In Galilee with His disciples, the Divine Master spoke of persecutions, death and resurrection, in contrast with the notion of a merely human Messiah who would restore Israel’s temporal power. He opened an entirely new panorama before them: humility, detachment and service must characterize the one who wishes to exercise authority according to the spirit of Jesus.
Gospel – Twenty-fifth Sunday in Ordinary Time
“They went on from there and passed through Galilee. And He would not have any one know it; for He was teaching His disciples, saying to them, ‘The Son of man will be delivered into the hands of men, and they will kill him; and when He is killed, after three days He will rise.’ But they did not understand the saying, and they were afraid to ask Him. And they came to Capernaum; and when He was in the house He asked them, ‘What were you discussing on the way?’ But they were silent; for on the way they had discussed with one another who was the greatest. And He sat down and called the twelve; and He said to them, ‘If any one would be first, he must be last of all and servant of all.’ And He took a child, and put him in the midst of them; and taking him in His arms, He said to them, ’Whoever receives one such child in My name receives Me; and whoever receives Me, receives not Me but Him who sent Me.’”(Mk 9:30-37).
I –Human Society in Paradise
If a society had developed in Earthly Paradise, composed of humanity in the state of original justice, it would have been ruled by divine grace and favoured with preternatural and supernatural gifts from God. There, full harmony and understanding would have reigned among men. There would have been no envy or rivalry, for each person would have admired the virtues of his neighbour—rejoicing in them and wishing him the greatest possible holiness.
But man sinned and was exiled from Paradise. Bereft of the gifts enjoyed by our first parents, humanity became subject to disease, death, mental imbalance and countless other ills.
Worse than this, the soul lost the gift of integrity through which it had dominated concupiscence and kept the passions in perfect order.1 Without this gift, the passions became unruly and man had to wage continual inner warfare to govern them. Innocence entered a belligerent state to protect itself from sin.
The root of dissension
Consequences of this disorder are envy and rivalry, which, in turn, are the main cause of strife and dissension. As Saint James the Apostle affirms in the second reading of this twenty-fifth Sunday in Ordinary Time, “Where jealousy and selfish ambition exist, there will be disorder and every vile practice” (Jms 3:16).
Envy is, in fact, one of the most pernicious vices. The one who gives into envy knows no happiness. The envious person is constantly comparing himself with others. When he finds another who surpasses him in some aspect, he immediately asks himself: “Why is he greater than I? Why does he have more than I?” This attitude makes his life bitter, produces multiple woes, and can even provoke physical ills.
All evil springs from this “why,” which ultimately stems from pride. Saint James states this clearly: “What causes wars, and what causes fighting among you? Is it not your passions that are at war in your members?” (Jms 4:1).
How contemporary man struggles just to obtain more money, power or prestige, often resorting to illicit or even criminal means! How many moral wrongs he falls into to reach this objective!
Yet, even in amassing a fortune or reaching the heights of power, he will never be satisfied. He will always want more, since the human soul is naturally insatiable, being made for the infinite, the absolute, and the eternal.2 Thus, Saint James concludes: “You desire and do not have; so you kill. And you covet and cannot obtain; so you fight and wage war” (Jms 4:2). The greedy man madly strives after the very things that, instead of bringing him happiness, rob his peace of soul!
Holiness restores lost equilibrium
There is only one way to conquer the unruly passions and restore the equilibrium of soul lost through sin: embracing the ways of sanctity. In the constant fight against our own passions and the attempt to subject them to Divine Law, we gradually recover our first innocence. The reactions of the soul increasingly come to resemble those it would have had in Paradise. What would have been easy there, now costs us, in this land of exile, great efforts, interior struggles and much asceticism—all accompanied by the indispensable aid of grace. For, without grace, no one can dominate the tremendous unrest of his own passions.
Therefore, the Kingdom of God will flourish on this earth to the measure that there are holy souls among men who serve as beacons of virtue and innocence to illumine humanity’s way. It will be the Reign of innocence, the image of Our Lord Jesus Christ, the Innocent One par excellence. We will thus enjoy the closest possible realization of the paradisiacal civilization. This is one of the important lessons to be drawn from the wealth of this Sunday’s Gospel.
