Luke 12:32–48

Luke 12:32–48 ESV – Bible Gateway

---

The phrase starting with “Fear not, little flock” is unique to Luke. Paraphrasing Brant Pitre’s commentary on this it reflects what we also find in John’s Gospel regarding Jesus as the shepherd and his disciples as a flock. This builds on an image used by the Old Testament prophets. The little reflects a reality that only a portion or a remnant will be “will be righteous and obedient to God.”[1] This reminds me of a 1969 broadcast on German Radio by then-Cardinal Ratzinger.

He references the “little flock” and also says:

From the crisis of today the Church of tomorrow will emerge — a Church that has lost much. She will become small and will have to start afresh more or less from the beginning.. … “The Church will be a more spiritual Church, not presuming upon a political mandate, flirting as little with the Left as with the Right. It will be hard going for the Church, for the process of crystallization and clarification will cost her much valuable energy. It will make her poor and cause her to become the Church of the meek. The process will be all the more arduous, for sectarian narrow-mindedness as well as pompous self-will will have to be shed. One may predict that all of this will take time.

Jesus then instructs them on almsgiving and the treasures that we should build up. If you can read the lines “For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.” and not tremble a bit at them you are either oblivious, a liar, or on the path to sanctity.

St. John Chrysostom. For there is no sin which almsgiving does not avail to blot out. It is a salve adapted to ever wound. But almsgiving has to do not only with money, but with all matters also wherein man succours man, as when the physician heals, and the wise man gives counsel. [2]

“Jesus moves into discussing the active vigilance that should characterize the Christian life. The image of Passover lies in the background—the great liturgical vigil when Israel awaited the arrival of the LORD to take them away and betroth them to himself at Sinai. Thus the imagery of staying awake on a wedding night.””[1]

The ESV-CE version uses “Stay dressed for action and keep your lamps burning,“ While we are used to the phrase of girding your loins, ”dressed for action” gives us the context here. Still, there is a deeper meaning in usage such as when Jesus girds himself with a towel and then he washes the feet of his disciples. That was a task of a slave to their master. The vigilance that is emphasized in this reading from the Gospel requires obedience and a relationship to Jesus if we are to be ready when the master arrives.

St. Gregory the 1st reflects:

The first watch then is the earliest time of our life, that is, childhood, the second youth and manhood, but the third represents old age. He then who is unwilling to watch in the first, let him keep even the second. And he who is unwilling in the second, let him not lose the remedies of the third watch, that he who has neglected conversion in childhood, may at least in the time of youth or old age recover himself.[3]

The connected parables that Jesus uses to teach have four different outcomes.

1. The first servant knows his master’s will and is vigilant until he returns. He is the one awarded the most.
2. The second servant knew his master’s will but decided in the interim why he waiting for him to return decided to beat he could beat his fellow servants and eat and drink as if there was no judgment. This servant is cut in two. This is possibly a sign of breaking the covenant promises.
3. The third servant also knows his master’s will, but he does not act on this. He is not as wicked as the second servant and is not living the epicurean life. His punishment is to receive a severe beating.
4. The fourth servant does not know the master’s will but lives a life that deserves a beating as judgment. He is beaten lightly as he is in the category of what we now call “invincibly ignorant.”

Generally, it has been interpreted that the state of punishment after judgment refers to Purgatory.

John Bergsma writes:

In our Gospel passage, the varying degrees of punishment referred to, based on each one’s knowledge and therefore culpability, may refer either to hell or to purgatory. In any event, it teaches us that punishment in the afterlife will not be “one size fits all,” but the severity of punishment for wickedness in this life will be proportionate to the amount of revelation we have received. The spiritual tradition refers to this as being “judged according to one’s lights,” that is, according to the “light” (i.e., revelation, information received about God and salvation) each one experienced.[4]

Between these four examples, Peter had asked “Lord, are you telling this parable for us or for all?”

John Bergsma ponders:

Is it just an accident that in response to _Peter’s_ question, the Lord begins to talk about a “faithful and prudent _steward_” who will be put in charge of all the servants? Matthew 16:18–19, when read in light of Isaiah 22:15–24, demonstrates that Jesus appointed Peter as the royal steward of his kingdom. For myself, I am convinced that this portion of Luke 12 is St. Luke’s equivalent of Matthew 16:18–19. It is the passage of his Gospel that lays out the Petrine role in the Church.[4]

Jesus ends with:

 But the one who did not know, and did what deserved a beating, will receive a light beating. Everyone to whom much was given, of him much will be required, and from him to whom they entrusted much, they will demand the more.

