Luke 2:16–21

¹⁶  And they went with haste and found Mary and Joseph, and the baby lying in a manger. ¹⁷  And when they saw it, they made known the saying that had been told them concerning this child. ¹⁸  And all who heard it wondered at what the shepherds told them. ¹⁹  But Mary treasured up all these things, pondering them in her heart. ²⁰  And the shepherds returned, glorifying and praising God for all they had heard and seen, as it had been told them.

²¹  And at the end of eight days, when he was circumcised, he was called Jesus, the name given by the angel before he was conceived in the womb.

Luke 216–21 ESV – Bible Gateway

---

St. Ambrose. Esteem not the words of the shepherds as mean and despicable. For from the shepherds Mary increases her faith, as it follows: Mary kept all these sayings, and pondered them in her heart. Let us learn the chastity of the sacred Virgin in all things, who no less chaste in her words than in her body, gathered up in her heart the materials of faith.[1]

Dr. Brant Pitre, in his commentaries, has noted that the idea that shepherds were especially despised has been overblown. Shepherds are rather prominent in the Old Testament, from Abraham, Moses, and King David. I can easily see how they had been looked down by others higher on the cultural food chain. Jesus describes himself as the Good Shepherd. Still, the lowliness of these witnesses to the Incarnation is an important theme in the birth of the Messiah. A king who came to us pre-announced, but in a shockingly humble and hidden way. This would not be the script that we would write.

From the Navarre commentary on the Gospel of Luke:

The birth of the Saviour Messiah is the key event in the history of mankind, but God wanted it to take place so quietly that the world went about its business as if nothing had happened. The only people he tells about it are a few shepherds. It was also to a shepherd, Abraham, that God gave his promise to save mankind.[2]

Mary treasuring and pondering the news from the Shepherds combined with her own experience with God is such a rich vein to mine.

Peter Kreeft puts it well in his commentary:

Mary is mentioned three times in this passage, and there is something we can learn from all three things that are said about her.
First, she is simply there, at the manger, with Joseph and baby Jesus. She does not go to the shepherds; they come to her, and so do the three wise men, later. Men move around the circumference; a woman is at the center of the circle.
Second, she “kept all these things” that had happened and “reflected on them in her heart.” The older translation says she “pondered” them in her heart. It’s a kind of praying.
Third, she and Joseph brought Jesus to the temple to be circumcised eight days after he was born, as the Mosaic Law commanded, and they named him “Jesus” in obedience to the angel’s command to Joseph. Both the circumcising and the naming were instances of obeying: obeying God’s Mosaic Law and obeying God’s angel.

So we have Mary staying, praying, and obeying.[3]

He continues:

What does “pondering” add to “thinking”? Depth. And patience. Most of the most important things in life take time and patience to understand, like the three most important choices we make: what God to believe in and what person to marry and what career to work at. Patience is necessary especially with people: you can’t understand other people, or even yourself, without patience and experience. It’s not like math or technology, with formulas and machines that give you instant answers. In all the most important areas of life, truth comes gradually, like the tides, or the sunrise, not instantly, as it does when you just press a key or flip a switch or solve a math problem.[4]

This example of pondering and treasuring should be the necessary part of everyone’s life who desires to be a disciple of Christ. How often do we treasure what God has worked on in our lives and pondered his word? It is one thing to have knowledge of Christ, but to contemplate this and to bring our lives into conformity is another thing. I often fail miserably at integrating what I know into my life, still grasping at that pearl of great price and falling in awe to my knees.

Mary contemplates Jesus’ birth and childhood, not from a distance, but as a participant in the mystery (1:35, 43; 2:51).[5]

Dr. Brant Pitre explains:

The Greek word syntēréō literally means to “treasure up” (Luke 2:19). It is from the idea of putting money into a treasury. So she’s taking the words of the shepherd and she’s treasuring them up in her heart, she is storing them up inside of her interiorly, in her heart and in her mind.[6]

This Gospel passage ends with the circumcision and the naming of Jesus.

Dr. Brant Pitre explains why this passage was selected for the Solemnity of Mary, Mother of God and also why the first reading was selected.

