Category: weekly commentaries

June 27, 2017 Sunday Commentary, weekly commentaries Post a Comment

13th sunday of the year

Feast of Saints Peter and Paul

13th Sunday in Ordinary Time (July 02, 2017)

Feast of Saints Peter and Paul

Acts 12:1-11; Psalm 34:2-9; 2 Tim 4:6-8, 17-18; Matt 16:13-19

Download

Theme: “I sought the LORD, and he answered me, and delivered me. . .”

The thirteenth Sunday in Ordinary Time gives way this year to the feast of Saints Peter and Paul with a set of readings geared to help us reflect on the significance of these two central figures from the Christian story. In the first reading we are treated to the delightful story of Peter’s miraculous release from prison; while the reading from the pseudonymous Second Letter to Timothy (probably written by a member of the Pauline community some time after Paul’s death) presents Paul speaking of his impending death: “I am already being poured out as a libation, and the time of my departure has come” (2 Tim. 4:6).

 

Both readings speak of the protagonist being “rescued”. In Acts, Peter “came to himself and said, ‘Now I am sure that the Lord has sent his angel and rescued me. . . .’” (Acts 12:11). Second Timothy presents Paul as if anticipating his second trial in Rome after having been “rescued from the lion’s mouth” (2 Tim 4:17) at his first defense. Paul now understands his ‘rescue’ to be his being taken up into God’s heavenly kingdom, “The Lord will rescue me from every evil attack and save me for his heavenly kingdom” (v 18; see Fiore).

 

Both Peter and Paul could surely join the psalmist’s joyful proclamation in today’s Responsorial Psalm: “I sought the LORD, and he answered me, and delivered me from all my fears. . . . This poor soul cried, and was heard by the Lord, and was saved from every trouble” (Psalm 34:4, 6).

 

We presume that, as observant Jews, both Peter and Paul knew the Torah story by heart and, therefore, in response to the question of the Gospel “Who do you say I am?” would be able to situate Christ Jesus within the continuity of that story. James Sanders says it well: “It was Paul’s conviction that if one read the Torah story, emphasizing it as a story of God’s works of salvation and righteousness for ancient Israel, then one could not escape seeing that God had wrought another salvation, and committed another righteousness, in Christ just like the ones of old. . . . If you really know the Torah and know what righteousness of God is, then you know that Christ is precisely that kind of act of God” (Sanders 48, 51).

 

For Reflection and Discussion: Read Pierre Lenhardt’s comment: “Jesus Christ is the unlimited Word which, out of love, limited or ‘abbreviated’ itself. According to all the pharisaic masters, God limited Himself in giving His Torah to Israel ‘in human language’. . . . God went even further, God limited Himself in speaking, in the Torah, ‘according to human language’” along with the following comment of James A. Sanders: “For Judaism, Torah became the living Talmud; for Christianity, Torah became the living Christ (Rom 10:4). But Torah can finally never be lost or absorbed in the one or the other. Whatever else Christ was for the early church he was the Torah incarnate (Jer 31:31-34; Rom 10:4). . . . And Torah, in that basic sense, is the single foundation of both church and synagogue, two denominations in one Israel of God (Gal 6:15). . . . The Bible, of whichever canon, has as its basic core a Torah, a paradigm on how to affirm the oneness and integrity of God in ever-challenging circumstances, to view humanity whole and God as One, to learn, tough as it may be, that God is not Christian, God is not Jewish, God is not Muslim. God is God” (Sanders, 2005, 140-41).

 

Do these comments of Pierre Lenhardt and James Sanders inspire you to increase your efforts as a Bat Kol alum to take even more seriously the task to reflect on and to foster the notion of “two denominations in one Israel of God?”

 

Bibliography: B. Fiore, S.J., The Pastoral Epistles (Liturgical Press, 2007); D. J. Harrington, The Gospel of Matthew (Liturgical Press, 1991); P. Lenhardt, “The Importance of Jewish Sources for a Christian” (Bat Kol, 2007); J. A. Sanders, From Sacred Story to Sacred Text (Fortress Press, 1987); idem, Torah and Canon. Second Edition (Cascade Books, 2005).

