May 9: Study and Meditations on This Sunday's Scripture Readings

[Fidelis]

To help you prepare for this coming Sunday, here are the readings and reflections for this coming Sunday’s Scripture readings. This Sunday is the 6th Sunday of Easter, and in the Gospel Reading we hear Jesus speaking to his Apostles at the Last Supper.

Here are the Scripture readings from the U.S. Catholic bishops website.

My own weekly study can be found here under "Current Study.

Reflections on the Sunday Scriptures to share with the younger ones in your family by Emily and Jeff Cavins can be found at Family Night .

Here also are links to audio reflections on the Gospel reading by Dr. Scott Hahn and Fr. Robert Barron.

*The Navarre Bible Commentary *for each reading can be viewed here.

Further study resources for the Readings: St. Charles Borromeo Bible Study can be found here, and Catholic Matters can be found here.

Here are a pair of recorded weekly Catholic Bible studies on the readings, each about an hour long:
– St. Martha Catholic Church Adult Faith Formation
– Sunday Gospel Scripture Study.

Discussion and charitable comments are always welcome. Have a blessed and joyful Easter Season!

http://schoolnet.gov.mt/davinci_lastsupper/images/passion.jpg

[Photo from Mel Gibson’s The Passion of the Christ]

 

[Fidelis]

Navarre Bible, text (RSV) and commentary

**First Reading

From:** Acts 15:1-2, 22-29

Acts 15:1-35. This chapter is the center of Acts, not just because it comes right in the middle of the book but also because it covers the key event as far as concerns the universality of the Gospel and its unrestricted spread among the Gentiles. It is directly linked to the conversion of the pagan Cornelius; here, with the help of the Holy Spirit, all the consequences of that event are drawn out.

Christians with a Pharisee background–“certain men [who] came from James” (Galatians 2;12)–arriving in Antioch, assert categorically that salvation is impossible unless a person is circumcised and practices the Law of Moses. They accept (cf. 11:18) that Gentile converts can be baptized and become part of the Church; but they do not properly understand the economy of the Gospel, that is the “new” way; they think that the Mosaic rites and precepts are all still necessary for attaining salvation. The need arises, therefore, for the whole question to be brought to the Apostles and elders in Jerusalem, who form the government of the Church.

Dissension at Antioch; Judaizers
--------------------------------
[1] But some men came down from Judea and were teaching the brethren, “Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.” [2] And when Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and debate with them, Paul and Barnabas and some of the others were appointed to go up to Jerusalem to the Apostles and the elders about this question.

1. Paul and Barnabas are once again commissioned by the Antiochene community to go to Jerusalem (cf. 11:30). Paul says in Galatians 2:2 that this journey to the Holy City was due to a special revelation. Possibly the Holy Spirit inspired him to volunteer for it. “Paul”, St. Ephraem writes, “so as not to change without the Apostles’ accord anything which they would allow to be done perhaps because of the weakness of the Jews, make his way to Jerusalem to see to the setting aside of the Law and of circumcision in the presence of the disciples: without the Apostles’ support they [Paul and Barnabas] do not want to set them aside” (“Armenian Commentary, ad loc”.).

Acts 15: 6-21. [Not included in this Sunday’s reading] The hierarchical Church, consisting of the Apostles and elders or priests, now meets to study and decide whether baptized Gentiles are obliged or not to be circumcised and to keep the Old Law. This is a question of the utmost importance to the young Christian Church and the answer to it has to be absolutely correct. Under the leadership of St. Peter, the meeting deliberates at length, but it is not going to devise a new truth or new principles: all it does is, with the aid of the Holy Spirit, to provide a correct interpretation of God’s promises and commandments regarding the salvation of men and the way in which Gentiles can enter the New Israel.

This meeting is seen as the first general council of the Church, that is, the prototype of the series of councils of which the Second Vatican Council is the most recent. Thus, the Council of Jerusalem displays the same features as the later ecumenical councils in the history of the Church: a) it is a meeting of the rulers of the entire Church, not of ministers of one particular place; b) it promulgates rules which have binding force for all Christians; c) the content of its decrees deals with faith and morals; d) its decisions are recorded in a written document–a formal proclamation to the whole Church; e) Peter presides over the assembly.