So the first reason that this passage is on this particular day, is that January 1st is the eighth day after the birth of Christ. It is the octave, so to speak, within the season of Christmas and, in fact, in earlier times, before the Second Vatican Council, January 1st was actually the Feast of the Circumcision and the Naming of Jesus.
… I think, not a coincidence that the new year—because this feast always falls on January 1st—opens with a blessing. It opens with the blessing of the people of God. So the very first reading for the beginning of the new year is that the Lord would bless his people.[7]

From the Catena Aurea:

St. Epiphanius. Christ was circumcised for several reasons. First indeed to shew the reality of His flesh, in opposition to Manichæus f and those who say that He came forth in appearance only. Secondly, that He might prove that His body was not of the same substance with the Deity, according to Apollinaris, and that it descended not from heaven, as Valentinian said. Thirdly, to add a confirmation to circumcision which He had of old instituted to wait His coming. Lastly, to leave no excuse to the Jews. For had He not been circumcised, they might have objected that they could not receive Christ uncircumcised.[8]
St. Bede. He was circumcised also that He might enjoin upon us by His example the virtue of obedience, and might take compassion on them who being placed under the law, were unable to bear the burdens of the law, to the end that He who came in the likeness of sinful flesh might not reject the remedy with which sinful flesh was wont to be healed. For circumcision brought in the law the same assistance of a saving cure to the wound of original sin which Baptism does in the time of the grace of revelation, except that as yet the circumcised could not enter the gates of the heavenly kingdom, but comforted after death with a blessed rest in Abraham’s bosom, they waited with a joyful hope for their entrance into eternal peace.[9]

Finishing with a paragraph from the Catechism:

495 Called in the Gospels “the mother of Jesus,” Mary is acclaimed by Elizabeth, at the prompting of the Spirit and even before the birth of her son, as “the mother of my Lord.” In fact, the One whom she conceived as man by the Holy Spirit, who truly became her Son according to the flesh, was none other than the Father’s eternal Son, the second person of the Holy Trinity. Hence the Church confesses that Mary is truly “Mother of God” (Theotokos)[10]

Sources

• Catena Aurea: Commentary on the Four Gospels, Collected out of the Works of the Fathers, Volume 3: St. Luke – Verbum
• Navarre, Saint Luke’s Gospel (2005)
• The Ignatius Catholic Study Bible꞉ The New Testament
• Peter Kreeft, Food for the Soul: Reflections on the Mass Readings Year A
• Catholic Productions, Commentaries by Brant Pitre
• Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2nd Edition
• Photo by Ben White on Unsplash

---

1. St. Ambrose, Archbishop of Milan, A.D. 374. Catena Aurea: Commentary on the Four Gospels, Collected out of the Works of the Fathers: St. Luke (J. H. Newman, Ed.; Vol. 3, pp. 74–75).  ↩
2. Navarre, Saint Luke’s Gospel (2005)  ↩
3. Peter Kreeft, Food for the Soul: Reflections on the Mass Readings Year A, Solemnity of Mary, Mother of God  ↩
4. ibid  ↩
5. Ignatius Catholic Study Bible: New Testament  ↩
6. Catholic Productions, Brant Pitre, Solemnity of Mary, Mother of God  ↩
7. ibid.  ↩
8. St. Epiphanius, Bishop of Salamis, A.D. 367. (ubi sup.) Catena Aurea: Commentary on the Four Gospels, Collected out of the Works of the Fathers: St. Luke (J. H. Newman, Ed.; Vol. 3, pp. 74–75).  ↩
9. St. Bede, Venerable, Presbyter and Monk of Yarrow, A.D. 700. Catena Aurea: Commentary on the Four Gospels, Collected out of the Works of the Fathers: St. Luke (J. H. Newman, Ed.; Vol. 3, pp. 74–75).  ↩
10. Catholic Church. (2000). Catechism of the Catholic Church (2nd Ed). United States Catholic Conference.
    – Photo by Ben White on Unsplash  ↩

Matthew 1:19–24

¹⁸  Now the birth of Jesus Christ to Joseph, before they came together she was found to be with child from the Holy Spirit.¹⁹  And her husband Joseph, being a just man and unwilling to put her to shame, resolved to divorce her quietly. ²⁰  But as he considered these things, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, “Joseph, son of David, do not fear to take Mary as your wife, for that which is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. ²¹  She will bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins.” ²²  All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had spoken by the prophet:

²³  “Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son,
    and they shall call his name Immanuel”

(which means, God with us). ²⁴  When Joseph woke from sleep, he did as the angel of the Lord commanded him: he took his wife,

