Daily Scripture Readings Thursday August 18 2011 20th Week in Ordinary Time Cycle I
Thursday 20th Week in Ordinary Time Cycle I
Official Readings available at http://www.usccb.org/bible/
Judges 11:29-39a
Douay-Rheims Challoner
Therefore[1] the spirit of the Lord came upon Jephte, and going round Galaad, and Manasses, and Maspha of Galaad,[2] and passing over from thence to the children of Ammon, He made a vow to the Lord,[3] saying:
If thou wilt deliver the children of Ammon into my hands, Whosoever shall first come forth out of the doors of my house, and shall meet me, when I return in peace[4] from the children of Ammon, the same will I offer a holocaust to the Lord.
And Jephte passed over to the children of Ammon to fight against them: and the Lord delivered them into his hands. And he smote them from Aroer[5] till you come to Mennith, twenty cities, and as far as Abel, which is set with vineyards,[6] with a very great slaughter: and the children of Ammon were humbled by the children of Israel. And when Jephte returned into Maspha, to his house, his only daughter[7] met him with timbrels and with dances:[8] for he had no other children. And when he saw her, he rent his garments, and said:
Alas![9] my daughter, thou hast deceived me, and thou thyself art deceived: for I have opened my mouth to the Lord, and I can do no other thing.[10]
And she answered him:
My father, if thou hast opened thy mouth to the Lord, do unto me whatsoever thou hast promised, since the victory hath been granted to thee, and revenge of thy enemies.
And she said to her father:
Grant me only this, which I desire: Let me go, that I may go about the mountains for two months, and may bewail my virginity[11] with my companions.
And he answered her:
Go.
And he sent her away for two months. And when she was gone with her comrades and companions, she mourned her virginity in the mountains.[12] And the two months being expired, she returned to her father,[13] and he did to her as he had vowed, and she knew no man.[14]
Psalm 39:5, 7-10 (Ps 40 NAB)
DR Challoner
Blessed is the man whose trust is in the name of the Lord;
and who hath not had regard to vanities, and lying follies.
Sacrifice and oblation thou didst not desire;
but thou hast pierced ears for me.
Burnt offering and sin offering thou didst not require:
Then said I, Behold I come.
In the head of the book it is written of me
That I should do thy will: O my God,
I have desired it, and thy law in the midst of my heart.
I have declared thy justice in a great church,
lo, I will not restrain my lips: O Lord, thou knowest it.
The Holy Gospel of Jesus Christ According to Saint Matthew 22:1-14
Haydock New Testament
And Jesus answering,[15] spoke to them again in parables, saying:
The kingdom of heaven is like to a man being a king, who made a marriage for his son.[16] And he sent his servants,[17] to call them that were invited to the marriage; and they would not come. Again he sent other servants, saying:
Tell them that were invited: Behold, I have prepared my dinner: my beeves and fatlings are killed,[18] and all things are ready: come ye to the wedding.
But they neglected, and went their ways, one to his farm, and another to his merchandise.[19] And the rest laid hands on his servants, and having treated them contumeliously, put them to death.[20] But when the king heard of it, he was angry, and sending his armies, he destroyed those murderers, and burnt their city.[21] Then he saith to his servants:
The wedding indeed is ready; but they that were invited, were not worthy.[22] Go ye therefore into the highways, and as many as you shall find, invite to the wedding.[23]
And his servants going out into the highways, gathered together all that they found, both bad and good:[24] and the wedding was filled with guests. And the king went in to see the guests: and he saw there a man who had not on a wedding-garment.[25] And he saith to him:
Friend, how camest thou in hither not having a wedding-garment?[26]
But he was silent. Then the king said to the waiters:
Bind him hand and foot, and cast him into the exterior darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
For many are called, but few are chosen.
