One of the difficulties with the readings for this Sunday is that they lend themselves so well to the problem of the homeless, that there is a danger of overemphasis. These readings are about love of neighbor. Like it or not, the homeless are our neighbors, thus, my focus is on them this Sunday.
Kerr then suggests something to do. “There is a fundamental question that is rarely asked due to our failure to critically examine the reality behind the growing number of people without homes. Who benefits from institutionalized homelessness?” Kerr begins by focusing on companies offering jobs for temporary workers, but then goes on to include “banks, developers, and contractors interested in building luxury townhouses in former working-class residential neighborhoods.” As can be drawn from the readings, the question “Who benefits from institutionalized homelessness?” merits attention.
“… as time passed and sociopolitical circumstances shifted, the [Seventh Century BC Deuteronomic] school [before the Babylonian Exile] understood even the same text differently (see Person’s study of Deut 30:1014 as read against two different social, political, and ideological settings).” This change of ancient Deuteronomic perspective from family morality to the authority of the state, back to family morality, legitimates considering a change in modern perspective in the relationship between homelessness and capitalism.
Timeframe of Deuteronomic History
Periods of Israelite History: 1250-560 BC
1250-1020 Tribal Period or Period of Judges
922- 586 Divided Kingdom
922- 722/1 Northern Kingdom (
Destroyed by Assyrians
Ten lost tribes
922- 587/6 Southern Kingdom (
Destroyed by Babylonians
Destruction marks beginning of Exilic Period
I am contradicting myself, first citing a source that the Deuteronomic school belongs in the Seventh Century B.C., then citing a more complete source in 550 B.C., the Sixth Century, B.C. My reason for not unscrambling the dichotomy is that I am uncomfortable as to why the sources differ. Both make some sense to me. After all what is a century among friends when tracking back over 2500 years?
Deuteronomy 30:1-10 is tricky. Mullen writes, “Barker argues that 30:1-10 is
best understood as an expression of Deuteronomy’s expectation of
C. Clifton Black, review of
This review brings out two important
problems. One is that there are tensions
within the Pentateuch. Pentateuch is a Christian era term for
the first five books of the Bible: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and
Another problem is that earlier
scholarship in Deuteronomy held an anti-Jewish bias, expressed by E. P.
Sanders, in the words of
I am not sure of the answer Lambert gives to his question, but I think the answer is “No.” Lambert writes, “… practice was concerned to evoke and construct an experience of externally driven, divine intervention, not an internally driven process of turning away from sin.” The function of Twentieth Century prayer, then, can be to direct and redirect internal attitudes toward such problems as homelessness.
Responsorial Psalm 1: Psalm 69 14, 17, 30-31, 33-34, 36, 37
The Psalter has a prophetic rather than a legal, bias, which is expressed in Psalm 69. In verse 36a, For God will save Zion implies prophetic transformation.
This is a psalm of sickness, though not used in Care for the Sick. Care for the Sick does use Luke 10:25-37, the Gospel reading for this Sunday, about the Good Samaritan. Firth asserts that the governing authorities were always assumed to be the ordinary path of redress to violence. This same path is appropriate for the Faithful in their concern for the homeless.
Stanley B. Marrow, “Kosmos in
There is no Hebrew word for cosmos. Instead, the Hebrew uses heaven and earth.
Verses 2-14a is a lament; verses 14b-30, a petition; and verses 31-37 a declaration of divine praise. This Lectionary reading uses verses 4, 17, 30 and 34.
Responsorial Psalm: 1. Psalm 69:14, 17, 30-31, 33-34, 36, 37 (cf. 33) or 2. Psalm 19 8, 9, 10, 11
Colossians is a
More simply, In Colossians 1:16 ff, St. Paul establishes
The following is from the
“Encyclical Letter: Deus Caritas Est
of the Supreme Pontiff Benedict XVI to the Bishops Priests and Deacons Men and
Women Religious and All the Lay Faithful on Christian Love.”