 

 

 

This week’s Sunday Gospel Commentary was prepared by

Helen R. Graham, M.M., PhD. Bat Kol Alumna 2002, 2005, 2006, 2009.
Email address: helengraham522@gmail.com

[Copyright © 2017]

……………………………………………………………………………………………………

PLEASE NOTE: The weekly Parashah commentaries represent the research and creative thought of their authors, and are meant to stimulate deeper thinking about the meaning of the Scriptures. While they draw upon the study methods and sources employed by the Bat Kol Institute, the views and conclusions expressed in these commentaries are solely those of their authors, and do not necessarily represent the views of Bat Kol. The commentaries, along with all materials published on the Bat Kol website, are copyrighted by the writers, and are made available for personal and group study, and local church purposes. Permission needed for other purposes. Questions, comments and feedback are always welcome.

………………………………………………………………………………………………

Bat Kol Institute for Jewish Studies, Jerusalem

1983-2017

“Christians Studying the Bible within its Jewish milieu, using Jewish Sources.”

Website: www.batkol.info; Parashah Admin: gill@batkol.info

 

Parashah Commentary, weekly commentaries Post a Comment

Parashat Chukat

Parashat Chukat

Shabbat Table Talk

Parashat Chukat– Erev Shabbat 30 June 2017

Week of 25 June – 01 July

Torah portion: Numbers 19:1- 22:1 Haftarah: Judges 11:1-33

Download

It is now the 40th year of wandering in the desert and the generation that left Egypt has died out. The people are again murmuring at Meribah (20:1-29), the first occasion was reported in Exodus 17:1-7. It could be two versions of the same story, but it could also be a renewed complaint against the leaders who seemed to keep Israel forever in the wilderness. The focus in this account is more on the failure of leadership. The brevity of this version raises serious questions about the sin Moses committed.

 

The Israelites, journeying in the desert, thirsting for water, blame Moses and Aaron for their predicament. God instructs Moses to take his staff, speak to the rock and draw water from it. Moses strikes the rock and water flows. He and Aaron are then informed that because they did not “trust and sanctify” God (20:12), they will not lead the people into the Promised Land. What precisely did they do to merit so harsh a punishment? This question has troubled commentators over the centuries. Leibowitz cites many different explanations of Moses’ sin (see pgs 236-247).

 

Ibn Ezra sees Moses’ fault not in his actions at the rock nor any deviation from the Divine instruction, but in his undignified reaction to the people’s grumblings (Leibowitz 242). God responds with compassion to the Israelites’ complaints that both they and their cattle will die of thirst. God’s instruction to Moses reveals that dual concern, Moses is to bring forth water from the rock and provide for “the community and their cattle” (v.8), The Torah makes the point of recounting that both “the community and their cattle drank” (v.11). At the conclusion of the account the Israelites ‘contended with God’ (v.13). God heard their quarrel in the context of their fear of dying of thirst and responded accordingly. Moses, however, lost sight of what the people needed and why they were complaining and addressed them as “rebels.”

 

According to many commentators, including Maimonides (Introduction to Pirke Avot, Chap.4), Moses’ sin was his outburst of anger in front of the whole assembly berating the people and calling them “rebels” (v.10) that is both disrespectful and demeaning. The Psalmist states, “They so embittered his spirit that rash words crossed his lips” (Ps 106:33). This is also the explanation given by the Sages in the Midrash (Bamidbar Rabbah 19:10; Devarim Rabbah 2:2, 2:8). “Because of one utterance that Moses made he was unable to enter the Land.” Anger was considered to be self-indulgent and was strongly condemned by the rabbis of the Talmud and major Jewish thinkers (Ben David p.274).

 

What likely made this situation even more difficult for Moses is that he suddenly had less support. The narrative opens with the death of Miriam (20:1) Moses’ relative and partner in leading the people out of Egypt. “I sent before you, Moses, Aaron and Miriam” (Micah 6:4). Miriam was the feminine voice in the leadership and now she is no longer there to nurture Moses in times of difficulty. What is telling is that the word Moses uses when he calls the people ‘rebels’ (”morim”) is spelt the same way as Miriam. Perhaps the Torah is hinting at Moses’ distress at the death of his sister.