This is encapsulated in the phrase from Spider-Man “With great power comes great responsibility”, which was originally a caption and not spoken by any character.

As St. Augustine says:

“I’m terrified by what I am for you, [but] I am given comfort by what I am with you. For you I am a bishop, with you . . . I am a Christian. The first is the name of an office undertaken, the second a name of grace; that one means danger, this one salvation.”

And commenting on this passage in Luke, St. Ambrose writes:

“It seems to be set before priests, whereby they know that they will suffer severe punishment in the future, if, intent on worldly pleasure, they have neglected to govern the Lord’s household and the people entrusted to them.”

John Bergsma reflects:

How sobering, then, for those who are teachers, priests, superiors, professors, or other kinds of spiritual leaders! They have had so much education: woe be to them if they pervert what they have received! Thus Jesus says, “Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him if a great millstone were hung round his neck and he were thrown into the sea” (Mark 9:42, RSV2CE). It would be healthy to have a plaque made of this verse and have it hung in the theology departments of every Catholic school and university. Jesus had no encouragement or consolation to offer to authority figures who lead the young or the ignorant into committing sin. May none of us ever do such a thing.[4]

Regardless, we are all called to vigilance, which results from growing in holiness.

The Vatican II document Lumen Gentium says:

“Since we know neither the day nor the hour, we should follow the advice of the Lord and watch constantly so that, when the single course of our earthly life is completed (cf. Heb 9:27), we may merit to enter with him into the marriage feast and be numbered among the blessed (cf. Mt 25:31–46) and not, like the wicked and slothful servants (cf. Mt 25:26), be ordered to depart into the eternal fire (cf. Mt 25:41)” [5]

From the Catechism, paragraph 2849:

Such a battle and such a victory become possible only through prayer. It is by his prayer that Jesus vanquishes the tempter, both at the outset of his public mission and in the ultimate struggle of his agony In this petition to our heavenly Father, Christ unites us to his battle and his agony. He urges us to vigilance of the heart in communion with his own. Vigilance is “custody of the heart,” and Jesus prayed for us to the Father: “Keep them in your name.” The Holy Spirit constantly seeks to awaken us to keep watch. Finally, this petition takes on all its dramatic meaning in relation to the last temptation of our earthly battle; it asks for final perseverance. “Lo, I am coming like a thief! Blessed is he who is awake.[6]

References

• Catholic Productions, Commentaries by Brant Pitre
• 1969 Speech by Cardinal Razinger
• The Word of the Lord: Reflections on the Sunday Mass Readings for Year C – John Bergsma
• Lumen Gentium
• Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2nd Edition
• The Gospel of Luke, Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture, Rev. Pablo T. Gadenz
• Photo by Ben White on Unsplash

---

1. Catholic Productions, Brant Pitre  ↩
2. St. John Chrysostom, Abp. of Constantinople, A.D.398. (Hom. 25. in Act.) Catena Aurea  ↩
3. S. Gregory I. Pope, A.D. 590. (ubi sup.), Catena Aurea  ↩
4. The Word of the Lord: Reflections on the Sunday Mass Readings for Year C, John Bergsma  ↩
5. Vatican II, Lumen gentium, 48, Nov 21, 1964  ↩
6. Catholic Church. (2000). Catechism of the Catholic Church (2nd Ed). United States Catholic Conference.  ↩

Luke 12:13–21 ESV – Bible Gateway

---

This Gospel passage is another example of “Don’t ask Jesus a question if you have an ulterior motive.” If you do, Jesus is going to ask you a question instead and follow it up with a story that is going to illustrate and undermine the foundation of your motive. “Whenever Jesus is asked a question, he always turns the situation around so that it is he who asks the deeper question and the questioner who is challenged and questioned.”[1]

This man is only interested in his own problems; he sees in Jesus only a teacher with authority and prestige who can help sort out his case (cf. Deut 21:17). He is a good example of those who approach religious authorities not to seek advice on the way they should go in their spiritual life, but rather to get them to solve their material problems. Jesus vigorously rejects the man’s request—not because he is insensitive to the injustice which may have been committed in this family, but because it is not part of his redemptive mission to intervene in matters of this kind. [2]

The Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture says that Jesus’ answer hints at his identity:

The question echoes the one put to Moses: “Who has appointed you ruler and judge over us?” (Exod 2:14), which Luke includes twice in Stephen’s speech in Acts in showing that, although some Israelites rejected Moses, God appointed him as their redeemer (Acts 7:27, 35). Similarly, Jesus will be rejected but will bring about God’s redemption (Luke 21:28; Acts 3:13–14).[3]

Jesus then warns the man asking the question, “Take care, and be on your guard against all covetousness, for one’s life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions.”