Paragraph 15 draws from
THE UNITY OF LOVE
Jesus Christ—the incarnate love of God
12. … treated at Reading 056B, Sixth Sunday of Easter 060521.
we need to consider yet another aspect: this
sacramental “mysticism” is social in character, for in sacramental communion I
become one with the Lord, like all the other communicants. As Saint
15. This principle is the starting-point for understanding the great parables of Jesus. The rich man (cf. Lk 16:19-31) begs from his place of torment that his brothers be informed about what happens to those who simply ignore the poor man in need. Jesus takes up this cry for help as a warning to help us return to the right path. The parable of the Good Samaritan (cf. Lk 10:25-37) offers two particularly important clarifications. Until that time, the concept of “neighbor” was understood as referring essentially to one’s countrymen and to foreigners who had settled in the land of Israel; in other words, to the closely-knit community of a single country or people. [The Masonic Charges of the African American Prince Hall include the Good Samaritan.] This limit is now abolished. Anyone [without distinction between the deserving and undeserving poor] who needs me, and whom I can help, is my neighbor. The concept of “neighbor” is now universalized, yet it remains concrete. Despite being extended to all mankind [sic ], it is not reduced to a generic, abstract and undemanding imprecision of love, but calls for my own practical commitment here and now. The Church has the duty to interpret ever anew this relationship between near and far with regard to the actual daily life of her members. Lastly, we should especially mention the great parable of the Last Judgment (cf. Mt 25:31-46), in which love becomes the criterion for the definitive decision about a human life’s worth or lack thereof. Jesus identifies himself with those in need, with the hungry, the thirsty, the stranger, the naked, the sick, and those in prison. “As you did it to one of the least of these my brethren, you did it to me” (Mt 25:40). Love of God and love of neighbor have become one: in the least of the brethren, we find Jesus himself, and in Jesus, we find God.
Love of God and love of neighbor
16. Having reflected on the nature of love and its meaning in biblical faith, we are left with two questions concerning our own attitude: can we love God without seeing him? And can love be commanded? Against the double commandment of love, these questions raise a double objection. No one has ever seen God, so how could we love him? Moreover, love cannot be commanded; it is ultimately a feeling that is either there or not, nor can it be produced by the will. Scripture seems to reinforce the first objection when it states: “If anyone says, `I love God,’ and hates his brother, he is a liar; for he who does not love his brother whom he has seen, cannot love God whom he has not seen” (Jn 4:20). But this text hardly excludes the love of God as something impossible. On the contrary, the whole context of the passage quoted from the First Letter of John shows that such love is explicitly demanded. The unbreakable bond between love of God and love of neighbor is emphasized. One is so closely connected to the other that to say that we love God becomes a lie if we are closed to our neighbor or hate him altogether. Saint John’s words should rather be interpreted to mean that love of neighbor is a path that leads to the encounter with God, and that closing our eyes to our neighbor also blinds us to God.
Warren Carter, “Getting Martha out of the Kitchen: Luke 10:38-42 [sic] Again”
Noel elaborates on how
Blomberg writes, “As for
example-stories, the criteria by which they were first identified were never
ones of form, but of perceived function, and studies of individual parables
usually assigned to this category (Luke 10:29-37; 12:16-21; 16:19-31; 18:9-14)
have increasingly questioned their exemplary nature.” This means that even though
For more on sources see the Appendix file. Personal Notes are on the web site at www.western-civilization.com/CBQ/Personal%20Notes.
 the Catholic Biblical Quarterly, Vol. 66, No. 3 (July 204) 456-458.
 http://pirate.shu.edu/~carterch/DeuteronomicHistory/sld005.htm 070625.
 the Catholic Biblical Quarterly, Vol. 69, No. 1 (January 2007) 109.
 the Catholic Biblical Quarterly, Vol. 67, No. 4 (October 2005) 717.
 the Catholic Biblical Quarterly, Vol. 68, No. 3 (July 2006) 560.
 the Catholic Biblical Quarterly, Vol. 68, No. 4 (October 2006) 631-649.
International Commission on English in the Liturgy: A Joint Commission of Catholic Bishops’ Conferences, The Roman
Ritual: Revised by Decree of the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council and
Published by Authority of Pope
 the Catholic Biblical Quarterly, Vol. 64, No. 1 (2002) 93.
 the Catholic Biblical Quarterly, Vol. 66, No. 4 (October 2006) 584.
 Maximilian Zerwick, S.J., English Edition adapted from the Fourth Latin Edition by Joseph Smith, S.J., Scripta Pontificii Instituti Biblico—114—Biblical Greek (Roma: Editrice Pontificio Istituto Biblico, 1994) 97.
 the Catholic Biblical Quarterly, Vol. 58, No. 2 (April 1996) 267, 268, 276.
 the Catholic Biblical Quarterly, Vol. 68, No. 2 (April 2006) 343, 344.
 the Catholic Biblical Quarterly, Vol. 53, No. 1 (October 1991) 55, 57, 67.