Confusion with Matthew 21: 1-7 and 12-13

[ConfirmedAgnes]

Hello friends!

I have relatively recently decided to start reading the New American Bible, since it is the inerrant Word of God inspired by the Holy Spirit. I am beginning with thew New Testament and then hopping back to read the Old. As I have been reading the Bible I have been having very few problems in understanding teachings, but last night I hit these two verses and have questions about them.

For Matthew 21: 1-7, my specific question is more about verse 7. Jesus had asked the disciples to get him an *** and a colt to ride upon to fulfill the prophecy, and in verse 7 it says “They brought the *** and the colt and laid their cloaks over them, and he sat upon them.” Now this verse seemed a tiny bit confusing, but I thought perhaps “them” referred to the clothing. Then I read the footnote and it said " Upon them: upon the two animals; an awkward picture resulting from Matthew’s misunderstanding of the prophecy." This confuses me, because didn’t Matthew just make an error in our inerrant Word of God? Please don’t think I am being petty, I am really trying to understand how this can be!

As for Matthew 21: 12-13, it speaks of people selling things in the temple area that were connected with temple worship. Jesus gets upset by this and even overturned the tables. This was a verse I had never really heard or at least never payed close attention to before. I had kind of forgotten about it, but upon reading it this past evening I remember something that occurred in Germany. I was touring Churches with my good friend who happened to be LDS. At the exit of one sanctuary there was a little box where you could drop a dollar in to take a religious book, and at a couple other Churches right outside the Sanctuary there were little gift shops. My LDS friend turned to me and said that this was a corrupt action of my Church and in direct violation of Jesus’ wishes. She cited this verse, but I had no idea what she was talking about at the time, so I had no defense. Now that I have read it, I still cannot think of what the defense would be. Sometimes our Church will sell things such as Nativities outside of the Sanctuary too. Help!

So I ask you fellow Catholics out there for help with interpretations of these two verses. How is Matthew 21:7 inerrant, and how is it to be understood; and how can I defend different Church’s actions as unsinful based on the Matthew 21: 12-13?

Like I said before, please do not think I am being petty! I just want some apologetics and strive to gain a deeper understanding. Our faith is so beautiful, and I strive to have the proper comprehension of all of this so that I can not only wrap my mind around it all myself, but defend it to other as well!

Thank you!

 

[R_C]

Part 1 - the donkeys

Biblia Sacra Vulgata - emphasis is mine

1 et cum adpropinquassent Hierosolymis et venissent Bethfage ad montem Oliveti tunc Iesus misit duos discipulos

2 dicens eis ite in castellum quod contra vos est et statim invenietis asinam **alligatam et pullum **cum ea solvite et adducite mihi

3 et si quis vobis aliquid dixerit dicite quia Dominus his opus habet et confestim dimittet eos

4 hoc autem factum est ut impleretur quod dictum est per prophetam dicentem

5 dicite filiae Sion ecce rex tuus venit tibi mansuetus et **sedens super asinam et pullum **filium subiugalis

6 euntes autem discipuli fecerunt sicut praecepit illis Iesus

7 et adduxerunt asinam et pullum et (name removed by moderator)osuerunt super eis vestimenta sua et eum desuper sedere fecerunt

See? There are two animals. A donkey (a humble work animal of the horse family) and a colt (a young male horse or offspring of donkey).

The prophecy refers to Zechariah 9:9:

exulta satis filia Sion iubila filia Hierusalem
ecce rex tuus veniet tibi iustus et salvator
ipse pauper et ascendens
super asinum et super pullum filium asinae

Rejoice greatly, Daughter Zion!
Shout, Daughter Jerusalem!
See, your king comes to you,
righteous and victorious,
lowly and riding on a donkey,
on a colt, the offspring of a donkey.

Holy Scripture is inerrant. Commentary is not Don’t let the commentary upset you. Maybe the commentarist meant to say that the Lord was not quite sitting across both animals, but Matthew described it that way because of the prophecy. Then again, Matthew was there.

Part 2 - “the zeal of your house shall burn me”, or the wipping of the merchants

Our Lord does not get upset because there were people selling things in the temple. It was part of their worship to sacrifice animals for God. It is very reasonable that they would purchase them at the temple. The holy patriarch Joseph, foster father of Christ, purchased two doves on the Presentation of Christ and the Purification of the Blessed Virgin.

Also in the temple there was always a box to collect donations. Your friend may have a good heart, but he has never been involved with any parish activity. To keep a parish running is expensive. And the church also has a divine mandate to help the poor. To do so, the faithful donate, and the donations are used to help the poor. This was also the practice of the apostles - Scripture in the Acts and other epistles describes and even mandates this, and the apostles surely were not performing corrupt actions that violated the Lord’s wishes when they gathered donations. But people just have to hate the Church, and especially the practice of donations. It is particularly worthy that the Church would not just ask for donations, but be willing to allow the faithful to buy little objects that are the fruit of the work of human hands…objects that can be blessed and become sacramentals…much like the animals of old would be sacrificed - sacri facere, rendered sacred - and bring grace to the one who offered them.

