First Testament: Genesis 15:1-6; 21:1-3
Psalm: Psalm
105:1-6, 8-9 (7a, 8a) (page 97 in the Lectionary)
Epistle: Hebrews
11:8, 11-12, 17-19 (page 98 in the Lectionary)
Commentary
When these Personal Notes refer to the Lectionary, they do not
assume the reader has access to the Lectionary, except as it is read
during the liturgy. This is so important that I will repeat it one more Sunday (January
4), after which I will make it the first sentence in the Appendix.
When we pray about the Holy Family, we readily move from
The Psalm reminds the Faithful that The
Lord remembers his covenant forever. Genesis is about the joy of Abraham
and Sarah finally having Isaac. Hebrews explains that the joy of Abraham and
Sarah translated into the joy of Faith in Jesus. The Gospel is about the Fourth
Joyful Mystery of the Rosary, the Presentation of Jesus in the
==================================================================
Annotated
Bibliography
Material above the double line
draws from material below the double line. Those uninterested in scholarly and
tangential details should stop reading here. If they do, however, they may miss
some interesting scholarly prayer-provoking information.
Genesis 15:1-6; 21:1-3
Genesis 15:5
Fisk writes that, with your descendants is one of the blessings the LORD bestows first on the patriarchs, to which I add, and then on the rest of the Faithful. This snippet is also used in the following two articles.
Gen 15:5
Paul Niskanen, "Yhwh as Father, Redeemer, and Potter in Isaiah 63:7—64:11"[2]
Niskanen
argues, “`The exalted father [the LORD],’ however, abdicates this title in
Isaiah. Jacob, renamed
Gen 15:5b
John
Paul Heil, “From Remnant to Seed of Hope for
Among
others, Heil includes this verse to argue “that it is not the children of the
flesh that are the children of God, but the children of the promise are reckoned
as seed (sperma).” In that way, even childless people, like those taking a vow of celibacy,
can have descendants.
Psalm 105:1-6, 8-9 (7a, 8a)
While I do not understand why, what was explained last Sunday about the difference in numbering between the Hebrew Masoretic and Greek Septuagint texts explains the Codex Sinaiticus. Psalm 105 in the Lectionary is Psalm 104 Sinaiticus. That is sufficient for now.
Comparing
the Latin translation of
In
verse 4, the Lectionary uses different words, where
In verse 6, the Latin is seed, whereas the English is descendants. The difference in words is not significant, because the Lectionary also uses descendants in Hebrews 11:12 and 18. Noting the differences enriches the resulting prayer. The Psalms are known as the prayer book of the Church.
Psalm 105:1-22
William Doan and Terry Giles, "The Song of Asaph: A Performance-Critical Analysis of 1 Chronicles 16:8-36"[5]
Doan argues that the Fourth Century 1 Chronicles 16:8-36 draws from Psalm 105:1-22, the Lord remembers his covenant forever.
Psalm 105:1
Using Qumran Scroll 11QPsa, this is a very technical article speculating on how the psalms divided over time. Barré bases his speculation on the Halelu yah. Psalm 105 and seven other psalms range through the article.
Psalm 105:4
Dennis Hamm, S.J., “The Tamid Service in Luke-Acts: The Cultic Background behind Luke's Theology of Worship (Luke 1:5-25; 18:9-14; 24:50-53; Acts 3:1; 10:3, 30)”[7]
Hebrews 11:8, 11-12, 17-19
The apparatus indicates there is difficulty translating Hebrews 11:11.
Lectionary (1998) —and
Sarah herself was sterile—
The Vulgate (circa 410) —et
ipsa Sara sterilis—
Douay-Rheims (1582-1610) being
barren,
King
Catholic RSV (1969) Sara
herself… even when she was past the age
New American (
New Jerusalem (1985) Sara, in spite of being past the age,
As best I can tell,
the problem with the Greek is herself.
My sense is over the reflex emphasis.
There is another difficulty at Hebrews 11:12.
Lectionary (1998) …
that there came forth …
The Vulgate (circa 410) …
orti sunt …
Douay-Rheims (1582-1610) there
sprung
King
Catholic RSV (1969) were
born
New American (
New Jerusalem (1985) there came from
I sense a feminine
bursting forth from Abraham, rather than planting his seed. I wonder whether
that is what is causing trouble with the Greek. Why the Latin is plural escapes
me.
Heb 11:1—12:24
Koester argues that Hebrews presents a series of arguments that return “to the contradiction between the hope of glory in God’s kingdom and the inglorious experience of life in the world.” Bette words it pithily, “life is hell, and then you die.” Faith is the link to hope for the joy of better things to come.