II – The Clash between Two Mentalities
“They went on from there and passed through Galilee. And He would not have any one know it…”
After descending Mount Tabor and exorcising a possessed child before a great crowd, Jesus set out for Galilee. He wanted to travel discreetly, accompanied only by His closest, for, “He taught His disciples” 3 along the way. Here, the Evangelist reveals Jesus’ divine pedagogy. He instructed the disciples along the way, through conviviality. He did not teach them the philosophy of the Greeks, nor the doctrine of the masters of Israel; He revealed to them the secrets of His Divine Heart, and taught them everything He had heard from His Father (cf. Jn 15:15).
Jesus prepares the Apostles for trials
Nothing had been disclosed of the sublime episode that took place on Tabor, witnessed only by Peter, James and John. Yet, the other Apostles, seeing the three so radiant and filled with light, likely perceived that something significant must have occurred. Undoubtedly, they were curious, and perhaps even anxious, to know what had happened.
Perhaps, according to their worldly criteria, they thought that the Lord had revealed some bold plan to seize power, demanding total secrecy. The idea of the restoration of a temporal kingdom that would give the Israelites dominion over all other peoples was so deeply rooted among the Jewish people of that time—and consequently among the followers of Jesus—that even after the Resurrection, some still asked: “Lord, will you at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?” (Acts 1:6).
Little by little, the Master patiently adjusted His disciples’ worldly and materialistic outlook. Setting out with them alone corresponded with this objective. Jesus wished to be by Himself with the Apostles, to form and prepare them for the difficult trials that lay ahead.
“… for He was teaching His disciples, saying to them, ‘The Son of man will be delivered into the hands of men, and they will kill him; and when He is killed, after three days He will rise.’”
In announcing His Passion and death, Jesus set the bitterness of trial and persecution before the Twelve.
Didon affirms4 “nothing disgusted the Jewish people more than the idea of a suffering and sacrificial Messiah.” They eagerly awaited the glory and triumph of Israel and a peace and prosperity that would endure for centuries or even millennia. In short, they yearned for an eternity of earthly pleasure.
The Apostles undoubtedly realized that Jesus was creating an institution to carry on His Work. They also perceived that He was forming them so that each would play an important future role. But they clung to the mistaken notion of an earthly kingdom, and were concerned with knowing who would hold the key positions in this new organization.
Didon describes the situation that provoked rivalries among them: “Peter had been designated as the head. James and John seemed to enjoy a certain predilection. Now, these obvious preferences certainly awakened some envy and jealousy in the others […] Hence the bitter disputes, rivalries, insults and the wounded self-love.” 5
In this climate of ambition and lust for power, Our Lord patiently prepares His disciples to not succumb in face of the terrible trial that is approaching.
“But they did not understand the saying, and they were afraid to ask Him.”
It was not the first time that the Messiah had foretold His Passion and Resurrection to the Apostles. However, such considerations were so alien to them that not even Peter, James and John, the privileged eyewitnesses of the Transfiguration, understood His meaning.
Descending Mount Tabor, the Lord had warned them not to tell anyone “until the Son of man should have risen from the dead” (Mk 9:9). However, they could not grasp the meaning of these words, and debated among themselves what “the rising from the dead meant” (Mk 9:10).
Chrysostom clearly points out “how little the disciples understood the meaning of the clear prediction of the Lord’s death. Even after all of these enlightening miracles, after this unique revelation of Jesus’ identity by the heavenly voice, and after the explicit prediction of His death and Resurrection, they still failed to comprehend what was most important and remained preoccupied with their own concerns.” 6
Fr. Lagrange analyses the passage in this way: “The disciples still did not understand. The Passion was what least befit the Messiah; what they least understood of Jesus’ doctrine was the necessity of suffering. When the Master spoke of this for the first time, Peter protested, but was vigorously reprimanded (cf. Mk 8:31); on the second occasion, they changed the subject (cf. Mk 9:11); now they do not even dare ask.” 7
Their mentality clashed with that of Our Lord
If the disciples did not understand what the Master had said to them, why were they afraid to ask? Jesus had always treated them with unspeakable goodness and the occasion could not have been better, as they were alone with the Master. It would have been so easy, especially in that intimate setting, to ask Him for an explanation!
There was a deep psychological reason behind this. The prospect of the death of their Master countered all of their plans for the social advancement and political and economic solutions they so desired. It meant the downfall of the tower of illusions that the Israelites had constructed regarding the Messiah: that of an incredibly capable man, filled with gifts enabling him to free the Chosen People from the Roman yoke and raise them above other peoples.
The Apostles noted that their mentality clashed with that of Our Lord. The Master taught a doctrine that they, in the depths of their hearts, did not want to hear. Jesus’ reply could render this dissonance all too evident, obliging them to change their mentality, which was the last thing they wanted.
