First Reading:                    2 Samuel 12:7-10, 13

Responsorial Psalm:          Psalm 32:1-2, 5, 7, 11 (cf. 5c)

Second Reading:               Galatians 2:16, 19-21

Alleluia:                             1 John 4:10b

Gospel:                             Luke 7:36—8:3



The readings for this Sunday involve the sexual sins of David.  David sinned against Uriah by having a relationship with Bathsheba.  Bathsheba, however, was a grandmother of Jesus.  She finagled David into passing on his throne to their son, David.  Then Bathsheba maneuvered Solomon into eliminating his rivals.  Bathsheba was more than a poor, battered widow.  To keep her power, she successfully manipulated her environment.

Just as the Faithful at the time of David involved themselves with morally correct sexuality, so do the Faithful today find themselves in the throes of sexual controversy.  The matter is not only the cover-up of priestly sexual abuse of the Faithful; it is also extends to the cover-up of episcopal sexual abuse of the Faithful.  When the episcopate pretends that there is not room for reasonable discussion about when life begins, the episcopate abuses the Faithful sexually.  This is especially true when the episcopate claims its right to teach, even when what it teaches is both less than reasonable and unconvincingly manipulative, designed to keep their power.


The following paragraph from the National Catholic Reporter lays out some of the episcopal arrogance the Faithful are forced to confront.


The difference between the Catholic definition of abortion (any destruction of a fertilized human egg) and the American Medical Association’s definition (any destruction of an embryo following its implantation—typically about seven days after fertilization) is a major subtext in the debate over whether Plan B is only contraceptive or also possibly abortifacient in some cases.[1]


Earlier, the NCR explains.


Plan B, the nation’s most widely used emergency contraceptive, works only as a contraceptive and does not cause abortions, according to an article in the January-February issue of Health Progress, the official journal of the Catholic Health Association.


Historically, the organism was considered human at the quickening or about the third month of pregnancy.  The episcopate is dishonest when it pretends that its version of when human life begins is the only reasonable version.  No one pretends that Divine Revelation reveals the exact clock moment when human life begins.



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 material.


2 Samuel 12:7-10, 13

2 Sam 12:7a

Jeremy Schipper, “From Petition to Parable: The Prophet’s Use of Genre in 1 Kings 20:38-42”[2]

Schipper uses 2 Samuel 12:7a to make an unintended point, namely that the Lectionary again uses sloppy scholarship to claim verse 7.  You are the man!  Is left out as the first words of what the Lord said to David.  The Faithful can pray that the next translation benefits from scholarly review before the bishops publish.  You are the man is fundamental to the argument pursued by Schipper.


2 Sam 2:7

John Kessler, "Sexuality and Politics: The Motif of the Displaced Husband in the Books of Samuel”[3]

Kessler outlines his arguments as follows.


  I.      Dramatic Progression in the Narratives of David’s Marriages with



A.       First Samuel 25:  Abigail, Nabal, and David

B.       Second Samuel 3:1-16:  Michal, Paltiel, David

C.       Second Samuel 11—12:  Bathsheba, Uriah, and David



 II.      Broader Theological Reflections

          A.       Sexuality and Politics in Samuel and Kings

          B.       David as a Paradigm of Divine Forbearance


2 Sam 12:7

Irene Nowell, O.S.B., Jesus' Great-Grandmothers: Matthew's Four and More"[4]

Comments above the double line draw from this article.  This article also relies on You are the one, casting the blame on David for what he did to Uriah and Bathsheba.


2 Sam 12:10-12

Paul Lawrence, The IVP Atlas of Bible History[5]

Lawrence unravels the politics involving David and Solomon.


Psalm 32:1-2, 5, 7, 11 (cf. 5c)

Ps 32:1-2 (31:1-2 LXX)

A. Andrew Das, “Paul and Words of Obedience in Second Temple Judaism:  Romans 4:4-5 as a `New Perspective’ Case Study”[6]

Das argues that the Psalm implies that Abraham committed the same types of sins as David and that God saves people despite their sins.


Ps 32:1-5

Celia M. Deutsch, review of Aaron Milavec, Salvation Is from the Jews (John 4:22): Saving Grace in Judaism and Messianic Hope in Christianity[7]

While Deutsch reports that Milavec does not grasp recent scholarship, he also reports that Milavec tries to unscramble the question of why Christianity broke off from Judaism.



Galatians 2:16, 19-21

Gal 2:11-21

Pauline Nigh Hogan, review of John Riches, Galatians through the Centuries[8]

Galatians is fundamental to the Protestant Revolt from domination by the Roman Catholic episcopacy.  Hogan reports that Riches does survey the commentaries through the centuries, from the Patristic Era to the present, with a particular favor to Reformed and Lutheran theologies.


