CHAPTER 13
Luke 13.1 At that time some people came and told Jesus what had happened to the Galileans, whose blood Pilate had mixed with that of their sacrifices. – At the same time. So, just as Jesus was finishing his discourse in chapter 12, some men were there who immediately began to tell him about a horrible incident that had recently occurred in Jerusalem, and of which they were perhaps the first news. Galileans whose blood Pilate had mingled…The event is recounted in few words, but in a truly tragic manner, quite capable of making an impression. One would think one was seeing these unfortunate Galileans suddenly assailed by Pilate's soldiers in the temple courtyard, at the very moment when the priests were sacrificing victims in their name, and themselves mercilessly sacrificed, so that their blood mingled with the blood of the animals they were offering. There was something dreadful in this coincidence («"« »An abominable sacrificial cult, splattered with the blood of animals and men” (Livy, Histories 19, 39). Secular history has remained completely silent on this bloody drama, which we owe to St. Luke for its remembrance. But it is perfectly consistent with the character of Pilate and that of the Galileans, as they are known to us from the most authentic sources. Uprisings against Roman authority were not uncommon in Jerusalem at that time, especially during festivals, and whenever a riot occurred, one was sure to find the Galileans among the most fervent and agitated Zealots. (cf. Flavius Josephus, Antiquities 17, 9, 3; 10, 2; Vila, § 17). On the other hand, Pilate was then showing himself to be merciless. He was not a man to be intimidated by the sanctity of the Jewish sanctuary, even though a special stipulation forbade the Roman governor from bringing his soldiers into the temple. From the Antonia Tower, which communicated with the sacred building and served as a garrison for the imperial troops, one could enter the courtyards in an instant. When there was fighting, victory invariably belonged to the legionaries, who once slaughtered as many as 20,000 rioters (Flavius Josephus, Ant. 20, 5, 3).
Luke 13.2 He answered them, «Do you think that these Galileans were greater sinners than all the other Galileans, because they suffered in this way? 3 No, I tell you, but if you do not repent, You will all perish like them. Without passing any judgment on Pilate's conduct, Jesus, remaining in his spiritual role, took advantage of this grim news to exhort all those around him to repentance. He divinely understood and exposed the narrators' secret thoughts. Linking their account to his last words, 12:57-59, they had in fact presented it as proof that the unfortunate Galileans, fallen under the Roman swords within the very walls of the temple, indeed, so close to the altar, while performing the most august act of religion, must be exceptionally guilty, since their sacrifices, instead of drawing down the Lord's grace upon them, seemed on the contrary to have provoked his vengeance. This was, moreover, the common view in the East (cf. Job 4:7), and particularly among the Jews (cf. John 9:2 and the commentary): great misfortunes were always believed to follow great sins. Jesus forcefully affirms that such a judgment is often unjust, that it is at least unjust in this case. No, those of his compatriots who had just suffered such a lamentable end were no worse than the other Galileans. Undoubtedly, there exists—the entire Bible testifies to this—a close relationship between physical and moral evil, for it is quite certain that all our suffering stems from sin. But it would be wrong to claim that individual misfortune is infallibly the sign of individual crime, that a person punished in this world is, for this reason alone, more guilty than those who live happily around them. Having overturned this sad prejudice in a single word, Our Lord sets aside these sterile questions to draw, as was his custom, the attention of his listeners to practical, personal considerations of the utmost importance: If you do not repent, you will all perish likewise.. All is emphatic: All without exception. Similarly as miserably as those whose deaths you have just recounted. Therefore, reflect on yourselves in the face of such a calamity; learn from the lesson it teaches you: otherwise, it is the sword of God, and not just that of Pilate, that will make a terrible massacre of you. The warning was also a prophecy, as commentators readily point out. Because the Jews did not repent at the call of Jesus, they perished by the millions during the war with Rome, in Galilee, throughout Palestine, in Jerusalem, and even in the temple.
Luke 13.4 Or those eighteen on whom the tower of Siloam fell and whom it killed, do you think their debt was greater than that of all the other inhabitants of Jerusalem? 5 No, I tell you, but if you do not repent, you will all perish in the same way. » To reinforce his conclusion, Jesus reminds the audience of another painful event, also taking place in Jerusalem, and which we know of only through St. Luke. A tower, probably one of the city walls, located not far from the Pool of Siloam, suddenly collapsed, crushing eighteen people in its fall. Were we to assume that the victims of this catastrophe were the most impious, the most immoral inhabitants of the Jewish capital? Certainly not, Jesus replies again. Then he repeats, like a terrible refrain, his words from verse 3. Here again we have a prediction that was fulfilled literally in the final days of the theocratic state, when many Jews were crushed in Jerusalem under the rubble of houses and buildings. But we can, indeed we must, rise even higher. The Savior's warning did not concern only the inhabitants of Palestine, nor was it merely a passing event. Taken in its fullest sense, it has a universal scope, both in space and time, and applies to people of all times and all countries. We too will perish, and forever, if we do not do sincere penance.