 

Reflection and Discussion: 1. Why do you think that the Torah never disclosed the actual reason for Moses’ punishment? 2.The Mishnah of Pirke Avot (5:11) cites four types of personalities, i. Easy to become angry and easy to be pacified. ii. Hard to become angry and hard to be pacified. iii. Hard to become angry and easy to be pacified. iv. Easy to become angry and hard to be pacified. Which type are you? Do you know anyone who fits the third category?

 

Bibliography: Ben David, Around the Shabbat Table (New Jersey 2000); Leibowitz Studies in Bamidbar/Numbers (Maor Wallach Press, Israel); Plaut, The Torah, Modern Commentary (UAHC New York 1981); Rabbi Uziel Weingarten 2002; The African Bible (Paulines Pub. Kenya)

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

This week’s teaching commentary was prepared by

Marie André Mitchell BA. MTh Johannesburg, South Africa

Bat Kol Alum 2001-2, 04, 06, 08, 09, 10, 11, 15

Email: marieandre@telkomsa.net

[Copyright © 2017]

…………………………………………………………………………………………………….

PLEASE NOTE: The weekly Parashah commentaries represent the research and creative thought of their authors, and are meant to stimulate deeper thinking about the meaning of the Scriptures. While they draw upon the study methods and sources employed by the Bat Kol Institute, the views and conclusions expressed in these commentaries are solely those of their authors, and do not necessarily represent the views of Bat Kol. The commentaries, along with all materials published on the Bat Kol website, are copyrighted by the writers, and are made available for personal and group study, and local church purposes. Permission needed for other purposes. Questions, comments and feedback are always welcome.

……………………………………………………………………………………………….

Bat Kol Institute, Jerusalem

1983-2017

“Christians Studying the Bible within its Jewish milieu, using Jewish Sources.”

Website: www.batkol.info; Parashah Admin: gill@batkol.info

June 20, 2017 Sunday Commentary, weekly commentaries Post a Comment

12th Sunday of the Year

12th Sunday of the Year

12th Sunday of the Year – A (25 June 2017)

Jeremiah 20:10-13, Psalm 68, Romans 5:12-15, Matthew 10:26-33

Download

Theme: ‘The Lord listens’ … ‘in your great love, answer me, O God.’ (Ps. 68)

In our first reading, Jeremiah is having a hard time. His message, which challenges his listeners to ‘change your lives and stop doing evil’ (25:5-6), doesn’t go down well. Not surprising when others tell a soothing message that all will be well, shades of the struggle between ‘fake news’ and truth that we experience today. One of those voices that Jeremiah rails against is that of the priest, Pashur, to whom Jeremiah said in 20:3, ‘The Lord has named you not Pashur but “Terror-all-around”. In our reading, in 20:10 we have a play on this new name as, despite Pashur’s soothing message, terror is being acted out at many levels. Jerusalem is under threat from outside forces, an undermining threat comes from those who give a ‘false’ message that all will be well (Jer. 20:6), and the people reinforce the intensity of the threat by listening to the false messages even to the point of threatening Jeremiah who is warning them of the dangers involved.

 

Jeremiah knows that, as inadequate as he feels to speak out against all this ‘terror’ that he is noticing and experiencing, his voice is not his own, it comes from God (Jer. 1:4-10). Our reading shows his clarity that in expressing God’s voice, he must also root himself in its source, for it is God who ‘has delivered the life of the needy from the hands of evildoers’ (20:13), it is God who sees ‘the heart and the mind’ (20:12).

 

In the Gospel reading the theme of threat continues. Jesus says, ‘do not be afraid’. His attention is on the inner world of the ‘soul’ and he provides ‘a warning to be faithful despite persecution’ (The Jewish Annotated New Testament).