Gal 2:15-16

Robert C. Tannehill, review of Richard I. Pervo, Dating Acts: Between the Evangelists and the Apologists[9]

Pervo argues that Acts was written between 110 and 120.  Tannehill is not entirely convinced by the arguments Pervo proposes.


Gal 2:19-20

Patricia M. McDonald, review of Hendrikus Boers, Christ in the Letters of Paul: In Place of a Christology[10]

Boers argues that Paul did not have a Christology.  Paul experienced Christ in his own life and expected the Faithful to do likewise.  Paul was not particularly engaged with matters of hierarchy, leading to the papacy.  McDonald concludes, “It is a serious attempt at redirecting attention to the specifics of the primary text, as we struggle to understand Paul’s expression of what God has done in and through Christ.”


Gal 2:20

Charles H. Talbert, "Paul, Judaism, and the Revisionists”[11]

Talbert argues,


Paul's authorial audience would have heard a statement like Gal 3:27 ("as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ") as a statement of empowering.  They would have heard Gal 2:20 (about the indwelling Christ's living through believers) in the same way.  To be clothed in Christ means to be transformed by Christ and to be enabled by Christ with Christ's own power.


In other words, the Sisters and the rest of us do not need to rely on the episcopate as the only source of empowerment.


Gal 2:20

Frank J. Matera, "Christ in the Theologies of Paul and John: A Study in the Diverse Unity of New Testament Theology"[12]

Matera explains,


If the Crucified One was truly God’s Son, what was the significance of his death?  In answering this question, Paul learned from, and built upon, the Church’s Kerygmatic [apostolic proclamations of salvation through Jesus Christ] formulas that were already proclaiming the soteriological [salvation] significance of Jesus’ death.  Paul quotes such a formula in … the one who loved “me” and gave himself up for “me” (hyper emou; [sic Greek] Gal 2:20 [used here)].  … Paul argued that God had already justified and reconciled humanity to himself through Christ’s redemptive death on the cross; otherwise, Christ died for nothing (Gal 2:21 [used here]).


Gal 2:20

Thomas D. Stegman, S.J., "Episteusa, dio elalhsa (2 Corinthians 4:13): Paul's Christological Reading of Psalm 115:1a LXX"[13]

Stegman argues that Living the Christ-life does not depend on the episcopacy.  More importantly, Stegman writes, “observe the linkage here between Christ’s love and his active handing over of self.”  This translates into the little favors the Faithful do for one another implicitly in the name of Christ, explicitly in the name of love. 


Gal 2:16, 20

Kenneth Schenck, "2 Corinthians and the PistiV Cristou Debate"[14]

Christ believed in God and so lived his life the way he did.  The Faithful also believe in God and so live their lives the way Christ did, not by believing in Christ, but by believing in God the way Christ did.  The shift is from believing in Christ to believing with the belief of Christ in God, our Father.



Gal 2:20

Bernard O. Ukwuegbu, "Paraenesis, Identity-defining Norms, or Both?  Galatians 5:136:10 in the Light of Social Identity Theory"[15]

Ukwuegbu explains, “It is also possible that Paul linked his understanding of law-fulfilling love with the self-sacrifice of Christ on the cross, a theme he had already established in his claim … `Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law’ …”  In the current sexual-abuse cover-up scandals, that law seems to include the law of the Church, Canon Law.


1 John 4:10b


Luke 7:36—8:3

Different languages see reality differently.  The ancient Greeks used pronouns for emphasis.  Translating this emphasis from the original Greek into English is an object of the highlighting on the last pages of the hard copy, not found on the web site.  The purpose of the highlighting is to transfer the Greek emphasis on personal pronouns into the English translation.  Pronouns highlighted in blue have greater emphasis than in English, but are not as intense as the words marked in red.  Words marked with a vertical line, rather than fully highlighted, indicate places where the English translation lacks a pronoun corresponding to a pronoun in the Greek.

Anyone else wanting one, please ask me at  Thank you.


In verse 36, the Lectionary uses the noun, Jesus, in place of the pronoun.  That is why Jesus is highlighted in blue.


When the Pharisees are thinking to themselves in verses 39 and 49, the meaning is intense.


Luke 7:44

The Lectionary[16] I use repeats When I entered your house, you did not give me water for my feet.  That is a proofing error, because the text used at 8:00 a.m. Sunday Mass June 13, at Our Lady of Mount Carmel Church did not duplicate the line.  At least in my Lectionary that was sloppy scholarship, again.



Luke 7:36-49

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.[17]

The Osterreichische Nationalbibliothek in Vienna has a Sixth-Seventh Century papyrus manuscript with Luke 7:36-45.  The Public Library in Leningrad has a Sixth Century parchment manuscript with Luke 7:39-49.  On page 256, the Alands make reference, which I do not understand, to an exclamation [18]point in a marginal note for one of the standard Greek New Testaments to Luke 7:21.  I mention the reference for anyone coming after me who may have a better understanding of the Alands.