Remember how Christ even praised the widow who dropped her last coin in the donations box in the temple?? He did not say that the donations box was a corruption and that the widow should have used her last coin to buy bread for her child. He said that she was greatly blessed because she had donated to the temple her last coin.

Why was Our Lord upset? Because when He entered the temple, He did not see people selling animals for the sacrifice. He found a marketplace. A thieves’ den. He even found tables of moneychangers!

John 2:16 provides more details…notice how “He poured out the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables”, but then He turns to the men selling doves and peacefully tells them: “Take these things away.”. His point was that the Temple was not to become a place of business, a marketplace.

Remember that we have to love and trust our Mother the Church. There’s a beautiful prayer, originally directed to Our Lady, the Virgo Ecclesia Facta (Virgin Made Church), that you may want to keep in mind and mentally pray whenever someone speaks evil of the Church and you do not know how to reply:

Dignare me laudare te, Virgo sacrata…da mihi virtutem contra hostes tuos.

Allow me to praise you, o sacred Virgin…give me virtue against your adversaries.

What the Church allows is not sinful, because, unlike the old worship, the Church today has Christ as Head, and her soul is the Holy Spirit.

Donations are employed to cover the expenses for the church, which otherwise would fall to pieces, to purchase what is needed for the liturgy, to cover the basic stiped of the people and the priest, and to help the poor. There’s nothing sinful or wrong about that. If someone feels bad about purchasing a rosary inside a church, he can place his donation in the poor’s box or in the collection plate. If he thinks it’s wrong to donate to the Church, then he can place the money in the hands of a poor man outdoors, but the Church, like Christ, takes five loaves of bread and multiplies them into thousands, because she is Mater Admirabilis.

 

[RedFox0456]

I may be able to assist with the money changers versus the modern situation in churches. If I am not mistaken, the temple actually used a different currency which was required to obtain things such as animals to offer for sacrifice. You were not able to obtain the animals for sacrifice from other locations, so the vendors would also charge exorbitant prices. The money changers also offered a poor exchange rate. To be clear, you were being ripped off if you wanted to practice your faith. Such is why Jesus referred to the temple as a den of thieves. The items being offered in churches today can supplement the faithful and the Church would certainly like to make these things conveniently available to the faithful, but contrary to popular opinion, the Church isn’t made of money. We also aren’t required to buy a nativity or audio cd’s to attend mass!

 

[fred_conty]

Part 1 - the donkeys

Biblia Sacra Vulgata - emphasis is mine

See? There are two animals. A donkey (a humble work animal of the horse family) and a colt (a young male horse or offspring of donkey).

The prophecy refers to Zechariah 9:9:

Holy Scripture is inerrant. Commentary is not Don’t let the commentary upset you. Maybe the commentarist meant to say that the Lord was not quite sitting across both animals, but Matthew described it that way because of the prophecy. Then again, Matthew was there.

Part 2 - “the zeal of your house shall burn me”, or the wipping of the merchants

Our Lord does not get upset because there were people selling things in the temple. It was part of their worship to sacrifice animals for God. It is very reasonable that they would purchase them at the temple. The holy patriarch Joseph, foster father of Christ, purchased two doves on the Presentation of Christ and the Purification of the Blessed Virgin.

Also in the temple there was always a box to collect donations. Your friend may have a good heart, but he has never been involved with any parish activity. To keep a parish running is expensive. And the church also has a divine mandate to help the poor. To do so, the faithful donate, and the donations are used to help the poor. This was also the practice of the apostles - Scripture in the Acts and other epistles describes and even mandates this, and the apostles surely were not performing corrupt actions that violated the Lord’s wishes when they gathered donations. But people just have to hate the Church, and especially the practice of donations. It is particularly worthy that the Church would not just ask for donations, but be willing to allow the faithful to buy little objects that are the fruit of the work of human hands…objects that can be blessed and become sacramentals…much like the animals of old would be sacrificed - sacri facere, rendered sacred - and bring grace to the one who offered them.

Remember how Christ even praised the widow who dropped her last coin in the donations box in the temple?? He did not say that the donations box was a corruption and that the widow should have used her last coin to buy bread for her child. He said that she was greatly blessed because she had donated to the temple her last coin.

Why was Our Lord upset? Because when He entered the temple, He did not see people selling animals for the sacrifice. He found a marketplace. A thieves’ den. He even found tables of moneychangers!

John 2:16 provides more details…notice how “He poured out the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables”, but then He turns to the men selling doves and peacefully tells them: “Take these things away.”. His point was that the Temple was not to become a place of business, a marketplace.

