The Sánchez Archives THIRTY-FOURTH SUNDAY IN ORDINARY TIME Year A

By
Patricia Datchuck Sánchez

Consider the Criteria

EZEKIEL 34:11-12, 15-17
1 CORINTHIANS 15:20-26,28
MATTHEW 25:31-46

In every project that is undertaken, in every task which is assigned, in every position which is filled, in every job which is done, there are criteria which must be met. So also with the task of being a committed believer in the service of the kingdom of God. Today’s liturgical selections invite us to explore these criteria.

The first reading from the prophet Ezekiel was occasioned by the failure of Judah’s kings to live up to the criteria expected of rulers of God’s people. Rather than lead their contemporaries in fidelity to the Lord’s will, these unworthy monarchs generally served their own interests. Ezekiel mediated a promise that the Lord himself would exceed every criteria of leadership to come among his people and lovingly lead them as a shepherd tends his sheep.

Paul in the second reading (1 Corinthians) advises his readers that the risen Christ has become the criterion for every believer. Just as Christ has conquered death and sin so must those committed to him wage battle until such time as “God may be all in all” (1 Corinthians 15:28).

In the gospel (Matthew), the criteria of discipleship are frighteningly simple, so simple, in fact, that these facile acts of mutual kindness and concern may be overlooked in favor of more dramatic and challenging displays. How disarmingly easy it is to give water to a thirsty person or to share some food with someone who is hungry. It is really such a difficult accomplishment to visit someone who is ill . . . or to give some clothes to the annual drive for the needy? How much effort does it take to offer hospitable welcome to a stranger, a newcomer in town, or a new family in the neighborhood.

Obviously, none of these activates requires years of study or a college degree; none demands that one serve an internship or apprenticeship, enroll for technical training, or be a certain age. But in these simple manifestations of human kindness, believers can satisfy the demands of discipleship, not only because of the deeds in themselves, but because Jesus Christ, the incarnate Savior of the world, has chosen to identify himself with the hungry, thirsty, naked, sick, imprisoned and estranged of this earth. In ministering to these, we meet the criteria of the kingdom because in ministering to the poor and needy, we minister to Christ himself.

When Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel (Who Is Man?, Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA: 1965) considered the criteria of his own commitment to God, he remarked, “Over and above personal problems, there is an objective challenge to overcome inequity, injustice, helplessness, suffering, carelessness, oppression. Over and above the din of desires there is a calling, a demanding, a waiting, an expectation. There is a question that follows me wherever I turn. What is expected of me? What is demanded of me?. . . Over and above all things, is a sublime expectation, a waiting for . . . This is the most important experience in the life of every human being: something is asked of me. Every human being has had a moment in which he(she) sensed a mysterious waiting for him(her). Meaning is found in responding to the demand, meaning is found in sensing the demand.”

Today’s readings, particularly the gospel, also remind us yet again that there is one who calls, demands, waits and expects us. When did we see him? Better yet, when did we not see him? Where shall we find him? Where is the waiting? What does he expect and demand?

We’ll find him in the poor man lying in the alley or panhandling for quarters in the park. We’ll find him in the shabbily dressed woman who is tempted to shoplift a loaf of bread and some cheese to feed her hungry children. We’ll find him in the faces of every immigrant who comes in search of a home where his/her basic human rights are assured. We’ll find him in the old and the young, in the attractive and in the unsightly, in the friendly as well as in the cantankerous.

What does he demand? . . . that we see his face and find his presence in his least brethren. . . that we attend to them as lovingly and as reverently as we attend to his sacramental eucharistic presence. While this may seem to be a shocking proposition, it is nevertheless the criterion which will determine accessibility and accoutrements of every believer’s eternal inheritance.

EZEKIEL 34:11-12, 15-17

With very few exceptions, the chronicles of the kings of Israel and Judah reads like a Who’s Who? of deviant monarchs. For example, the chronicler’s commentary on Manasseh reads: “he erected altars for the Baals (Canaanite idols), made sacred poles and prostrated himself before the whole host of heaven and worshipped them. . . It was he, too, who immolated his sons by fire in the valley of Ben-hinnom. He practiced augury, divination and magic, and appointed necromancers and diviners of spirit. . .” (2 Chronicles 33:3-6). Of Jehoram, Akaziah, Joash, Amaziah, Uzziah, Akaz, Amon, Jehoiakim, Jehoiachin, Zedekiah and so many others, it was written, “He did evil in the sight of the Lord.” A haunting refrain, these words are repeated in the annals of one king after another. Even the exceptions among them, e.g. David, Solomon, Hezekiah, were not without their faults and failures.