Luke 13.6 He also told this parable: «A man had a fig tree planted in his vineyard. He went to look for fruit on it, but did not find any, – The parable of the barren fig tree consists of a quickly stated fact, v. 6, and a short dialogue between the owner of the tree and the farmer, vv. 7-9. It is the poetic, dramatic development of Matthew 3:10. A man had a fig tree… This man represents God; the fig tree represents the Jewish people (cf. Matthew 21:19-20 and the commentary), planted in the middle of the vast vineyard which is the emblem of the whole world. Planted in his vineyard. In Palestine, fruit trees were often planted among the vineyards, and the fig tree was the most common choice. See this passage from Pliny, Natural History 17, 18: "(The shade) of the fig tree, although extensive, is light; therefore, it is not forbidden to plant it among the vines." Hence the frequent association of the vine and the fig tree in the Holy Scriptures. He came there looking for fruit and found none.. (cf. Mark 11:13). God had, however, done everything possible so that his chosen people would produce excellent and abundant fruit. But they had shown themselves rebellious against both grace and threats. They had even refused to convert to the voice of Jesus.
Luke 13.7 He said to the winegrower: For three years I have been coming to look for fruit on this fig tree and I find none, cut it down then: why does it make the land unproductive? The owner, disappointed in his expectation, complains with a certain bitterness, and quite legitimately so, for it was already the third time he had been thus frustrated. Would a good tree remain barren for so long? In terms of morality, and in the application of the parable, these three years have been interpreted in many ways. “Some Fathers understand them to refer to the three states under which humankind has lived: under natural law, from the beginning of the world until Moses; under written law, from Moses until Jesus Christ; under the Gospel law, from Jesus Christ until the end of the world (St. Ambrose, St. Augustine, St. Gregory). Others understand them to refer to the threefold government that existed under the Jews: the government of judges, since Joshua up to Israel; the government of the kings, from Saul to the Babylonian captivity, and the government of the high priests, from the captivity to Jesus Christ. Others (Theophylact) refer to the three ages of man: childhood, manhood, and old age. Still others refer to the three years of the preaching of Jesus Christ.” D. Calmet. We will venture to say, following the illustrious exegete from Lorraine, that “these explanations are all arbitrary,” because the three years “simply indicate that God gave the Jews all the time and all the appropriate means to exonerate them.” Therefore, we should not dwell too much on this detail. If one insisted on understanding these three years in a strictly chronological manner and seeing in them an allusion to the public ministry of Our Lord Jesus Christ, we would reply that the fourth year should also be taken literally: now, it certainly represents the forty-year period granted to the Jews between the death of Jesus and the destruction of Jerusalem. – After the complaint, the sentence: cut it then. «Not only is it of no benefit (the fig tree), but it steals the water that the vines drew from the earth…and occupies space,» Bengel. The tree is barren; moreover, it is harmful: a double reason to destroy it. St. Gregory gives an excellent paraphrase: «The barren tree grows tall, but beneath it, the earth remains barren.» Similarly, Corneille de Lapierre: «It renders the earth inert and barren, both by its shade and by its roots, by which it deprives neighboring vines of the earth’s sap.» No one here below is simply useless. Whoever does not do good does evil, the priest more than anyone else. – Although truly terrible («one hears it with great fear,» St. Gregory, Hom. 31 in Evang.), the Lord’s command, cut down this treeThis clearly demonstrates his paternal goodness, as the Holy Fathers observed. "It is a particular detail of God's clemency towards mankind not to unleash punishments silently and secretly, but to first proclaim their arrival through threats, so as to invite them in this way." the fishermen "To repentance," St. Basil. "If he had wanted to condemn, he would have remained silent. No one warns someone to be on their guard when they want to strike them." According to the ancient adage, when they have a firm will to punish, "the Gods approach on tiptoe"; they give no warning and gently approach the guilty whom they wish to surprise.
Luke 13.8 The vinedresser replied, "Sir, let it alone for one more year, until I have dug up and put manure all around it.". – The vinedresser, who here represents Our Lord Jesus Christ, intercedes for the barren fig tree. Suspend your just judgment for another year: perhaps more diligent care will bring this tree fruit. He cites, as examples of his redoubled efforts during this time of trial, two particular details, I dug, and m‘There was manure all around, which symbolize special graces, more abundantly poured out. This represents the treatment of sick or barren trees.