According to the “Code of Canon Law” (can. 338-341) ecumenical councils are assemblies–summoned and presided over by the Pope–of bishops and some others endowed with jurisdiction; decisions of these councils do not oblige unless they are confirmed and promulgated by the Pope. This assembly at Jerusalem probably took place in the year 49 or 50.

Continued next post…

 

[Fidelis]

**From: Acts 15:22-28

The Council’s Decision**​

[22] Then it seemed good to the Apostles and the elders, with the whole Church, to choose men from among them and send them to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas. They sent Judas called Barsabbas, and Silas, leading men among the brethren, [23] with the following letter: “The brethren, both the Apostles and the elders, to the brethren who are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia, greeting. [24] Since we have heard that some persons from us have troubled you with words, unsettling your minds, although we gave them no instructions, [25] it has seemed good to us in assembly to choose men and send them to you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, [26] men who have risked their lives for the sake of our Lord Jesus Christ. [27] We have therefore sent Judas and Silas, who themselves will tell you the same things by word of mouth. [28] For it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things: [29] that you abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols and from blood and from what is strangled and from unchastity. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well. Farewell.”

22-29. The decree containing the decisions of the Council of Jerusalem incorporating St. James’ suggestions makes it clear that the participants at the Council are conscious of being guided in their conclusions by the Holy Spirit and that in the last analysis it is God who has decided the matter.

“We should take,” Melchor Cano writes in the 16th century, “the same road as the Apostle Paul considered to be the one best suited to solving all matters to do with the doctrine of the faith. …] The Gentiles might have sought satisfaction from the Council because it seemed to take from the freedom granted them by Jesus Christ, and because it imposed on the disciples certain ceremonies as necessary, when in fact they were not, since faith is the key to salvation. Nor did the Jews object by invoking Sacred Scripture against the Council’s decision on the grounds that Scripture seems to support their view that circumcision is necessary for salvation. So, by respecting the Council they gave us the criterion which should be observed at all times; that is, to place full faith in the authority of the synods confirmed by Peter and his legitimate successors. They say ‘it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us’; thus, the Council’s decision is the decision of the Holy Spirit Himself” (“De Locis”, V, 4).

It is the Apostles and the elders, with the whole Church, who designate the people who are to publish the Council’s decree, but it is the Hierarchy which formulates and promulgates it. The text contains two parts–one dogmatic and moral (verse 28) and the other disciplinary (verse 29). The dogmatic part speaks of imposing no burden other than what is essential and therefore declares that pagan converts are free from the obligation of circumcision and of the Mosaic Law but are subject to the Gospel’s perennial moral teaching on matters to do with chastity. This part is permanent: because it has to do with a necessary part of God’s salvific will it cannot change.

The disciplinary part of the decree lays down rules of prudence which can change, which are temporary. It asks Christians of Gentile background to abstain–out of charity towards Jewish Christians—from what has been sacrificed to idols, from blood and from meat of animals killed by strangulation.

The effect of the decree means that the disciplinary rules contained in it, although they derive from the Mosaic Law, no longer oblige by virtue of that Law but rather by virtue of the authority of the Church, which has decided to apply them for the time being. What matters is not what Moses says but what Christ says through the Church. The Council “seems to maintain the Law in force,” writes St. John Chrysostom, “because it selects various prescriptions from it, but in fact suppresses it, because it does not accept ALL its prescriptions. It had often spoken about these points, it sought to respect the Law and yet establish these regulations as coming not from Moses but from the Apostles” (“Hom. on Acts,” 33).

 

[Fidelis]

Second Reading:

**From: Revelation 21:9b-14, 22-23

A New World Comes Into Being. The New Jerusalem**​

[9b] (One of the seven angels) spoke to me, saying, “Come, I will show you the Bride, the wife of the Lamb.” [10] And in the Spirit he carried me away to a great high mountain, and showed me the holy city Jerusalem coming down out of heaven from God, [11] having the glory of God, its radiance like a most rare jewel, like a jasper, clear as crystal. [12] It had a great, high wall, with twelve gates, and at the gates twelve angels, and on the gates the names of the twelve tribes of the sons of Israel were inscribed; [13] on the east three gates, on the north three gates, on the south three gates, and on the west three gates. [14] And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and on them the twelve names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.

