§ f 12–19 Call of the Apostles—(Mt 10:1–4; Mk 3:13–9). Having broken with the representatives of official Judaism, Jesus now groups around himself new followers—a Church. Lk is peculiar in giving the impression of something of grave import; it calls for a night spent alone in the mountain ‘in the prayer of God’. This is characteristic: cf. 3:21; 9:18 before confession of Peter, 9:29, etc. Lk records in Ac how this practice was kept up by the Church; 13:3. He emphasizes (here and in Ac 1:2) the deliberate choice of the Twelve from a greater number; there were 120 disciples gathered for Peter’s address in Ac 1:15 ff. He insists on the name bestowed, Apostles (not referred to till later in Mk 6:30) and throughout Lk and Ac he shows a preference for this title, contrary to the practice of the other evangelists. Insistence on the note of choice recalls God’s choice of the twelve patriarchs (cf. Ac 13:17) and emphasizes the idea that something new is beginning, the new Israel of God (cf. Gal 3:7–9; 6:16). His order of Apostles differs from Mk and Mt, as these differ from each other; but all observe the same three groups of four, and the same names head each group, Peter’s name always heading the first group. Thaddaeus of Mk, Lebbaeus of Mt, is ‘Jude of James’ in Lk, identified with the Jude of Jn 14:22, the author of the Epistle. Doubtless like others of his time he enjoyed several names, and it is natural that the early Christians should have avoided the name he shared with the traitor. Finally, Lk follows Mk in omitting to identify Matthew with Levi the publican.

§ g 17–49 Discourse on the Qualifications of a True Disciple—Usually called the Sermon on the Plain because of 17a. Lk here forsakes Mk who has no collection of sayings of Jesus. Is this the same discourse as the Sermon on the Mount in Mt 5–7? But the first question is whether these two sermons are here as our Lord gave them. A common opinion today is that both are a collection of his principal sayings which must have been often repeated. Both in Mt and Lk they appear in an artificial setting; cf. Mt 4:23 ff. with Lk 6:17 ff. In both there is a similar mise en scène, in both the same beginning and the same conclusion. Mt makes collections of sayings, parables and miracles. Lk, who prefers a different sort of order, has distributed much of Mt’s sermon through his Gospel, putting sayings in their due setting, whether chronological or logical we do not know. St Augustine seems to conclude that Mt and Lk have both taken the inaugural sermon of Jesus to his chosen disciples, each editing it after his own fashion and purpose, § 745a. In Lk the sermon is addressed to disciples and would-be disciples; it forms a programme of the dispositions required of them. § h 20–26. Like Mt he begins with the opposition existing between the spirit of Jesus and the spirit of the world, exemplified by the Beatitudes to which here Lk adds the Woes (reserved by Mt to much later; cf. 23:13; Lk is a lover of contrasts) Those animated by the spirit of this world seek riches, comfort, pleasure and honour; the disciple is to look for happiness (the Beatitudes begin with μακάριοι, ‘happy are ye’) in the midst of poverty, privation, tears and persecution. Lk agrees with Mt in proceeding to show Jesus predicting the inevitable clash between these contrary spirits. 27–36. Here, as in Mt 5:44–48, the disciple is warned that persecution is to be met with charity alone, a superhuman charity which involves detachment from worldly considerations, which demands that absolute surrender of self insisted on so often in Lk. 37–45. As in Mt 7:1 ff., warning against the temptation to judge oneself better than others, even while meeting hatred with goodness, mercy and generosity of an extraordinary kind. The disciple must strive to make others better by his example, even correcting them when necessary; but let him begin the work of improvement and correction with himself. Only the good can do good. 46–49. Conclusion as in Mt 7:21–27; let all set to work, not satisfied with listening to their Master but eager to carry out his teaching loyally. Such is Lagrange’s summary of the discourse. It will be noted that Lk omits Mt’s references to the Old Law; he has not the latter’s precise purpose of showing our Lord as the long-foretold Messias, and showing him in this sermon like a new Moses giving a New Law from the mountain.

§ i 20. Lk puts simply ‘poor’ for Mt’s ‘poor in spirit’; it is clear from the whole sermon that he is not preaching social revolution or beatifying material conditions as themselves the sources of happiness. As in Mt emphasis is here laid on the interior dispositions of soul. Unorthodox critics argue from 20–38 that this teaching anticipates ‘a speedy end of the age and the early advent of the Kingdom of God’; a literal application of this teaching ‘would be to invite anarchy’. But there is no indication that Jesus is laying down precepts to be followed by all, nor even counsels of perfection which absolve his followers from their social duties. But ‘if these words were a little oftener practised in imitation of the Saints, society would rather gain than lose by such heroic examples of charity’ (Lagrange). We have just seen the enormous influence exercised by Gandhi, a non-Christian, who practised some of these teachings heroically. 22. ‘when they shall excommunicate you (cf. In 9:22; 12:42; 16:2) and insult you, and proscribe your name as evil’ etc., recalling the proscriptions so common at the beginning of the Roman empire. 32–34. Lk substitutes ‘sinners’ for ‘publicans’ and ‘Gentiles’ in Mt 5:46–7. 35. Difficulty about true reading here; it is maintained that the Greek will not bear the translation of D7454V and V7455g; ‘thereby’ is a gloss. Some translate ‘nothing despairing’ or ‘despairing of none’ or ‘making none despair’. But although ἀπελπίζειν is not found elsewhere with the V7456g meaning, there is no doubt that such meaning best fits the context. 36. Substitution of ‘merciful’ for Mt’s ‘perfect’: characteristically Lucan.

§ 753a 7:1–10 The Centurion’s Servant—(Mt 8:5–15, not in Mk; affinities with Jn 4:46 ff., but probably different incident). The incident well suits Lk’s aim of showing how the Gospel benefits are extended to the Gentiles. This Gentile centurion is presented in a particularly favourable light even at the expense of Israel: his humanity towards a slave, his religious spirit and kindness to Judaism, the reverence and humility he shows towards Jesus, and finally his ‘great faith’. The Church uses his humble confession daily in the administration of Holy Communion. What is the faith on which he is congratulated by our Lord, a faith such as Jesus had not yet found among his fellow-Jews (even the Apostles are not excepted)? Note that from now on Lk begins to record examples of faith; cf. 7:50; 8:25, lack of faith; 8:48, 50. The centurion argues from his own situation to that of our Lord, with all that it implies. He is one fixed τασσόμενος in a system of authority having superiors above and inferiors below. Whoever Jesus may be, the centurion recognizes him as one set in a system of authority of which the head and source is God, and Jesus has power to exercise this authority to do such a thing as here suggested. In other words the centurion admits our Lord’s special relationship to God and the divine character of his mission, a thing that the Jews refuse to do. At the same time he admits his unworthiness as a Gentile to profit by close contact with this Jewish thaumaturge; his Jewish friends doubtless left him in no doubt about the essential holiness of Israel and the essential sinfulness of Gentiles; cf. Gal 2:15; Eph 2:1–3; Lk 6:32–33 with Mt 5:47. The incident is surely the same both in Mt and Lk despite the differences, e.g. that in Mt the servant is called a ‘boy’, that he is a paralytic, that the centurion comes himself to ask for the cure; such differences, which St Augustine reconciles, do not militate against the identity. Mt has drawn the conclusion in 8:11–12 which we might have expected Lk to draw; but his parallel to Mt 8:11–12 comes much later, 13:28–30.