Matthew 119–24 ESV – Bible Gateway

---

St. Augustine. Furthermore, this manner in which Christ was born of the Holy Spirit suggests to us the grace of God, by which man without any previous merits, in the very beginning of his nature, was united with the Word of God into so great unity of person, that he was also made son of God. (c. 38.). But inasmuch as the whole Trinity wrought to make this creature which was conceived of the Virgin, though pertaining only to the person of the Son, (for the works of the Trinity are indivisible,) why is the Holy Spirit only named in this work? Must we always, when one of the Three is named in any work, understand that the whole Trinity worked in that? [1]

St. Thomas Aquinas, in his commentary on the Gospel of Matthew, reflects on what St. Augustine wrote:

Although, however, according to Augustine, the works of the Trinity are indivisible, and therefore, that conception was worked not only by the Holy Ghost but also by the Father and Son; nevertheless, by a certain appropriation, it is attributed to the Holy Ghost; and this is for three reasons. The first reason is, because the Holy Ghost is love. And this was the sign of the greatest love, that God willed His Son to be incarnated; “God so loved the world, as to give His only begotten Son” (Jn. 3, 16). The second reason is that to the Holy Ghost is attributed grace; “There are diversities of graces, but the same Spirit” (I Cor. 12, 4); and this was the greatest grace. The third reason is assigned in the acts of the Council of Nicea, which is; that in us there is a twofold word: the word of the heart and the word of the voice. The word of the heart is that conception of the intellect, which is hidden from men, except inasmuch as it is expressed by the voice or the word of the voice. To the word of the heart is compared the eternal Word before the Incarnation, when He was with the Father, and hidden from us; but to the word of the voice is compared the Incarnate Word which now has appeared to us and is manifest. But the word of the heart is not joined to the voice except by means of the breath; and thus, rightly, the Incarnation of the Word, through which He visibly appeared to us, was made by means of the Holy Ghost.[2]

There have been many commentaries and books regarding the question of St. Joseph being declared a just man in scripture, along with the reason he wanted to send her away quietly.

The Ignatius Catholic Study Bible provides a summation of the traditional interpretations:

Catholic tradition proposes three main interpretations to explain why Joseph resolved to end his betrothal with Mary.
– (1) The Suspicion Theory. Some hold that Joseph suspected Mary of adultery when he discovered her pregnancy. Joseph thus intended to pursue a divorce in accord with Deut 24:1–4 until the angel revealed to him the miraculous cause of the conception (1:20). Joseph is said to be righteous because he shuns immorality and directs his life by the Law of God. Proponents of this view include St. Justin Martyr, St. John Chrysostom, and St. Augustine.
– (2) The Perplexity Theory. Others hold that Joseph found the situation of Mary’s pregnancy inexplicable. Divorce seemed to be his only option, and yet he wished to do this quietly, for he could not bring himself to believe that Mary had been unfaithful. Joseph is said to be righteous because he lives by the Law of God and judges Mary’s situation with the utmost charity. The main proponent of this view is St. Jerome, whose exegesis was adopted into the notes of the medieval Bible.
– (3) The Reverence Theory. Still others hold that Joseph knew the miraculous cause of Mary’s pregnancy from the beginning, i.e., he was made aware that the child was conceived “of the Holy Spirit” (1:18). Faced with this, Joseph considered himself unworthy to be involved in the Lord’s work, and his decision to separate quietly from Mary was a discretionary measure to keep secret the mystery within her. On this reading, the angel confirms what Joseph had already known and urges him to set aside pious fears that would lead him away from his vocation to be the legal father of the Messiah (1:20). Joseph is said to be righteous because of his deep humility and reverence for the miraculous works of God. Proponents of this view include St. Bernard of Clairvaux and St. Thomas Aquinas. [3]

St. Thomas Aquinas takes a deep look at the various interpretations, and here he looks at the Reverence Theory.