 

‘Terror’ is familiar in our world today too. It can be difficult to hear our own inner voice or God’s. In difficult times, when we experience ‘terror’ at the various levels highlighted above, it can force us to stop and listen in a new way. A difficult task perhaps when the ‘terrors all around’ potentially present us with a mirror in which we might see our own inner world and the terrors which may lurk therein. Terror ‘uncovers’ something ‘hidden’ and ‘proclaims’ something ‘dark’. ‘Do not be afraid’, however, for we are told that there will be movement and what is covered now will be uncovered, what is hidden will become clear, what is whispered in the dark will be proclaimed in the daylight. Jesus’ message, just like Jeremiah’s, contains within itself the movement it anticipates. Where we move to, however, depends on our willingness to be aware of ‘terror’, at all its levels, and whose voice we choose to listen to in response to it.

 

These external and internal ‘terrors’ and the shadows they caste, remind me of Proverbs 20:27, ‘The human soul is the lamp of the Lord, searching every inmost part.’ To ensure the light of this lamp remains kindled, for ourselves and others, requires a capacity to hear and remain faithful to God as Jeremiah did and to believe Jesus’ words, ‘no need to be afraid’. Their words invite us to face the ‘terror all around’ and the terror within ourselves. They support us to ‘uncover’ what is ‘hidden’, to ‘proclaim’ in the ‘light’ rather than ‘whisper’ in the ‘dark.’ They move us from ‘fake news’ to truth and through the darkness that has been uncovered, sometimes by terror, further into our identity as ‘the lamp of the Lord.’

 

For Reflection and Discussion: 1 To whom do I listen and how does this influence my choices? 2 Where is the source of my own voice? 3 What stops me from listening and remaining faithful to the voice of God in my life at all times?

 

Bibliography: The Jewish Annotated NT by Amy-Jill Levine & Marc Zvi Brettler (eds)

 

This week’s Sunday Gospel Commentary was prepared by

Thérèse Fitzgerald nds, Bat Kol Alumni 2015
Email address: theresefitzgerald7@gmail.com

[Copyright © 2017]

…………………………………………………………………

PLEASE NOTE: The weekly Gospel commentaries represent the research and creative thought of their authors, and are meant to stimulate deeper thinking about the meaning of the Sunday Scriptures. While they draw upon the study methods and sources employed by the Bat Kol Institute, the views and conclusions expressed in these commentaries are solely those of their authors, and do not necessarily represent the views of Bat Kol. Questions, comments and feedback are always welcome

……………………………………………………………….

Bat Kol Institute for Jewish Studies, Jerusalem

1983-2017

“Christians Studying the Bible within its Jewish milieu, using Jewish Sources.”

gill@batkol.info Website: www.batkol.info

Parashah Commentary, weekly commentaries Post a Comment

Parashat Korach

Parashat Korach

Shabbat Table Talk

Parashat Korach – Erev Shabbat June 23, 2017

Week of June 18-24

Torah portion: Num. 16:1-18:32 Haftarah: I Sam. 11:14-12:22

Moses continues to lead the people bamidbar (in the desert) between Egypt and the Promised Land. He has already endured a series of revolts, first by Miriam and Aaron, then the “scouts,” then an attack on the Amalakites not sanctioned by God. Now he and Aaron face another revolt, this one instigated by their cousin, Korah, a Levite, and by Dathan and Abiram, sons of Reuben. In his accusations against Moses and Aaron, Korah has enlisted the support of two hundred and fifty prominent leaders of the community.

 

What to make of this most serious of all revolts? For this I draw on a workshop given in 2004 in Winnipeg by Brother Jack Driscoll, much loved director of Bat Kol, entitled Israelites in the Wilderness: Revolt and Reform. Br. Jack opened by pointing us towards identifying the characters. “Remember…names can be one of the narrator’s clues. Who are these people?” So we focused on the geneaology of Korah and found that Korah’s father Izhar was the second son of Kohath after Amram, Moses and Aaron’s father. Yet it was Elizaphan, the son of Uzziel, Kohath’s fourth son, who was named prince of the family (Num 18:2). This perceived injustice embittered Korah and led him to confront and challenge Moses as God’s chosen leader and Aaron’s position as priest, as opposed to his lesser position as Levite. At this point, Korah along with Dathan and Abiram “took” two hundred and fifty chieftains of the community to confront Moses and Aaron. Using other scriptural references to “took,” Br. Jack expanded this to mean, “He drew their hearts with persuasive words.”

