Patrick Comerford
We are continuing in Ordinary Time in the Church Calendar and tomorrow is the Fifteenth Sunday after Trinity (Trinity XV, 8 September 2024).
Before today begins, I am taking some quiet time this morning to give thanks, for reflection, prayer and reading in these ways:
1, today’s Gospel reading;
2, a reflection on the Gospel reading;
3, a prayer from the USPG prayer diary;
4, the Collects and Post-Communion prayer of the day.
Luke 6: 1-5 (NRSVA):
6 One sabbath while Jesus was going through the cornfields, his disciples plucked some heads of grain, rubbed them in their hands, and ate them. 2 But some of the Pharisees said, ‘Why are you doing what is not lawful on the sabbath?’ 3 Jesus answered, ‘Have you not read what David did when he and his companions were hungry? 4 He entered the house of God and took and ate the bread of the Presence, which it is not lawful for any but the priests to eat, and gave some to his companions?’ 5 Then he said to them, ‘The Son of Man is lord of the sabbath.’
Today’s Reflection:
There are two minor details that continue to puzzle me about this morning’s Gospel reading (Luke 6: 1-5).
On this Saturday morning, I am slightly puzzled about the timing or the day when this event takes place. The NRSV and NIV translations refer to ‘one sabbath’, although footnotes explain that other ancient authorities read ‘on the second first sabbath.’ The KJV and similar translations refer to ‘the second sabbath after the first’.
But the KJV is based on the Textus Receptus, and the phrase in question, ἐν σαββάτῳ δευτεροπρώτῳ (en sabbáto deuteropróto) only exists in the Textus Receptus, a later text, and not in the earlier manuscripts or the critical versions. The phrase is omitted by many manuscripts, including the Codex Sinaiticus and the Codex Vaticanus.
In any case, what day did this event occur on?
When was ‘the second first sabbath’ or ‘the second sabbath after the first’?
Is the second sabbath after the first not the third sabbath?
Because the Greek word δευτερόπρωτος (deuteróprotos) is limited to Luke 6: 1, it is not found in all the manuscripts – or in other, contemporary Greek texts – and it is difficult to define and impossible to agree on.
One suggestion is that it refers to the Sabbath following the first day of Passover or Pascha, the Festival of Unleavened Bread festival. Some of the other efforts to provide explanations include:
• the first Sabbath in the second year of a seven-year cycle comprising the period from one Sabbatical year to the other;
• the first Sabbath after the second day of Passover;
• the second Sabbath after the Passover has taken place;
• the first of the seven Sabbaths the people were to ‘count unto’ themselves from ‘the morrow after the sabbath’ until Pentecost (see Leviticus 23: 15);
• the first Sabbath in the Jewish religious calendar of the time – about the middle of March;
• the Sabbath during Shavuot, the Feast of Weeks;
• the first Sabbath in the civil year – about the middle of September;
• the Sabbath for the presentation of the second offering of the first fruits;
• or, simply, some ‘technical expression of the Jewish calendar’ – without asking or explaining what that may be.
Indeed, the term deuteroprotos is an awkward, clunky combination of the words δεύτερος (deuteros, ‘second’) and πρω̑τος (protos, ‘first’). Its use may point to unskilful work and textual emendation on the part of copyists. If so, then it is not necessary to try unravel this conundrum.
The phrase has confounded scholars from as early as the fourth century CE, when Jerome, in a letter to Nepotianus, confesses that he consulted Saint Gregory of Nazianzus, and was unable to determine what the phrase meant:
‘My teacher, Gregory of Nazianzus, when I once asked him to explain Luke’s phrase σάββατον δευτερόπρωτον, that is ‘the second-first Sabbath,’ playfully evaded my request saying: ‘I will tell you about it in church, and there, when all the people applaud me, you will be forced against your will to know what you do not know at all. For, if you alone remain silent, everyone will put you down for a fool’ (Jerome, Letter LII, 2).
I suppose I may simply accept it is not essential that we know the precise meaning of this calendar term. It is more important to get to heart of what this story is about.
The second minor detail that continue to puzzle me about this morning’s Gospel reading is why Luke’s account does not include a peculiar detail in Saint Mark’s version of this event (Mark 2: 23-30).
In Saint Mark’s account, Jesus and his disciples are criticised for ‘harvesting grain’ on the Sabbath. They are simply plucking some heads of grain to munch on as they walk through a grainfield (verse 23). When the disciples are challenged about what they are doing on the Sabbath, Jesus cites an event in I Samuel 21: 1-6, and refers to a time when ‘Abiathar was high priest’.