But, according to Jerome and Origen, he did not suspect adultery: for Joseph knew Mary’s chastity; he read in Scripture that a virgin would conceive: “And there shall come forth a rod (virga) out of the root of Jesse, and a flower shall rise up out of his root,” etc., (Isaias 7, 14 & 11, 1). He also knew that Mary had descended of the line of David. Hence, he more easily believed this to be fulfilled in her, than for her to have been ravished. And therefore, considering himself to be unworthy to dwell with one of so great holiness, he wanted to put her away privately, as Peter said: “Depart from me, O Lord, for I am a sinful man,” Luke 5, 8. Whence, he was not willing to take her, that is to lead her home to himself, and accept her as a spouse, thinking himself to be unworthy. Or, according to the opinion of others, being unaware of the purpose, he did so lest he be held guilty if he concealed the matter, and kept her with himself.[4]

Jimmy Akin in his article Why Did Joseph Plan to Divorce Mary also goes through some of the different views along with what then-Pope Benedict XVI wrote in his book Jesus of Nazareth: The Infancy Narratives.

The late Fr. William Most seems to have preferred the Perplexity Theory:

He had several options: he could denounce her to the tribunal to annul the engagement; he could keep her and celebrate the marriage itself; he could repudiate her in public, but without asking for any punishment, or he could do it privately before two witnesses without having to give a motive, and without dating the bill of rejection, to save her honor. It is this last option that Joseph was planning to use, for he was “just”, that is, a man who did everything that was morally rightsuch is the sense of Hebrew sedaqah and sadiq. He was interiorly convinced of her honor and moral rightness even though he could not reconcile that with the pregnancy. If he did not have that conviction he might have publicly repudiated her. But in divine matters at times we meet two conclusions which clearly clash. Then we should hold to both without straining either one until finally, we hope, a solution may appear.

Regardless, we do not have a magisterial teaching on this. I prefer the Reverence Theory, a preference in that is the one I most want to be correct.

Most importantly, is that Joseph was obedient to God’s word he was given through the Angel. That he would continue to be obedient and provide a pivotal role as the Guardian of the Redeemer.

In St. John Paul II’s Apostolic Exhortation “Redemptoris Custos,” he writes in the introduction:

Inspired by the Gospel, the Fathers of the Church from the earliest centuries stressed that just as St. Joseph took loving care of Mary and gladly dedicated himself to Jesus Christ’s upbringing, he likewise watches over and protects Christ’s Mystical Body, that is, the Church, of which the Virgin Mary is the exemplar and model.

In this way the whole Christian people not only will turn to St. Joseph with greater fervor and invoke his patronage with trust, but also will always keep before their eyes his humble, mature way of serving and of “taking part” in the plan of salvation.
…
I am convinced that by reflection upon the way that Mary’s spouse shared in the divine mystery, the Church – on the road towards the future with all of humanity—will be enabled to discover ever anew her own identity within this redemptive plan, which is founded on the mystery of the Incarnation.

This is precisely the mystery in which Joseph of Nazareth “shared” like no other human being except Mary, the Mother of the Incarnate Word. He shared in it with her; he was involved in the same salvific event; he was the guardian of the same love, through the power of which the eternal Father “destined us to be his sons through Jesus Christ” (Eph 1:5).[5]

From the Catechism paragraph §497:

The gospel accounts understand the virginal conception of Jesus as a divine work that surpasses all human understanding and possibility:“That which is conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit,” said the angel to Joseph about Mary his fiancée. The Church sees here the fulfillment of the divine promise given through the prophet Isaiah: “Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a son.”[6]

Sources

• St. Thomas Aquinas “Commentary on the Gospel of St. Matthew”
• The Ignatius Catholic Study Bible꞉ The New Testament
• The Father William Most Collection
• Apostolic Exhortation, Redemptoris Custos, “Guardian of the Redeemer”
• Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2nd Edition
• Photo by Ben White on Unsplash

---

1. St. Augustine, Bishop of Hippo, A.D. 396, (Enchir c. 40.) Catena Aurea: Commentary on the Four Gospels, Collected out of the Works of the Fathers: St. Matthew (J. H. Newman, Ed.; Vol. 1, pp. 43–44)  ↩
2. St. Thomas Aquinas, Commentary on the Gospel of St. Matthew, Dolorosa Press, 2012
   :[7] Ignatius Catholic Study Bible: New Testament
3. St. Thomas Aquinas, Commentary on the Gospel of St. Matthew, Dolorosa Press, 2012  ↩
4. Pope John Paul II, Apostolic Exhortation, Redemptoris Custos, 1989, August 15  ↩
5. Catholic Church. (2000). Catechism of the Catholic Church (2nd Ed). United States Catholic Conference.  ↩
6. 5  ↩

Matthew 11:2–11

²  Now when John heard in prison about the deeds of the Christ, he sent word by his disciples ³  and said to him, “Are you the one who is to come, or shall we look for another?” ⁴  And Jesus answered them, “Go and tell John what you hear and see: ⁵  the blind receive their sight and the lame walk, lepers are cleansed and the deaf hear, and the dead are raised up, and the poor have good news preached to them. ⁶  And blessed is the one who is not offended by me.”

