The Lectionary and Scripture Interpretation for Ordinary Time
More information can be found here.
Isaiah 25:6-10a
Isaiah I: shape up or else; exile is coming 1-39
Isaiah II: Book of Consolation, comfort in captivity 40-55 Deutero Isaiah (suffering servant songs)
Isaiah III: going home 56-66 Trito Isaiah; struggle for a new temple and new leadership
Chps 24-27 “The little apocalypse of Isaiah.” One feature of apocalyptic literature is that the author seems to have lost all hope and confidence in human effort in the political-historical realm.
25:1-12 looks forward to the end of evil. This is a scene of permanent victory, abundant feasting and life without end! Liturgical times always blend into and out of one another: we are approaching the end of the liturgical year, the high point of which is the Feast of Christ the King, looking forward to that time when Christ returns to reign over all.
This passage will reference a mountain three times. The reference is to Mt. Zion, which was the place of the giving of the law; the place where God dwells. In Exodus, only Moses went up to the mountain. In the banquet at the end of the time, everyone goes up to the mountain to be in God’s presence. This “eschatological banquet” is a symbol for eternal happiness throughout the prophetic literature such as Isaiah.
Verse 7 references a veil and a web. This is poetry, so the second line here is expanding on and reinforcing the first line. They are basically saying the same thing with different images. The Jewish Study Bible translates “veil” as “mourning veil” and “web” as “covering.” The imagery here is something covering all the dead of the earth. And on the mountain, at the final banquet, death is destroyed and the covering is removed. A secondary interpretation of these images is that they represent all that keeps us from God’s presence.
The rest of the passage speaks of how God will ultimately destroy death. It’s implicit here that this is not a singular event in a human life (one death) but rather a negative force in the world that diminishes life at every level in every way. Again, we see the blending of seasons: Advent tells us to look for Jesus’ coming in the past, in the future, and at every moment of our life. Here we are to look for the destruction of death in a sense in the past (Jesus’ death and resurrection), in the future (when Jesus comes again) and also at every moment (Jesus removing bit by bit everything that diminishes our being able to live out who we are called to be).
What veils keep you from enjoying God’s loving presence?
Recall a time of feasting in your life, maybe a family meal that has special significance or a wedding. Feel the joy of gathering with people you love. Allow yourself a taste for all that Jesus has promised us.
Verse 9 says “On that day it will be said: ‘Indeed, this is our God; we looked to him, and he saved us! This is the LORD to whom we looked; let us rejoice and be glad that he has saved us!’ Recall the times you looked to God for help and God helped you. Express your gratitude to God for these times. How might you share one of these stories with someone else to inspire hope and joy?
Matthew 22:1-14
During Ordinary Time, I’ll cover the Old Testament and then the Gospel readings as a pair so that we can better see the connections.
Chps 19-22 is “Authority and Invitation.” It’s an important section of this gospel and we spend seven Sundays reading in it.
Today’s parable does not exist in Mark; Luke’s version (Luke 14) is similar but emphasizes Luke’s particular themes.
This is another attempt by Matthew to explain why the Gentiles are being offered a place in the kingdom. This parable is an outline of salvation history from a Christian perspective.
This parable tells us that mere invitation and admission is not enough; there must be an appropriate response. This is an important message and one that Matthew has said before. It’s a subtle warning against the arrogance of being “in.”
In verse 1 Jesus is still speaking to the chief priests and elders – the religious authorities.
Verse 2 sets the scene in a wedding feast. This connects us to the messianic banquet theme in Isaiah. In that culture, wedding banquets were huge, lavish affairs. The bigger the banquet the more the honor would be accrued.
Also in that culture, the invitation would first go out and be accepted or not. The host would need a good head count in order to buy and prepare all the food. It might take time to get just the right supplies so it would be hard to set an exact date. But, when the food was ready, the invited guests would be summoned to what they had already said yes to, and they would expect and be expected to drop everything in order to come. To refuse at that point would have been a very deliberate insult. And to do this to a king would have been almost a suicidal action.
Verse 3 says that the servants were sent to “summon the invited guests.” Both “summon” and “invited” are forms of the Greek word kaleo, called. The servants called those who had been called.
In verse 4 he sends the servants back out. The food is ready and waiting. A fattened calf alone could feed a small village but what this king has prepared is a massive amount of food about to go to waste. “Prepared” and “ready” in this verse are the same Greek root and they are also the same word as John the Baptist’s message in Matthew 3:3 “prepare the way of the Lord.” This word implies an urgency.