Brant Pitre explores the underlying Greek word pleonexia, which is translated usually as greed or covetousness.

It does mean covetousness, it does mean greed, but one of the most prominent dictionaries in the New Testament defines it as following: “the state of desiring to have more than one’s due; insatiableness.” So pleonexia, it means a kind of super abundance or desire to have more than you need, which of course is what greed is all about. [4]

Jesus then tells him a story now known as the Parable of the Rich Fool, which is unique to Luke. A rich man who has put both God and neighbor out of the picture. A man without thankfulness and gratitude other than patting himself on his own back. He is lost in the Epicurean pleasures to just “relax, eat, drink, be merry.” “There is nothing better for a person under the sun than to eat and drink and be glad” (Ecclesiastes 8:15).

However, God calls him a fool, a term Jesus earlier applied to the Pharisees (Luke 11:40). “The fool says in his heart, / ‘There is no God’” (Ps 14:1). Effectively, the rich man behaved as if there is no God, since he put his trust in his possessions rather than in God. He is an atheist in practice.[3]

Examples of the rich man illustrated in this parable are easy to find in real life. The self-made man, the man who believes in himself. These traits have so often been seen as admirable in our society. Unfortunately, if we look in the mirror, we can see aspirations not much different from those illustrated in this parable.

John Bergsma makes the point:

The American Dream is fundamentally incompatible with the Gospel of Jesus Christ. A life whose goal is 2.5 children and a spacious ranch house in the suburbs looks essentially different from a life whose goal is eternal communion with Jesus Christ and his saints. Bourgeois Christianity that regards more than two kids as “unrealistic” because they are “too expensive,” that thinks twenty dollars in the offering plate is a favor to God, that can’t be bothered with a homily longer than ten minutes or a Mass longer than sixty, that is repulsed by the idea of the religious life for oneself or one’s children, is really a form of unconverted Christianity, which is no Christianity at all.[5]

This is the core of the anti-Gospel. To go out into the whole world to exploit it for yourself for your own sense-pleasures. This is very similar to the parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man, blindness to those around us in need.

Jesus ends by implying that the only riches that endure are the ones that we lay up in treasure towards God.

¹⁹  “Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust⁶ destroy and where thieves break in and steal, ²⁰  but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust destroys and where thieves do not break in and steal. ²¹  For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also. (Matthew 6:19–21)

In contrast to the disordered love of possessions and ego, St. John of the Cross in his commentary on his poem “The Spiritual Canticle” shows us what the true treasure is:

Whether the heart has been truly stolen by God will be evident in either of these two signs: if it has longings for God or if it finds no satisfaction in anything but him, as the soul demonstrates here. The reason is that the heart cannot have peace and rest while not possessing, and when it is truly attracted it no longer has possession of self or of any other thing. And if it does not possess completely what it loves, it cannot help being weary, in proportion to its loss, until it possesses the loved object and is satisfied. Until this possession the soul is like an empty vessel waiting to be filled, or a hungry person craving for food, or someone sick moaning for health, or like one suspended in the air with nothing to lean on. Such is the truly loving heart. [6]

Finishing up with two quotes from the Church Fathers.

St. Athanasius:

“A person who lives as if he were to die every day—given that our life is uncertain by definition—will not sin, for good fear extinguishes most of the disorder of our appetites; whereas he who thinks he has a long life ahead of him will easily let himself be dominated by pleasures”[7]

St. Ambrose

For in vain he amasses wealth who knows not how to use it. Neither are these things ours which we cannot take away with us. Virtue alone is the companion of the dead, mercy alone follows us, which gains for the dead an everlasting habitation. [8]

Sources

• Peter Kreeft, Food for the Soul: Reflections on the Mass Readings Year C
• Navarre, Saint Luke’s Gospel (2005)
• The Gospel of Luke, Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture, Rev. Pablo T. Gadenz
• Catholic Productions, Commentaries by Brant Pitre
• The Word of the Lord: Reflections on the Sunday Mass Readings for Year C – John Bergsma
• The Collected Works of St. John of the Cross
• Photo by Ben White on Unsplash