Regarding this, Fr. Tuya notes: “They know that the Master’s predictions come to pass. They have a premonition regarding that sober scenario—for both Jesus and themselves—and they avoid pursuing the matter.” 8
Thomistic philosophy teaches that man never practices evil as such—he always seeks to justify it, giving it the appearance of good.9 In the mind of the disciples, two contradictory ideas were in conflict: that of the authentic Messiah who spoke to them of persecutions, death and resurrection, and that of the merely human Messiah, restorer of temporal power to Israel. Therefore, they rationalized, to justify the erroneous idea that they persisted in believing. The fear of crumbling the foundations of this political and earthly mentality made them wary of asking.
“And they came to Capernaum; and when He was in the house He asked them, ‘What were you discussing on the way?’ But they were silent; for on the way they had discussed with one another who was the greatest.”
Christ knew perfectly well what the Apostles had been discussing along the way. They fell silent at the awkward query, ashamed to tell the Master that the topic of their conversation had been an egoistic dispute over personal primacy.
Their silence was a partial acknowledgement of the fault committed, of which they were somewhat conscious, affirms Cardinal Gomá: “Their conduct is in flagrant opposition to the Master’s position, and they are abashed before Him.” 10
Commentators from the Company of Jesus express the same: “The disciple’s silence at the Master’s question is very psychological. They undoubtedly sensed that their aspirations would not meet with approval.” 11
A new concept of authority
“And He sat down and called the twelve; and He said to them, ‘If any one would be first, he must be last of all and servant of all.’”
The Master knew those He had chosen very well, and according to Fr. Lagrange He “is not surprised at the disciples preoccupation, nor does He contest the principle of hierarchy, but He intimates the new spirit which should animate those who occupy positions of authority. Here, a new order of things is surely foreshadowed.” 12
With His words, Jesus did not condemn the quest for primacy, but He set a condition: to be the first, one must be the “last of all and servant of all.” This affirmation opened an entirely new panorama for the Apostles, who shared in the concept of authority commonly held in that epoch, namely, that the strongest, wealthiest, most capable, intelligent or cunning ought to rule, and the rest obey.
In light of this, Our Lord declares the rule of government that should prevail in the Christian Era: “The new Kingdom which I wish to establish will not resemble earthly kingdoms. What should impel my disciples is not the spirit of ambition or the quest for greatness. Rather, the primary and fundamental condition to attain the first place in the Messianic Kingdom is humility, contempt of honours and the disinterest of one who forgets himself so as to dedicate himself to the service of his brethren.” 13
Humility, contempt of honours, self-denial and dedication to neighbour: these are the traits of those who are to rule according to the spirit of Jesus. It is the supremacy of virtue and innocence in society, as opposed to that of anger, jealousy and rivalries that so torment mankind after original sin!
In this regard, Fr. Maldonado transcribes the expressive commentary of the bishop and martyr St. Cyprian: “With His response, Jesus did away with all emulation and rooted out every occasion and pretext for bitter envy. It is not licit for the disciple of Christ to entertain such rivalries and jealousies, nor can there exist competition among us, to outdo one another, for we have learned that humility is the way to the first place.” 14
Finally, it is interesting to note that Jesus “sat down” before making this solemn declaration, “so as to judge from His Tribunal and teach the Apostles, from His Chair, something serious and important which does not warrant being said standing, as if in passing, but seated and expressly, with full deliberation and consideration.” 15
III – Governing in keeping with Innocence
“And He took a child, and put him in the midst of them; and taking him in His arms…”
Exegetes comment extensively on this episode in which Jesus calls a child to Himself, relating it to the account of St. Luke which closes with these words of the Saviour: “for who is least among you all is the one who is great” (Lk 9:48).
Children are free of envy and vainglory
It is noteworthy how the Divine Master uses this eloquent pedagogical aid to show the disciples—blinded by the desire for supremacy—the necessity of being simple and humble. Because, as Chrysostom notes, “both from envy the little child is pure, and from vainglory, and from longing for the first place.” 16
Venerable Bede focuses on God’s high esteem for the virtue of humility: “By which, He either simply shows, that those who would become greater must receive the poor of Christ in honour of Him, or He would persuade them to be like children, to keep simplicity without arrogance, charity without envy, devotedness without anger. Again, by taking the child into His arms, He implies that the lowly are worthy of His embrace and love.” 17
Through this episode, Jesus shows how the true disciple should not focus on whether or not he is mistreated, forgotten or put aside. He must present himself with neither falsity nor pride, but rather filled with admiration for the qualities of the others. The one who does this will be first to receive God’s mercy. Whoever considers himself last and least will receive most from Divine Providence.