Verse 5 says that some “ignored” the call, a word meaning “paid no attention, to be careless, no concern, disregard, neglect. To make light of.”
Verse 6 echoes last week’s parable – the tenants trying to take over the vineyard who kill the messengers.
Verse 7 feels like somewhat of an intrusion into the story. Most scholars see this as an oblique reference to the destruction of the temple in 70AD by the Romans. The original audience might have been experientially familiar with that event which would have driven the parable home for them.
Verse 8 says now that those originally called were not worthy to come. Why not? Because they refused the call.
Verse 9 feels a bit odd to us. The king is saying just get people in the doors; it doesn’t matter who the guests are at this point. Remember, the king has food ready and waiting and the more guests, the more honor he gets. It didn’t really matter the social quality of the guests.
The servants are sent to the main roads which would have been the heart of the city where the non-elites gathered: those in undesirable trades, the prostitutes, beggars, etc. This is a twist of the parable: these types of people did not eat together. This would have been political suicide for the king.
One lectionary option is to end here. The parable is a lot easier to swallow with that option – it doesn’t matter who I am – I am invited to come because some other souls rejected the call. Comforting, perhaps, but we miss the meaning for Matthew. Interestingly, Luke’s version does indeed end here, suggesting that perhaps the original parable might have as well. Feeling some comfort in this is not amiss, it’s just not how Matthew is using this story.
The rest of the verses don’t seem to fit the narrative. The dominant theory is that Matthew has taken another parable which he’s tacked on to the end of this one but without its opening context.
Verse 11 is a judgment scene. We’re still in the context of an eschatological, end of times banquet. So this is taken to be the final judgment. And this man is not dressed or prepared appropriately.
The king’s response fits salvation history if not the story line.
These are troublesome verses. We read it and think the king is quite fickle – he invites people from the street and expects them to be dressed appropriately. How could they be?! How in the world could someone like this have been expected to be dressed properly in this situation?
One explanation: A wedding garment wouldn’t be a tuxedo or evening gown. Just something clean would do. This man seems to have deliberately come in dirty clothes. He received an urgent invitation but he didn’t really take the time to get ready.
Another explanation: It might have been the custom for the host to provide a wedding garment to the guests. In that case, this guest has chosen to come but not wear the clothing provided.
If Matthew did indeed combine two parables, presuming the original opening of the second parable was lost, we might imagine that it contained a story about a guest who was duly invited and equipped to come properly dressed, but chose not to.
Whatever the explanation, the parable, I think, wants us to equate clothing with a way of life. Paul used this image a number of place (for example Galatians 3:27).
Matthew’s point is that we must always be ready for the arrival of this banquet at the end of time, adequately clothed with good deeds and a life of faithful discipleship. We must always be ready and prepared for that.
Verse 14 says that many are called but few are chosen. The imagery here suggests that we’re all called, but sinners are expected to repent and reorient their lives (metanoia). It distinguishes between the initial call of salvation and final election with perseverance. Persevering is not automatic. The invitation is freely given but there are still standards for its enjoyment. This is not a free for all. This is that delicate balance between faith and works. It’s not that works get us into the kingdom but works are evidence of a changed life.
Last week the emphasis was on the mercy and patience of God. This week suggests a limit to that: there are expectations and consequences.
One allegorical interpretation is that the Jews are the ones who initially said yes to the banquet. Then Jesus came and the food was ready, at which point they said no! So the Gentiles are brought in to receive what the Jews would not. But even the Gentiles must be conformed to the kingdom. We realize, of course, it’s not that simple. Nothing that pushes whole groups of people into a single category can be wholly accurate.
Another thing to grapple with in this reading is our image of God. We default to assuming the king in the parable is God. Are we not surprised (and maybe feeling just a little vindicated) when this God gets testy with people who say no? Do we maybe gloat a bit when he says some people aren’t worthy, because don’t we all have a list of those people? But does that square with what we know of God? How do we balance a God who invites everyone, who loves everyone, who came to save everyone with a God who expects us to grow up and live into all we were created to be?
Take some time to pray with this parable in different ways. Pray as one of the invited but refusing to come guests. Pray as the guest not properly dressed. Pray as the king. Pray as one of the servants. See what new vistas open up on kingdom living as you approach this parable from different angles.
Imagine yourself standing right now at that final judgment. How do your clothes look? Are they appropriate? What would Jesus say? What would Jesus do?
How does the image of God in this parable affirm or challenge your own image of God?
Old Testament / Gospel Connection
How are the Old Testament and Gospel readings connected? Each week I will offer my views on this but I encourage you to first read the passages and look for your own connections!