 

Here then is their accusation against Moses and Aaron: “Too much is yours! Indeed, the entire community, the entirety of them, are holy, and in their midst is YHWH. Why then do you exalt yourselves over the assembly of YHWH?” (Num.16: 3). This is a rather compelling argument, something that resonates into today! After all, are we not all “a royal priesthood, a holy nation” (Ex.19: 6)? Anyone familiar with Br. Jack’s passion for archaeology of the Word would recognize his next instruction: Find out where this intersects with your own life!

 

In the Women’s Commentary, R. Frishman raises the question: Is this merely a power struggle? Or is this also a struggle with personal worth, with understanding one’s role and purpose in life…How easily Korah twists and challenges the reputation of Moses and Aaron, ascribing his own ambition to them. How easily the people listen and are fooled. How little Korah understands the true responsibility and burden of authority and power that rest on Moses and Aaron.

 

Turning to Fox (p. 734) we read: “Martin Buber points out that the rebels’ contention that “the entire community are holy” is in reality a most dangerous claim. Holiness in the Bible is a trait that can be acquired, even transmitted to an extent, but it is not absolutely innate, except in the case of God; and the Torah sees as one of its major goals developing the means whereby people can, with holy intent and preparation, properly serve the Holy. The fate of the rebels therefore bespeaks the seriousness of the threat they pose, and is unique in the Bible.”

 

We return to the workshop and Br. Jack. There is a great controversy at stake here and Br. Jack introduces a portion from Mishnah Avot 5:17 to expand on it. The Mishnah reads: “Every controversy which is for the sake of heaven will in the end endure; but one which is not for the sake of heaven will not endure in the end. A controversy for the sake of heaven? Such was the controversy of Hillel and Shammai and one, which was not for the sake of heaven? Such was the controversy of Korah and all his company.” (Hillel and Shammai were founders of two different schools of Phariseeism; the first accepted the oral tradition, the other only the written tradition.) The Mishnah continues: “For the sake of heaven: that is, to establish truth…and not out of a passion for lording it over others or building up a reputation or self-glorification at the expense of others Rabbi Jonah adds: “But controversy “which is not for the sake of Heaven, will not endure in the end”; on the contrary, the disputants will perish in the very first controversy, as in the instance of Korah.” And such is indeed what happened, as God put to death over fourteen thousand Israelites to end the revolt and restore Moses and Aaron’s standing as his chosen leaders in the eyes of the whole community.

 

Question and Discussion: How aware am I of debate/ controversy for the sake of heaven and not for the sake of heaven, both within myself and in the world in which I am involved?

 

Bibliography: Fox Five Books of the Bible (Schocken Press NY 1995; The Torah, A Modern Commentary; Modern Commentary (UAHC New York 1981); Frishman, Women’s Torah Commentary; Jack Driscoll. Israelites in the Wilderness:

 

This week’s teaching commentary was prepared by

Winn Leslie, Winnipeg, Canada, Bat Kol Alumna 2001, 2007 and 2015

E-mail: w.leslie@shaw.ca

[Copyright © 2017]

………………………………………………………………………………

PLEASE NOTE: The weekly Parashah commentaries represent the research and creative thought of their authors, and are meant to stimulate deeper thinking about the meaning of the Scriptures. While they draw upon the study methods and sources employed by the Bat Kol Institute, the views and conclusions expressed in these commentaries are solely those of their authors, and do not necessarily represent the views of Bat Kol. The commentaries, along with all materials published on the Bat Kol website, are copyrighted by the writers, and are made available for personal and group study, and local church purposes. Permission needed for other purposes. Questions, comments and feedback are always welcome.

……………………………………………………………………………………

Bat Kol Institute for Jewish Studies, Jerusalem

1983-2017

“Christians Studying the Bible within its Jewish milieu, using Jewish Sources.”

Website: www.batkol.info; Parashah Admin: gill@batkol.info