[22] And I saw no temple in the city, for its temple is the Lord God the Almighty and the Lamb. [23] And the city has no need of sun or moon to shine upon it, for the glory of God is its light, and its lamp is the Lamb.

9-21. In contrast with the punishment visited on the evil city, Babylon, the harlot (cf. 17:1), we are now shown the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, the spouse, coming down from heaven. There is a significant parallel between 17:1ff and 21:9ff.

The author writes with a truly remarkable mastery of language: after the introduction (v. 9), he describes the Holy City using three literary devices which, after giving the measurements of the city, he repeats in more or less reverse order. The description is like the impressions a traveler has as he approaches: first, from afar, he sees its radiance–the city as a whole and the glory of God (vv. 10-11); as he comes closer he can distinguish walls and gates (vv. 12-13), and when closer still its foundation stones (v. 14). Once inside, he realizes its sheer scale (vv. 15-16) and is able to assess the size and richness of its walls (vv. 17-18) and foundation stones and gates (vv. 19-21); and he is spellbound by the brightness that shines from the glory of God (21:22-22:5).

The city is given the titles of Bride and Wife (Spouse) which are normally used to designate the Church (cf. 19:7). This is easy to understand in the context of the imagery used: the city represents the Church, the community of the elect viewed in its complete, indissoluble union with the Lamb.

10-14. This vision is rather like the one the prophet Ezekiel had when he saw the New Jerusalem and the temple of the future (cf. Ezek 40-42). However, St John stresses (cf. also 21:2) that the city comes down from heaven: this shows that the full establishment (so long desired) of the messianic kingdom will be brought about by the power of God and in line with his will.

The description of the Holy City begins with the view from outside. This is the first thing that is seen and it is what makes it strong and unassailable. He speaks of walls and gates and foundations. The names of the tribes of Israel and the twelve Apostles show the continuity between the ancient chosen people and the Church of Christ; and yet the point is made that the Church is something quite new which rests on the twelve Apostles of the Lord (cf. Eph 2:20). The arrangement of the gates, in threes facing the four points of the compass, indicates that the Church is universal: all nations must come to it to gain salvation. his is what St Augustine means when he says that “outside the catholic Church one can find everything except salvation” (“Sermo Ad Cassar”, ).

21b-27. After taking us up to the walls and through the gates of the ity, the author brings us right inside, to its very center; this also so amazingly rich. However, surprisingly, there is no temple. This makes it different from the Jerusalem described by Ezekiel, for the center of that city was the temple (cf. Ezek 4042). The temple in Jerusalem and the tent of the tabernacle in the wilderness symbolized the fact that God dwelt there; it was the visible sign of divine presence (“shekinah” in Hebrew), a presence revealed by the descent of the cloud of the glory of God.

In the heavenly Jerusalem there is no longer any need for God to have a dwelling-place, because God the Father himself and the Lamb are always present. The Godhead does not need to be brought to mind by the temple (the symbol of his invisible presence), because the blessed will always see God face to face. This sight of God is what causes the righteous to be forever happy. “There are no words to explain the blessedness which the soul enjoys, the gain which he obtains once his true nature has been restored to him and he is able henceforth to contemplate his Lord” (Chrysostom, “Ad Theodorum Lapsum”, 1, 13).

In the Old Testament theophanies of Yahweh, a splendid brightness revealed the divine glory. And so, the presence of God will fill the heavenly Jerusalem with such a brightness of light that there is no need of sun or moon. Beside God the Father, with equal rank and dignity, is the Lamb, whose glory will also shine out, revealing his divinity.

This light will illuminate all those who worship the Lord, thereby fulfilling the messianic prophecies of Isaiah (cf. Is 60:3, 5, 11; 65-66).

The gates of the Holy City will stay open by day, that is, always, because there will be no more night, nor anything unclean: the saints will be the only ones to enter.

 

[Fidelis]

**From: John 14:23-29

The Promise of the Holy Spirit
------------------------------**
[23] Jesus answered him, "If a man loves Me, he will keep My word, and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our home with him. [24] He who does not love Me does not keep My words; and the word which you hear is not Mine but the Father’s who sent Me.