⁷  As they went away, Jesus began to speak to the crowds concerning John: “What did you go out into the wilderness to see? A reed shaken by the wind? ⁸  What then did you go out to see? A man dressed in soft clothing? Behold, those who wear soft clothing are in kings’ houses. ⁹  What then did you go out to see? A prophet? Yes, I tell you, and more than a prophet.¹⁰  This is he of whom it is written,

“‘Behold, I send my messenger before your face,
    who will prepare your way before you.’

¹¹  Truly, I say to you, among those born of women there has arisen no one greater than John the Baptist. Yet the one who is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he.

Matthew 112–11 ESV – Bible Gateway

---

The Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture puts this chapter of Matthew into context:

Matthew 11 is a hinge chapter that swings the storyline of the Gospel into its next major phase. It begins by addressing what Jesus’ mighty words and deeds indicate about his identity. It also begins a long section, extending to 16:16, that reports how different people respond to Jesus. Some believe he is the Messiah and Son of God (14:33; 16:16). Others are sufficiently impressed to think he is a prophet (14:2; 16:14). Still others reject him and his message (11:20–24; 13:53–58). Most disturbing of all, the Pharisees accuse him of wielding the power of Satan (12:24) and begin to plot his demise (12:14).[1]

This question, from John the Baptist to Jesus, sent via John’s disciples, can be perplexing. How can John, who proclaims Jesus as the “Lamb of God” come to what appears to be doubt regarding this?

The Church Fathers also asked the same question regarding this passage and provided some interpretations:

St. Gregory. We must enquire how John, who is a prophet and more than a prophet, who made known the Lord when He came to be baptized, saying, Behold the Lamb of God, that taketh away the sins of the world!—why, when he was afterwards cast into prison, he should send his disciples to ask, Art thou he that should come, or look we for another? Did he not know Him whom he had pointed out to others; or was he uncertain whether this was He, whom by foretelling, by baptizing, and by making known, he had proclaimed to be He? [2]

St. Ambrose. Some understand it thus; That it was a great thing that John should be so far a prophet, as to acknowledge Christ, and to preach remission of sin; but that like a pious prophet, he could not think that He whom he had believed to be He that should come, was to suffer death; he doubted therefore though not in faith, yet in love. So Peter also doubted, saying, This be far from thee, Lord; this shall not be unto thee. (Mat. 16:22) [3]

St. Hilary. John then is providing not for his own, but his disciples’ ignorance; that they might know that it was no other whom he had proclaimed, he sent them to see His works, that the works might establish what John had spoken; and that they should not look for any other Christ, than Him to whom His works had borne testimony.[4]

It is easy to assume that the question John the Baptist is asking is a straightforward question whether Jesus is the Messiah. That is not the question he actually asks, but “Are you he who is to come?” This terminology provides a clear allusion to a prophecy in the book of Malachi.

Dr. Brant Pitre dives into this aspect of John’s question in Jesus’ reply.

Here Jesus alludes to a very important prophecy from the book of Malachi. I mentioned Malachi last week as prophesying that one day Elijah would come before the great and terrible day of the Lord, before the coming of the Lord (see Mal 4:5). And at the end of Malachi it also says that God is going to send his messenger to prepare his way (see Mal 3:1). So here Jesus identifies John as the messenger who would prepare the way for the coming of the Lord himself (see Matt 11:10). Now that’s very interesting because a lot of times Christians assume that he’s just talking about the coming of the Messiah. But if you go look at the book of Malachi, it doesn’t say anything about the coming Messiah, it says something about the coming of the Lord, about the coming of Yahweh, about the God of Israel coming on this great day of judgment. So what Jesus is saying here is that he’s more than a prophet because he’s the one who heralds the coming of the Lord himself.[5]

John’s question might be something deeper than asking if Jesus is the expected Messiah. Whether the Messiah is something much greater than the general expectations of what the coming of the Kingdom of God means?