§ b 11–17 Widow of Naim—Only in Lk. The Gentile centurion had recognized in Jesus a person endowed with the mysterious power belonging to God alone, therefore one coming from God. The incident at Naim ends with the same conclusion on the part of Jews: ‘God hath visited his people’; cf. 1:68, 78; Ac 15:14. In these last two incidents Lk may be said to sum up what any honest witness might have gathered from the life and actions of Jesus. Naim lies about 8 m. SE. of Nazareth and not far from Sunam where Elias raised the dead boy to life, 4 Kg 4, a fact which is enough to make the rationalist critics throw doubt upon Lk’s incident. But neither Eliseus nor any other prophet had raised a dead person to life by a word; note the prophets’ extraordinary labours in 3 Kg 17 and 4 Kg 4. Plummer remarks that most of the recorded cases of the raising of the dead in Scripture were for the sake of women; cf. Heb 11:35. 13. Note ‘the Lord’ a sudden appearance of the phrase after the constant use of ‘Jesus’; doubtless Lk’s witness to early Christian usage. Here Lk forsakes his usual reserve in speaking of our Lord and says he was ‘moved with compassion’ (not, mercy) ἐσπλαγχνίσθη, a word used only of Jesus in the Gospels and only here applied by Lk to him (but see 10:33 and 15:20). 17. Judaea again, perhaps used in its restricted sense in view of the sequel; John’s disciples come from the south where their master is in prison at Machaerus, Herod’s castle lying east of the Dead Sea.

§ c 18–35 Jesus and John the Baptist—(Mt 11:2–19, cf. Lk 16:16). One of the first cares of our Lord’s disciples was to determine and record the relationship of their Master to John the Baptist, and therefore what attitude they should adopt to John’s followers. That a lack of understanding between the two groups sometimes survived is proved by Ac 18:24–26; 19:1 ff., where as late as a.d. 54–5 persons claiming to be disciples of John appear to be ignorant of the necessity of Christian discipleship. Mk, writing for Roman Christians, has no need to clear up this point and omits this incident narrated by Lk and Mt. In a certain way John the Baptist had overshadowed Jesus by appearing in the traditional garb of a prophet, frightening people with thundering denunciations like a prophet, attracting them by his courage and burning enthusiasm; while Jesus appeared in a very modest manner, quietly preaching in the synagogues; cf. 11:28–30; 12:15–21. It was necessary then to record the fact that John, great as he was, had his raison d’être in his relationship to Jesus; in the designs of God, as in fact, he pointed to Jesus; cf. Jn 1:6–9, 15, 26, 29, etc. § d But this incident fulfils another purpose in Lk, at one with his theme of Jesus as the manifestation of the goodness and mercy of God. To understand the sense of the question put to Jesus by John’s disciples it is necessary to refer to John’s preaching, in which he had announced ‘a Coming One’, ὁ ἐρχόμενος, who was to baptize with the Holy Ghost and fire, who was to separate the wicked from the good. To escape the formidable judgement that was foreshadowed men had to change their lives by penance (μετανοία ‘conversion’), for the Coming One was pictured with an axe in his hand to cut down unfruitful trees. As indicated above, the mission of Jesus seems to bear no relation to such a grim foreboding. Indeed there is more than a suggestion here that, if Jesus is the Coming One, why does he not save his witness from prison and death? Cf. Jn 11:37. Traditional exegesis is not inclined to admit that John himself is in doubt; his question is for the sake of his followers in view of his coming death, so that he may pass them on to Jesus. It must be confessed that at first sight the Gospel seems to give the opposite impression. § e But there is a third explanation based on the difference between the method of John and that of Jesus, of which we have just spoken. In other words John, as Mt 11:2 says, having heard while in prison of the miracles of Jesus which serve to confirm what has been revealed to himself of the person and mission of Jesus, feels a certain surprise and perhaps impatience. Why does Jesus hesitate to declare himself and to use his mighty power to cleanse the threshing floor in the vigorous way that John has foretold? At any rate the reply of Jesus, addressed be it noted to John, seems to suppose that such was the sense of John’s question. God’s work must be done only in God’s way. What that way is has already been indicated in 4:16 ff. 20. The question is not whether Jesus is the Messias; John had never used the word of him. But although ‘the Coming One’ was not a current name for the Messias it certainly suggests a Messianic significance. Hence, although 22 is generally made a fulfilment of Isaian Messianic prophecies in 35:5, 61:1, it may be noted that there is not much identity between these texts and 22. Moreover these texts were not traditional Messianic texts for the Jews; hence 22 must be read in the light of 21, a Lucan addition. Jesus bids his questioners not to form their conclusions from what they see in his appearance, 23, but from his works which, as they might know from the Scripture, manifest the benign hand of God working in the world. This is Lk’s thesis, and Jn’s too: ‘If you will not believe me, believe the works’. The answer seems also to indicate that Jesus has not come as the executor of divine vengeance, which the preaching of John might seem to indicate. The same is gathered from the sermon at Nazareth, 4:18–21, which refers to the same texts in Isaias. In a word, John had announced Jesus as the one through whom the Spirit of God should be poured out upon the world; our Lord replies that his works prove that this is now taking place in his person; cf. Jn 7:39. Lk reproduces with great similarity the panegyric of John as in Mt. This is the Church’s answer to the disciples of John: John was great because he was the forerunner of a greater: the greatest of the prophets because nearest to Christ, who was the raison d’être of all the prophets; cf. 16:16. (See commentary on Mt for exegesis of these verses.) § f 29–30. Proper to Lk; not a Lucan parenthesis, but a continuation of our Lord’s words; cf. Mt 21:32. Therefore, ‘and all the people hearing (John), even the publicans …’. The meaning is that the despised common people (cf. Jn 7:49) and even publicans fell in with God’s benevolent designs for man’s salvation (for John’s baptism was part of the divine Messianic plan), while the religious leaders ‘nullified God’s purpose in their regard’ by rejecting John’s baptism; cf. 20:1–8. 31–35. Parable and application as in Mt. (Omit ‘and the Lord said’; not in Gk.) It is a parable, not an allegory, otherwise it would have to be turned round. It is the Pharisees who are like disagreeable children, finding fault whatever is proposed, whether it is John coming in ascetic manner to help them, or Jesus who comes to their aid leading a normal life. But happily there are others, more in harmony with God and divine wisdom, who therefore recognize the hand of God wherever it appears, whether in John fasting, or in Jesus eating and drinking with sinners. Thus ‘wisdom is vindicated’ by all such, for they are her true children.