22-23. It was commonly held by the Jews that when the Messiah came He would be revealed to the whole world as King and Savior. The Apostles take Jesus’ words as a revelation for themselves alone, and they are puzzled. Hence the question from Judas Thaddeus. It is interesting to note how easy the Apostles’ relations with our Lord are: they simply ask Him about things they do not know and get Him to clear up any doubts they have. This is a good example of how we should approach Jesus, who is also our Teacher and Friend.

Jesus’ reply may seem evasive but in fact, by referring to the form His manifestation takes, He explains why He does not reveal Himself to the world: He makes Himself known to him who loves Him and keeps His commandments. God repeatedly revealed Himself in the Old Testament and promised to dwell in the midst of the people (cf. Exodus 29:45; Ezekiel 37:26-27; etc.); but here Jesus speaks of a presence of God in each person. St. Paul refers to this presence when he asserts that each of us is a temple of the Holy Spirit (cf. 2 Corinthians 6:16-17). St. Augustine, in reflecting on God’s ineffable nearness in the soul, exclaims, “Late have I loved You, O Beauty so ancient and so new, late have I loved You! You were within me, and I was in the world outside myself. I searched for You in the world outside myself… You were with me, but I was not with You. The beautiful things of this world kept me far from You and yet, if they had not been in You, they would have no being at all. You called me; You cried aloud to me; You broke my barrier of deafness; You shone upon me; Your radiance enveloped me; You cured my blindness” (“Confessions”, X, 27, 38).

Jesus is referring to the indwelling of the Holy Spirit in the soul renewed by grace: “Our heart now needs to distinguish and adore each one of the Divine Persons. The soul is, as it were, making a discovery in the supernatural life, like a little child opening his eyes to the world about him. The soul spends time lovingly with the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, and readily submits to the work of the lifegiving Paraclete, who gives Himself to us with no merit on our part, bestowing His gifts and the supernatural virtues!” (St. J. Escriva, “Friends of God”, 306).

*Continued next post… *

 

[Fidelis]

[25] “These things I have spoken to you, while I am still with you. [26] But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you.”

[27] "Peace I leave with you; My peace I give to you; not as the world gives do I give to you. Let not your hearts be troubled, neither let them be afraid. [28] You have heard Me say to you, `I go away, and I will come to you.’ If you loved Me, you would have rejoiced, because I go to the Father; for the Father is greater than I. [29] And now I have told you before it takes place, so that when it does take place, you may believe

25-26. Jesus has expounded His teaching very clearly, but the Apostles do not yet fully understand it; they will do so later on, when they receive the Holy Spirit who will guide them unto all truth (cf. John 16:13). “And so the Holy Spirit did teach them and remind them: He taught them what Christ had not said because they could not take it in, and He reminded them of what the Lord had taught and which, either because of the obscurity of the things or because of the dullness of their minds, they had not been able to retain” (Theophylact, “Enarratio in Evangelium Ioannis, ad loc”).

The word translated here as “bring to your remembrance” also includes the idea of “suggesting”: the Holy Spirit will recall to the Apostles’ memory what they had already heard Jesus say–and He will give them light to enable them to discover the depth and richness of everything they have seen and heard. Thus, "the Apostles handed on to their hearers what He had said and done, but with that fuller understanding which they, instructed by the glorious events of Christ (cf. John 2:22) and enlightened by the Spirit of truth, now enjoyed: (Vatican II, “Dei Verbum”, 19).

“Christ has not left His followers without guidance in the task of understanding and living the Gospel. Before returning to His Father, He promised to send His Holy Spirit to the Church: `But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all I have said to you’” (John 14:26).

“This same Spirit guides the successors of the Apostles, your bishops, united with the Bishop of Rome, to whom it was entrusted to preserve the faith and to `preach the Gospel to the whole creation’ (Mark 16:15). Listen to their voices, for they bring you the word of the Lord” ([Pope] John Paul II, “Homily at Knock Shrine”, 30 September 1979).

In the Gospels is consigned to writing, under the charism of divine inspiration, the Apostles’ version of everything they had witnessed–and the understanding of it, which they obtained after Pentecost. So it is that these sacred writers “faithfully hand on what Jesus, the Son of God, while He lived among men, really did and taught for their eternal salvation, until the day when He was taken up (cf.Acts 1:1-2)” (Vatican II, “Dei Verbum”, 19). This is why the Church so earnestly recommends the reading of Sacred Scripture, particularly the Gospels. “How I wish your bearing and conversation were such that, on seeing or hearing you, people would say: This man reads the life of Jesus Christ” ([St] J. Escriva, “The Way”, 2).