There are multiple ways to look at this and there might be both/and with some interpretations. He could ask this question as a teaching moment for his disciples and also asking a deeper question for himself. John was always working to point to Jesus instead of himself.

In most modern commentaries I read, there is much more openness to the idea that John had some doubts, or more accurately, some questions. I don’t believe he actually doubted in the theological sense. I refer to St John Henry Newman quote, “Ten thousand difficulties do not make one doubt.”

Is St. John the Baptist going through a dark night of the soul?

Dr. John Bergsma writes:

Even great saints can go through a dark night and experience trials of faith. Such is not incompatible with holiness. As John suffers in the physical and spiritual darkness of Herod’s dungeon, he reaches out to Jesus for consolation: “Are you the one who is to come? Don’t you know I’m imprisoned for speaking up for marriage?”[6]

When St. Thérèse of Lisieux was going through her dark night, she wrote: “I believe that I have made more acts of faith in this past year than all through my whole life.”

St. John the Baptist was not the man to wax and wane in his spiritual life, as Jesus attested when he asked if John was “A reed shaken by the wind?”

Asking questions of God when you are amid suffering is not an act of denial, but of trust. That even if you do not understand what is going on, that in God’s providence and personal love of you, that there are answers. Coming to a Jobian understanding of this is difficult because we have to put away our pride in thinking we can see everything from God’s point of view. Our asking questions of him shows we realize the intelligibility of God’s plan and that there are answers even if we can’t grasp them.

What I find interesting is that John’s question and Jesus’ answer do much more than shoring up either his own faith or the faith of John’s disciples. Jesus’ answer lets us also so that we might see God’s plan. His answer points to the passage in Isaiah, which is in the first reading today. That it was always part of God’s plan that he heal us of our infirmities. Faith removes the blindness of doubt, the dead raised into the beatific vision, those contaminated with the leprosy of sin, restored. Those who are deaf to others move out of themselves to hear and to help them.

The Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture has an interesting observation on these verses:

Verses 7–15 are the mirror opposite of verses 2–6. Just as John, by asking a question, brought to light the true identity of Jesus, so now it is Jesus who poses a series of questions in order to reveal the true identity of John. And just as Jesus explained his messianic mission by alluding to Scripture, so now he explains the preparatory mission of John by referencing Scripture. The parallels are significant, for each in his own way is described as “one who is to come” (Jesus, 11:3; John, 11:14).

---

CCC §719: John the Baptist is “more than a prophet.” In him, the Holy Spirit concludes his speaking through the prophets. John completes the cycle of prophets begun by Elijah. He proclaims the imminence of the consolation of Israel; he is the “voice” of the Consoler who is coming. As the Spirit of truth will also do, John “came to bear witness to the light.” In John’s sight, the Spirit thus brings to completion the careful search of the prophets and fulfills the longing of the angels. “He on whom you see the Spirit descend and remain, this is he who baptizes with the Holy Spirit. And I have seen and have borne witness that this is the Son of God.… Behold, the Lamb of God.” (2684; 536)[7]

Sources

• The Gospel of Matthew (Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture)
• Catholic Productions, Commentaries by Brant Pitre
• The Word of the Lord: Reflections on the Sunday Mass Readings for Year A – John Bergsma
• Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2nd Edition
• Photo by Ben White on Unsplash

---

1. The Gospel of Matthew, Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture, Edward Sri and Curtis Mitch  ↩
2. St. Gregory I. Pope, A.D. 590. (Hom. in Ev. vi. 1.) Catena Aurea: Commentary on the Four Gospels, Collected out of the Works of the Fathers: St. Matthew (J. H. Newman, Ed.; Vol. 1, p. 404)  ↩
3. St. Ambrose, Archbishop of Milan, A.D. 374. (in Luc. 7. 19.) Catena Aurea: Commentary on the Four Gospels, Collected out of the Works of the Fathers: St. Matthew (J. H. Newman, Ed.; Vol. 1, p. 404)  ↩
4. St. Hilary, Bishop of Poictiers, A.D. 354. Catena Aurea: Commentary on the Four Gospels, Collected out of the Works of the Fathers: St. Matthew (J. H. Newman, Ed.; Vol. 1, p. 404)  ↩
5. Catholic Productions, Brant Pitre  ↩
6. The Word of the Lord: Reflections on the Sunday Mass Readings for Year A, John Bergsma  ↩
7. Catholic Church. (2000). Catechism of the Catholic Church (2nd Ed). United States Catholic Conference.  ↩

Matthew 31–12 ESV – Bible Gateway

³  In those days John the Baptist came preaching in the wilderness of Judea, ²  “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.” ³  For this is he who was spoken of by the prophet Isaiah when he said,

“The voice of one crying in the wilderness:
‘Prepare the way of the Lord;
    make his paths straight.’”