---

1. Peter Kreeft, Food for the Soul: Reflections on the Mass Readings Year C  ↩
2. Navarre, Saint Luke’s Gospel (2005)  ↩
3. The Gospel of Luke, Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture, Rev. Pablo T. Gadenz  ↩
4. Catholic Productions, Brant Pitre  ↩
5. The Word of the Lord: Reflections on the Sunday Mass Readings for Year C, John Bergsma  ↩
6. The Collected Works of St. John of the Cross, ICS Publications  ↩
7. Athanasius, Adversus Antigonum  ↩
8. 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  ↩

Luke 11:1–13 ESV – Bible Gateway

---

Over the course of time, the apostles observed Jesus as he prayed and the opportunities he took to pray before major events. They would also have seen that the focus of Jesus’ prayers to the Father was more personal than the normal corporate addressing of the Father by Israel as a whole. Some of the apostles had also been followers of John the Baptist and this passage reveals that John also taught his followers how to pray or provided them with a vocal prayer to use. One of the apostles steps up to ask Jesus to teach them how to pray.

The Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture comments on the two versions of the Our Father we have:

Luke’s version of the Lord’s Prayer is shorter than the one in Matthew (Matt 6:9–13), containing five petitions instead of seven. Like the variations in the accounts of Jesus’ institution of the Eucharist, the differences here may reflect how the Lord’s Prayer was used in prayer and worship in the early Church. Matthew’s version became the one commonly adopted for liturgical, devotional, and catechetical use.[1]

Brant Pitre writes:

Luke gives us a shorter version of it than Matthew does, just as Luke gives us a shorter version of Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount than Matthew does.[2]

Mr. Pitre also points out that in ancient Jewish tradition there were prayers with both longer and shorter versions, just as we also have different Eucharistic prayers now.

Since we are so familiar with the Our Father, it is important sometimes to slow down and think about it again instead of just letting our mind or tongue go on auto-pilot. A prayer that Jesus gives us directly as he also wants us to develop a relationship with God the Father.

Earlier in his own prayer, Jesus addressed God as “Father” (Luke 10:21). He also explained that as the Son he could reveal the Father to whomever he wished (10:22). Thus he now reveals that when you pray, it is good to begin by addressing God as Father. [1]

St John Paul II in a General Audience said:

There is such a simplicity in them that even a child can learn them, but at the same time such a depth that a whole life can be spent meditating on their meaning. Isn’t that so? Does not each of those petitions deal with something essential to our life, directing it totally towards God the Father? Doesn’t this prayer speak to us about ‘our daily bread’, ‘forgiveness of our sins, since we forgive others’ and about protecting us from ‘temptation’ and ‘delivering us from evil’?”

At times we can be dismissive of vocal prayers that are memorized. Yearning instead for spontaneous prayers that have a more personal touch indicating relationship and conversation. Again this is the case for both/and since both prayer forms can be fruitful. St. Teresa of Avila noticed this when directing her nuns that some of her nuns who were mostly using vocal prayer were engaging in higher levels of mental prayer just as those using extemporaneous prayers.

The saints have also given us many commentaries on the Our Father or works using it as a framework. Jesus’ prayer given to us directed to the Father is something that we must rediscover and nourish within ourselves repeatedly. Preaching to myself here.

Jesus follows up by giving them this prayer with examples of how to pray. In the first example, a man goes to his neighbor at midnight asking for food to help feed his own late visitor.

Brant Pitre comments on a central word used.

In this case, the New American Bible translates “importunity” as “persistence”, The New International Version (NIV) says “boldness”. Importunity is kind of an old word, it’s from the King James Version, so it’s kind of an archaic word. We don’t use the word importunity very much, but the Greek word here is very important. It’s the word anaideia, which is from the Greek word aidōs, which means self-respect or respect. So anaideia means no respect. So in this case, what he is saying is, because of his lack of respect, or because of his shamelessness, you will get up and give him some bread. So what is Jesus doing? He’s telling us to pray in a shameless manner. In other words, to not just be persistent, but to be shameless in our prayer. So when you shame someone is acting shamelessly, what we’re saying is that they have no respect for custom or for etiquette. And that’s what the guy in the parable is doing. He doesn’t care that it’s midnight. He doesn’t care that the guy is already asleep, his kids are in bed already. He just wants his bread and he’s going to come over there and shamelessly pound on the door until his friend gets up and gives him some bread. That is how Jesus wants his disciples to pray: relentlessly, shamelessly, without regard for custom or etiquette, in a kind of act of desperation, begging God to give us the assistance that we need. [2]

I find it interesting how he ties this also to the first reading where Abraham is bargaining with God over Sodom and Gomorrah.

