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.”

Matthew 17:1–9 ESV – Bible Gateway

---

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.[1]

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).[2]

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).”[3] 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.”[4]

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.) [5]

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.[6]

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:[7]

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.”[8] Moses and Elijah had seen God’s glory on the Mountain; the Law and the Prophets had announced the Messiah’s sufferings.[9] Christ’s Passion is the will of the Father: the Son acts as God’s servant;[10] 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.”[11] (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. [12]

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).[13]

Sources

• St. Thomas Aquinas, Commentary on the Gospel of St. Matthew
• The Word of the Lord: Reflections on the Sunday Mass Readings for Year A – John Bergsma
• The Gospel of Matthew (Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture)
• Catena Aurea: Commentary on the Four Gospels, Collected out of the Works of the Fathers, Volume 3: St. Luke – Verbum
• Catholic Productions, Commentaries by Brant Pitre
• Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2nd Edition
• Photo by Ben White on Unsplash

---

1. Commentary on the Gospel of St. Matthew, Dolorosa Press  ↩
2. The Word of the Lord: Reflections on the Sunday Mass Readings for Year A, John Bergsma, 2nd Sunday of Lent, Year A  ↩
3. The Gospel of Matthew, Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture, Edward Sri and Curtis Mitch  ↩
4. Commentary on the Gospel of St. Matthew, Dolorosa Press  ↩
5. Catena Aurea: Commentary on the Four Gospels, Collected out of the Works of the Fathers: St. Luke, St. John Damascene, Presbyter of Damascus, A.D. 730 (Orat. de Trans fig. §. 8.)  ↩
6. Catholic Productions, Brant Pitre, 2nd Sunday in Lent (Year A)  ↩
7. Catholic Church. (2000). Catechism of the Catholic Church (2nd Ed). United States Catholic Conference.  ↩
8. Lk 24:26.  ↩
9. Cf. Lk 24:27.  ↩
10. St. Thomas Aquinas, STh III, 45, 4, ad 2.  ↩
11. Byzantine Liturgy, Feast of the Transfiguration, Kontakion.  ↩
12. Cf. Isa 42:1.  ↩
13. The Gospel of Matthew, Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture, Edward Sri and Curtis Mitch  ↩

Matthew 4:1–11

⁴  Then Jesus was led up by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil. ²  And after fasting forty days and forty nights, he was hungry. ³  And the tempter came and said to him, “If you are the Son of God, command these stones to become loaves of bread.”⁴  But he answered, “It is written,

“‘Man shall not live by bread alone,
    but by every word that comes from the mouth of God.’”

⁵  Then the devil took him to the holy city and set him on the pinnacle of the temple ⁶  and said to him, “If you are the Son of God, throw yourself down, for it is written,

“‘He will command his angels concerning you,’

and

“‘On their hands they will bear you up,
    lest you strike your foot against a stone.’”

⁷  Jesus said to him, “Again it is written, ‘You shall not put the Lord your God to the test.’” ⁸  Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their glory. ⁹  And he said to him, “All these I will give you, if you will fall down and worship me.” ¹⁰  Then Jesus said to him, “Be gone, Satan! For it is written,

“‘You shall worship the Lord your God
    and him only shall you serve.’”

¹¹  Then the devil left him, and behold, angels came and were ministering to him

Matthew 4.1–11 ESV – Bible Gateway

---

As we enter the first Sunday of Lent, the lectionary pairs the Gospel with the First Reading to set the scene and to prepare us.

The only way the Gospel writers could possibly have learned about Christ’s three temptations in the wilderness was from Christ himself. They were not there. He was alone. So this story is right from the lips of Jesus Christ, not from human witnesses and interpreters.[1]

One of the first questions people intuitively ask about event recorded in the synoptic Gospels is the devil’s knowledge of who Jesus is? Jimmy Akin in his commentary on the parallel passage in the Gospel of Luke responds:

It could be that the devil is trying to put pressure on Jesus out of sheer spite, without hoping to actually corrupt him. On the other hand, the devil may have the irrational arrogance to think that he could corrupt the infinitely holy Son of God.

Or it could be something else: The Greek verb used here (peirazō) means not only tempt but also test. The devil can be seen as testing Jesus—putting pressure on Jesus to see whether it is possible to get him to give in to sin.