Luke 13.9 Perhaps it will bear fruit later; if not, you can cut it down.» – Once these extraordinary measures have been taken, a twofold alternative will present itself. Either the fig tree will bear fruit, and then it will be left to live; or it will persist in its barren state, and in that case the owner will have only to carry out his initial plan. This fate will be so perfectly deserved that even the voice of love will this time refrain from opposing it. – The sentence then remains suspended. The owner of the vineyard makes no reply, as if he did not want to commit to granting the vinedresser's request. The parable thus ends abruptly, threateningly. It is nevertheless in keeping with the spirit of this interesting tale to suppose that the prayer was answered. – The lesson, as we have said, is addressed directly and primarily to Israel; but it can also be applied to all humankind. “What is said of the Jews serves as a warning to all, I greatly fear, and especially to us: lest, devoid of merit, we occupy a fruitful place in the Church, we who, having been blessed, must, like the pomegranate, produce inner fruits, fruits of modesty…fruits of love and mutual charity, contained as we are in one and the same womb, that of our mother the Church, lest the wind harm the harvest, the hail destroy it, the heat of greed consume it, the storms of our passions ravage it,” St. Ambrose, Exp. in Luke, 7, 171. There is indeed, in this parable, the story of God’s loving conduct toward every sinner. He bears with them, he is patient, he cares for them to the very end: he only punishes them when all hope of conversion has vanished. St. Gregory of Nazianzus (ap. Cat. D. Thom.) wants us to imitate divine forbearance: “Let us never be quick to strike, but let us prevent by mercy"For fear of cutting down a fig tree that can still produce fruit, and which might perhaps be cured by the care of a skilled farmer."
Luke 13.10 Jesus was teaching in a synagogue on the Sabbath. Jesus ended his ministry as he had begun it (see Mark 1:21ff). At the beginning and end of his public life, we see him preaching the Gospel in the synagogues on the Sabbath. The divine Savior never tires of sowing the good seed of the Gospel into hearts.
Luke 13.11 Now, there was a woman there who had been possessed for eighteen years by a spirit that made her infirm: she was bent over and could not straighten up at all. – While the sacred historian only indicated the place and date of the miracle in general terms, the «dearest doctor» described the patient's pathological condition very well. Possessed by a spirit that rendered her crippled, A spirit of infirmity, of weakness. This expression will be commented on later (v. 16) by Our Lord: it designates the cause of the evil, and this cause was entirely moral and spiritual. The infirmity stemmed from a possession by the evil spirit. Cf. Mark 9:25. – The particular nature of the illness is then indicated. For eighteen years, the poor woman upon whom Jesus had just cast a merciful glance had been completely bent over, curled up in on herself, to such an extent, adds St. Luke, to better show how worthy of pity she was, that she could not look upward at all. The illness, therefore, was not only located in her neck, but it also affected her back and kidneys, in short, her entire spine. The Holy Fathers, in their moral paraphrases, regard this sad state as the figure of souls which are, in the poet's words, bowed down toward the earth, while it is so fitting for man (does not the form of his body constantly tell him so?) to "seek the things of heaven and lift his gaze above the earth." St. Basil, Hom. 9 in Hexam. cf. St. Augustine, Enarrat. 2 in Psalm. 68, 24; Theophylact 11.
Luke 1312 When Jesus saw her, he called her and said, «Woman, you are set free from your infirmity.» 13 And he laid his hands on her, and immediately she sat up and glorified God. Maldonat makes an excellent observation on this subject: «He showed doubly kindness and generosity towards this woman, by healing her and, first and foremost, by encouraging her to regain her health. Jesus rarely healed anyone without being asked. But this woman, not only did he heal without her asking, but, in a certain way, he begged her to be healed.» You are freed from your infirmity.. «A word entirely worthy of God,» exclaimed St. Cyril, “and filled with heavenly majesty.” Even before it was uttered, the result was already accomplished in the will of the Thaumaturge. Let us also note the beautiful metaphor, quite classic indeed, by which the illness is likened to bonds that hold one captive: in this case, it was particularly apt. And he laid his hands on him. This gesture, a sign of Jesus' omnipotence, probably accompanied his all-powerful word (St. Cyril, Euthymius, Trench). The effect was instantaneous. Immediately, the humble woman, freed from both her spiritual and physical bonds, began to proclaim God's praise with effusion. She glorified… This time indicates continuity: she glorified and glorified again the author of every perfect gift.