Continued on the next post…

 

[Fidelis]

[27] "Peace I leave with you; My peace I give to you; not as the world gives do I give to you. Let not your hearts be troubled, neither let them be afraid. [28] You have heard Me say to you, `I go away, and I will come to you.’ If you loved Me, you would have rejoiced, because I go to the Father; for the Father is greater than I.

1. Wishing a person peace was, and still is, the usual form of greeting among Jews and Arabs. It is the greeting Jesus used, and which the Apostles continued to use, as we can see from their letters (cf. 1 Peter 1:3; 3 John 15; Romans 1:7; etc.). The Church still uses it in the liturgy: for example, before Communion the celebrant wishes those present peace, a condition for worthily sharing in the holy sacrifice (cf. Matthew 5:23) and also a fruit of that sacrifice.

On our Lord’s lips this common greeting acquires its deepest meaning; peace is one of the great messianic gifts (cf. Isaiah 9:7; 48:18; Micah 5:5; Matthew 10:22; Luke 2:14; 19:38). The peace which Jesus gives us completely transcends the peace of the world, which can be superficial and misleading and compatible with injustice. The peace of Christ is, above all, reconciliation with God and reconciliation of men with one another; it is one of the fruits of the Holy Spirit (cf. Galatians 5:22-23); it is “serenity of mind, tranquility of soul, simplicity of heart, a bond of love, a union of charity: no one can inherit God if he does not keep His testament of peace, or live in unity with Christ if he is separated from Christianity” (St. Augustine, “De Verbis Domini Serm.”, 58).

"Christ is our peace' (Ephesians 2:14). And today and forever He repeats to us: My peace I give to you, My peace I leave with you’. …] Never before in the history of mankind has peace been so much talked about and so ardently desired as in our day. …] And yet again and again, one can see how peace is undermined and destroyed. …] Peace is the result of many converging attitudes and realities; it is the product of moral concerns, of ethical principles based on the Gospel message and fortified by it. …] In his message for the 1971 Day of Peace, my revered predecessor, that pilgrim of peace, [Pope] Paul VI, said: “True peace must be founded upon justice, upon a sense of the untouchable dignity of man, upon the recognition of an indelible and happy equality between men, upon the basic principle of human brotherhood, that is, of the respect and true love due to each man, because he is man’. This same message I affirmed in Mexico and in Poland. I reaffirm it here in Ireland. Every human being has inalienable rights that must be respected. Each human community–ethnic, historical, cultural or religious–has rights which must be respected. Peace is threatened every time one of these rights is violated. The moral law, guardian of human rights, protector of the dignity of man, cannot be set aside by any person or group, or by the State itself, for any cause, not even for security or in the interests of law and order. The law of God stands in judgment over all reasons of State. As long as injustices exist in any of the areas that touch upon the dignity of the human person, be it in the political, social or economic field, be it in the cultural or religious sphere, true peace will not exist. …] Peace cannot be established by violence, peace can never flourish in a climate of terror, intimidation and death. It is Jesus Himself who said: `All who take the sword will perish by the sword’ (Matthew 26:52). This is the word of God, and it commands this generation of violent men to desist from hatred and violence and to repent” ([Pope] John Paul II, “Homily at Drogheda”, 29 September 1979).

The peace and joy which Christ brings us should be typical of believers: "Get rid of those scruples that deprive you of peace.—What takes away your peace of soul cannot come from God.

“When God comes to you, you will feel the truth of those greetings: My peace I give to you…, peace I leave you…, peace be with you…, and you will feel it even in the midst of troubles.” ([St] J. Escriva, “The Way”, 258).