§ g 36–50 The Sinful Woman anoints Jesus—The similarities between this story and those recorded in Mt 26:6–13; Mk 14:3–9; Jn 12:1–8, have led to the opinion that the four evangelists narrate the same incident. Latin tradition since the time of St Gregory the Great has been in favour of identity; the general tradition among the Greeks (except for Origen) is that Lk’s incident is altogether different and most modern Catholic commentators adopt this view. It must be admitted that the divergences seem irreconcilable. If Lk omits Mk 14:3–9 in his parallel place, that is only in accordance with his common practice of avoiding repetition of similar incidents. The impression is given that this is a woman of abandoned life and well-known as such, though the word ‘sinner’ would not necessarily mean that for a Jew. Note the relation of this story to 7:29. If Lk omits to name her, that is only in harmony again with his delicate reserve. There is nothing in Lk which justifies identifying her with Mary of Magdala, 8:2, or Mary of Bethany, 10:38 ff. Greek tradition generally distinguishes them all. 38. She comes in to seek Jesus and render him this act of reverence and affection. Why? Presumably, especially in view of 29–35, because she is one of those who have ‘justified God’ in recognizing Jesus as God’s minister for her salvation. She manifests the penance (μετανοία ‘conversion’) to which he calls sinners; cf. 5:32. The pouring of sweet ointment on the head of an esteemed person was no extraordinary thing; it is noteworthy that she presumes only to put it on his feet; cf Mt 26:7, Mk 14:3. § h 40–43. The application of the parable is certainly that love is consequent on forgiveness, though the opposite seems to be stated in 47a; hence the traditional interpretation that charity removes sin, despite the apparently opposite meaning of 50 which Protestant commentators have used to support the doctrine of justification by faith alone. But 47b shows that 47a cannot mean what it at first sight appears to mean, for in that case 47b would be without purpose. Hence 47a must mean, ‘wherefore I say to thee, (it is manifest) her many sins have been forgiven because she (shows clear signs that she) hath loved much’. Note what is claimed here in a veiled manner: she was a sinner, Jesus declares her sins have been forgiven, the love she feels in return is shown to Jesus. At the least, then, she treats him as representing God. Note the significance of anointing in the OT, i.e. God’s elect, God’s representative, priest, king, prophet, Messias especially. A further conclusion Simon is left to draw for himself: he has treated the woman with contempt as one separated from God, cf. 18:9, but if Jesus may conclude from the woman’s behaviour that God has forgiven her, Simon too may conclude from his own behaviour towards Jesus that God has not forgiven him. Lk again draws attention to the supernatural power of Jesus in reading thoughts, 40. Simon objects that Jesus must be ignorant of the woman’s character; Jesus replies that he knows very much about her, even that her sins have been taken away. 50. Faith here and elsewhere in Lk is not the mere intellectual assent to truths about God under the influence of the will, but an attitude of the whole man, mind and will and affections, towards God, a compound of faith, hope and charity; a belief in God not merely as existing, but as rewarding and full of solicitude for the good of man; cf. Heb 11:6. It also includes a certain attitude towards Christ as God’s representative at least; in a word, it sums up the thesis of Lk, God visiting his people in the person and work of Jesus to save them. That is the note on which the incident terminates.

§ 754a 8:1–3 Women Disciples of Jesus—A brief description, peculiar to Lk, of a preliminary journey of ministry with the Twelve and a group of women. Taken with v 4 (cf. Mt 13:2; Mk 4:1) it furnishes the mise en scène for the parables which follow here as in Mk and Mt. Joanna appears in Lk alone, here and again at the sepulchre, 24:10. All the women have been healed by Jesus of diseases either of body or soul. It does not follow that Mary of Magdala, on the west coast of the Lake of Galilee, has been healed of moral disease; but as seven signifies completion in Semitic thought, it follows that she has been either a great sufferer or a great sinner. Lk gives no ground for her identification with the sinful woman of 7:36–50.

§ b 4–18 Teaching in Parables—(Mt 13:1–23, 5:15, 10:26, 25:29; Mk 4:1–25). Lk here takes up again the thread of Mk and runs parallel for a considerable space, while Mt’s parallels are scattered. We have already seen examples of our Lord’s fashion of using argumentative parables to silence the Pharisees; here begin his illustrative parables, i.e. throwing light on the nature and characteristics of the Kingdom of God which he has preached from the start; cf. 4:43. Light is needed because the subject is one of mystery, 10, and his parables are the means by which he brings the hidden things to light, 16–18. It is surely in accordance with the clear drift of these words that we must interpret the difficulty of 10, where Lk is much briefer than Mt 13:10–15, Mk 4:10–12, probably in view of his Gentile reader. He could not omit the warning altogether, seeing that it left such a strong impression on the mind of the early Church. All the Evangelists record it, St Paul insists on it, Ac 28:25 ff., Rom 11:8. The most reasonable explanation of this enigmatical saying of our Lord is that given by Chrysostom (P7457G 57, 467) and Aquinas (ST7458 III, 42, 3), i.e. the parable is of its very nature apt to enlighten the mind, and its enigmatic form is intended to excite the interest of the hearer. But for the same reason it serves as a sifting process, its enigmatic form ensuring that only those who are well disposed to the speaker and keen on finding out the truth will take the trouble to apply their minds seriously in order to see the meaning of the comparison. Therefore Jesus uses such phrases as ‘he that hath ears to hear let him hear’ and ‘take heed therefore how you hear’, as though to say: ‘Think well on this: it needs your close attention’. It is only in the above sense that obscurity may be said to be the object of the parables. (For further commentary see Mt and Mk in loc.)

§ c 19–21 The Mother and Brethren of Jesus—(Mt 12:46–50; Mk 3:31–35). Lk postpones further parables and inserts this incident which comes earlier in Mk; but it is very well placed here just at the moment when our Lord has made his disciples the confidants, as it were, of his family secrets (cf. Jn 15:15). He omits reference to ‘brother and sister’, perhaps to avoid arousing unprofitable questions in the mind of his reader; the word ‘brethren’ could have a wider meaning in Greek than children of the same mother and father. The dogmatic tradition of the Church maintains the virginity of both Mary and Joseph. For The Brethren of the Lord see Lagr7459., S. Marc (1911) 72 ff. and GJC I, 203–5, and §§ 672–3.