One can imagine the deep perplexity of the Twelve at that moment. They want to occupy important positions, and Jesus shows them the need of taking the lowest place. They yearn for a glorious Messianic kingdom, and Jesus alerts them as to His Passion and death on the Cross… The clash of the two mentalities becomes increasingly clear. But all is said with sweetness, without acrimony, at the right moment, so that the Master’s words beneficially penetrate their souls. Here, He shows once again the admirable and delicate art of correction, to serve as a model for all those responsible for guiding souls.
Jesus manifests His love for those who have never sinned
“…He said to them, ’Whoever receives one such child in My name receives Me; and whoever receives Me, receives not Me but Him who sent Me.’”
Although the Evangelists are concise in narrating this passage, we can imagine how Our Lord must have lingered with the child to make beautiful reflections on childhood. We can envision how warmly He would have praised the child’s humility and simplicity, as He highlighted the virtues of one who has never sinned.
In this final verse of the Gospel considered today, we clearly see Jesus’ great love for innocence, represented in the child He embraced. This child—the future martyr St. Ignatius of Antioch, according to Eusebius of Caesarea18—symbolizes those who give themselves wholeheartedly to God with a right intention and free of rationalization.
As man, Christ is the model of innocence; as God, He is innocence itself. He drew the child to Himself because, as St. Leo the Great teaches, “He loves childhood—teacher of humility, standard of innocence, model of meekness. Christ loves childhood, upon which He desires adults to model their customs, and to which He wants old age to be guided back; and He leads those who He will later raise to the eternal Kingdom to follow its humble example.” 19
Venerable Bede states: “He adds also, ‘In my name,’ that they might, with the fixed purpose of reason, follow for His name’s sake that mould of virtue to which the child keeps, with nature for his guide. And because He taught that He Himself was received in children, lest it should be thought that there was nothing in Him but what was seen, He added, ‘And whoever shall receive Me, receive not Me, but Him that sent me’; thus wishing, that we should believe Him to be of the same nature and of equal greatness with His Father.” 20
“Whoever receives one such child in My name receives Me.” In this way Jesus shows Himself to be equal to the Father, while indicating that whoever welcomes, cares for and protects an innocent child actually embraces God Himself.
In this vein, Maldonado recalls that St. Mark “offers this reason in place of the conclusion drawn by St. Matthew: Truly, I say to you, unless you turn and become like children, you will never enter the Kingdom of Heaven. This conclusion is implicitly confirmed by what St. Mark says here, that no one will enter the Kingdom of God if they are not similar to God. Nothing unclean shall enter that city (as St. John writes in Revelation, 21:27). You cannot be like God if you do not receive Him; and you cannot receive Him if you do not receive Me, whom the Father has sent. And you cannot receive Me if you do not receive the children in My name and become like them. Therefore, if you do not convert and become like little children, you will not enter the Kingdom of Heaven.” 21
A new way of governing and interacting
According to the Gospel spirit, declared just previously by the Divine Master, whoever wishes to rule must be willing to serve. Jesus had just taught the Apostles this truth which was entirely at odds with the pagan mentality dominating their souls, that held that people should be ruled by force.
In a society marked by innocence, authorities should govern subordinates as one governs a child. Children do not vie for power; they are simple, flexible, humble and always at the disposal of others. Since they are small and weak, they must be guided with kindness and affection. Likewise, those who govern must place themselves at the service of their subordinates, creating a climate that attracts rather than imposes, and that seeks to awaken enthusiasm to practice the good.
IV – The Most Precious Good that One Can Receive
To preserve baptismal innocence—or to recover it, if it was sadly lost—should be the goal of every Christian, for those who possess it conserve Our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father and the Holy Spirit in their soul.
Innocence is the most precious good man can receive. The union with the Blessed Trinity enjoyed by one who has never sinned, bestows an authority that neither power, money, nor diplomatic moves can give.