Heb 11:7, 10, 14
Thompson observes that “Esau’s worldly behavior is … to be contrasted to the men of faith who gave up earthly assurances in favor of the heavenly reward (cf. 11:7, 10 [used here] 14).” Thompson concludes by arguing that Faith offers “the grounds for the [Christian] community to find the `stability’ necessary to continue the Christian pilgrimage.”
Heb
prepein means propriety. Mitchell
argues that Hebrews 10:19—12:29, of which Hebrews 11 [used here] is part,
contains the main point of Hebrews. That main point is that the death of Jesus has
lasting quality that does not require repetition, in contrast to the ritual
requirements for the Day of Atonement. In other words, the Holy Family is a
model for all times.
Hebrews 11:8
Hahn uses Hebrews 11:8 by faith Abraham obeyed as part of “the model of the process of inheritance in the Epistle to the Hebrews [that] has little in common with testamentary practice.” In other words, Faith in and of Christ brings an inheritance of a different quality than anything that came before. This inheritance in the next life is received “through suffering, death, and resurrection” in this life. Hahn goes on,
this [Christian inheritance] runs counter to a testamentary model, in which only God (the Father 1:5) could function as the testator, since he dispenses the inheritance. Yet it is impossible for God to die. Ironically, it is not God, the “testator,” but Christ the heir, who must die to receive the heavenly inheritance.
The wonders of the Holy Family are unceasing.
Heb 11:17-19
Hahn writes, “It is significant that each of the biblical covenants that concern the author of Hebrews involved a Drohritus [?] symbolizing the curse of death. … implying, `As was done to the animals, so may it be done to us if we fail to keep the covenant.’”
Heb 11:17-20
This article affects me as the most significant one I have read in the forty-one years I have been receiving the Catholic Biblical Quarterly. This article helps me grasp at the idea that salvation means salvation from the inevitability of death. At this point, Daly has two paragraphs, citing Hebrews 11:17-20 as “the clearest and most complete reference” to the Akedah [“Binding of Isaac”] in the New Testament.”
Hebrews 11:17-19
Margaret Barker, The Great High Priest: The
Barker links the survival of Isaac past the willingness of Abraham to sacrifice him, with the survival of Jesus through the Resurrection. We are now finished with Barker.
Hebrews 1:1-2
Luke 2:22-40
Luke 2:22-40
Kurt Aland and Barbara Aland, The Text of the New Testament: An
Introduction to the Critical Editions and to the Theory and Practice of Modern
Textual Criticism, 2nd ed., Erroll F. Rhodes, tr.[15]
The Alands refer to manuscripts containing the Gospel of Luke on three pages: 98, 122, and 126. These references give authenticity to the words present in the Lectionary.
Luke 2
Alexander Globe, “Some Doctrinal Variants in Matthew 1 and Luke 2, and the Authority of the Neutral Text”[16]
This article about textual criticism challenges the Codex Vaticanus (B), which scholars used to think was significantly more authentic than other manuscripts. Present scholars recognize that the early scribes replaced Koine Greek with literary Attic forms. Glove argues for the eclectic text, focusing on parallel passages in Matthew 1 and Luke 2, used here. In a footnote, Globe asserts, “The first unambiguous statement of Mary’s virginitas in partu does not occur until Zeno, 362-72 A.D.”
The Protestant Revolt over Catholic dogma seems relevant to studying Sacred Scripture.
Luke 2:22-40
Hanan Eshel and John Strugnell, “Alphabetical Acrostics in Pre-Tannaitic Hebrew”[17]
Eshel argues for a possibility that “Anna and the people she spoke to belonged to a group of pious ones who dwelt in the temple and yearned for Zion’s redemption …” What the Lectionary translates as after her marriage, Eshel translates from her virginity. This article helps place the prayer-life of the Holy family in the context of what was going on in their lives.
Luke 2:23—24:53
While O’Toole congratulates McComiskey for developing his theoretical structure, O’Toole concludes with “We will all want to know how accurate his theory is …” As best I can tell, O’Toole did not think it worth his while to do the “heavy going” required to do justice to his review. In other words, O’Toole did not evaluate what McComiskey wrote.
Luke 2:29-35
Dillon argues that the aorist tense does not disqualify either Mary’s cousin Elizabeth, Simeon, or Anna from prophesying.
Luke 2:26
Cook writes of the “… extra character in the story, the expectant people, whose experience of a doubtful future at the beginning of the narrative awaits the resolution of the doubt in the lyrical statement of what this preternatural childbirth finally means.” In other words, the people, the Faithful, matter.