22–56 Various Miracles—(Mt 8:23–34; 9:18–26; Mk 4:35–5:43). These four miracles demonstrate in an ascending scale the supernatural power of Jesus and the growing recognition of him by his disciples as one who is a depositary of divine authority to be exercised at will. There is a further clarification of the meaning of faith, 25, i.e. such an attitude to Jesus as to one through whom God is intervening in the world for man’s good that his mere presence even when asleep gives sufficient ground for confidence; cf. also 48 and 50. The following peculiarities of Lk may be noted: the Greek has ‘Master! Master!’ in 24, giving a realistic air to the disciples’ cry. 43. Luke the physician characteristically omits Mk’s remark about the woman being rather the worse for the attention of the doctors. 48. ‘Thy faith hath saved thee’ as in 7:50, and again in 18:42.

§ d 9:1–50 Stages in the Formation of the Apostles—Passing over Mk’s account of the visit of Jesus to Nazareth, having dealt with that in 4:16 ff., Lk continues to follow the general lines of Mk’s narrative while omitting numerous incidents. The omissions are dictated partly by the fact that he has in mind to include a large section, 9:51–18:30, not found in Mk and Mt, although parts of it are scattered through Mt. He therefore omits incidents which are more or less duplications of things already described, e.g. the walking on the sea, the second feeding of the multitude; he passes over the dispute with the Pharisees about purification and the incident of the Canaanite woman’s daughter, the former as of no interest to the Gentile reader, the latter because of the apparently hard words spoken by Jesus regarding non-Jews. The mission of the Apostles is followed by the report of what Herod thinks about Jesus, which prepares for the question of what the Apostles themselves think. This leads to Peter’s confession, whereupon the Twelve are taken aside for further instruction of a more advanced character. They have reached the stage where they are strong enough to hear the prediction of the Passion, which is to be drilled into them henceforth. The Galilean ministry in Lk, which had opened with the declaration from heaven at the Baptism, closes with the same declaration at the Transfiguration.

§ e 1–6 Mission of the Apostles—(Mt 10:1, 9–11, 14; Mk 6:7–13). Here Lk follows Mk pretty closely, but substitutes that the Apostles went out ‘announcing the good tidings’ for Mk’s ‘they preached that men should do penance’.

7–9 Herod’s Perplexity—(Mt 14:1–2; Mk 6:14–16). The indication given in 6 is sufficient to explain the stir that would naturally be caused through Galilee and disturb Herod, whose perplexity would be better accounted for if Lk had not omitted Mk’s story of John’s execution. 9b, proper to Lk, prepares us for another special incident added by him in the Passion narrative concerning Herod’s interview with Jesus, 23:7–12.

10–17 Feeding of the Multitude—(Mt 14:13–21; Mk 6:30–44). There is little change from Mk here (except of a literary character) beyond the introduction of the miracle in 10b–11, where the mention of Bethsaida indicates a special source; Lk is often careless of topography, and even here he does not tell us how the scene changes from Bethsaida to the desert place of 12.

§ f 18–27 Confession of Peter—(Mt 16:13–28; Mk 8:27—39). Lk neglects the mention of Caesarea Philippi; the incident might have taken place near Bethsaida according to the information he gives us. But he adds to Mk and Mt by saying that Jesus was occupied with prayer. Thenceforward he follows Mk save for a change in the words of the confession and his characteristic omission of the reprimand of Peter, Mt 16:22–23; Mk 8:32–33. Arising from prayer Jesus questions the disciples about the opinion of the crowd (in Mk and Mt ‘men’) concerning him. The answers recall exactly the opinions already given in 8, where it will be noted that nobody had suggested that he was the Messias; therefore the confession of Peter, in the name of the rest, stands out all the more significantly. Lk’s record of the confession is more complete than Mk’s, less than Mt’s; but it is consistent with what has gone before; cf. 2:11, 26, also Ac 10:38. It adds nothing in reality to Mk’s simple formula; and in view of what Lk has told us regarding the origin and person of our Lord, nothing can be concluded, from his omission of Mt’s words ‘the Son of the living God’, adverse to his teaching on the divinity of Christ. In any case, we have said that it seems certain Lk bases himself on Mk’s narrative rather than upon Mt’s in his account of the Galilean ministry. § g 21–23. Here Lk, like Mk and Mt, shows our Lord imposing silence on the disciples about what is called the Messianic Secret. The reason for this is plain: as Jesus has already said 7:22–23, he wishes people to judge of him and his mission from the character of his works and not to be led astray by their preconceptions. Moreover he has to guard himself against the misplaced enthusiasm of the crowd (cf. Jn 6:14–15), based as it is upon false conceptions of the true role of God’s Messias, conceptions which seem to persist in his own disciples right up to the end; cf. 24:19 ff.; Ac 1:6; Mk 10:35 ff. (not in Lk). His own disciples are the first to be taught that the Messias is to complete his destined work in a shocking manner, described by the repeated predictions of the Passion, the first of which appears in 22. Those who have been associated with him in this work must be conformed to the example of their Master in this respect. The prediction of 22 is sufficient to indicate what sort of death he must die, for if the Elders, the High-priests and the Scribes (representing the three sections of the Sanhedrin) are to reject Jesus, that means execution by the only power that has authority to put to death, i.e. the Roman governor. All doubt is removed by the words of 23, where Lk adds that the disciple must bear his cross ‘daily’. This verse must be read with the fact in mind (it was surely in the minds of the disciples) that only twenty years before 2,000 Jews had been crucified under the legate Varus for rebellion (Jos., Ant. 17, 10, 10). The penalty of crucifixion had become very common in the provinces of the empire after the death of Julius Caesar, and was common in Judaea under every procurator. 27. Lk concludes with the mysterious promise (in Mk and Mt with remarkable differences) which is interpreted by some of the Fathers as referring to the Transfiguration; others see in it a reference to the fall of Jerusalem, the signal for the complete release of the Church from the shackles of Judaism and the consequent extension of the Kingdom of God in the Gentile world.