Like the other prophets, Ezekiel witnessed firsthand the corruption of his leaders and the effects which their shoddy leadership had upon the general populace. A theocratic society, Israel (and Judah) regarded the king as Yahweh’s regent, whose responsibility it was to maintain and sustain the people in fidelity to their covenant with God. This fidelity was to be translated into authentic liturgy in the temple and a just and sincere charity within society. But, as history attests, the kings did not meet the criteria and as a result, every aspect of life (political, social, religious) was affected.

From what can be ascertained from the content of his preaching and oracles, Ezekiel witnessed the fall of Judah to Babylonia during the reign of Zedekiah. Most scholars agree that he was among the first group of captives exiled to Babylonia ca. 598 B.C.E. Once in Babylonia, Ezekiel exercised a ministry intended to restore his contemporaries faithfulness to the covenant. He interpreted their plight in exile as deserved retribution for sin (Ezekiel 17) and issued a series of promises that God, in all goodness and holiness, would forgive and renew them (16:53, 60-61; 20:40-44; 36; 37:1-14). Today’s first reading embodies one of those promises of renewal in the form of a loving shepherd-king.

In the verses immediately preceding this excerpted pericope, Judah’s rulers were denounced by the prophet (vss. 2-10) as evil and unworthy shepherds. Then, in keeping with a tradition (Isaiah 40:11; Ps 23; Jeremiah 31:10) well known to his people, Ezekiel promised that God himself would intervene on their behalf. Where their rulers had failed them, God would not. . .

Not a distant sovereign, aloof from and uninvolved in the daily concerns of the people, God would be, promised Ezekiel, a “hands-on” leader. If they were scattered or lost in the clouds and darkness, Yahweh would seek them out. For Ezekiel’s exiled contemporaries scattered among the pagan peoples of Babyolonia and lost in the exile of clouds and darkness created by their own sin, these words held no small comfort.

Unfortunately the lectionary has retained, albeit in brackets, the problematic reference in verse 16 which reads “but the sleek and the strong I will destroy.” Some scholars suggest that the harshness of this statement signals the judgment to be announced in the following verses (vvs. 17-22). Others point out the fact that this reference contradicts the loving, shepherding care of God and may represent a corruption or interpolation in the text. Because of the similarity of two Hebrew verbs which can be rendered as I will destroy and I will watch over, the Greek, Syriac and Vulgate versions have opted for the more positive meaning as is reflected in the NJB, REB and RSV translations.

Christians recognize that the shepherd-king had finally come among the scattered and lost sheep in the person and mission of Jesus (John 10:1-18). Today we celebrate this pastoral quality of Jesus’ leadership and pray for those who are to lead others in his name.

1 CORINTHIANS 15:20-26,28

Before arriving at the most crucial issue causing conflict among the Corinthian Christians, Paul had dealt with a variety of topics ranging from incest and dietary differences to appropriate demeanor at the eucharistic liturgy. When the great apostle broached the subject of the resurrection, he knew that he had to deal with philosophical and anthropological problems before there could be any theological understanding and agreement.

Anthropologically, the Greek Christians of Corinth understood the human person as a body-soul dichotomy. Philosophically the Corinthian believers ascribed to a proto-gnosticism which held that matter, and therefore the body was merely a peripheral and temporal aspect of human existence, subject to corruption and of no value. Salvation, liberation, or self-realization was to be achieved by freeing the soul from the oppressive chains of corporeality through the attainment of gnosis, or knowledge.

Some of the Corinthians converts to Christ brought with them the anthropological and philosophical baggage of their former lives. As a result, they tended either toward the excesses of licentiousness with regard to the body or to an exaggerated asceticism, both extremes believing that since the body had no significance, it mattered little how it was treated.

Unfortunately these gnostic ideas, when pushed to their logical conclusion, threatened the central tenet of Christian faith, the belief in the resurrection. If, as the gnostics argued, the body was of no consequence, what purpose could be served in raising it from death. To deny the value and integrity of the body is to question the incarnational and eucharistic aspects of the faith as well. Jesus became matter; he took on the corporeality of human existence, in which he suffered died and rose; moreover, he offered his real presence, in the material gifts of bread and wine, to those who believe. Realizing the absolute necessity of the resurrection as a linchpin of Christian faith, Paul would not yield, dilute or alter any of his teachings in that regard.

Unlike, some contemporary theologians (e.g. Willi Marxen) who posit differing models of the resurrection, Paul (followed by Raymond E. Brown, Reginald Fuller, Xavier Léon-Dufour, Wolfhard Pannenberg, Norman Perrin, Béda Rigaux) did not consider the resurrection to be a subjective or symbolic idea but a basic historical truth.