Luke 13.14 But the synagogue leader, indignant that Jesus had performed this healing on the Sabbath, spoke up and said to the people, «There are six days for work, so come and be healed on those days and not on the Sabbath day. The scene changes suddenly. Words of anger and indignation loudly interrupt the thanksgiving, and it is the president of the assembly who utters them. And why is this man indignant? Because Jesus had performed this healing on a Sabbath day That was his entire motive. «It serves them right to be scandalized that she was raised up, they who were bowed down,» St. Augustine, the slave, like so many others, of senseless traditions, took for a servile work the act that Jesus had just performed. Do not the Rabbis teach that, while it is permitted for a doctor to treat a sudden and dangerous illness on the Sabbath, it is absolutely forbidden to treat a chronic infirmity? However, the synagogue leader does not dare to directly address Our Lord: it is on the innocent crowd, from whom he knows he has nothing to fear, that his bitter reproaches first fall. But, as the exegetes point out, what inconsistencies, what ridiculousness, in his language dictated by blind zeal and hatred! The remonstrance begins, however, with a sentence that is almost a literal quotation from the Law: There are six days to work. cf. Exodus 209, 10; Deuteronomy 5, 15 ff. But it ends in the strangest way: Come then in those days, and be healed. What does this mean? Had the sick woman asked for her healing? And even if she had, and Jesus had been guilty of granting it, where was the fault of the people, who had merely acted as witnesses? Should a sick person to whom the Savior miraculously offered health refuse it if it was the Sabbath? The Gospel provides no other examples of such illogical interference, or such incurable folly. It is reminiscent of the behavior of the Jewish sailor who suddenly let go of the rudder in the midst of a storm because the Sabbath had just begun.
Luke 13.15 "Hypocrite," the Lord replied, "doesn't each of you on the Sabbath untie your ox or donkey from its stall and lead it out to water?" – The Lord, in turn, is indignant and rightly condemns such actions. What force in the apostrophe: Hypocrites! With this, he lifts the mask of religion under which his adversaries hid their resentment. It is addressed to all those members of the congregation (and they were quite numerous, according to verse 17) who shared the sentiments of the synagogue leader. What vigor, too, in the short apology that follows! It consists of two parts: in verse 15, he shows that his adversaries are not consistent with their principles, and he concludes, «a fortiori,» in verse 16. Is each of you…Are you then so rigorous when your material interests are at stake? Do you hesitate to engage in activities that constitute genuine work? And you condemn in me a word and a gesture? The custom mentioned here by Our Lord is explicitly stated in the Talmud: «Not only is it permitted to lead an animal to water on the Sabbath, but even to draw water for it, in such a way, however (a strange distinction that reveals the full Pharisaical character), that the animal goes to the water itself and drinks, but not that the water is brought to the animal,» Tr. Erubhin, f. 20, 2. But if one were so respectful of the Sabbath rest, why not bring a supply of water to the stable the night before? – See in St. Matthew, 12, 11, a similar line of reasoning, although presented in a different form.
Luke 13.16 And this daughter of Abraham, that Satan had kept bound for eighteen years, She should not have been released from this chain on the Sabbath day.. » – A striking contrast, vividly drawn. Who was the sick woman? A daughter of Abraham: a glorious title that resonated deeply with a Jew. (cf. Matthew 3:9). And Jesus contrasts this daughter of Abraham with the mere animals mentioned earlier. What was her condition? Under the power of Satan, who had bound her (an expressive and vivid image) for years. Should she then be allowed to suffer any longer, when, quite rightly, animals were not made to endure thirst for a few hours without reason? Certainly not. That would be contrary to all divine intentions. – St. Irenaeus, 4.19, demonstrates that by performing frequent healings on Saturdays, Jesus honored the heavenly instituter of the Sabbath, who loved to bestow his most delicate favors upon his people on that day.
Luke 13.17 While he was speaking, all his opponents were covered in confusion, and all the people were delighted by all the wonderful things he was accomplishing. – The Savior's argument had a twofold effect. His enemies, covered in shame, blushed (a powerful expression not found elsewhere in the Gospel), and were unable to respond. The mass of the Jewish assembly experienced a profound sense of joy at seeing Jesus perform so many wonders.
Luke. 18-19 = Matt. 13, 31-32; Mark. 4, 30-31.
Luke 13.18 He also said, «What is the kingdom of God like, and to what shall I compare it? – What is the kingdom of God like?… A formula designed to sharpen attention. Repetition to what shall I compare it? This further increases interest.
Luke 13.19 It is like a mustard seed, which a man took and planted in his garden; it grew and became a tree, and the birds of the air made their homes in its branches.» – St. Matthew and St. Mark (see our comments) develop this parable a little further. St. Luke, despite the brevity of his account, nevertheless provides several special details. 1. He shows us the mustard seed sown, not in a field (St. Matthew) or in the earth, even more generally (St. Mark), but in a garden. 2. He then shows it to us, through hyperbole, not only becoming the largest of all garden herbs, but transformed into a tree. As for the meaning, it is exactly the same as in the other Gospels. «Just as the seed of the field mustard, which surpasses the seeds of other oils in quantity, grows to the point of providing shelter for many birds, so the doctrine of salvation resided, at first, in a few people, and subsequently received an increase,» St. Cyril, 11. And what an increase! Is not the world largely Christian? Cf. S. August. Serm. 44, 2.