§ 755a 28–36 The Transfiguration—(Mt 17:1–8; Mk 9:2–8). As Lagrange says, it is impossible to read the Gospel without seeing the relation of this scene to the parallel scene in Gethsemani: ‘they stand in opposition to one another like strophe and antistrophe, but the Transfiguration serves as a sure pledge of Christ’s future glory, while Gethsemani shows him to us in the lowest depths of human abasement’. The incident must be joined with the prediction of the Passion; these predictions always end (except in Lk 9:44b) with a promise of resurrection, and it is the glory of the risen Christ that is foreshadowed in the Transfiguration. The chief additions in Lk are characteristic: our Lord is again at prayer while the events begin to happen (cf. 3:21); his Passion is the subject of his conversation with Moses and Elias, who like Jesus (32) appear in glory; the disciples are heavy with sleep as at Gethsemani; it is only when Moses and Elias are on the point of departure that Peter breaks in with his suggestion. 28. Lk is less definite than Mk and Mt about the time, but such is his manner. 30–33. Here, contrary to his usual custom when parallel with Mk, he is much more detailed; Lk evidently attaches much importance to the incident. ‘They spoke of his decease’, ἔξοδος, V7460g excessus. The Gk word is used for death in 2 Pet 1:15; Wis 3:2, 7:6. There is little doubt about its meaning here, and the importance of the incident in Lk’s eyes may be gathered from its relation to 24:25–27, 44–47. Moses and Elias, who as Tertullian says certainly stand for the Law and the Prophets, appear ‘in glory,’ ἐν δόξῃ (cf. 2:9), i.e. dwelling with God. They confirm the prediction of the Passion just made by Jesus, thus declaring that such is the design of God. In transfiguratione illud principaliter agebatur ut de cordibus discipulorum scandalum crucis tolleretur (St Leo the Great). § b33. Lk’s remark that Peter speaks only when he sees Moses and Elias departing justifies the translation, ‘Master, it is a good thing that we are here’, which is grammatically correct: a good thing, because he and his companions can build some sort of shelter against the sun (σκῃνή ‘tent’ or ‘booth’) for Jesus and his visitors from heaven. He wishes to detain them. What do they want shelters for? Surely because Peter is under the impression that, supported by such undeniable witnesses as Moses and Elias, Jesus is about to inaugurate his Messianic manifestation to the world (cf. 20). The lesson of 22–27 has not yet gone home, as subsequent events will prove. Lk adds, with Mk, that Peter does not know what he is talking about. 34. The cloud comes as if in answer to Peter’s words, here as elsewhere signifying the divine presence; he had suggested making shelters and the divine cloud covers them. God now enters on the scene and speaks as he spoke with Moses on Sinai about the Law, of which Christ is the end; Gal 3:24; cf. Ex 19:9 ff. 35. MS authority is divided between ‘beloved’ (only) ἀγαπητός and ‘elect’ ἐκλελεγμένος. The former looks like a borrowing from Mk and Mt or from 3:22. ‘Elect’ is a traditional Jewish Messianic title; cf. 23:35 and Is 42:1. The relation between the Transfiguration and the Confession of Peter is emphasized here by the similar command of silence (implied in Lk, explicitly stated in Mk and Mt) with which they both conclude.

§ c 37–50 Further Instruction of the Apostles—(Mt 17:14–23; 18:1–5; Mk 9:14–41). The recent events inspire the questions of the disciples now recorded by Mk and Mt but omitted by Lk, who proceeds immediately with the story of the epileptic boy which Mk describes in very great detail to the disadvantage of the Apostles. Lk characteristically passes over what seems to discredit the Apostles and makes the addition that the boy is an only son; a similar addition in the case of Jairus’s daughter. But he does not fail to include the somewhat surprising outburst of our Lord in 41, ‘O faithless and twisted generation, how long …’. To whom is the reproach addressed? To all. To the disciples who have been attempting the cure during the absence of Jesus with Peter, James and John, but have failed through lack of faith and due means (Mk 9:28–29 omitted by Lk); to the father whose faith is so imperfect (Mk 9:22–23 omitted by Lk); and to the Scribes who have been attacking the disciples as Mk alone shows, 9:14. Lk’s abbreviations necessarily obscure the meaning at times. 43b is very Lucan; cf. 7:15. Similarly 44, ‘all were astonished at the greatness of God’.

§ d 44b–45 Second Prediction of the Passion—(Mt 17:21–22; Mk 9:30–31). Lk makes our Lord take occasion from the recent astonishment and admiration to renew his warning about the future, introducing it with the emphatic ‘Lay up in your ears [not hearts] these words’; here, but not in Mk and Mt, the warning is the more serious from the omission of all reference to the Resurrection. Lk is very emphatic about the way the disciples are at a loss.

46–48 Dispute about Precedence—(Mt 18:1–5; Mk 9:33–7). Though Lk, like Mk, omits to record the bestowal of the primacy on Peter at his confession, it is tempting to think that this dispute had its occasion there. ‘In a few words Jesus teaches them what are the conditions necessary for spiritual power. He who has the right to command must exercise that right only in the general interest; he is the servant of all’ (Lagrange). Lk adds that the really great man is he who makes himself less than others.

49–50 The Unknown Exorcist—(Mk 9:37–41). The instructions conclude as in Mk (not in Mt) with a word about the attitude to be adopted towards those who believe in Jesus but are outside the circle of his chosen disciples. The man in question seems to have been successful in his use of Jesus’ name; hence he must have been a true follower. Lk abbreviates again. So ends the Galilean ministry in Lk.

§ 756a 9:51–18:30 Insistent Preaching of Salvation on the Way to Jerusalem—Here begins a very distinctive part of Lk, mostly proper to the third Gospel and comprising about one-third of the total. Unjustifiably it has been called the Peraean Ministry, for only some of its incidents take place east of the Jordan; others have called it the Samaritan Ministry because of the special reference it makes to the people of that district. Perhaps its best name is the Journey Narrative, though it appears to deal with more than one journey; but we have seen that Lk has special sources, and certainly Jn knows of several journeys to Jerusalem. But it can be said that Lk is here concerned principally with the progress of Jesus to Jerusalem for the purpose of fulfilling the divine decree of the Passion which he has begun to announce; cf. 9:51; 13:22; 17:11; 18:31. It is the final events at Jerusalem that Lk has in view all the time, and this it is which gives unity to the section. It is largely composed of discourses, containing thirteen parables proper to Lk. Scattered here and there are some of the logia or sayings contained in the Sermon of Mt chh 5–7. Characteristic of this part, and somewhat of a change from the preceding, is the severity of our Lord’s language on occasion; cf. 9:57–62; 11:42–52; 12:20, 56; 13:5, 26–35; 14:26–35. It may be an indication of his source that Lk here shows very little care for topography; the Apostles are named but once, even Peter, James and John rarely appearing. Finally this section contains some of the finest examples of Lk’s writing, e.g. 15:1–32