Why would he do that? If the devil knows that it is impossible to get the Son of God to sin then, presumably, he would be doing it to find out if Jesus is the Son of God. By passing the test, Jesus shows that he is.[2]

The Catechism[3] points out:

394 Scripture witnesses to the disastrous influence of the one Jesus calls “a murderer from the beginning,” who would even try to divert Jesus from the mission received from his Father. “The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the works of the devil.” In its consequences the gravest of these works was the mendacious seduction that led man to disobey God.

395 The power of Satan is, nonetheless, not infinite. He is only a creature, powerful from the fact that he is pure spirit, but still a creature. He cannot prevent the building up of God’s reign. Although Satan may act in the world out of hatred for God and his kingdom in Christ Jesus, and although his action may cause grave injuries—of a spiritual nature and, indirectly, even of a physical nature—to each man and to society, the action is permitted by divine providence which with strength and gentleness guides human and cosmic history. It is a great mystery that providence should permit diabolical activity, but “we know that in everything God works for good with those who love him.”

Jimmy also replied to this question on a recent episode of Catholic Answers Live where he also notes that the even if the devil knew he was the Christ, he could have just been being malicious.

The Gospel writer presents this event with the imagery of “a new Exodus with Jesus as the new Israel.”[4]

Dr. Brant Pitre ties together our first reading from Genesis with the three temptations presented here:

So that’s the threefold lust: the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes and the pride of life. Well what do those mean? So if you correlate these three with the three temptations of Adam and Eve, you can see that they go together. The lust of the flesh is the disordered desire for pleasure, so like when Eve sees the fruit, she saw that it was “good for food.” That’s the lust of the flesh, her desire to eat of that fruit even though it had been forbidden, so the desire for the pleasure of eating. Second, the lust of the eyes, goes back to Eve seeing the fruit, that it wasn’t just good for fruit, but that it was a “delight to the eyes.” In other words, it was beautiful, it was some good-looking fruit. So she saw it and even though it didn’t belong to her, she wanted to possess it. So the lust of the flesh is the disordered desire for pleasure and the lust of the eyes is a disordered desire to possess things that don’t belong to us. And then finally, the pride of life, St. John describes, goes back to the third reason. Eve took of the fruit because it was “desirable to make one wise.” What does that mean? In other words, to make one wise like God. Because what the devil said to her was “you will not die when you eat of it, the day you eat of it you will become like God,” or in the Hebrew literally like Elohim (plural), you will become like gods. So there’s a temptation there to be like God but apart from God. So this is what we call the sin of pride or vanity. So those are the three temptations: pleasure, possessions and pride or vanity. The lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes and the pride of life.[5]

St. Thomas Aquinas in his commentary on Matthew notes the difference in ordering of the three temptations/testings.

“… according to Augustine: for everything which is narrated here is also narrated in Luke nor is it related in Luke either that this was the first or the second temptation. But Rabanus says that Luke observes the order of history; and thus he ordered the account according to which it happened. On the other hand, Matthew followed the nature of the temptations, because after the temptation of gluttony and of vainglory follows the temptation of ambition: for thus was Adam tempted…”[6]

There is so much that you can take from the devil’s questions and Jesus replies, but I found this an interesting irony, as presented by Dr. Brant Pitre:

This is a really interesting temptation because in it, the devil quotes Scripture also. We have seen that Jesus is quoting Scripture, so the devil gets into the game and he quotes Psalm 91, which does in fact say that “God will give his angels charge of you and they will bear you up less you strike your foot against a stone.” But what is interesting about this Psalm in a first century Jewish context, is that the Psalm was also the Psalm of exorcism. So in other words, Psalm 91 was the Psalm that Jewish exorcists would sing when they were casting out demons. They used this Psalm to cast out the devil. So it is kind of funny. I like to tell my students sometimes that “the devil knew this Psalm really well,” he had heard it before in other words. So he takes a couple of the verses out of context and then he throws them back at Jesus.
… So is this a real temptation? Well I think yes because what the devil is basically doing is trying to tell Jesus to commit the sin of pride. In other words, he’s trying to say “if you’re really the son of God then why don’t you just prove it.”[7]

He also notes an important conclusion to this testing and one that is good to dwell on.