Luke 13, 20-21 = Matt. 13, 33.
Luke 13.20 He also said, «To what shall I compare the kingdom of God?” – He said again : he repeated. The following words are in fact an abbreviated reproduction of the formula used above, v. 18.
Luke 13.21 It is like the leaven that a woman takes and mixes with three measures of flour, so that the whole dough rises.» The parable of the mustard seed expressed the expansive power of Gospel doctrine, the outward development of the Kingdom of God; this one speaks of an inner development, a transformative power. And indeed, the leaven of the Gospel has permeated everything: family life, politics, science, the arts; nothing escapes its influence. Even those who claim to be immune to it live off it. See, moreover, our explanation of the parallel passage in St. Matthew. The two versions are entirely identical in the Greek text.
Luke 13.22 So he went through the towns and villages, teaching and making his way towards Jerusalem. – He was going. This is still the continuation of the great journey begun in chapter 9, verse 51 (see the explanation), as is clear from the words advancing towards Jerusalem. This formula introduces a new series of interesting scenes. The evangelist mentions in passing that Jesus, according to his custom, proclaimed the good news in each of his temporary residences.
Luke 13.23 Someone asked him, "Lord, will only a few be saved?" He told them: – Someone asked him. The questioner is not otherwise defined by the narrative. His character and the occasion for his question are left vague. We do not even know if he was a disciple or simply a Jew from the crowd. For in general, in the Gospel narrative, «all the personalities, apart from that of Christ, withdraw to the background: their story is not related for their own sake, but because of the application we must make of it, and insofar as it introduces the words addressed to us all by Our Lord.» Will only a small number be saved? ? cf. Act 2, 47 (…) The Lord added daily to the number of those who were on the path to salvation.This was a very topical question among the Jews, due to the great excitement that the expectation of the Messiah had produced within their ranks. One of the Rabbis' bizarre Kabbalistic fantasies was to try to fix the number of the elect by the value digital letters from this or that scriptural text relating to the kingdom of heaven. We find an echo of these subtle discussions in: “The Most High has made this age for many, but the age to come for few,” 4 Ezra 8:1; “I have said it before, I say it now, and I will say it again: those who perish are more numerous than those who are saved, as the wave is compared to a drop of water,” 4 Ezra 9:15-16. He told themJesus' response was therefore addressed to the entire audience, not just the questioner. S. Augustine of Hippo (Sermon 32, on the words of the Lord) The Savior answers affirmatively to the question posed to Him: «Are there few who are saved?» because few enter through the narrow gate. This is what He Himself declares elsewhere: «The way that leads to life is narrow, and only a few find it.» (Matthew 7) — Bede the Venerable. That is why he adds here: «For many, I tell you, will seek to enter (excited by the desire to save their souls), and they will not be able,» frightened as they will be by the difficulties of the way. — St. Basil of Caesarea. (On Psalm 1.) The soul, indeed, hesitates and wavers when, on the one hand, the consideration of eternity leads it to choose the path of virtue, and when, at the same time, the sight of earthly things leads it to prefer the seductions of the world. On one side it sees rest and the pleasures of the flesh, on the other, subjugation, self-slavery; on one side, intemperance, on the other, sobriety; on one side, dissolute laughter, on the other, streams of tears; on one side, dances, on the other, prayers; here the sound of instruments, there, weeping; on one side, voluptuousness, on the other, chastity. — St. Augustine (Sermon 32) Our Lord does not contradict himself in saying here that few enter through the narrow gate, and in declaring elsewhere that "a great number will come from the east and the west," etc. (Matthew 8). They will be few in comparison to those who are lost, but they will be many in the company of angels. When the grain is threshed on the threshing floor, it is scarcely visible, yet such a great quantity of grain will come from that threshing floor that it will fill the granary of heaven.
Luke 13.24 «Strive to enter through the narrow door, for many, I tell you, will try to enter and will not be able.”. – Strive to enter. The Greek word *rod*, from which our noun "agony" comes, implies the idea of struggle, of combat. It is therefore necessary to struggle if one wishes to succeed in entering the kingdom of heaven. Cf. 1 Corinthians 9:25; 1 Timothy 6:12. The beautiful metaphor of the narrow gate is already familiar to us from a similar passage in the first Gospel (Matthew 7:12; see the commentary), where we have seen it developed further. This narrow gate is the one that gives access to the Messianic palace, that is, to the abode of the blessed. Many, I tell you.…With these words, Our Lord motivates and justifies his strong recommendation, his call to violence. Fight, I tell you, for there will be many who will not be able to pass through the gates of heaven, because their attempts will have been weak and inconsistent. They will therefore have only themselves to blame.