Once he established the centrality of the resurrection (vvs. 1-19), Paul then explored the consequences of this most important doctrine for believers. Borrowing from Hebrew tradition, Paul described the risen Jesus as the first fruits of those who have fallen asleep (vs. 20). Prescribed for in the law (Exodus 23:19, Leviticus 23:10, Numbers 15:20-21, Deuteronomy 26:1-11), the aparche or first fruits of field and flock and family (Exodus 13:12-15, Numbers 18:15-16) were offered to God in acknowledgement of the divine provenance over all. These offerings were also understood as a promise of the good things to come, e.g. an abundant harvest, strong fertile flocks, etc. Understood in this way, Jesus’ resurrection constitutes the first fruits or criterion of what God will do for all of humankind through him.

Paul also drew upon the Adam-Christ typology to which he would refer elsewhere in his letters (Romans 5:12-21) and contrasted the destruction brought by Adam with the redemption wrought by Christ. As Jerome Murphy O’COnnor has explained (“1 Corinthians”, The New Jerome Biblical Commentary, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs: 1990), “The parallel between Adam and Christ is founded in the ideas of belonging (to Adam by nature; to Christ by decision) and causality (through Adam, who infected society with sin and death; through Christ who gives life).”

Inasmuch as the deeds of destruction will militate against the work of redemption until such time as Jesus appears in glory, believers must continue in their daily struggles. Jesus’ victory over sin and death has been accomplished but that victory has yet to be realized in the heart and mind of every creature. For this reason, we continue to watch, work and wait in confident hope until “God is all in all” (v. 28).

MATTHEW 25:31-46

Leo Tolstoy (1828-1910 C.E.), the great Russian author was also a great Christian who took seriously the demands of the Great Sermon (Matthew 5-7) and attempted to live his life accordingly. One day a beggar stopped him while he was out walking and asked him for alms. Tolstoy searched his pockets for a coin but finding none he said with regret. “Please, don’t be angry with me, my brother, but I have nothing with me. If I did I would gladly give it to you.” At that, the beggar’s face brightened with joy. “You have given me more than I asked for”, he said, “You have called me brother!” Tolstoy had not only grasped the intent of the Great Sermon but he had also penetrated the truth of today’s gospel. He regarded the poor man, asking for alms, as a brother because he had understood and made his own the great commandment (Matthew 22:37). But he had also learned to see the face of Christ in the poor, and because of that insight, he met the criteria of judgment set forth for our consideration in this Matthean text.

So many of the important themes of Matthew’s gospel come to a climactic crescendo in this eschatological scene. Up to this point readers of Matthew have been told that wheat and weeds will grow together until harvest, that all species of fish will be hauled together in one net, that good and bad will grow together until the final separation. Believers have also been instructed, through many parables, with lessons of watchfulness and waiting. But with this passage, it becomes evident that the time of growing together and waiting has passed, yielding to the moment of separation and judgment.

A John P. Meier (Matthew, Michael Glazier, Inc., Wilmington: 1983) has noted, “the scene is not a parable but the unveiling of the truth which lay behind all the parables of chapters 24-25.” For this reason, readers should recognize the scene as one of judgment but also of revelation.

Jesus is being revealed as Son of Man in glory, as the king who judges justly and as the criterion of judgment. The just who have ministered to the needs of the poor are called blessed because in providing for the hungry, thirsty, naked, ill, estranged and imprisoned they have met and ministered to Christ himself. Notice the surprise registered in the responses of both the just and the unjust, “Lord, when did we see you. . .?” (vv. 37, 44). How startling the revelation that the promised Emmanuel, God-with-us (1:23) has chosen to be known and experienced in the least brothers and sisters of this earth. For deeds done to these least ones, all the nations (panta ta ethne, in Greek) will be judged. Meier (op.cit.) has further explained, “These deeds for others are the criterion of judgment because they define a person’s essential behavior and relation to the Judge, not just to other men. Judgment according to works of mercy is therefore a judgment based on Christology, on the centrality of the person of Jesus Christ.” In his commentary, Wilfrid Harrington (The Saving Word, Michael Glazier, Inc., Wilmington: 1980) states that when one looks closely at this passage it will be seen that judgment is “autojudgment”, i.e. believers judge themselves by deeds of mercy done or left undone.

Although this eschatological scene is unique to Matthew’s gospel, there are echoes of its truth elsewhere in the Christian scriptures. Recall the Lucan parable of the rich man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19-31). In the person of Lazarus, poor, sick, covered with sores and lying daily at his door, the rich man could have tended to the Lord himself. The fact that he neglected to do so had eternally unpleasant consequences. In the Johannine literature, believers are assured repeatedly that “if we love one another, God remains in us and his love is brought to perfection in us. . . that we may have confidence on the day of judgment, because as he is, so are we in this world.” (1 John 4:12, 17).

When did we see you Lord. . .? Indeed. . . when did we not see you?

[NOTE TO USERS: This archive is available for use without charge, but it remains the property of the author and under copyright with Celebrations Publications. Users are permitted to print individual Sunday commentaries for pastoral use, but are prohibited from downloading or copying files or printing any portion of this for sale or distribution.]