- Therefore. Heb. “then.” Sept. “and.” The refusal of the king of Ammon was not precisely the reason why God endued Jephte with shuch wisdom and courage, though we may say that it was the occasion. H.↵
- Jephte summoned the troops in Galaad, and in the two tribes of Manasses, to attend his standard. He also invited Ephraim, (C. xii. 2. C.) and we may reasonably suppose the other tribes also, who were near enough to be ready for the day of battle. Having collected what force he could in so short a time, he returned to Maspha, and thence proceeded to attack the enemy. H.↵
- He. Heb. and Sept. “And he vowed.” A new sentence commences; (Cajet.) so that it is not clear that Jephte was moved to make this vow by the spirit of the Lord; else it could not be blamed. H.↵
- Whosoever, &c. Some are of opinion, that the meaning of this vow of Jephte, was to consecrate to God whatsoever should first meet him, according to the condition of the thing; so as to offer it up as a holocaust, if it were such a thing as might be so offered by the law; or to devote it otherwise to God, if it were not such as the law allowed to be offered in sacrifice. And therefore they think the daughter of Jephte was not slain by her father, but only consecrated to perpetual virginity. But the common opinion followed by the generality of the holy fathers and divines is, that she was offered as a holocaust, in consequence of her father’s vow: and that Jephte did not sin, at least not mortally, neither in making nor in keeping his vow; since he is no ways blamed for it in scripture; and was even inspired by God himself to make the vow, (as appears from ver. 29, 30.) in consequence of which he obtained the victory; and therefore he reasonably concluded that God, who is the master of life and death, was pleased, on this occasion, to dispense with his own law; and that it was the divine will he should fulfil his vow. Ch. — S. Thomas (2. 2. q. 88. a. 2.) acknowledges that Jephte was inspired to make a vow, and his devotion herein is praised by the apostle. Heb. xi. 32. But he afterwards followed his own spirit, in delivering himself, without mature deliberation, and in executing what he had so ill engaged himself, to perform. This decision seems to be the most agreeable to the Scripture, and to the holy fathers. S. Jerom (in Jer. vii.) says, non sacrificium placet, sed animus offerentis. “If Jephte offered his virgin daughter, it was not the sacrifice, but the good will of the offerer which deserves applause.” Almost all the ancients seem to agree that the virgin was really burnt to death; and the versions have whosoever, which intimates that Jephte intended to offer a human victim; particularly as he could not expect a beast fit for such a purpose, would come out of the doors of his house to meet him. C. — Yet many of the moderns, considering how much such things are forbidden by God, cannot persuade themselves that Jephte should be so ignorant of the law, or that the priests and people of Israel should suffer him to transgress it. The original may be rendered as well, “whatsoever proceedeth…shall surely be the Lord’s, and (Prot.) or I will offer it up for a holocaust.” Pagnin. &c. — The version of Houbigant is very favourable to this opinion. See Hook’s Principia. — It is supposed that the sacrifice of Iphigenia, which took place about this time, (Aulis. v. 26,) was only in imitation of this of Jephte’s daughter. But the poets say, that Diana saved her life, and substituted a doe in her place; (Ovid Met. xii.) which, if true, would make the conformity more striking, if we admit that the sacrifice of Jephte’s daughter was not carried into effect. Iphigenia was made a priestess of Dians, to whom human victims were immolated. The daughter of Jephte, whom the false Philo calls Seila, was consecrated to the Lord, and shut up (H.) to lead a kind of monastic life; as the wives of David, (2 K. xx. 3. Grotius) after they had been dishonoured, were obliged to live in a state of continency. Although (H.) forced chastity be not a virtue, (C.) yet Jephte had no reason to believe that his daughter would not enter into the spirit of his vow, and embrace that state for God’s honour and service. We know that she gave her entire consent to whatever might be the nature of his vow; and surely she would be as ready to refrain from marriage, however desirable at that time, as to be burnt alive, which would effectually prevent her from becoming a mother, v. 37. To require this of her, was not, at least, more cruel in her father than to offer her in sacrifice. Then Chaldee paraphrast says, “Jephte did not consult Phinees, the priest, or he might have redeemed her;” and Kimchi gives us a very mean idea, both of Jephte and of the high priest, the great Phinees, whom the Rabbins foolishly suppose was still living, and of course above 300 years old, v. 26. — “Phinees said, He wants me, let him come to me. But Jephte, the head of the princes of Israel, shall I go to him? During this contest the girl perished.” To such straits are those reduced who wish to account for the neglect of Jephte in redeeming his daughter, as the Targum observes, was lawful for a sum of money. Lev. xxvii. 