And on the one hand, that sounds like it might be disrespectful, but that’s precisely the kind of prayer Jesus is calling his disciples to. And in this case, Abraham isn’t set up as doing something wrong, he really is a model for persistent, humble prayer before the Lord.

Jesus gives us confident assurances in how to approach prayer actively and that ultimately our prayers are heard and answered. Jesus does not give us timelines on when our prayers are answered. Instead, he reminds us that if our earthy fathers know to give us good things, how much more so for the Heavenly Father.

“how much more will the heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him!”

Brant Pitre on the significance of this last line:

Now, I think that last twist there is significant because let’s face it, how many of us in our petitionary prayers are begging God the Father to give us the Holy Spirit? Isn’t it much more natural for us to beg God for earthly goods? Like food and drink and clothing and all the kind of needs and anxieties that are so frequent in human life. So Jesus knows that, he knows what necessities people are often worried about and pray for, at the same time he’s trying to lead his disciples to try pray for the higher gifts. In this case, for the gift of the Holy Spirit itself.[2]

A good reminder and to quote the Catechism paragraph 2671:

2671 The traditional form of petition to the Holy Spirit is to invoke the Father through Christ our Lord to give us the Consoler Spirit. Jesus insists on this petition to be made in his name at the very moment when he promises the gift of the Spirit of Truth. But the simplest and most direct prayer is also traditional, “Come, Holy Spirit,” and every liturgical tradition has developed it in antiphons and hymns.

Come, Holy Spirit, fill the hearts of your faithful and enkindle in them the fire of your love. Heavenly King, Consoler Spirit, Spirit of Truth, present everywhere and filling all things, treasure of all good and source of all life, come dwell in us, cleanse and save us, you who are All-Good.

Sources

• The Gospel of Luke, Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture, Rev. Pablo T. Gadenz
• Catholic Productions, Commentaries by Brant Pitre
• General Audience 14 March 1979 | John Paul II
• Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2nd Edition
• Photo by Ben White on Unsplash

---

1. The Gospel of Luke, Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture, Rev. Pablo T. Gadenz  ↩
2. Catholic Productions, Brant Pitre  ↩

Luke 10:38–42 ESV – Bible Gateway

---

As Jesus and his apostles continue on their final journey to Jerusalem, they stop off in Bethany to visit Martha and her sister Mary. Their brother Lazarus is not mentioned in Luke, but in the Gospel of John, we have the only other reference to these sisters along with their brother.

The Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture for Luke introduces this story:

Since the parable of the good Samaritan emphasizes love of neighbor, many scholars suggest that this next passage instead highlights love of “the Lord, your God” (10:27; see vv. 39–41, where the title “Lord” is again used for Jesus). Moreover, like the earlier list of women who followed Jesus along with the Twelve (8:1–3), this passage highlights women disciples, Martha and Mary, who happen to be siblings. In typical Lukan fashion, they complement James and John, siblings as well, who appeared at the beginning of the journey (9:54) that now continues. Martha welcomed Jesus, and so the passage further explains what it means to welcome Jesus and his gospel message (10:8) [1]

There have been consistent interpretations of this story as two aspects of spiritual life regarding activity and contemplation going back to at least the early ecclesial writer Origen. In this framework, Martha is seen to fulfill the active role and Mary the contemplation. This interpretation over the years has gained weight in describing two types of religious orders. The contemplation orders, usually cloistered, are dedicated to prayer with less interaction in the world. Active orders, also centered around prayer, have more interaction in the world. When it comes to religious women’s orders, this is where the distinction between nuns and sisters comes from.

This as an interpretation has its good points, but there is a lot more showcased here and the sisters’ interactions with Jesus. Luke introduces Martha as the owner of the house and her sister Mary, “who sat at the Lord’s feet and listened to his teaching.”

Brant Pitre gives us the 1st Century Jewish background on what this phrase means.

sitting at someone’s feet is a Jewish way of describing the posture or the position of a disciple to their master.[2]

Luke later goes on to use this phase in the Acts of the Apostles to describe St. Pauls’s relationship as a student to the rabbi Gamaʹli-el’.