Luke 7:3-50

Charles H. Talbert, review of Hans Jorg Sellner, Das Heil Gottes: Studien zur Soteriologie des lukanischen Doppelwerks[19]

Sellner has his own definition of soteriology as “God’s saving acts.”  The dictionary definition I use is theology dealing with salvation especially as effected by Jesus Christ, dating from 1768.  Talbert likes what Sellner has done, but says more is needed for current interest in how the early church dealt with the time between conversion and death.


Luke 7:36-50

Bogdan G. Bucur, “Exegesis of Biblical Theophanies in Byzantine Hymnography: Rewritten Bible?”[20]

A Ninth century Byzantine nun wrote a hymn using the sinful woman washing the feet of Jesus as expiation for the original sin of Eve.


Luke 7:36-50

Garwood P. Anderson, "Seeking and Saving What Might Have Been Lost: Luke's Restoration of an Enigmatic Parable Tradition"[21]

Luke seems to have taken ambiguity away, perhaps even from the original parables.  In Luke, the parables are polemic when addressed to the religious authorities, but are explanatory of communal and moral interests when addressed to disciples.  The parable about forgiving debtors explains the love of the sinful woman for her God and changes the problem from breaking laws to gratitude and effectively reaching out to sinners.


Luke 7:36-50

Daniel G. Groody, C.S.C., “Crossing the Divide:  Foundations of a Theology of Migration and Refugees”[22]

Groody argues that Jesus “… reached out in particular to those who were marginalized racially (Lk 7:1-10), economically (Lk 1:11-17), religiously (Lk 7:24-35), and morally (Lk 7:36-50 [used here]).”


Luke 7:41

Deborah Furlan Taylor, “The Monetary Crisis in Revelation 13:17 and the Provenance of the book of Revelation”[23]

The Greek for day’s wages is denarius.  The denarius was not the coin of the realm in Palestine at the time of Jesus.  This means that Luke was using a word he expected potential converts to understand, even if Palestinian Jews might not.  The denarius did not predominate throughout the Roman Empire until about 200 A.D.  This archaeological and numismatic fact explains my interest in the original Greek manuscripts.



For more on sources see the Appendix file.  Personal Notes are on the web site at


[1] Jerry Filteau, “Catholic journal says Plan B does not cause abortions:  New finding could mean no moral dilemma in giving drug to rape victims,” National Catholic Reporter: The Independent News Source, Vol. 46, No. 12 (April 2, 2010) page 18, column 1.


[2] the Catholic Biblical Quarterly, Vol. 71, No. 2 (April 2009) 270.


[3] the Catholic Biblical Quarterly, Vol. 62, No. 3 (April 2000) 409 ff.


[4] the Catholic Biblical Quarterly, Vol. 70, No. 1 (April 2008) 8.


[5] Downers Grove, Illinois,  InterVarsity Press, 2006, 67.


[6] the Catholic Biblical Quarterly, Vol. 71, No. 4 (April 2009) 807.


[7] the Catholic Biblical Quarterly, Vol. 70, No. 4 (April 2008) 840.


[8] the Catholic Biblical Quarterly, Vol. 71, No. 2 (April 2009) 420.


[9] the Catholic Biblical Quarterly, Vol. 69, No. 4 (April 2007) 827


[10] the Catholic Biblical Quarterly, Vol. 70, No. 1 (April 2008) 139.


[11] the Catholic Biblical Quarterly, Vol. 63, No. 1 (April 2001) 17 and 21.


[12] Theological Studies, Vol. 67, No. 2 (June 2006) 243, 244.


[13] the Catholic Biblical Quarterly, Vol. 69, No. 4 (April 2007) 730, 743.


[14] the Catholic Biblical Quarterly, Vol. 70, No. 3 (April 2008) 524, 533, 536.


[15] the Catholic Biblical Quarterly, Vol. 70, No. 3 (April 2008) 547, 551.


[16] National Conference of Catholic Bishops, The Roman Missal Restored by Decree of the Second Ecumenical Council of the Vatican and Promulgated by Authority of Pope Paul VI: Lectionary for Mass: For Use in the Dioceses of the United States of America: Second Typical Edition: Volume I: Sundays, Solemnities, Feasts of the Lord and Saints (Collegeville, Minnesota: The Liturgical Press, 1998) 647.


[17] Grand Rapids, Michigan, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1989, 96, 101, 120, 256.


[18] a

[19] the Catholic Biblical Quarterly, Vol. 70, No. 3 (April 2008) 622.


[20] Theological Studies, Vol. 68, No. 1 (January 2007) 101.


[21] the Catholic Biblical Quarterly, Vol. 70, No. 4 (April 2008) 737, 738, 747.


[22] Theological Studies, Vol. 70, No. 3 (September 2009) 657.


[23] the Catholic Biblical Quarterly, Vol. 71, No. 3 (April 2009) 582.