⁴  Now John wore a garment of camel’s hair and a leather belt around his waist, and his food was locusts and wild honey. ⁵  Then Jerusalem and all Judea and all the region about the Jordan were going out to him, ⁶  and they were baptized by him in the river Jordan, confessing their sins.

⁷  But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming to his baptism, he said to them, “You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the wrath to come? ⁸  Bear fruit in keeping with repentance. ⁹  And do not presume to say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our father,’ for I tell you, God is able from these stones to raise up children for Abraham.¹⁰  Even now the axe is laid to the root of the trees. Every tree therefore that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.

¹¹  “I baptize you with water for repentance, but he who is coming after me is mightier than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire. ¹²  His winnowing fork is in his hand, and he will clear his threshing floor and gather his wheat into the barn, but the chaff he will burn with unquenchable fire.”

---

They circumcise John the Baptizer on the eighth day, his neighbors and relatives declare:

“What then will this child be?” For the hand of the Lord was with him. (Lk 1:66) [1]

They only knew that God had mysteriously entered the lives of Elizabeth and Zechariah and Zechariah’s mouth being opened and his tongue loosed, confirms this. They talked about this event throughout Judea and now John the Baptist enters the scene showing the hand of the Lord in preaching repentance.

Turning to the Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture regarding this passage:

But John’s call to repentance comes with an even greater sense of urgency because he announces something no prophet before him could proclaim: the kingdom of heaven is at hand. Israel faces a unique, now-or-never opportunity to repent. The “kingdom of heaven” does not refer to a place—a place, for example, where God and the angels dwell—but to God’s dynamic activity as ruler. God alone was king over Israel, and the prophets foretold that he would come as king, establish his reign in Jerusalem, and bring justice on earth. Thus in proclaiming that “the kingdom of heaven is at hand,” John is announcing that God’s promised reign is now dawning on Israel and the world …[2]

John’s popularity is surprising. He was not a man to sugarcoat or make his message palatable. Usually, if you want to disperse a crowd, you simply call for those around you to repent of their sins. There was a heightened awareness in Israel of the imminent coming of the Messiah. That perhaps this man, talked about from his birth, appearing in the very garb of Elijah, might indeed by him. John’s location was not convenient and yet they sought him out. Expecting perhaps to hear about the glorious coming of the kingdom of God, only to be confronted by their personal need to repent of their sins. John told them what they needed to hear, not what they wanted to hear, and grace moved them to respond by acknowledging this and seeking John’s baptism.

Dr. Brant Pitre gives us an idea about the popularity of St. John the Baptist:

This is one of the reasons by the way, if you noticed the passage, John was so popular. It says all Jerusalem, all Judea, everyone around the Jordan, they all went out to him to be baptized. Sometimes we forget that although John was the forerunner of Jesus, he was actually in some ways more popular than Jesus in his day. In fact, if you read the writings of the first century Jewish historian Josephus, he gives much more space to his description of John the Baptist than he does to Jesus of Nazareth. And that is kind of indicative of the immense popularity that John the Baptist had with the Jewish people. He was an extremely popular prophet because they knew what he was doing. This guy is out at the river Jordan talking about the prophecies being fulfilled and the way in the wilderness being made. That means that the time for the new exodus is at hand, that the prophecies of God are going to be fulfilled.[3]

He further points out the excitement regarding him that “there hadn’t been a prophet, a true prophet of God, on the scene since the time of Daniel, Ezekiel and Malachi. Centuries had gone by without any true prophet arising and now John arises and everyone recognizes that this guy is a prophet of God, and he’s come to herald this one who is ‘mightier than I’” (Matt 3:11)[4]
Verse 4 mentions John’s clothing and diet and Edward Sri and Curtis Mitch comment on the importance of this:

But the biblical connections between John and Elijah are deeper than clothing. Both prophets confronted wicked kings with their sinfulness and were persecuted for it. Both prepared the way for another prophetic figure who would succeed them. Elijah’s ministry was passed on to the prophet Elisha, who cleansed a leper (2 Kings 5:1–19), raised a child from the dead (2 Kings 4:32–37), and multiplied loaves of bread to feed a crowd (2 Kings 4:42–44). Similarly, John the Baptist was the forerunner of an even greater prophet, Jesus, who also cured a leper (8:2–4), raised a child from the dead (9:23–25), and multiplied loaves to feed a multitude (14:15–21; 15:32–38).[5]

and

Perhaps the most significant link between John and Elijah is the place that marked the culmination of their ministries: the Jordan River. Elijah passed on his ministry to Elisha at the Jordan just before being taken up to heaven in the fiery chariot (2 Kings 2:6–14). Now, centuries later, John appears as a prophet, at the same river, dressed like Elijah and calling people to repent. And there at the Jordan, John, like Elijah, will pass on his ministry to the one who comes after him, Jesus Christ (3:13–17).[6]

Dr. John Bergsma in his commentary writes:

I think this is meant to indicate some typical foods, not that his diet was entirely limited to just these two items. This would mean he was living off the land, eating whatever was edible in the environment. Locusts and wild honey were clean foods and permissible, according to Mosaic Law.[7]

He also notes some interesting correlations between this and the possibility that John had once been part of the Essene community and expelled from it. We gathered this from what we have learned of this community from Josephus and other sources. He goes into these connections in his book Jesus and the Dead Sea Scrolls: Revealing the Jewish Roots of Christianity

While some note that John’s baptism does not include the remission of sins and only points to the Baptism of the Holy Spirit, it is still significant. There had been various ceremonies using water to maintain ritual purity in the life of the Jews. The Qumran community, which was in proximity to where John was, practiced a routine of ritual washings.

A third possible background to John’s baptism is the Jewish practice of proselyte baptism: the ritual cleansing of a Gentile converting to Judaism that symbolized the rejection of one’s sinful ways and a commitment to the Jewish way of life. Although it is not certain that this practice was already in place in the time of John the Baptist, John’s rite does seem to entail the same kind of radical renunciation of a lifestyle found among Gentiles converting to Judaism… If John’s baptism does reflect proselyte baptism, he would be requiring all of Israel to repent like the Gentiles.[8]

In verse 7, John discerns the motive of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming to see him. Like encounters between them and Jesus, there is likely some intellectual curiosity at play here, along with already making up their minds that John and Jesus are a threat to the status quo and their leadership.

Remigius. There is a tradition, that John preached at that place of the Jordan, where the twelve stones taken from the bed of the river had been set up by command of God. He might then be pointing to these, when he said, Of these stones.[9]

In verses 11–12, we get to the major thrust of John’s life. That he is a pointer to Jesus and desires repentance for others that they may know the Messiah. John is the oddity that knows he is a warm-up act and desires nothing more. Totally subsumed in this task to only decrease so that Christ may increase. When asked questions about who he is, he points to Christ. Totally content to live in Jesus’s shadow where there is no darkness at all.

This is an Advent reminder to myself to evaluate how much pride warps me by pointing to myself other than Jesus. Wanting to point to myself and Christ at the same time.

Sources

• The Gospel of Matthew (Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture)
• Catholic Productions, Commentaries by Brant Pitre
• The Word of the Lord: Reflections on the Sunday Mass Readings for Year A – John Bergsma
• Catena Aurea Commentary on the Four Gospels, Collected out of the Works of the Fathers, Volume 1 St. Matthew – Verbum
• Photo by Ben White on Unsplash

---

1. (Lk 1:66). ESV-CE (2019). Augustine Institute.  ↩
2. The Gospel of Matthew, Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture, Edward Sri and Curtis Mitch  ↩
3. Catholic Productions, Brant Pitre  ↩
4. ibid  ↩
5. The Gospel of Matthew, Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture, Edward Sri and Curtis Mitch  ↩
6. ibid  ↩
7. The Word of the Lord: Reflections on the Sunday Mass Readings for Year A, John Bergsma  ↩
8. The Gospel of Matthew, Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture, Edward Sri and Curtis Mitch  ↩
9. Remigius, Presbyter and Monk of Anxerre, A.D. 880. Catena Aurea: Commentary on the Four Gospels, Collected out of the Works of the Fathers: St. Matthew (J. H. Newman, Ed.; Vol. 1, p. 92)  ↩