Luke 2:28
Warren
Carter, “Getting Martha out of the Kitchen: Luke 10:38-42 Again”[21]
Carter translates he took him into his arms as he received him into his arms to concentrate on how Martha received Jesus signifying “her commitment to Jesus’ mission and to the God who sent him …” Adult discipleship results in making difficult decisions in the context of social expectations.
Luke 2:35
Pierre Benoit, “Et toi-me, un glaive te transpercera l’ame!”[22]
This article is in French, which I lack the time and energy to translate.
Luke 2:30
Charles H. Talbert, review of Hans Jorg Sellner, Das Heil Gottes: Studien zur Soteriologie des lukanischen Doppelwerks[23]
Sellner has a chapter to include Luke 2:30, my eyes have seen your salvation. Sellner writes nothing new, but leaves the reviewer, Talbert, with the question, “How are God’s saving acts related to this period between beginning the Christian walk and departing this life?” That is exactly what these Notes are trying to address.
Luke 2:32
Matthew Goff, review of Hubert Frankemolle, Fruhjudentum und Urchristentum: Vorgeschichte—Verlauf—Auswirkungen[24]
Contrary
to what is commonly understood, Frankemolle argues, unconvincingly, that Jews
and Christians split over the use of Hebrew and Aramaic in
Kilian McDonnell, O.S.B., “Feminist Mariologies: Heteronomy/Subordination and the Scandal of Christology”[25]
McDonnell explains,
In Luke 1:27, [when the parents brought in the child] the accent is not on virginity as liberation, but functions as a declaration that the child conceived is God’s Son and the conception is “totally God’s work.” Unfortunately in the postbiblical tradition, especially around the fourth century, the attention was turned to biologism [limited to the biological point of view], making physical details seem an important theological issue. Even today biologism is a significant problem. But in reaction to the denigration of sexuality, and in order to promote the wider value of “integrity” and insure [sic] women “do not live `a derivative’ life as mother, daughter, spouse,” [Catherina?[26]] Halkes wants a definition of virginity that would not include sexual abstinence.
Biologism is one of the factors causing suffering in the Holy Family of the Faithful.
[1]
the Catholic Biblical
Quarterly, Vol.
62, No. 3 (July 2000) 483.
[2]
the Catholic Biblical
Quarterly, Vol.
68, No. 3 (July 2006) 400.
[3]
the Catholic Biblical
Quarterly, Vol.
64, No. 4 (October 2002) 718.
[4]
Cassell’s Latin Dictionary:
Latin-English and English-Latin, revised by J. R. V. Marchant, M.A. and Joseph F. Charles, B.A. (New
York: Funk & Wagnalls Company, 1952) 82, 452.
[5] the Catholic Biblical
Quarterly,
Vol. 70, No. 1 (July 2008) 31, 36, 37, 38.
[6]
the Catholic Biblical
Quarterly, Vol.
45, No. 2 (July 1983) 195-200.
[7] the Catholic Biblical
Quarterly,
Vol. 65, No. 2 (July 2003) 229.
[8]
the Catholic Biblical
Quarterly, Vol.
64, No. 1 (January
2002:) 112.
[9] the Catholic Biblical Quarterly, Vol. 40, No. 1 (July 1978) 58-59, 63.
[10]
the Catholic Biblical
Quarterly, Vol.
54, No. 4 (July 1992) 690.
[11]
the Catholic Biblical
Quarterly, Vol.
66, No. 3 (July 2004) 421.
[12]
the Catholic Biblical
Quarterly, Vol.
66, No. 3 (July 2004) 429.
[13]
the Catholic Biblical
Quarterly, Vol.
39, No. 1 (July 1977) 66.
[14]
[16] the
Catholic Biblical Quarterly, Vol. 42,
No. 1 (July 1980) 52-72, fn 26 .
[17]
the Catholic Biblical
Quarterly, Vol.
62, No. 3 (July 2000) 453.
[18] the Catholic Biblical
Quarterly,
Vol. 68, No. 3 (July 2006) 548.
[19] the Catholic Biblical Quarterly, Vol. 68, No. 3 (July 2006) 469, 474.
[20] the Catholic Biblical
Quarterly,
Vol. 55, No. 3 (July 1993) 465.
[21]
the Catholic Biblical
Quarterly, Vol.
58, No. 2 (July 1996) 268, 274
[22]
the Catholic Biblical
Quarterly, Vol.
25, No. 3 (July 1963)
251-261.
[23]
the Catholic Biblical
Quarterly, Vol.
70, No. 3 (July 2008) 622.
[24]
the Catholic Biblical
Quarterly, Vol.
70, No. 1 (July 2008) 150.
[25] Theological Studies, Vol. 66, No. 3 (September 2005) 539.