I was asked by my professor whether this Lk 7, 36-50 has basis in the history? According to him this is one of the most controversial stories in the Gospel. Please give me some (name removed by moderator)uts about this pericope’. Please explain also the central issue in this gospel narrative. Thank you
D-R Bible, Haydock Commentary:
Ver. 36. And one of the Pharisees, by name Simon, as we learn in ver. 40.
Ver. 37. A woman in the city, who was a sinner. Some say she had only been of a vain airy carriage; one that loved to be admired for her beauty and wit; but the common exposition and more conformable to the text, is, that she had been of a lewd, debauched life and conversation. (Witham) — Mary Magdalene.
Ver. 38. Jesus Christ was then at table, after the manner of the Orientals, reclined at length on a couch, a little raised from the ground, having his face turned towards the table, and his feet extended. He had quitted his sandals, according to the custom of the country, before he had laid himself on the couch. (Bible de Vence)
Ver. 39. The Pharisee was egregiously deceived. 1. In thinking that Christ was ignorant of the character of the woman, when he not only clearly saw the past bad conduct of the woman, but the present unjust thoughts of the Pharisee; 2. in his erroneous inference that Christ could not be a prophet; for all things are not necessarily revealed by God to his prophets; 3. by judging of Christ, after his own and the other Pharisees’ treatment of sinners; who, elated with pride, and thinking themselves just, kept all public sinners at a respectful distance; whereas not those who are well, but such as are sick, need the physician. (Menochius)
Ver. 42. Which will love him most? as we read in the Protestant version, and in the Greek, agapesei. But Christ, seeming to require love as a previous disposition to the remission of sins, as appears from ver. 47 below, the Catholic Church has adopted the version of St. Augustine, hom. xxiii. in the present tense: quis ergo plus eum diligit? (Jansenius, Comment. in Evang.)
Ver. 43. In proportion to our sins, should be our grief, says St. Cyprian: ut pœnitentia non sit minor crimine. (lib. de lapsis.)
Ver. 47. Many sins are forgiven her, because she hath loved much. In the Scripture, an effect sometimes seems attributed to one only cause, when there are divers other concurring dispositions; the sins of this woman, in this verse, are said to be forgiven, because she loved much; but (ver. 50,) Christ tells her, thy faith hath saved thee. In a true conversion are joined faith, hope, love, sorrow, and other pious dispositions. (Witham)
Ver. 50. This is one of those places upon which modern sectaries lay so much stress, in order to prove that faith alone can save us. But if they will attentively consider the different parts of this history, they will easily discover the fallacy of their argument. Because, before Christ spoke these words: thy faith, &c. he had said to Magdalene: many sins are forgiven her, because she hath loved much. Therefore she was justified not so much through her faith, as her charity: still she had faith, or she would not have come to Jesus, to be delivered from her sins. It was therefore her faith, working by charity, that justified her: and this is the doctrine of the Catholic Church. Nevertheless, she had not that faith, which modern sectaries affirm to be necessary for their justification, viz. a belief that they are already justified, and that their sins are forgiven: this faith the woman here mentioned had not before Christ spoke those words to her; for it was to obtain the remission of her sins, that she performed so many offices of charity, washing his feet with her tears, &c. But is may be asked, why then does Christ attribute her salvation to her faith? The answer is easy, and has often been given, viz. that faith is the beginning of salvation; for it was her faith that brought her to Christ: for had not the woman believed in him, she never would have come to him to obtain the remission of her sins. (Maldonatus)