Luke gives us Martha’s state of mind as “being distracted with much serving.” She complains directly to Jesus that her sister is not helping her. She implies she wants him to rebuke Mary directly. Instead, Jesus gives her a light rebuke and provides a proper ordering for all of us. That is when we want to complain about the amount of work others are doing to see if we have chosen the “good portion” first.

“Martha, Martha, you are anxious and troubled about many things, but one thing is necessary. Mary has chosen the good portion, which will not be taken away from her.”

There is much more here than a distinction between the active and the contemplative life here. As is often the case, there is a large both/and here. If we have not put Christ first in our life, we will be anxious and troubled about many things especially when we put all the onus on ourselves in what we want to accomplish. This anxiousness is often a lack of trust in Jesus’ will for us. Or a cry to God to look at us as to what we are doing for him and pointing out others seemingly less dedicated. As Jesus also told his apostles “Therefore I tell you, do not be anxious about your life, what you shall eat, nor about your body, what you shall put on.”

Mary is not being rebuked for her preparation and service, which are laudable in themselves. But, in the attitude, she carried them out. That in everything we do that is in itself a good, we can actively dedicate to God. As St. Teresa of Avila said, “God walks among the pots and pans.”[3] Further as another Carmelite, Brother Lawrence, instructed in the classic “The Practice of the Presence of God” we can unite ourselves and talk with God in all the events of our daily lives.

Peter Kreeft in his commentary regarding Martha’s attitude. [4]

What is wrong with her? She is confusing the means with the end. The work is the means, but Christ is the end. The work is for him, not for itself. He is the one thing needful, the one thing necessary, the one thing that is required. He’s God. Our work is not. It’s for him, not he for it. Martha is dissipating herself and her love and her heart among many little things, splitting herself into all the many little things she identifies with. Her soul is like the little bouncing balls of mercury that fall out of an old-fashioned fever thermometer when it breaks. She has lost her interior unity. She is serving many gods; she is acting like a polytheist. But she can be free of that if only she realizes the simple truth that there is literally only one thing that is absolutely necessary, only one thing, and that is Christ himself. And Mary knows that.

We can be deprived of success in all those many good things that Martha is doing, but we cannot be deprived of success in the one good thing that Mary is doing. She is giving her whole heart and mind to Christ, and that is guaranteed success and reward, while nothing else is; none of the things Martha is doing are guaranteed success.

Luke goes on in the Acts of the Apostles to record an event that shows the correct ordering.

Interestingly, Lydia in Acts makes the right combination, responding like both Mary and Martha. First, she “listened” to the gospel message preached by Paul and then offered hospitality to him and his companions (Acts 16:14–15).[1]

Fundamentally if we are “too busy to pray”, then we are “too busy.” Busy with busyness losing sight of the priority of Christ and how this should inform everything we do. We are all called to live as contemplatives in the world according to our state in life.

In the document Lumen gentium, issued by the Second Vatican Council, under the heading of “The Universal Call to Holiness in the Church” says:

Thus it is evident to everyone, that all the faithful of Christ of whatever rank or status, are called to the fullness of the Christian life and to the perfection of charity; by this holiness as such a more human manner of living is promoted in this earthly society. In order that the faithful may reach this perfection, they must use their strength accordingly as they have received it, as a gift from Christ. They must follow in His footsteps and conform themselves to His image seeking the will of the Father in all things. They must devote themselves with all their being to the glory of God and the service of their neighbor. In this way, the holiness of the People of God will grow into an abundant harvest of good, as is admirably shown by the life of so many saints in Church history.

This is put succinctly by St. Teresa of Calcutta:

“We are all called to be contemplatives in the heart of the world — by seeking the face of God in everything, everyone, everywhere, all the time, and [God’s] hand in every happening; seeing and adoring the presence of Jesus, especially in the lowly appearance of bread, and in the distressing disguise of the poor.”