Concluded on next post…

 

[Fidelis]

1. Jesus Christ, as Only-begotten Son of God, possesses divine glory for all eternity; but while He is on earth this glory is veiled and hidden behind His holy human nature (cf. 17:5; Philippians 2:7). It only shows itself on a few occasions, such as when He performs miracles (cf. 2:11) or at the Transfiguration (cf. Matthew 17:1-8 and paragraph). Now, through His death, resurrection and ascension into Heaven Jesus will be glorified–in His body also–as He returns to the Father and enters into His glory. Therefore, His departure from this world should be a source of joy for His disciples; but they do not properly understand what He is saying, and they are saddened because they are more aware of the Master being physically separated from them than the glory which awaits Him.

When Jesus says that the Father is greater than He, He is thinking about His human nature; as man Jesus is going to be glorified, ascending as He does to the right hand of the Father. Jesus Christ “is equal to the Father in His dignity, less than the Father in His humanity” (“Athanasian Creed”). St. Augustine exhorts us to "acknowledge the twofold nature of Christ–the divine, by which He is equal to the Father; the human, by which He is less than the Father. But the one and the other are together not two, but one Christ’ (“In Ioann. Evang.”, 78, 3). However, although the Father and the Son are equal in nature, eternity and dignity, our Lord’s words can also be understood by taking “greater” to refer to His origin: only the Father is “beginning without beginning”, whereas the Son proceeds eternally from the Father by way of a generation which is also eternal. Jesus Christ is God from God, Light from Light, True God from True God (cf. Nicene Creed).

1. Clearly the world is good, for it has been created by God, and God loved it so much that He sent His Only-begotten Son (cf. John 3:16). However, in this passage “world” means all those who reject Christ; and “the ruler of the world” is the devil (cf. John 1:10; 7:7; 15:18-19). The devil opposed the work of Jesus right from the start of His public life when he tempted Him in the desert (cf. Matthew 4:1-11 and paragraph). Now, in the passion, he will apparently overcome Christ. This is the hour of the power of darkness when, availing of Judas’ treachery (cf. Luke 22:53; John 13:27), the devil manages to have our Lord arrested and crucified.

 

[Fidelis]

Most of the lessons and meditations I’ve seen so far on this Sundays readings have focused on the First Ready-- probably because it relates such a critical event of Early Church history, the Council of Jerusalem. This reflection by Msgr. Pope is an example of that:

It is the Decision of the Holy Spirit and Us….On the Council of Jerusalem and the Catholicity of the Early Church

In the first reading at Today’s Mass (and all last week at daily Mass) we have recounted for us the Council of Jerusalem which scholars generally date to around the Year 50 AD. It was a pivotal moment in the history of the Church since it would set forth an identity for the Church that was independent per se from the culture of Judaism, and it would open wide the door or inculturation to the Gentiles. This surely had significant impact upon evangelization in the early Church.

Catholic Ecclesiology is Evident here: I want to set forth in this article the proposition that we have reflected here a very Catholic model of the Church in terms of how a matter of significant pastoral practice and doctrine is properly dealt with. In effect what we see here is the same model the Catholic Church has continued to use right to our own time. What is evident here and in all subsequent Ecumenical Councils is a gathering of the Bishops presided over by the Pope which considers a matter and may even debate it. If necessary the Pope resolves debates where consensus cannot be reached. Once a decision is reached, a letter is issued to whole Church and considered binding.

All these elements are seen here though somewhat in seminal form. Let’s consider this First Council of the Church in Jerusalem of 50 AD. beginning first with the remote preparation -

1. Bring in the Gentiles! – The Lord, just before he ascended gave the Apostles the great commission: Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit (Matt 28:19). Hence, the Gentiles are now to be summoned and included in the ranks of discipleship and of the Church.

1. But it looks like the Church was mighty slow in beginning any outreach to the Gentiles. It is true that on the day of Pentecost people from every nation heard the Sermon of Peter and 3000 converted. By they were all Jews (Acts 2). In fact it seems the Church did little at first to leave Jerusalem and go anywhere, let alone to the nations.

1. Perhaps as a swift quick in the pants the Lord allowed a persecution to break out in Jerusalem after the stoning of Stephen (Acts 7). This caused the gospel to begin a northward trek into Samaria at least. Samaritans however are not usually considered Gentiles, since they were a groups that had intermarried with Jews in the 8th Century BC. There is also the Baptism of an Ethiopian Official but he too was a Jew.