2. 3. 28. — But H. his vow was of the nature of the cherom, which allowed of no redemption, and required death. C. — On this point, however, interpreters are not agreed, and this manner of devoting to death, probably, regarded only the enemies of God, or such things as were under a person’s absolute dominion. H. — If a dog had first come out to meet Jephte, could he have offered it up for a holocaust? Certainly not, (Grot.) because it was prohibited, (Deut. xxiii. 18,) to offer even its price, (H.) and only oxen, sheep, goats, turtles and doves, were the proper victims. If, therefore, a person made a vow, of a man, he was to be consecrated to the Lord, (Grot.) like Samuel, and he might marry. But a woman could not, as she was already declared the servant of the Lord, and was not at liberty to follow her husband. Amama. — We need not herein labour to defend the conduct of Jephte. The Scripture does not canonize him on this account. If he did wrong, his repentance, and other heroic acts of virtue, might justly entitle him to be ranked among the saints of the old law. S. Aug. q. 49. — “Shew me the man who has not fallen into sin…Jephte returned victorious from the enemy, but in the midst of his triumph, he was overcome by his own vow, so that he thought it proper to requite the piety of his daughter, who came out to meet him, by parricide. In the first place, what need was there of making a vow so hastily, to promise things uncertain, the event of which he knew not, instead of what was certain? Then why did he perform so sorrowful a vow to the Lord God, by shedding blood?” S. Amb. Apol. Dav. i. 4. — This saint adopts the common opinion that Jephte really immolated his daughter. But he is far from thinking that he was influenced by the holy spirit to make the vow, otherwise he would never represent it in such odious colours. If God had required the life of Jephte’s daughter, as he did formerly command Abraham to sacrifice his son, the obedience and faith of the former would have been equally applauded, as the good will of the latter. But most of those who embrace the opinion that Jephte sacrificed his daughter, are forced to excuse or to condemn the action. They suppose that he was permitted to fulfil his vow, that others might be deterred from making similar promises, without the divine authority. S. Chrys. hom. xiv. ad pop. Ant. S. Jer. c. Jov. i. “I shall never, says S. Amb. (Off. iii. 12,) be induced to believe that Jephte, the prince, did not promise incautiously that he would immolate whatever should meet him “at the door of his own house;” whence he seems to take whosoever in the same latitude as we have given in the Hebrew. He concludes, “I cannot accuse the man who was obliged to fulfil his vow,” &c. We may imitate his moderation, (H.) rather than adopt the bold language of one who has written notes on the Prot. Bible, (1603) who says, without scruple, that by this rash vow and wicked performance, his victory was defaced; and again, that he was overcome with blind zeal, not considering whether the vow was lawful or not. W. — If Jephte was under the immediate influence of the Holy Ghost in what he did, as Salien believes, and the context by no means disproves, we ought to admire the faith of this victorious judge, though he gave way to the feelings of human nature, v. 35. We should praise his fidelity either in sacrificing or in consecrating his daughter to God’s service in perpetual virginity: but if he followed his own spirit, we cannot think that he was so ill-informed or so barbarous as to murder his daughter, nor that she would consent to an impiety which so often disgraced the pagan superstition, though she might very well agree to embrace that better part, which her father and God himself, by a glorious victory, seems to have marked out for her. Amid the variety of opinions which have divided the learned on this subject, infidels can derive no advantage or solid proof against the divine authority of the Scripture, and of our holy religion. The fact is simply recorded. People are at liberty to form what judgment of it they think most rational. If they decide that Jepthe was guilty of an oversight, or of a downright impiety, it will in the first place be difficult for them to prove it to the general satisfaction; and when they