Sources

• The Gospel of Luke, Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture, Rev. Pablo T. Gadenz
• Catholic Productions, Commentaries by Brant Pitre
• Peter Kreeft, Food for the Soul: Reflections on the Mass Readings Year C
• The Word of the Lord: Reflections on the Sunday Mass Readings for Year C – John Bergsma
• Lumen gentium
• Photo by Ben White on Unsplash

---

1. The Gospel of Luke, Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture, Rev. Pablo T. Gadenz  ↩
2. Catholic Productions, Brant Pitre  ↩
3. Book of the Foundations (1610)  ↩
4. Peter Kreeft, Food for the Soul: Reflections on the Mass Readings Year C  ↩

Luke 10:25–37 ESV – Bible Gateway

The Parable of the Good Samaritan is unique to the Gospel of Luke and provides another telling example of why this Gospel has been called The Gospel of Mercy.  A scholar of the law—that is, a scribe and teacher of the Torah, asks Jesus a question. In Luke, questions by such scholars are always portrayed negatively and this is no exception. There are immediate clues that his motives are not motivated by other than scholarly interests. That is putting Jesus to the test and that he would attempt to justify himself in further questions.

Jesus knows his motives, but this does not prevent him from engaging the man and trying to bring the conversation along into a fruitful dimension. It is not rare that we also can become involved in conversations that we suspect are not real questions, but gotchas. We should try to follow Jesus here and not write off the questioner, but deepen this into an actual conversation.

Jesus asks him a question for clarification. The scholar answered and quoted from Deuteronomy and Leviticus, with the first reference also used in the Shema prayer that was recited at least twice a day by the Israelites. Jesus tells them that he has answered correctly and that if he does this he will live.

The scholar probably started to wonder how this got turned around on him when he is called on to answer his own question and that he had to live out the answer he already knew. He asked the most important question, the same one the rich young official in Luke will later ask Jesus. In both cases, they are not really happy with the answer calling them to act on what they know.

The scholar then asked a follow-up question as he seemed to desire an answer that limited the scope of what he was called to do. This is such a human reaction that we have all experienced when we sense the immensity of what God is calling us to. When we forgot that we can do nothing on our own without his help and that we should be calling on that help instead.

Jesus could have drawn out this scholar on questions in the Old Testament revolving around how expansive the term neighbor could be at times. Instead, he places the central question into the context of a story to engage the scholar’s moral intuition directly.

Jesus often told parable with a surprise twist to make his point. He focuses first on a Levitical priest, and then on a member of the tribe of Levi as Israelites to be held in regard. Both men, for whatever reason, would pass by a fellow Israelite in need of immediate care. The twist is one of the despised Samaritans would the person who would actually live out what they were called to do themselves. The scholar would also likely have known that this story also closely resembles a story in 2nd Chronicles where leaders of Samaria helped a group of captives of Judah using many of the same descriptions Jesus used.

We are not given the direct reason the two men passed by. It is often assumed it revolved around the issue of ritual purity.

As Brant Pitre notes:

Jesus’ points seems much more focused on the theme not of ritual purity, but of mercy, compassion and love of neighbor. That’s what their debating. What does love of neighbor look like?[1]

The scholar answered Jesus’ question correctly but he is unable to simply reply “The Samaritan”, but had to answer more abstractly.

And, as earlier, Jesus’ words challenge the man not just to know the right answers, but also to do the right things, identifying even with the Samaritan: Go and do (poieō) likewise. If he does, then he too will become a neighbor who gives love, even to his enemies.[2]

There is much that can also be mined on several levels in seeing Jesus as the Good Samaritan and ourselves as the half-dead man lying on the road.

“The whole human race, you see, is that man who was lying on the road, left there by bandits half dead, who was ignored by the passing priest and Levite, while the passing Samaritan stopped by him to take care of him and help him…. In this Samaritan the Lord Jesus Christ wanted us to understand himself.”[3]

John Bergsma in his commentary writes:

I am aware that the Christian tradition of seeing Jesus typified in the Good Samaritan is widely rejected by scholars, but I believe the tradition is correct. Jesus often told parables with multiple levels of meaning, and he was known to tell parables in which one of the characters was an image of himself (see Matt 21:33–41). I believe this is the case also with the Good Samaritan parable.[4]

• Navarre, Saint Luke’s Gospel (2005)
• Catholic Productions, Commentaries by Brant Pitre
• The Word of the Lord: Reflections on the Sunday Mass Readings for Year C – John Bergsma
• Photo by Ben White on Unsplash

---

1. Catholic Productions, Brant Pitre  ↩
2. Navarre, Saint Luke’s Gospel (2005)  ↩
3. Augustine, Sermons 171.2; trans. E. Hill, cited in Gadenz, The Gospel of Luke , p. 213ø  ↩
4. The Word of the Lord: Reflections on the Sunday Mass Readings for Year C, John  ↩