§ b 9:51–10:24 Proclamation of the Kingdom of God—The opening verse sets the tone for the whole section. ‘Assumption’; the same word (in its verbal form) is used in Ac 1:2 and Mk 16:19 for the Ascension and in the LX7461X for the taking up to heaven of Henoch and Elias. 52 recalls Mal 3:1 with its reference to Elias and John the Baptist (cf. Mal 4:5 and Lk 1:17; 7:27); in Samaria Jesus and his disciples are in a locality which speaks of Elias. Hence the suggestion of James and John, 54, is a remembrance of 4 Kg 1:10 ff. Note the introduction of ‘the disciples James and John’ as though they had not yet appeared in Lk. There is very strong MS authority against the inclusion of 55b–56a. 57–62. Cf. Mt 8:19–22. What is said of Jesus in 51 is demanded of all would-be disciples. He ‘fixed his face to go towards Jerusalem’ in spite of those who tried to persuade him to the contrary; cf. Mk 8:31 ff.; 10:32–4; Jn 11:7–8. So too those who wish to follow him must tread down all obstacles. There is no room for the flabby-minded in the Kingdom of God. ‘Let the dead bury their dead’; a hard saying, suggesting to the mind of some commentators that those not preoccupied with the Kingdom of God are spiritually dead; cf. Jn 5:21–29; 11:25. But it may be no more than an enigmatic way of saying that Jesus demands disciples who are ready to renounce home and family ties for the Gospel. This was addressed to a man already called. Such is the meaning of 62: it is impossible to plough a straight furrow unless the eyes are fixed steadfastly on the mark set up by the ploughman. ‘Fit’ i.e. ‘well-placed’ and suitable for the work that has to be done.

§ c 10:1–24 Mission of the Seventy (-Two)—(Cf. Mt 9:37–38; 10:7–16, 40; 11:21–23 for parallel ideas.) This is proper to Lk although many of the instructions are contained in Mt’s mission of the Twelve, a point that need surely cause no surprise. Jesus has therefore gathered round him a large number of disciples ‘fit for the Kingdom of God’. In Ac 1:15 Lk shows us 120 disciples gathered at Jerusalem immediately after the Ascension. The disciples are sent out two and two like the Apostles in Mk 6:7, but with this difference that the Seventy-two are sent to prepare for the coming of Jesus himself. MSS differ about the reading seventy-two or seventy. 4b. The absorbing thought of the preacher must be his mission; he must have the appearance of a man on a most urgent journey, looking neither to right nor left; cf. 4 Kg 4:29. Their message is urgent indeed: ‘the Kingdom of God hath come near’, the proclamation with which Jesus begins his preaching in Mk 1:15; this is firstappearence in Lk. 12. ‘In that day’; ‘in the day of judgement’ in Mt’s parallel 10:15; understood of the great Messianic Day when God shall appear to vindicate his rights; cf. Dan 7:13 ff. 13–15. The mention of the Cities of the Lake, after 9:51–52, seems out of place; the context is more natural in Mt 11:21–23.

§ d 17–24 Return of the Seventy-two—There is a general feeling of joy in which Jesus notably shares, the reason being the subjection of the devils to his disciples, a sign that the Reign of God has begun; Satan’s power over men is broken by their power over him. 18 indicates that Jesus was acting through his disciples when they used his name. There is a common opinion that here he was warning them against the danger of pride, but that seems to be contradicted by 19, words echoing Ps 90:13 and paralleled in Mk 16:17–18. DV’s translation of 18 is confusing; what Jesus says is: ‘I was watching Satan falling like lightning-from-heaven’, referring to the swiftness of the collapse of Satan’s dominion over men brought about by the preaching of the disciples. 20. The disciples are not forbidden to rejoice over the subjection of the devils; here as in 21b we have the Semitic idiom of comparison: ‘rejoice more that your names are written in heaven than that …’; ‘I thank thee Father that thou hast revealed these things to little ones more than …’. ‘Names written in heaven’; cf. Ex 32:32; Ps 68:29; Is 4:3, etc. Greek cities kept an exact written roll of those with right to citizenship. § e 21–23. Remarkable verbal parallels with Mt 11:25–27 and 13:16–17. There is a characteristic addition in 21 where the joy of Jesus, like the whole action of his Messianic career, is attributed to the Holy Ghost; cf. 4:1, 14, 18. For the rest see the commentary on Mt where the context is different and very suitable, i.e. after our Lord’s explanation of the purpose of the parables which hide the secret of the Kingdom from the unworthy; but to the disciples it is given to know the mystery of the Kingdom, and the very heart of that mystery is the truth of the Incarnation to which reference is here made. This clear affirmation of the divinity of Christ (and in Mt) is a source of great embarrassment for rationalist critics; some have maintained, without the least support from the MSS, that a later hand has added these words from the teaching of Jn. But, as more orthodox critics have said, the teaching of Lk and Mt here provides one of the closest links between the Synoptic and the Johannine teaching on the person of Jesus. Its affinities to the Fourth Gospel are obvious, yet it comes to us embedded in the earliest Palestinian document Q, probably the earliest of the evangelical sources. We may agree with this while awaiting better proofs of the existence of Q. Note especially that here Jesus is no longer ‘the Son of Man’, but ‘the Son’ absolutely.

§ f 25–37 Neighbourly Charity—This teaching concludes with the parable of the Good Samaritan, proper to Lk, but the incident which calls forth the parable finds a somewhat similar parallel in Mk 12:28–31; Mt 22:34–40. Some hold that Mk’s and Mt’s incident is altogether different on account of the very obvious discrepancies. In Mk and Mt the Scribe poses a question, as though commencing a mere academic discussion, about the most important precept of the Mosaic Law; we are to remember that, as traditionally interpreted, the Law comprised some 300 positive precepts and some 300 negative ones. Lk’s Scribe begins with a more pleasing request: what was he to do to gain everlasting life? ‘Tempting’ need not be taken in a bad sense; ἐκπειράζειν will easily stand the meaning of ‘finding out by examination’. The mention of everlasting life, new in Lk, comes well after 20 and the recent echoes of Jn who harps on that note. 26. Jesus deals with the man in a friendly way, referring him to the Law of which as a Scribe he is an accredited master. What does the Law say, for the way to life depends on the Giver of that Law? 27. The Scribe replies as any Jew might have replied by quoting Deut 6:5, for these words are the beginning of the Shema, the ritual prayer required to be said by every Jew twice a day. But how many Jews would have added the words which echo Lev 19:18 about brotherly love? The Law, it is true, insisted on this point, but it drew little attention from the doctors of the Law. Such a combination of texts is nowhere found in the rabbinical writings; the prevailing Jewish attitude towards the non-Jew was one of bitter contempt; cf. Mt 5:43. 29. Therefore it looks as if the question of the Scribe here was dictated by his discontent with the common view on this point. Lk seems to present us with another of those pious Jews who have more thoroughly penetrated the true spirit of the Old Law, hence a kindred soul with Jesus.