have done so, they will only evince that he was once a sinner, and under this idea the word of God gives him no praise. But if he did wrong in promising, as many of the Fathers believe, he might be justified in fulfilling his vow, as God might intimate to him both interiorly, and by granting him the victory, that he dispensed with his own law, and required this sort of victim in order to foreshew the bloody sacrifice of Jesus Christ for our sins, (Serarius and Salien, A. 2850) or the state of virginity which his blessed Mother and so many nuns and others in the Christian Church embrace with fervour. Peace, with victory. — Same. Heb. “it shall be the Lord’s, and (or) I will make it ascend a whole burnt offering.” H. — The particle ve often signifies or as well as and, and it is explained in this sense here by the two Kimchis, by Junius, &c. See Ex. xxi. 17. Piscator says, the first part of the sentence determines that whatever the thing was it should be consecrated to the Lord, with the privilege of being redeemed, (Lev. xxvii. 11,) and the second shews that it should be immolated, if it were a suitable victim. Amama.↵
- Aroer, upon the Arnon, belonged to the tribe of Gad. Menith was four miles from Hesebon, towards Rabbath.↵
- Abel was noted for its vineyards, 12 miles east of Gadara, so that Jephte pursued the enemy, as they fled towards the north for about 60 miles, and during the course of the war destroyed 20 of their cities, (C.) to punish them for their unjust revenges and usurpation of another’s property. H.↵
- Daughter. It seems the vow had been kept secret, as no precautions were taken to prevent the affliction of the general; (C.) and indeed to have done so, would have been injurious to God’s providence, and childish in Jephte, as he meant to offer whatever should come to meet him. It would have been very mean, and contrary to the meaning of the vow, for him to procure something for which he had no great value, to present itself. H.↵
- Dances, as it was customary on such occasions. 1 K. xviii. 6.↵
- Alas. These indications of grief are the effects of nature. Salien. — S. Amb. considerst them as the marks of repentance; (v. 31,) and we might hence infer that the vow was not dictated by the holy spirit, who would have endued Jepthe with fortitude, as he did Abraham, though all may not possess the virtue of that great father of believers. Gen. xxii. H. — Deceived. We mutually expected comfort, from each other’s presence: but we must both experience the reverse. Heb. may signify, “depressed, terrified,” &c.↵
- Thing. Heb. “I cannot recede.” H. — It appears that he could not redeem what he had promised, (C.) as the condition had been fulfilled on the part of God. He might consider that he as no longer at liberty to use the privilege which the law allowed, when no condition had been specified. Lev. xxvii. 4. H.↵
- Bewail my virginity. The bearing of children was much coveted under the Old Testament, when women might hope that from some child of theirs the Saviour of the world might one day spring. But under the New Testament virginity is preferred. 1 Cor. vii. 35.↵
- Mountains. Such places were frequented in times of mourning. Jer. xxxi. 15. Is. xv. 2. C. — Jepthe allowed his daughter this short respite, without any offence, (Deut. xxiii. 21,) before he immolated her, (M.) or before he debarred her from the society of men. Grot. &c.↵
- Father. Her fortitude is commended by S. Ambrose (Off. iii. 12,) as more worthy of admiration than that of the two Pythagorean friends, one of whom, being sentenced to die, procured the other to stand bond for his return; and, at the time appointed, came freely to deliver himself up; an instance of generosity which made the tyrant who had sentenced him to die, beg that they would admit him into the society of their friendship. H. — Whatever we may think of Jephte, “we cannot sufficiently admire the dutiful behaviour, and amiable simplicity of the daughter, who voluntarily submitted to her parent’s will, and exhorted him to do as he had vowed. To die to sin, to resign the pomps of a licentious world, to renounce those pleasures and incentives to vice, which are inconsistent with a clean heart, is a sacrifice truly meritorious, and acceptable to God; it is a sacrifice which was solemnly begun at the font of baptism.” Reeves, A. 2817.↵
- No man. It is remarked by those who believe that she was not slain, that this observation would be very unnecessary in the contrary opinion. No mention of death is made. The virgin only deplores, with pious resignation, that she cannot be the happy mother of the Messias.↵