Luke 13.25 Once the head of the household has gotten up and closed the door, if you are outside and start knocking, saying: Lord, open the door for us. He will answer you: I don't know where you are from. Verses 25-30 dramatically comment on the general thought just expressed. Through a vivid allegory, the main elements of which we have already encountered in Matthew (7:22 ff.; 25:10-12), drawn from Eastern family life, Jesus depicts a terrible scene from the end times. He shows us a father who, after waiting a long time for his guests invited for the evening meal, enters the banquet hall with them and closes the door behind him. But several of the guests are late. For some time, they stand in the street at the entrance to the house, hoping that it will soon be opened to them. However, they grow impatient and begin to bang loudly on the door. They even call out to the master of the house: “Lord, open the door for us!” A dialogue ensues between them and him, but, alas: to their great confusion, for they have the pain of hearing each other say: I don't know where you're fromTheir prayers are now too late; “For after the judgment, there is no longer any question of petitions or merits,” St. Augustine, Sermon 22 on the Word of the Lord. They had to strive to enter through the narrow gate: they will never pass through the closed gate. St. Cyr. Our Lord then shows us by a clear example how guilty are those who cannot enter: “When the head of the household has entered and closed the door,” etc.; that is to say, suppose a head of the household has invited many people to his feast, when he enters with his guests and the door is closed, others arrive and knock at the door. — Bede. This head of the household is Jesus Christ, who is present everywhere by his divinity, but who is represented to us in the interior of heaven with those whom he gladdens with the sight of his presence, while he is as if outside with those whom he invisibly sustains in the struggle of this life. He will enter definitively when he allows the whole Church to contemplate him; he will close the door when he refuses the reprobate the grace of repentance. Those who remain outside and knock at the door—that is, those separated from the righteous—will plead in vain. mercy that they will have despised: “And he will answer them: I do not know where you come from.” — St. Gregory (Morals, 8.) Not knowing, for God, is to test him, as one says of a man truthful in his words, that he does not know how to lie, because he abhors lying; it is not that he could not lie, if he wished to, but love The truth inspires in him a profound contempt for falsehood. The light of truth, therefore, knows no darkness, which it condemns.
Luke 13.26 Then you will begin to say: We ate and drank in your presence, and you taught in our public squares. The outcasts persist, trying to be recognized as friends of the family man. Please, recall your memories: Didn't we eat and drink in your presence? Yes; but by this in front of you, They condemn themselves without seeming to realize it, for they could not express more strongly their lack of intimate communion with him. Before you, and not "with you." Did you not teach publicly in our public squares? Yes, but how did they receive his preaching? Is it enough, then, to attend a speech to be the speaker's personal friend?
Luke 13. 27 And he will answer you: I tell you, I do not know where you come from; depart from me, all you workers of iniquity. – These vain excuses, under which it is easy to see manifest allusions to the ministry of Our Lord Jesus Christ and to the unbelief of most Jews, are received as they deserve. I don't know where you're from, "That's what the father's voice coldly repeats. In truth, who are you? Any relationship we had was purely superficial; fundamentally, we are separated by an abyss. Therefore, I don't want to listen to you any longer." Get away from me. You are not my friends, but... workers of iniquity. A sentence of eternal damnation. "When he said I don't know you., "All that remained was Gehenna and intolerable torments. This saying is even more terrible than hell itself," St. John Chrysostom, quoted by Luke of Bruges.
Luke 13.28 Then there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when you see Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and all the prophets in the kingdom of God, while you are thrown out. 29 People will come from the East and the West, from the North and the South, and they will take their places at the banquet in the kingdom of God. – Y designates the place of despair and torment where the cursed workers of iniquity will be cast down. – Jesus then points out a detail that will constitute a particular torment for the damned among the Jews. From the depths of hell, they will see (cf. 16:23 and the commentary) the saints of their nation, especially the patriarchs and prophets, enjoying eternal happiness; moreover, while they, the children of the promise, will be excluded from the wedding feast of the Lamb, they will see many pagans, who have come from all corners of the world (from the East and the West… cf. Isaiah 49:12), admitted among the guests at this divine banquet (they will sit down at the table in the kingdom of GodWhat a desolate sight it will be when they remember how relatively easy it would have been for them to attain salvation. – The reader has no doubt noticed that, from verse 22 onward, Jesus addresses his listeners directly, as if his terrible description were to be enacted in their own persons. It cannot be denied that there is, in this passage, a clear allusion to the damnation of a great number of Jews, especially among the Savior's contemporaries. Moreover, the Talmud affirms the same fact in its own way. «Of the six hundred thousand men who came out of Egypt,» it says, “only two entered the Promised Land: thus, very few Israelites will be saved in the time of the Messiah.” Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Sanhedrin 111a.