§ g 30–37 The Good Samaritan—Though proper to Lk it echoes thoroughly the teaching of his fellow Synoptists; cf. Mt 5:43 ff.; 9:13; 12:7. The significance of the parable is tremendous when we recall the attitude of the Jews to the Samaritans; cf. Ecclus 50:25 ff.; Jn 4:9; 8:48. Here the Jews, even priests and Levites, are not only compared unfavourably with a Samaritan, but a Scribe is bidden to sit at his feet and learn the true meaning of the Law. Remember that the Samaritans too followed the Pentateuch and looked on Moses as their teacher. The contrasts are strong: on the one hand the wounded Jew; the priest and the Levite who, as they lived on the offerings of the faithful, were the more obliged to the offices of neighbourliness. On the other hand a hated Samaritan, passing through an unfriendly country and therefore excusable if he hurried to get out of it; but not content merely to render first-aid and leave the victim, he carries him to the inn and undertakes all the charges, paying what was the equivalent of two days’ wages, Mt 20:2, and promising to return in case there was more to pay. 36–37. If Jesus concludes by turning the Scribe’s question around the other way it is for two reasons: first because the sense of the question was, how far does the obligation of neighbourly love extend? The answer (provided by the Samaritan) is: to everyone in need, Jew or non-Jew, friend or enemy. Secondly, by thus raising the Scribe’s question to the sphere of general principles regarding charity and mercy, there is no room left for rabbinical casuistry about Jews and non-Jews, Samaritans and Gentiles. Every man is my neighbour, more particularly the man in need. The parable has always been a common field for allegory: Christ as the Good Samaritan, the wounded man as the human race robbed and despoiled by the devil, oil and wine the Sacraments, the inn the Church, etc.

§ 757a 38–40 Martha and Mary—Proper to Lk. There is great divergence of opinion about the significance of the incident; some think that here Lk intends to show that works of charity are not sufficient: faith is also required; others that the recent parable illustrates the second part of the Scribe’s answer in 27, while this incident shows how God is to be loved and sought first of all by contemplation, and thus the contemplative life has a pre-eminence over the active, etc. 38. Lk as usual neglects topographical details, but Jn 11:1 ff. and 12:1 ff. show that the place is Bethany near Jerusalem. Doubtless the parable of the Good Samaritan was spoken on the way up from Jericho to Jerusalem which passes through Bethany. Martha is shown as the mistress of the house; Mary appears for the first time; cf. § 753g. The law of hospitality, much insisted on in the East, would require both sisters to be occupied with the care of providing a meal for the unexpected guests, and it may be taken for granted that Jesus was accompanied by his disciples. 40. Martha is distracted or preoccupied with attention to the preparation of the meal: Lk in no way suggests that she is indifferent to the teachings of Jesus. ‘Much serving’ does not mean that the guests were already at table; our Lord is teaching. Mary too is distracted, torn away from the thought of the meal by absorption in the words of Jesus. The scene and the words of Martha indicate a situation of friendly familiarity, and it would be as false to interpret her complaint in too serious a manner as it would be to read a grave rebuke into the reply of our Lord. It would be very unlike him to rebuke a woman who, if she is busy, is busy for the sake of him and his friends. Moreover he was a guest; she was the hostess. § b 41. Note here again ‘the Lord’ and in 39. ‘Martha, Martha, thou art full of care and trouble about many things; but there is need of few things or of one (only)’. Such seems to be the preferable, as it is the more authoritative, reading of the Greek. The repetition of Martha’s name gives the reply an affectionate tone; the ‘many things’ is an obvious reference to the ‘much serving’ above, while the ‘few things or one (only)’ is an equally obvious contrast. In fact the plain literal meaning in the circumstances must be that Jesus bids Martha not to go to such trouble for the sake of her unexpected guests; it is embarrassing for them to be the cause of it. One dish alone would satisfy their needs. He concludes with the almost humourous remark of 42b: ‘for Mary hath chosen a good part and she shall not be deprived of it’ merely in order that she may join in all these preparations which are really unnecessary. It follows that Mary has really chosen well in preferring to listen to his words. The shorter reading of 42a, adopted by V7462g and DV, favours the more common interpretation, viz. that Jesus is here teaching the severe lesson that solicitude about the needs of this life stands in the way of ‘the one thing necessary’. Objections to that interpretation are that it would be out of place in the circumstances; secondly, what is ‘the one thing necessary’ here? Listening to Jesus like Mary? But our Lord often warns that merely hearing his words is of no profit, and here it is Martha who is doing the work of ministering to the Lord. We may note in conclusion that until 1950 this passage was the Gospel of the Assumption of our Lady who, in the fulfilment of her maternal office towards her Son, played the part of Martha as well as that of Mary. But like Mary, she ‘kept all these things in her heart’, 2:19, 51.

§ c 11:1–13 Teaching on Prayer—The material collected here, except for the parable of the Importunate Friend, is found in Mt 6:9–13 and 7:7–11. We have already noted Lk’s insistence on prayer, particularly in the life of our Lord (cf. 1:10, 46 ff., 68 ff.; 2:14, 20, 29 ff., 37; 3:21; 6:12; 9:18, 29; 10:21; 22:32, 42–44; 23:34; 24:53), most of these cases being proper. Here in a short treatise he sets before us the example of Jesus, the model of prayer taught by him, the conditions required for efficacious prayer, i.e. perseverance and faith in the goodness of God. 2–4. In the Our Father, as in the Beatitudes, Lk shortens the form given by Mt. Some hold that Lk’s form is the more primitive, that of Mt being amplified for liturgical purposes (cf. the addition in the Syriac version, ‘for thine is the kingdom’ etc., which is a liturgical addition). But the fact that Mt’s form is the one adopted in the liturgy probably shows that it is the more primitive; Lk has the habit of abridging. See Mt 6:9–13 for commentary. § d 5–8. By teaching his disciples to begin their prayers with the word ‘Father’, Jesus wishes to inspire them with confidence; there are two things looked for in the person from whom we seek favours: the ability to do what we require and the goodwill to do it for us. But if God is our Father, then he has our good at heart, and if he is a heavenly Father then there is no need to doubt his ability. To drive home this lesson Lk records a delightful parable for the full understanding of which it is necessary to put oneself in the circumstances of the time: a house of one room, beds spread on the floor, scant means of artificial lighting, all of which go to render more obvious the untimeliness of the request. Allegorization induces conclusions very unworthy of application to God; it is a clear parable with an evident meaning: unwearying and confident prayer. 9–13. But for an added example in 12 and the remarkable variation in 13b Lk gives this teaching as in Mt 7:7–11. The change from Mt in 13b is very characteristic in view of Lk’s insistence on the part played by the Holy Ghost: ‘how much more will your Father from heaven give the good Spirit (Mt “good things”) to them that ask him’? The influence of the Spirit, as in Gen 1:2; 2:7, is always represented as productive of good. The chief good the disciple is to ask in prayer is that he may be like his Father in heaven, and this will be accomplished by the reception of God’s Spirit, as Lk has so often heard from St Paul, Rom 8:9 ff., etc.