The triumph of Jesus in the wilderness is much more than a personal victory. It is also a triumph for the people of God. In part, this is because Jesus overcomes temptation with his human will. He could have vanquished the tempter with his divine might, but this was not his chosen approach. Instead, Jesus faced his trial in a human way, in full solidarity with humanity. He never ceased to be the Son of God, and yet he won the battle as a man.[8]

Dr. Peter Kreeft concurs in this when he wrote:

Jesus was fully human, like us in every way except sin. Therefore, he was tempted, really tempted, because he had a completely human nature. Adam and Eve were tempted even before they had any sin, when they were completely holy and completely innocent. So was the perfect and innocent Jesus. Adam and Eve gave in; Jesus did not.[9]

This example from Jesus is one for us to draw upon in our lives. The Ignatius Catholic Study Bible summarizes this aspect.

Morally (St. John Chrysostom, Hom. in Matt. 8): Jesus’ victory sets an example for Christian obedience. Earthly life is a wilderness trial for God’s people en route to the land of heaven. Through this probationary period, God wills the faithful to overcome temptations from the world, the flesh, and the devil. Triumph is possible through penance and obedience to God’s word. Rather than earthly bread and power, the faithful must desire the food of God’s will and the humility of Christ (11:29; Jn 4:34). The battle successfully won merits heavenly comfort in the company of angels (4:11). The Church annually reminds us of this life-long vocation during the 40 days of Lent (CCC 540, 2849).[10]

One last point on these temptations regarding Jesus. Returning to St. Thomas Aquinas’s commentary, where he references St. Gregory the Great.

Gregory says that there are three stages of temptation, namely, by suggestion, pleasure and consent. The first is from without, and can be without sin; the second is from within, in which it begins to be a sin, and which indeed is completed by consent. The first stage could have been in Christ, but not the others.[11]

Returning to Dr. Brant Pitre:

In the end, Jesus has proven himself the loyal Son of God. Neither the pangs of hunger nor the prospect of worldwide kingship have been able to bend his will away from the Father’s. In a final scene, we are told that angels from heaven came and ministered to him. Most likely this means that Jesus was fed by the angels, much as Elijah was in the Old Testament (1 Kings 19:4–7).[12]

I love this paragraph from the Catechism on the role of Angels in Jesus’ life. To reflect on the role of our Guardian Angel in our own life.

333 From the Incarnation to the Ascension, the life of the Word incarnate is surrounded by the adoration and service of angels. When God “brings the firstborn into the world, he says: ‘Let all God’s angels worship him.’” Their song of praise at the birth of Christ has not ceased resounding in the Church’s praise: “Glory to God in the highest!” They protect Jesus in his infancy, serve him in the desert, strengthen him in his agony in the garden, when he could have been saved by them from the hands of his enemies as Israel had been. Again, it is the angels who “evangelize” by proclaiming the Good News of Christ’s Incarnation and Resurrection. They will be present at Christ’s return, which they will announce, to serve at his judgment.[13]

Sources

• Peter Kreeft, Food for the Soul: Reflections on the Mass Readings Cycle A
• Jimmy Akin’s Studies on Mark (3 vols.) – Verbum
• Catholic Productions, Commentaries by Brant Pitre
• Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2nd Edition
• St. Thomas Aquinas, Commentary on the Gospel of St. Matthew
• The Ignatius Catholic Study Bible꞉ The New Testament
• Photo by Ben White on Unsplash

---

1. Peter Kreeft, Food for the Soul: Reflections on the Mass Readings Cycle A, # FIRST SUNDAY OF LENT  ↩
2. Jimmy Akin. (2014). Mark, A Commentary.  ↩
3. Catholic Church. (2000). Catechism of the Catholic Church (2nd Ed). United States Catholic Conference. Paragraphs 394, 395.  ↩
4. Catholic Productions, Brant Pitre, 1st Sunday in Lent (Year A)  ↩
5. ibid  ↩
6. Commentary on the Gospel of St. Matthew, Dolorosa Press  ↩
7. Catholic Productions, Brant Pitre, 1st Sunday in Lent (Year A)  ↩
8. ibid  ↩
9. Peter Kreeft, Food for the Soul: Reflections on the Mass Readings Cycle A, # FIRST SUNDAY OF LENT  ↩
10. Ignatius Catholic Study Bible: New Testament  ↩
11. Commentary on the Gospel of St. Matthew, Dolorosa Press  ↩
12. Catholic Productions, Brant Pitre, 1st Sunday in Lent (Year A)  ↩
13. Catholic Church. (2000). Catechism of the Catholic Church (2nd Ed). United States Catholic Conference. Paragraph 333.  ↩

Christ Came to Fulfill the Law

¹⁷  “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. ¹⁸  For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished. ¹⁹  Therefore whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. ²⁰  For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.