Luke 13.30 And those who are last will be first, and those who are first will be last.» – Conclusion of this tragic scene, in the form of an adage repeated several times by Our Lord (cf. Matt. 19:30; 20:16) and well suited to the present circumstance. The last shall be first. You pagans, so wretched, “you did not have Christ, you had no citizenship with Israel, you were strangers to the covenants and the promise, you had no hope and, in the world, you were without God” (Ephesians 2, 12), have taken first place; on the contrary, The first shall be last Many Jews were relegated to the last rank.
Luke 13.31 That same day some Pharisees came to him and said, «Get away from here, because Herod wants to kill you.» – Some Pharisees…A strange approach indeed. However, one must have seriously misunderstood the entire Gospel narrative regarding the Pharisees' earlier dealings with Jesus, or one must be determined to excuse the sect at all costs, to say, with M. Cohen (The Pharisees, 1877, vol. 2, p. 51): «Herod… had imprisoned John the Baptist… He also wanted to seize Jesus. Yet it was the Pharisees who came to warn Jesus of the tetrarch's evil intentions and provided him with the means to escape in time (!). Such an action proves that this group was far from being malevolent toward Jesus.» As if the Pharisees had not, on the contrary, constantly appeared to us as the Savior's implacable enemies. As if Jesus himself did not show, in his stern reply, that he fully understood the intentions of these hypocritical enemies, and that he was not deceived by them, even when they pretended to be worried about his life. "They pretended to esteem him," St. Cyril (in the Chain of Narratives) already aptly stated. Start from here. Our Lord was then, we believe, in Perea, a province which, like Galilee, belonged to the territory of Herod Antipas. Because Herod wants to kill you. These so-called friends, in order to incite Jesus to flee as quickly as possible, cited this motive, which at first glance seemed all the more plausible given that the tetrarch had recently put John the Baptist to death. Were they stating a true fact? Did Herod truly harbor bloodthirsty plans against Jesus? Or was it a ruse used by the Pharisees to frighten their adversary, to lure him away from a peaceful region where he faced no danger, to push him towards Judea and Jerusalem, and to discredit him by portraying him as a timid and cowardly man? Many exegetes (among others Theophylact, Euthymius, Maldonatus, Corneille de Lapierre, Fr. Luc, Calmet, Olshausen, Ebrard, and Stier) have accepted this latter hypothesis because it perfectly aligns with the deceitful and cunning nature of the Pharisees, and also because the former seems difficult to reconcile with Antipas's usual feelings toward Jesus. (See 9:9 and 23:8, where we see the tetrarch expressing a strong desire to see Our Lord.) However, the way in which the divine Master responds to the Pharisees ("Go and tell that fox") suggests rather that Herod played a personal role in this episode. We know from his conduct toward the Forerunner that he had an extremely fickle soul, which produced perpetual contradictions within him. Jealous of his power, he had feared John the Baptist: was it not natural that he should likewise fear the Prophet, the Wonderworker, who wielded such great influence over the crowds? It is therefore quite probable that he conspired with the Pharisees to intimidate him, perhaps without intending to carry out the threat he made. See in Amos 7:10-17, a similar plot, designed to put an end to the prophecies that the shepherd of Thecus was making against the kingdom of Israel.
