because He had known that worthy men would receive His doctrine, He wished to give it to them in such a way that they might remember it better; “I will open my mouth in parables” (Ps. 77, 2).[5]
Brant Pitre remarks on the apparent carelessness of the sower:
So let’s start back at the beginning of parable. Jesus says: “A sower went out to sow. And as he sowed, some seeds fell along the path.” Now pause there, that is the first unexpected element to this parable, because any first century Jew would’ve known that if you’re going to go and get seed—which was expensive—and you are going to plant it in your field or in your garden and that’s your livelihood, you’d better take good care that none of the seed gets lost. And so what is being described here is a sower who is careless in his sowing of seed.[6]
This facet of the parable strikes me as an aspect of God’s grace. God repeatedly gives us grace, but we often seem to carelessly waste it.. This seems to me to be a glimpse of the same aspect of God’s generousness revealed in the Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard.
Another point that strikes me is that this sowing of the seed is not a one-time event in our lives. Jesus the sower does not just come once and we hope to be lucky enough that he comes when we have good soil. In my life, I can recall my own rocky landscape where I rejected grace because I was confident in my atheism.. There were other times in my life where I was sure of my atheism, but wanting to be wrong since I was living a nihilist existence. Those tentative steps towards Christianity, the thorns of my pride choked them and a grasping towards faith withered away. It was only after so much time that the soil became more suitable for growth. Nothing could grow until I could grow.
Oddly, quickly looking up “Amending rocky soil”:
I now see how that process applied spiritually for me. First, those large stones of sin being removed. Continuously working on sins that thus became visible. Repeating the process and replacing evil practices with more virtuous ones. I did not know at the time I was doing this or what this ultimately would lead to, other than knowing I was not a good man and desired to be one. What is annoying is that this is a never-ending process in this life to grow closer to Christ.
In a really brilliant post by Amy Welborn, tongue-in-cheek titled Synodicalisminity, she referred to a previous post, But do you gird your loins and quoted from it:
The greatest irony about this irony-stuffed Synod on Synodality is fundamental and glaring. Once you see it, you can’t unsee it.
It’s this:
Anxiously desiring to show that it’s a listening Church, institutional church leaders perfectly demonstrate that they aren’t listening.
In short:
Take a look at the world around you. If your first response to the seeking, pain, suffering and questions that’s glaring evident at every level of society, in almost every home and even every heart is: let’s have a meeting on Church process and structure….you’re not listening.
This time around, reading this, this struck me even more. Just at the surface and rather petty level, “Listening Church”, always struck me the wrong way. It has the ring of political jargon. Politicians often go on listening tours and then change policies based on what they heard. Oops, I misstated that. They go on listening tours and change nothing regarding their policy. They pretend to listen to show how much they care and then do exactly what they wanted.
Do I have a jaundice view of the synodal process and see this same phenomenon? Unfortunately, yes. I try to temper that skeptical attitude and know that there have been places where local synods seem much closer to the ideal. Most of the coverage I have seen, from what I consider solid news sources without pre-determined hot takes, confirms my skepticism.
As a retired Navy chief, I think of metaphors in that vein. I think of the situation in the Church as an “all hands on deck” situation. Most Catholics in the world don’t go to Mass regularly, if at all. The ones who do often have an inadequate understanding of fundamental Church teaching. The views Catholics hold, in general, fall right along secular/political lines. There is just not a Catholic distinctive, for example, divorce and abortion rates.
“When the Church does not go out of herself to evangelize, she becomes self-referential; she grows ill (like the stooped woman in the Gospel). Evangelii Gaudium | Francis
There is so much pain and isolation in the modern world with a lack of understanding of the human person in the image and likeness of God. They are desperate for the very mission of the Church, for the answers and accompaniment they need from her.
Instead as, Amy writes: “let’s have a meeting on Church process and structure.” Can we get more self-referential than this?
We are hemorrhaging people and not only are we losing 41% or more of those raised Catholic, we also have a dismal rate of those leaving other faiths to become Catholic.
Leah Lebresco, previously looked at the numbers from the 2014 Religious Landscape study.
Why do evangelicals wind up ahead of other Christian sects in this model? They’re better at holding on to the people born into their tradition (65 percent retention compared to 59 percent for Catholics and 45 percent for Mainline Protestants), and they’re a stronger attractor for people leaving other faiths. According to Pew’s data on conversion rates, 10 percent of people raised Catholic wind up as evangelicals. Just 2 percent of people born as evangelicals wind up Catholic. The flow between mainline and evangelical Protestants is also tilted in evangelicals’ favor. Twelve percent of those raised evangelical wind up in mainline congregations, but 19 percent of mainline Protestants wind up becoming evangelical.Evangelical Protestants Are The Biggest Winners When People Change Faiths
Since then, these trends have not gotten better, and if anything, worse.
While the phrase, “the listening Church,” annoys me, not that this is not a valid role for the Church. Jesus would ask questions and listen to what they wanted. Often getting them to narrow down to the healing they most needed. This moment of contact could grow faith in them that seemed to have dissipated, like the paralyzed man at the pool of Bethesda. It is of great importance to listen to those around us and not just assign them what we think they need, whatever our particular hobby horse might be.
The phrase that I seem to hear seldom is “the teaching Church.”
“We do not want a church that will move with the world. We want a church that will move the world.” — G.K. Chesterton
To mix scriptural metaphors (4 days in Purgatory for me), we have the pearl of great price and are hiding it under a bushel basket. It is as if we are afraid to invoke Church teaching and are rather embarrassed about it. No wonder Catholic Apologists have to keep explaining what apologist means since so many have embraced the modern meaning regarding the faith. Sure, people can be a jerk invoking Church teaching, but people can be a jerk about anything, including truths.
God is guiding the Church and has equipped his Church with everything needed to heal those in our midst. We can do the both/and of listening/teaching. But hey, we wouldn’t want to appear triumphant or something.