Anger

²¹  “You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not murder; and whoever murders will be liable to judgment.’ ²²  But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment; whoever insults his brother will be liable to the council; and whoever says, ‘You fool!’ will be liable to the hell of fire. ²³  So if you are offering your gift at the altar and there remember that your brother has something against you, ²⁴  leave your gift there before the altar and go. First be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift. ²⁵  Come to terms quickly with your accuser while you are going with him to court, lest your accuser hand you over to the judge, and the judge to the guard, and you be put in prison. ²⁶  Truly, I say to you, you will never get out until you have paid the last penny.

Lust

²⁷  “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ ²⁸  But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart. ²⁹  If your right eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away. For it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body be thrown into hell. ³⁰  And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. For it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body go into hell.

Divorce

³¹  “It was also said, ‘Whoever divorces his wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce.’ ³²  But I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except on the ground of sexual immorality, makes her commit adultery, and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.

Oaths

³³  “Again you have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not swear falsely, but shall perform to the Lord what you have sworn.’ ³⁴  But I say to you, Do not take an oath at all, either by heaven, for it is the throne of God, ³⁵  or by the earth, for it is his footstool, or by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great King. ³⁶  And do not take an oath by your head, for you cannot make one hair white or black. ³⁷  Let what you say be simply ‘Yes’ or ‘No’; anything more than this comes from evil.

Matthew 5:17–37 ESV – Christ Came to Fulfill the Law – “Do – Bible Gateway

This Sunday, as we the last two weeks, we continue on with the Sermon of the Mount as Jesus hints further that his authority is more than the prophets of old along with explaining the depth of the moral law.

Dr. John Bergsma notes that:

This Gospel passage explodes the narrative that Jesus came to dumb down the moral law in order to make it easier to get to heaven. Jesus dumbs down the law not in the least. In the four antitheses (contradictions) that we have in this Gospel reading (“You have heard that it was said … but I say to you …”), Jesus does not loosen the moral requirements of Moses but tightens them. Moses did not go far enough, Jesus is saying. The Mosaic law governed external actions, but unless you undergo interior transformation as well, you cannot enter the kingdom of heaven.[1]

Jesus introduces the fulfilment of the law and the prophets, and you could say doubles-down on it. He does not explain away what came before, but points to the reality of the teaching that was always there. Yet, throughout history, we have those who would lighten his teaching to make it “easier” to “live out.” This tendency undercuts the grace that is given us to live out Jesus’ teaching. They diminish Jesus while boosting their own understanding. This lessening of our burdens actually increases them. This is one reason Jesus has such strong words for those who would teach others to relax their living out of the moral law. His praise is for those who hear his word, accept it, and live it out. James would echo this when he wrote, “But be doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving yourselves.[2]”

Dr. Brant Pitre explores what fulfills means:

The Greek word there for fulfill, plēroō, literally means to make complete, to bring to perfection. So what Jesus is revealing here is he is showing us that there are aspects of the Old Testament that are not perfect. In other words, they are not what God ultimately wants for his people.[3]

Jesus’ words regarding the Scribes and Pharisees imply that the heart of the moral law is not simply the text of the law, the explanation of the law, or the enforcement of the law regarding others. This entire section of The Sermon on the Mount shows how it is in the depths of our heart when united and lived out that we become more fully ourselves.

The Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture introduces the next session;

Jesus offers six vivid illustrations of the surpassing righteousness to which he calls his disciples. He sets up these examples with the phrase You have heard that it was said or It was also said, introducing either a quote from or an allusion to the law, sometimes with a mention of how the law was understood and applied. This is followed by the words “But I say to you,” which mark a solemn pronouncement by Jesus bringing forth the deeper meaning of the law and how it is to be lived out in the kingdom. In Greek, the “I” in these statements is emphatic. Jesus presents his teaching with the same authority as that by which God gave the law to Moses. This must certainly have aroused the attention of his listeners.[4]

When we look at the “Six Antitheses,” we might think that Jesus is bringing a new or deeper teaching. Showing how all our exterior acts start in the interior of our heart. That all sin starts in the will and what we will entertain and accept in our minds. Still, this idea was always an aspect of the Old Testament teachings from the beginning. In the Ten Commandments, we see condemned more than just outward actions as Dr. Brant Pitre points out:

The last two commandments are “you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife” and “you shall not covet your neighbor’s property.” So already in the Old Testament, God is trying to get his people to see that sin begins in the heart with the will.[5]

Or as Dr. Peter Kreeft puts it:

He explains “You shall not commit adultery” to mean not merely that we may not be unfaithful with our bodies but that we may not be unfaithful even with our souls.[6]

A fire is the easiest to extinguish if you first notice the embers growing and consuming an object. When that fire is robbed of the oxygen or material it needs to grow, it dies and can do no damage. This is the same with the moral life. We must be attentive to those potential fires in our will that end up consuming us. If a thought occurs to us, that is off-putting and against the moral law, we can snuff it out immediately and provide it no room to grow in our souls. If we entertain it and justify why this would be an acceptable response, we have allowed it to grow. Feeding it with resentment, anger, and a range of emotional excuses, the fire goes from easily contained to requiring much more effort to put out. We can move to denying the fire and feeding it more fuel until there is a conflagration that moves are will to action in carrying out this evil. We have moved from we must not do this to we must do this.

This ties back to those who teach relaxation of a commandment. Or indeed ourselves when we think that the moral law might be a fine ideal, but one we cannot live out. Later in the Gospel of Matthew, after Jesus teaches regarding impermissibility of divorce, “The disciples said to him, ‘If such is the case of a man with his wife, it is better not to marry.[7]’” This is a similar reaction we all have too difficult circumstances. There is an honesty in it if we realize it might be beyond our capability. We need help and that grace that only God can give us in carrying out his will. We don’t have to just white-knuckle it through life in that we have an advocate to help us and to form us.

This growth in holiness is a lifelong process of forming our interior dispositions to the will of Christ. It is properly a battle that requires eternal vigilance if we are to enter eternal life. Making John the Baptist’s “He must increase, but I must decrease,[8]” our own. Easier said than done, but we are not on our own.

One final aspect regarding oaths from the Catechism:[9]

2153 In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus explained the second commandment: “You have heard that it was said to the men of old, ‘You shall not swear falsely, but shall perform to the Lord what you have sworn.’ But I say to you, Do not swear at all.… Let what you say be simply ‘Yes’ or ‘No’; anything more than this comes from the evil one.” Jesus teaches that every oath involves a reference to God and that God’s presence and his truth must be honored in all speech. Discretion in calling upon God is allied with a respectful awareness of his presence, which all our assertions either witness to or mock.

2154 Following St. Paul, the tradition of the Church has understood Jesus’ words as not excluding oaths made for grave and right reasons (for example, in court). “An oath, that is the invocation of the divine name as a witness to truth, cannot be taken unless in truth, in judgment, and in justice.

Sources

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

---

1. The Word of the Lord: Reflections on the Sunday Mass Readings for Year A, John Bergsma, 6TH SUNDAY IN ORDINARY TIME  ↩
2. English Standard Version Catholic Edition (2019). Augustine Institute. (James 1:22)  ↩
3. Catholic Productions, Brant Pitre, 6th Sunday in Ordinary Time (Year A)  ↩
4. The Gospel of Matthew, Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture, Edward Sri and Curtis Mitch  ↩
5. Catholic Productions, Brant Pitre, 6th Sunday in Ordinary Time (Year A)  ↩
6. Peter Kreeft, Food for the Soul: Reflections on the Mass Readings Cycle A, SIXTH SUNDAY IN ORDINARY TIME  ↩
7. English Standard Version Catholic Edition (2019). Augustine Institute. (Matthew 19:10)  ↩
8. English Standard Version Catholic Edition (2019). Augustine Institute. (John 3:30)  ↩
9. Catholic Church. (2000). Catechism of the Catholic Church (2nd Ed). United States Catholic Conference.  ↩