In Isaiah they come to the feast and are grateful. In the gospel, some reject the feast. I am always left scratching my head over the Gospel reading. Why oh why would anyone reject the invitation to eternal happiness? Is it because they can’t see it as such? Do they look at the lives of Christians and see only rules and regulations and somber, forced obedience? What if we fully lived into the happiness of God’s promised and always coming kingdom?
Philippians 4:12-14, 19-20
See background on this book here.
Throughout this letter, Paul has expressed his gratitude for the support of the Philippian church but this passage is really the final “thank you.” But he doesn’t actually say “thank you.”
In that culture and in the Middle East even today, it’s rude to actually say thank you for something. Instead, gratitude is expressed by reciprocal doing. If you do something nice for me, you understand that I’ll do something for you down the road. Implicit in this is that we will have an ongoing relationship. To say “thank you” would imply that I will not do something for you and this is the end of our association.
Paul doesn’t want to close the door on future actions or relationship but he also realizes that he’s in prison and he may never be able to pay them back.
In verses 10-11 Paul declares he is self-sufficient. Financial independence for the sake of the gospel is a Pauline theme that is found elsewhere in his writings.
In the ancient world someone would have benefactors who would provide for them. To acknowledge one’s benefactors was an essential virtue. On the other hand, Paul didn’t want to become a client dependent on the church. This might compromise his ability to speak freely and not offend. So he’s aiming for that balance of expressing gratitude while not appearing to solicit more.
In verse 12 he references “abundance” but it’s not quite the same concept as most of us understand it. In his culture, (as in many places today) having “plenty” meant having more than enough to eat and wear; to exceed the ordinary in food, clothing or home. If someone had an extra change of clothes and enough to make two meals, that was abundance.
Verse 14 is as close as Paul comes to actually saying thank you. He commends them for “sharing” his distress. This is the Greek word koinania – to participate in something.
The lectionary leaves out verses 15-18. All the language in this passage has financial undertones and all of it was very common to financial receipts in that world. This passage is a current reckoning of the Philippian’s ongoing account with Paul. Paul was willing to accept and he did accept financial help from this church which indicates their special relationship. He says payment has been received in full which is a hint that further gifts would be an embarrassment.
In verse 19 Paul says that God will supply whatever the community in Philippi needs. Paul doesn’t know if he’ll be able to repay his debt, to reciprocate the gifts they’ve given. So his parting prayer is that God will repay whatever debts that Paul cannot. It also indicates that the real recipient of the church’s gift is God himself.
What is your standard of abundance? How “reasonable” is it?
We live in a different culture than Paul, one which expects a simple “thank you” for any gifts given. In what ways might you borrow from Middle Eastern culture and say thank you in a way that keeps the relationship going?
Questions to ponder
What do these readings say about how to live day in and day out as Christians?
What veils keep you from enjoying God’s loving presence?
Recall a time of feasting in your life, maybe a family meal that has special significance or a wedding. Feel the joy of gathering with people you love. Allow yourself a taste for all that Jesus has promised us.
Read Isaiah 25:9 and recall the times you looked to God for help and God helped you. Express your gratitude to God for these times. How might you share one of these stories with someone else to inspire hope and joy?
How do we balance a God who invites everyone, who loves everyone, who came to save everyone with a God who demands that we grow up and live into all we were created to be?
Take some time to pray with today’s parable in different ways. Pray as one of the invited but refusing to come guests. Pray as the guest not properly dressed. Pray as the king. Pray as one of the servants. See what new vistas open up on kingdom living as you approach this parable from different angles.
Imagine yourself standing right now at that final judgment. How do your clothes look? Are they appropriate? What would Jesus say? What would Jesus do?
How does the image of God in this parable affirm or challenge your own image of God?
Why oh why would anyone reject the invitation to eternal happiness? Is it because they can’t see it as such? Do they look at the lives of Christians and see only rules and regulations and somber, forced obedience? What if we fully lived into the happiness of God’s promised and always coming kingdom?
What is your standard of abundance? How “reasonable” is it?
We live in a different culture than Paul, one which expects a simple “thank you” for any gifts given. In what ways might you borrow from Middle Eastern culture and say thank you in a way that keeps the relationship going?
Scripture texts in this work are taken from the New American Bible, revised edition © 2010, 1991, 1986, 1970 Confraternity of Christian Doctrine, Washington, D.C. and are used by permission of the copyright owner. All Rights Reserved. No part of the New American Bible may be reproduced in any form without permission in writing from the copyright owner.
© 2023 Kelly Sollinger