- Jesus answered, and spoke to them again in parables, and concludes his discourse with again describing, 1st. the reprobation of the Jews; 2d. the calling of the Gentiles to the true faith; and 3d. the final judgment of both the one and the other. In this parable of the marriage feast, says S. Chrysostom, our Saviour again declares to the Jews their reprobation, and the vocation of the Gentiles, their great ingratitude, and his tender solicitude for them. For he did not send them a single invitation only; he repeatedly invited them. Say, says he, to the invited; and afterwards, call the invited; thus evincing the greatness of their obstinacy, in resisting all the calls and pressing invitations of the Almighty. Hom. lxx. — This parable is certainly not the same as that mentioned in S. Luke xiv. 16, as every one that will be at the pains to examine and compare all the circumstances of each, will easily discover, though they are very much alike. M.↵
- Is like to a man being a king, &c. This parable seems different from that of Luke xiv. 16. See S. Aug. l. ii. de Cons. Evang. c. lxx. The main design in this parable, is to shew the Jews that they were all invited to believe in Christ; though so few of them believed. The king is God; his son is Jesus Christ; the spouse is the Church; the marriage is Christ’s incarnation; the feast, the grace of God in this life, and his glory in the next. His servants were the prophets; and lastly his precursor, S. John.↵
- His servants. John the Baptist and Christ himself, who took the form of a servant, to call such as had been formerly invited to the nuptials that were to be celebrated in his time. The Jews were invited by Moses and the prophets, and were instructed to believe that the Messias would celebrate this happy feast. On the predetermined day, they were again called by his servants, saying: Do penance; for the kingdom of heaven is at hand: come to the feast, i.e. become members of his Church, by believing in Christ. Jans. — In the same manner, S. Chrysostom says that the Jews had been invited by the voice of the prophets, and afterwards by the Baptist, who declared to all, that Christ should increase, but that he himself should decrease. At length, they were invited by the Son in person, crying aloud to them: come to me all you that labour, and are heavily laden, and I will refresh you. Mat. xi. 28. And again: if any man thirst, let him come to me and drink. S. John vii. 37. — And not by his words only, but by his actions also did he call them; and after his resurrection, by the ministry of Peter and the rest of the apostles (hom. lxx,) he informed the invited Jews that the banquet was ready; because the Christian religion being now established, the way to eternal happiness was laid open to mankind.↵
- My fatlings, which I have prepared, and made fat for the feast: but this is but an ornament of the parable. Wi. — The same takes place in the kingdom of heaven, as when a king makes a marriage feast for his son. Jesus Christ seems to have had two things in view in this parable: 1st. that many are called to the kingdom of heaven, i.e. his Church, and that few come, as he concludes, v. 14, many are called, &c; 2d. that not all that come when called will be saved, i.e. will be reputed worthy of the celestial feast; because some have not on the wedding-garment, as he shews, v. 11. M. — Thus the conduct of God in the formation of his Church, and in the vocation of men to glory which himself has prepared for them in the kingdom of heaven, is like to that of a king, wishing to celebrate the marriage of his son. V. — Marriage is here mentioned, says S. Chrysostom to shew there is nothing sorrowful in the kingdom of God, but all full of the greatest spiritual joy. S. John Baptist likewise calls our Saviour the spouse; and S. Paul says, I have espoused thee to one man, 2 Cor. xi. S. Chrys. hom. lxx. See also Eph. v. 25. and Apoc. xxi. 2. and 9. The nuptials in this place do not signify the union of marriage, or the incarnation of Jesus Christ, by which the Church is made his spouse; but the marriage feast, to which men are said to be invited. This is no other than the doctrines, the sacraments and graces, with which God feeds and nourishes our souls, united to him by faith in this life, and by eternal joy and glory in the next. Jans. — This union is begun here on earth by faith, is cemented by charity in all such as are united to Christ in the profession of the one true faith he came down to establish, and will be consummated and made perpetual hereafter by the eternal enjoyment of Christ in his heavenly kingdom.↵