In that event, David and his men ate the 12 loaves of shewbread from the tabernacle in Nob. David approaches Ahimelech the priest in Nob and asks for food for his men They were on the run from King Saul, but David keeps that fact from Ahimelech. Ahimelech gives David some of the ‘bread of the Presence’ (verse 6) and then, at David’s request, gives him Goliath’s sword, which was being kept in Nob (verses 8-9).
Later, when Saul summons the priests to Gibeah to question them, Ahimelech is the priests’ spokesman (I Samuel 22: 6-14). The passage implies that Ahimelech is the chief priest during the time David fled from Saul. Abiathar fled to join David and served as his priest all through David’s years of wandering and exile. He was appointed high priest after David became king, and he shared the high priesthood with Zadok, Saul’s appointee, until David’s death.
Neither Matthew (Matthew 12: 1-8) nor Luke mention Abiathar. Did Matthew and Luke eliminate the reference to Abiathar, realising there was an error in the original source?
To explain why in Saint Mark’s account Jesus refers Abiathar as the high, several theories are put forward, although each one is equally tortuous and difficult. They include:
• Since Abiathar was the son of Ahimelech, it is possible that both men took part in high priestly duties.
• Abiathar was more closely associated with David than Ahimelech and was a long-time high priest during David’s reign.
• Abiathar, being present in Nob when David visited the tabernacle, is called the ‘high priest’ in anticipation of his future title.
Each explanation is eager to avoid accepting a literal reading of the conflicting or irreconcilable texts. To accept that there is a conflict between the passages means accepting that I Samuel are wrong, that Mark’s text is wrong, or that Jesus has made an historical error.
In addition, this event took place not in ‘the house of God’ (verse 4), for the Temple in Jerusalem had not yet been built, but in ‘the Tent of Meeting’.
It is interesting that the people who are most likely to refuse a literal exegesis of one or both passages are those most likely, in a very contradictory way to demand a very literal exegesis of their own concoction when it comes to their interpretation of passages on, for example, on sexuality. Is it any coincidence that these self-styled ‘conservative evangelicals’ are also those most likely to reject a literal exegesis of the Eucharistic passages in the New Testament.
Both Jesus and the Pharisees regard the decision to provide the show bread as righteous by both Jesus and the Pharisees.
The important points in this morning’s reading are not in the debate over the day on which the events took place, nor are they to be found in debating who knew who was once the high priest and when.
The important points in this morning’s reading are that the Sabbath is most sacred when it is about God and about people rather than about the minutiae of interpreting rules and regulations. And one of the most important emphases in Jesus’ ministry is to meet feed the hungry, the physically hungry with bread, and the spiritually hungry with him as the true Bread of Presence, the Bread of Life.
Today’s Prayers (Saturday 7 September 2024):
The theme this week in ‘Pray With the World Church,’ the Prayer Diary of the Anglican mission agency USPG (United Society Partners in the Gospel), has been ‘To Hope and Act with Creation.’ This theme was introduced last Sunday with a reflection on Creationtide.
The USPG Prayer Diary today (Saturday 7 September 2024) invites us to pray, reflecting on these words:
For the creation waits with eager longing for the revealing of the children of God (Romans 8: 19).
The Collect:
Almighty God,
whose only Son has opened for us
a new and living way into your presence:
give us pure hearts and steadfast wills
to worship you in spirit and in truth;
through Jesus Christ your Son our Lord,
who is alive and reigns with you,
in the unity of the Holy Spirit,
one God, now and for ever.
The Post Communion Prayer:
Lord God, the source of truth and love,
keep us faithful to the apostles’ teaching and fellowship,
united in prayer and the breaking of bread,
and one in joy and simplicity of heart,
in Jesus Christ our Lord.
Additional Collect:
Merciful God,
your Son came to save us
and bore our sins on the cross:
may we trust in your mercy
and know your love,
rejoicing in the righteousness
that is ours through Jesus Christ our Lord.
Collect on the Eve of Trinity XV:
God, who in generous mercy sent the Holy Spirit
upon your Church in the burning fire of your love:
grant that your people may be fervent
in the fellowship of the gospel
that, always abiding in you,
they may be found steadfast in faith and active in service;
through Jesus Christ your Son our Lord,
who is alive and reigns with you,
in the unity of the Holy Spirit,
one God, now and for ever.
Yesterday’s reflection
Continued tomorrow
Scripture quotations are from the New Revised Standard Version Bible: Anglicised Edition copyright © 1989, 1995, National Council of the Churches of Christ in the United States of America. Used by permission. All rights reserved worldwide. http://nrsvbibles.org
No comments:
Post a Comment