Remember that we have to love and trust our Mother the Church. There’s a beautiful prayer, originally directed to Our Lady, the Virgo Ecclesia Facta (Virgin Made Church), that you may want to keep in mind and mentally pray whenever someone speaks evil of the Church and you do not know how to reply:

What the Church allows is not sinful, because, unlike the old worship, the Church today has Christ as Head, and her soul is the Holy Spirit.

Donations are employed to cover the expenses for the church, which otherwise would fall to pieces, to purchase what is needed for the liturgy, to cover the basic stiped of the people and the priest, and to help the poor. There’s nothing sinful or wrong about that. If someone feels bad about purchasing a rosary inside a church, he can place his donation in the poor’s box or in the collection plate. If he thinks it’s wrong to donate to the Church, then he can place the money in the hands of a poor man outdoors, but the Church, like Christ, takes five loaves of bread and multiplies them into thousands, because she is Mater Admirabilis.

Ditto for me too.

 

[ConfirmedAgnes]

Thank you very much, these replies are very, very helpful!!

 

[bmonk]

Regarding Jesus riding two animals, there are other passages where Matthew has two persons and Mark and Luke have one in the parallels–such as two demoniacs in Matt 8:28, two blind men in Matt 9:27 as well as 20:30. Nobody knows why.

But it is true that, as the text reads, the image is rather amusing.

I’m also reminded that many prophesies have a rather obvious interpretation or two–but what actually happens to fulfill them is often not at all obvious, such as the Messiah coming to make a new covenant and reform the people–but to do it as a suffering servant, nailed to a cross.

Did Jesus ride two beasts? How did it happen? We are not sure.

As for the cleansing of the Temple, this would have been the Court of the Gentiles, a vast area where Gentiles were allowed to come and pray, if they wished. Of course, not too many came–most Gentiles had no idea that the God of Israel was welcoming them. So, like many another apparently little-used space, it got converted to other uses. In this case, it was a convenient place for changing coins into types acceptable for use in the Temple, as well as room for the sacrificial animals to be sold to those who wanted to sacrifice. Soon enough it would have been satisfactorily filled.

But Jesus comes along, and knows that God is renewing the invitation to all peoples and establishing a new Covenant. That means that this space is no longer excess–it must be cleaned out and returned to its intended use: to be a place of prayer for all the nations. And so he did.

Given that, is the use of a few square feet of space in the back of each church breaking the command of Jesus or corrupting his wishes? Probably not–although we must be careful not to go to excess in having things for sale to the point that the space becomes unusable or inconducive to prayer. This might rule out selling bells (or animals ), as well as, say, having a whole bookstore back there. There should be other places for such things.

 

[po18guy]

Thank you very much, these replies are very, very helpful!!

Each and every scripture translation misses the mark by just a bit - since none is in the ancient Hebrew or Aramaic language of the human author. I prefer to consult with various translations. Each is close to the bull’s eye, but in consulting with several, the bull’s eye may be bracketed, leading to perhaps a better understanding of the true center point of meaning.

As to the NAB, I do not rely on its footnotes. Some are quite good, but some are absolutely horrible. Have a read of the Revised Standard Version - Second Catholic Edition, a Knox Translation, or even a 1941-1969 Confraternity bible. All are very solid and their notes will not lead astray.

Now, as to what can be derived from various verses, you may look them up in the:

Haydock Commentary which is one of the stnadard references.

Or in the Catena Aurea (“Golden Chain”), which is the commentary of the Early Church fathers and Doctors of the Church, but is limited to the four Gospels.

Remembering that the meanings of scripture are as complex and multi-faceted as the Lord Himself. As Catholics, we have considerable latitude in scripture interpretation, but it must remain within the safe borders of the sheepfold as established by Christ - His Church. The Church is not a restriction, but rather a safety net which prevents us from falling into error.

 

[ConfirmedAgnes]

As to the NAB, I do not rely on its footnotes. Some are quite good, but some are absolutely horrible. Have a read of the Revised Standard Version - Second Catholic Edition, a Knox Translation, or even a 1941-1969 Confraternity bible. All are very solid and their notes will not lead astray.

I shall definitely look into these translations when I have the chance! In the past I’ve owned nothing but the New American Bible–it wasn’t until very recently that I knew all the options out there for Catholics.

I had also always assumed the footnotes were to be relied on with no error…although since they themselves aren’t the sacred text, it makes perfect sense! Sometimes you just need others’ aid in understanding

(And just so you know… you have actually answered my silent prayer of having access to a Knox Translation I have been trying to find it online, but to no avail…and here you are handing it to me!! God works in mysterious ways. Thank you!)

 

[po18guy]

(And just so you know… you have actually answered my silent prayer of having access to a Knox Translation I have been trying to find it online, but to no avail…and here you are handing it to me!! God works in mysterious ways. Thank you!)

Bishop Sheen’s favorite translation. You can find Knox bibles on eBay for fairly good prices. The Confraternity bible is also excellent, being American English, and its notes and introductions are very good, solid and confidence-inspiring. There are normally quite a few of them on eBay, but you may also find them in thrift stores.