- One to his farm. After they had put to death the Son of God, still did the Almighty invite them to the marriage-feast; but they with futile excuses declined and slighted the proffered favour, wholly taken up with their temporal concerns and sensual enjoyments, their oxen, lands and wives. From the punishment inflicted on these, we learn, that no consideration, how specious soever it may appear, can prove a legitimate excuse for neglecting our spiritual duties. S. John. Chrys. hom. lxx. — Such as refuse to be reconciled to the holy Catholic Church, allege vain pretexts and impediments; but all these originating in pride, indolence, or human respects, will not serve at the day of general retribution and strict scrutiny.↵
- Put them to death. Thus the Jews had many times treated the prophets. Wi. — These were by far the most impious and the most ungrateful; tenuerunt Servos ejus, as is related in the Acts, with regard to the death of James, and Stephen, and Paul. M.↵
- Sending his armies. Here our Redeemer predicts the destruction of Jerusalem, by the armies of Vespasian and Titus, sent against them by the Almighty, in punishment of their incredulity and impiety. S. Chrys. hom. lxx. — Thus the king destroyed those murderers, and burnt their city; for sooner or later God is observed to exert his vengeance on all such as despise his word, or persecute his ministers. See the miseries to which the Jews were reduced in Josephus, book the 6th, c. ix, Hist. of the Jewish war; who declares, that in the last siege of Jerusalem 1,100,000 persons perished, and that the city was completely destroyed. Other interpreters suppose that the evil spirits are here meant, by whom God punishes man, according to Psalm lxxvii, v. 49. M. and Maldonatus.↵
- Were not worthy. The Almighty knew full well that they were not worthy; he still sent them these frequently repeated invitations, that they might be left without any excuse. S. Chry. hom. lxx. — More is signified here than the bare letter conveys; they were not only less worthy of the nuptials, but by their very great obstinacy, ingratitude and impiety, quite unworthy. Not so the Gentiles. Jans. — Hence Christ says: Go ye therefore into the highways.↵
- Go ye therefore into the highways. The apostles first kept themselves within the precincts of Judea, but the Jews continually sought their destruction. Therefore S. Paul said to them, (Acts xiii. 46.) to you it behoved us first to speak the word of God, but seeing you reject it, and judge yourselves unworthy of eternal life, behold we turn to the Gentiles. S. Chrys. hom lxx.↵
- Both bad and good. Christ had before told the Jews that harlots and publicans should, in preference to them, inherit the kingdom of heaven, and that the first should be last, and the last first, which preference of the Gentiles, tormented the Jews more than even the destruction of their city. Chrys. lxx. — Good and bad, persons of every tribe, tongue, people, nation, sex and profession, without any exception of persons or conditions. Hence it is evident that the Church of God doth not consist of the elect only; and, that faith alone, without the habit of charity and good works, will not suffice to save us. B.↵
- Wedding garment, which Calvin erroneously understands of faith, for he came by faith to the nuptials. S. Augustine says it is the honour and glory of the spouse, which each one should seek, and not his own; and he shews this, in a sermon on the marriage feast, to be charity. This is the sentiment of the ancients, of S. Gregory, S. Ambrose, and others. What S. Chrysostom expounds it, viz. an immaculate life, or a life shining with virtues, and free from the filth of sin, is nearly the same; for charity cannot exist without a good life, nor the purity of a good life, without charity. In his 70th homily on S. Matthew, he says that the garment of life is our works; and this is here mentioned, that none might presume, (like Calvin and his followers) that faith alone was sufficient for salvation. When, therefore we are called by the grace of God, we are clothed with a white garment, to preserve which from every stain, from every grievous sin, depends upon the diligence (the watching and praying) of every individual. S. John. Chrys. — It was the custom then, as it still is in every civilized nation, not to appear at a marriage feast, or at a dinner of ceremony, except in the very best attire. V.↵
- Not having a wedding garment. By this one person, are represented all sinner void of the grace of God. Wi. — To enter with unclean garments, is to depart out of this life in the guilt of sin. For those are no less guilty of manifesting a contempt for the Deity, who presume to sit down in the filth of an unclean conscience, than those who neglected to answer the invitations of the Almighty. He is said to be silent, because having nothing to advance in his own defence, he remains self-condemned, and is hurried away to torments; the horrors of which words can never express. S. Chrys. hom. lxx.↵