Man was inerrant in his first innocence, for, as St. Thomas teaches: “As long as the state of innocence continued, it was impossible for the human intellect to assent to falsehood as if it were truth.” 22 Similarly, the man who maintains baptismal innocence will be infallible to the measure in which he lets himself be guided by grace, the infused virtues and the gifts of the Holy Spirit. Fr. Garrigou-Lagrange affirms: “In the order of grace, infused faith makes us adhere to the divine word and to whatever it expresses. […] While the scholars debate at length and raise all manner of hypotheses, God does His work in those who have a pure heart.” 23
We must spare no effort, then, to guard our soul from sin, even if it costs us our very lives. If we have had the misfortune of losing our baptismal innocence, let us valiantly strive to recover it, as did St. Mary Magdalene, by an ardent love for the Divine Master. Her fervent love made her resemble her Beloved so closely that she is venerated first among the virgins in the Litany of the Saints. ◊
Notes
1 “As the entire integrity of the harmonious state of which we have spoken was produced by the submission of the human will to God, there resulted from the withdrawal of the human will to this divine submission an alteration of the perfect submission of the inferior powers to reason, and of the body to the soul. As a consequence, man experienced, in the inferior sensory appetite, the disordered movements of concupiscence, anger and the other passions foreign to the order of reason, and even contrary to reason, enveloping him in darkness, for the better part of the time, and troubling him in his faculties” (ST. THOMAS AQUINAS Compêndio de Teologia [Compendium of Theology]. c.192).
2 Cf. AQUINAS, St. Thomas. Summa Theologica, q. 2 e 3.
3 Cf. MALDONADO, P. Juan de. Comentarios a los cuatro Evangelios – II San Marcos y San Lucas [Commentaries on the Four Gospels – II St. Mark and St. Luke]. Madrid: BAC, 1951, p.146.
4 DIDON. Jesus Cristo [Jesus Christ]. Porto: Liv. Int. de Ernesto Chardron, 1895, Vol. 2, p.227.
5 Idem, p.228.
6 Apud ODEN, Thomas C. e HALL, Cristopher A. La Biblia comentada por los Padres de la Iglesia – Nuevo Testamento 2 San Marcos [Bible Commentary by the Fathers of the Church – New Testament 2 St. Mark]. Madrid: Ciudad Nueva, 2000, p.184.
7 LAGRANGE, OP, P. M.-J. Evangile selon Saint Marc [Gospel according to St. Mark]. 5. Ed. Paris: Gabalda et Fils, 1929, p.244.
8 TUYA, OP, Pe. Manuel de. Biblia Comentada – II Evangelios [Bible Commentary – II Gospels]. BAC: Madrid, 1964, p.695.
9 Cf. AQUINAS, St. Thomas. Summa Theologica. I-II q. 78, a. 1.
10 GOMÁ Y TOMÁS, Card. Isidro. El Evangelio explicado [The Gospel Explained]. Barcelona: Rafael Casulleras, 1930, Vol. 3, p. 83.
11 La Sagrada Escritura. Texto y comentarios por Profesores de la Compañía de Jesus. Nuevo Testamento.– Evangelios. [Sacred Scripture. Text and commentaries by Professors of the Company of Jesus. New Testament] Madrid: BAC, 1961, Vol. 1, p. 450.
12 LAGRANGE, OP, P. M.-J. Op. cit., p.244-245.
13 DEHAULT. L’Evangile expliqué, défendu, médité – tome troisième [The Gospel Explained, Defended and Meditated – Third Volume]. Paris: P. Lethielleux Editeur, 1867, p.290.
14 MALDONADO, SJ, Op. cit., p.151.
15 Idem, ibidem.
16 JOHN CHRYSOSTOM, St. Homilies on the Gospel of St. Matthew, hom. 58, 3.
17 BEDE, St. In Marci Evangelium Expositio, l. 3, c. 9: PL 92, 0224.
18 Cf. DEHAUT, Op. cit., p. 290.
19 LEO THE GREAT, St. Sermones in praecupuis totius anni festivitatibus ad romanan plebem habiti. Serm. 37, c. 3: PL 54, 0258.
20 BEDE, St. Op. cit., PL 92, 0225.
21 MALDONADO, SJ, Op. cit., p.152-153.
22 AQUINAS, St. Thomas. Summa Theologica. I, q. 94, a. 4.
23 GARRIGOU-LAGRANGE, OP, P. Reginald Marie. El sentido común. La filosofía del ser y las fórmulas dogmáticas [Common Sense: The philosophy of being and dogmatic formulae]. Buenos Aires: DEDEBEC y Ediciones Desclée, De Brouwer, 1945, p. 340-344.