Luke 13.32 He replied to them, "Go and tell that fox: I drive out demons and heal." the sick Today and tomorrow, and on the third day I will have finished. Commentators vie with one another in admiration of the dignity, the calm, the holy boldness, and the profound meaning of Jesus' response. It is deliberately presented in a somewhat obscure and enigmatic form. But, while Herod and his ambassadors experienced some difficulty in understanding it, we can grasp it today without much trouble. Come on. You tell me to leave; I give you the same advice. Tell that fox. Jesus is far from speaking like a courtier here. But how well deserved that unflattering epithet he applied to Herod's name was! There is no people for whom the fox has not been an emblem of cunning, deceit, and wickedness. "As injustice is committed in two ways, by fraud or insults, fraud being related to the fox and insult to the lion, both are foreign to man, but fraud is the most odious," Cicero, De Offic. 1, 13. Aelian, Histor. 4, 39, places foxes at the pinnacle of malice and cunning. «The Egyptians were cunning and shrewd, which is why they are compared to foxes,» Talmud, Shamath R. 22. Yet history rarely presents such scheming, deceitful, and treacherous characters as Herod Antipas: his life, as we read it in the writings of Josephus, is a web of unhealthy schemes. And here Jesus caught him red-handed in this very act. I drive out demons, and heal. the sick. With these few words, Our Lord designates his ministry in its most salient aspect: the expulsion of demons and miraculous healings. He went about doing good, performing works of charity, and yet his enemies feared him as a dangerous man and sought to get rid of him through threats. But these threats were unable to intimidate him. What noble firmness in these two verbs used in the present tense (I hunt, I heal), which denote an unwavering resolve to act nonetheless, until the hour appointed by divine Providence. The expressions today, tomorrow, and the third day These dates should not be taken literally, as if they were strictly chronological. The words of Jesus would thus lose their grandeur. Following the ancients, who understood them very well, we will understand them in a broad sense. "By today, tomorrow, and the third day, is designated the entirety of the time required for his work," Cajetan, hl. Similarly in verse 33. I will have finished…It is not difficult to indicate what this end represents, of which Jesus speaks with such solemnity. It is his death that he calls the end (cf. John 19:28; Hebrews 2:10; 5:9). Our Lord meant by this figurative language: My death will not be long in coming, but my ministry has not yet reached its end. Therefore, I remain; I have no business altering God's plans for a Herod. As beautiful as this statement is, the following interpretation by several 19th-century authors would be petty, as Mr. Reuss (Hist. Évang. p. 482) rightly asserts: I still have two days of healings and expulsions to perform in this country; in three days I will have finished and I will leave. – It is worth noting in passing that although St. Luke mentions only a very small number of miracles during this period of Our Lord's public life (only four from chapter 10 to chapter 17), this verse proves that this silence does not indicate a cessation of miracles. Jesus continued to perform wonders; but the sacred writers could not record them all.
Luke 13.33 But I must continue on my way today and tomorrow and the day after, for it is not fitting that a prophet should die outside of Jerusalem. – Only, Continue, Savior, I must walk today. The appointed time for my departure will come, however, and then I will go to another land; but it will not be to flee, as if I were afraid of Herod's snares: it will be quite the contrary, to go and face death in the place where I must suffer it. Indeed, It is not fitting that a prophet should die outside of Jerusalem. «It is not that all the prophets died in Jerusalem, nor that there is any law against it; but, to exaggerate the cruelty of that city, the Savior says that it is so accustomed to shedding the blood of prophets that it seems impossible for a prophet to die anywhere else.» (D. Calmet) Above all, it was fitting that the Messiah should die in the Jewish capital. His person was therefore inviolable in Herod’s territory, whatever the tyrant’s designs might be. What did the cunning of a timid fox matter to the lion of the tribe of Judah?
Luke 13.34 Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to her! How often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were not willing!.To this saying, in which several exegetes have perhaps rightly seen a subtle and biting irony directed either at Jerusalem or at Antipas, Our Lord adds a few words of sorrowful lamentation. He will soon die in the holy city: the messianic residence will thus be a deicide city, and what misfortunes will it not bring upon itself through this horrible crime! He cannot help but groan over it. We also find in St. Matthew, but in a different place, 23:37-39 (see the commentary), this poignant apostrophe of Jesus in Jerusalem. Could it have been repeated twice? This seems very likely to us; at least it is generally accepted that it fits perfectly in both instances where we find it. Jerusalem, Jerusalem. «This is the germination of the word of one who takes pity or who loves excessively,» St. Cyril. – Jesus quickly reproaches this guilty city for its principal crime: it mercilessly massacres those sent to it by God to save it. I wanted to gather your children together like a hen gathers her brood under her wings. In the Gospel of Matthew we read, «How often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were not willing.» St. Augustine, in his Enarrat. in Psalm. 62, mystically applies this image to all people: «If the infernal spirit is like a vulture, are we not hidden under the wings of a divine hen, and can it still reach us? This hen, which gathers us under its wings, possesses invincible strength.» you didn't want it. The inhabitants of Jerusalem, remaining unbelieving, had thereby rejected the powerful and gentle refuge that Jesus wished to offer them. Thus, the eagles of Rome, when they descend upon them, will find them completely defenseless.
Luke 13.35 »Your house is left to you. I tell you, you will not see me again until the day comes when you say, ‘Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.’” The sentence is clearly stated. The sacred dwelling place of the Jews, that is, the Temple, will be abandoned by the divine guest whose palace it was. The fourth book (which is apocryphal), Ezra 1:30-33, announces this terrible abandonment in almost the same terms, and as the result of the same crime: «I have gathered you together as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings. Now what shall I do with you? I will remove you from my presence… The Lord Almighty has said: Your house is desolate.» However, the Savior, merciful even as he threatens and punishes, opens for the Jews, at the end, a prospect of happiness, leaving them a hope of salvation. Soon, they will cease to see him; but one day, converted and having become believers, they will receive him with this cry of joy and love: Blessed is he who comes… This will take place at the grand assembly of the general judgment.