Continued on next post…

 

[Fidelis]

1. Fifteen Years ?! The time line of Acts is a bit speculative however if we study it carefully and compare it to some of what Paul says (esp. in Galatians) it would seem that we are dealing with over 15 years before the baptism of the first Gentile! If this is true then it is a disgrace. There were of course strong racial animosities between Jew and Gentile that may explain the slow response to Jesus’ commission. It explains but does not excuse it.

1. Time for another kick in the pants. This time the Lord went to Peter who was praying on a rooftop in Joppa and by means of a vision taught him that he was not to call unclean what God had called clean. The Lord then sent to Peter an entourage from Cornelius, a high Roman military official who was seeking baptism. He, of course was a Gentile. The entourage requests that Peter go with them to meet Cornelius at Cesarea. At first he is reluctant. But then recalling the vision (kick in the pants) that God had given him he decides to go. In Cesarea he does something unthinkable. He, a Jew, enters the house of a Gentile. Peter has learned his lesson and been guided by God as the first Pope to do what is right and just. After a conversation with Cornelius and the whole household, and signs from the Holy Spirit, Peter has them baptized. Praise the Lord! It was about time. (All of this is detailed in Acts 10)

1. It is a true fact that many were not happy with what Peter had done and they confront him on it. Peter explains his vision, and also the manifestation of the Holy Spirit and insists that this is how it is going to be. While it is a true fact these early Christians felt freer to question Peter than we would the Pope today, it is also a fact that what Peter has done is binding even if some of them don’t like it. What Peter has done will stand. Once Peter has definitively answered them, they reluctantly assent and declare somewhat cynically: “God has granted life giving repentance (even) to the Gentiles!” (Acts 11:19)

1. Trouble Brewing – So, the mission to the Gentiles is finally open. But that does not mean trouble is over. As Paul, Barnabas and others begin to bring in large numbers of Gentile converts some among the Jewish Christians begin to object that they were not like Jews and began to insist that they must be circumcised and follow the whole Jewish Law, not just the moral precepts but also the cultural norms, kosher diet, purification rites etc. That is where we picked up the story in today’s Mass.

1. The Council of Jerusalem – Luke is a master of understatement and says “Because there arose no little dissension and debate….” (Acts 15:2) it was decided to ask the Apostles and elders in Jerusalem to gather and consider the matter. So the apostles and some presbyters (priests) with them meet and, of course, Peter is there as is James who was especially prominent in Jerusalem among the apostles and would later become bishop there. Once again Luke rather humorously summarizes the matter by saying, “After much debate Peter arose” (Acts 15:7). In effect Peter arises to settle the matter since (it would seem) that the apostles themselves were divided. Had not Peter received this charge from the Lord? The Lord had prophesied: Simon, Simon, behold, Satan has demanded to sift you all like wheat but I have prayed for you Peter, that your faith may not fail; and you, when once you have turned again, strengthen your brothers (Luke 22:31-32). Now Peter fulfills this text as he will again and every Pope after him. Peter clearly dismisses any notion that the Gentiles should be made to take up the whole burden of Jewish customs. Paul and Barnabas rise to support this. Then James (who may have felt otherwise) rises to assent to the decision and asks that a letter be sent forth to all the Churches explaining the decision. He also asks for and obtains a few concessions.

So there it is, the First Council. And that Council like all the Church-wide Councils that would follow was a gathering of the bishops, in the presence of Peter who works to unite them. A decision is then made and a decree, binding on the whole Church, is sent out. Very Catholic actually. We have kept this Biblical model ever since. Our Protestant brethren have departed from it for they have no Pope to settle things when they dispute. They have split endlessly into tens of thousands of denominations and factions. When no one is pope every one is pope.

A final thought. Notice how the decree to the Churches is worded: It is the decision of the Holy Spirit and of us (Acts 15:28). In the end we trust the Holy Spirit to guide the Church in matters of faith and morals. We trust that decrees and doctrines that issue forth from Councils of the Bishops with the Pope are inspired by and authored by the Holy Spirit Himself. And there it is right in Scripture, the affirmation that when the Church speaks solemnly in this way it is not just some bishops and the Pope as men, it is the Holy Spirit who speaks with them.

The Church – Catholic from the Start!

Be sure to watch the video re-tellling of the Council of Jeruslem found with this meditation, found here.