§ e 14–54 Beginning of Denunciations of Scribes and Pharisees—Here begins a series of incidents common to Lk and Mt but found very scattered in Mt. Mk has but one parallel, the parables following the accusation of diabolical agency in Jesus, Mk 3:22–27, an incident put by Mt and Mk in the Galilean ministry. The first series of disputes with the Scribes and Pharisees, 5:17–6:11, ended with the threat against our Lord’s life; here is the first fulfilment of that threat, an effort to discredit the undeniable miracles he has worked by making out that he is a tool of Satan. That is the key to the very strong condemnations he utters in reply, for such an accusation is a blasphemy against the good Spirit just spoken of, 13.

§ f 14–28 Satan does not fight Satan—(Mt 12:22–30, 43–45; Mk 3:22–27). Lk omits to say who the adversaries are, but we learn from Mt and Mk that they are Scribes and Pharisees. In Lk the Pharisees do not appear till the denunciations begin in 37–39. As in Mt the accusation of using diabolical agency arises out of the cure of the dumb man (also blind in Mt); both Synoptists attribute the defect of the man to diabolical influence. The ancient Semites, like the modern Arabs, attributed disease to demonic influence, especially such diseases as induce an apparent change of personality, like madness. Rationalist critics maintain that our Lord was subject to the same superstition, and it is common for orthodox scholars to reply that he merely accommodated his language to the current notions of his time. But that cannot be true of all the cases in the Gospels, for our Lord accepts diabolical possession as an objective reality as the Church does still. The fact is that there is nothing theologically wrong in attributing all human ills to diabolical agency from the Fall downwards. By consenting to sin man has subjected himself to the dominion of Satan; Jn 8:34, Rom 6:12–14; the purpose of the Incarnation is to deliver man from the consequences of the Fall and to destroy the reign of Satan through the re-establishment of the Reign of God. All this is reflected here. The only differences between Lk and Mt are Lk’s additional demand for a sign from heaven (found later in Mt 12:38), and the unexpected change of Mt’s ‘Spirit of God’ to ‘finger of God’ in 20; Lk’s expression echoes the cry of Pharaoh’s magicians in Ex 8:19. The demand for a sign is logical after the accusation; Jesus is required to show a sign that he acts through the Spirit of God and not through the evil spirit. The conclusion in 23 is a very stern hint for the adversaries; if they have so sided against Jesus when he casts out a devil, is not that in itself a sign that they have taken sides with Satan whose reign, as is shown in the allegorical application of the preceding parables, our Lord has come to overthrow? § g 24–26. This corresponds very closely with Mt 12:43–45, a passage which is variously interpreted. In Lk it seems to express by means of a parable the lesson that the Jews, in refusing to accept the Kingdom of God inaugurated in the person of Jesus and his victory over Satan, have placed themselves in a worse position than that in which they were before; cf. Jn 9:41. It reinforces the warning of 23. 27–28. Lk alone. In the context of Mt and Mk the Mother and brethren of Jesus are here brought in (earlier in Lk 8:19–21). This suggests that our Lady’s appearance may have inspired the good woman’s words of admiration at the victory of our Lord over his enemies: ‘Happy mother’, she cries, ‘that bore such a son’. The reply of 28 is the same in effect as that in 8:21; Jesus does not deny the woman’s affirmation, but he declares that exact fidelity to the will of God (of which he knew better than anyone Mary was so outstanding an example) is cause for greater happiness.

§ 758a 29–32 Jonas as a Sign of the Son of Man—Close correspondence here with Mt 12:38–42, save that Lk has put earlier, 11:16, the demand for a sign. He omits all reference to the whale and application to the Resurrection. The sign of Jonas is his preaching to the Ninevites, Jon 3:1 ff., whom he converts to such thorough-going penance. The Jews come out badly by comparison with the pagan Ninevites, and even with the Queen of Sheba. Note the growing severity of the reproaches and the significance of the claims: Jesus is superior to the Prophets, greater than Solomon.

33–36 Jesus is a Light for those who receive him—(Mt 5:15; 6:22–23). Lk has already used 33 before in the context on the use of parables, 8:16–17, but the verses are well-placed here where our Lord tells the Jews why they fail to see what is staring them in the face; their dispositions are evil. There is plenty of light, and he is that light. The moral application is well drawn out in Jn 3:19–21. 36b. ‘the whole (man) shall be lit-up as when the lamp enlighteneth thee with its shining brightness’.

§ b 37–54 Denunciation of Pharisees and Scribes—(Mt 23:4, 6, 13, 23, 25–26, 29–31, 34–36). The section concludes, as does the former series of disputes, with violent rage on the part of the adversaries of Jesus and renewed efforts to close his mouth. On this occasion battle is joined more earnestly; he sees that it is time to show them up for what they are, hypocrites, and therefore a danger to their fellow Jews. From the start we are surprised to see him breaking out into an attack on the Pharisee who has invited him to dinner. Note here again ‘the Lord said’, 39. 41. An obscure verse but evidently with the meaning that external observance is useless without interior observance; Is 58; Mt 5:20 ff. Hence ‘give in alms that which is within’ (i.e. inside the cup and platter); this would make them cleaner than all their repeated purifications; Ps 40:1–2. 47–48. Lk makes this more difficult to understand than the parallel in Mt. But perhaps he turns it into a piece of irony. While the Jews show honour to the Prophets by building their tombs, they are seeking an opportunity of killing Jesus, who is the Prophet of the Prophets; cf. 11:32. 53. ‘And as he went out thence, the Pharisees …’

§ c 12:1–59 Dispositions required in those who seek Salvation—Jesus declares that everything turns on this question of the soul’s salvation, for which a man must be prepared to face any loss, to renounce every other good whatsoever. Therefore, too, all must be on the watch constantly for the coming of the Lord, for the chance once lost is lost completely.

1–12 Instruction concerning the Future Preaching of the Disciples—(Mt 10:26–33; 12:32; 10:19–20). In the introductory verse we are shown a great crowd (μυριάδες. lit7463. ‘tens of thousands’) so pressing round Jesus that they tread on one another; Jesus renews his warning to the disciples of the leaven (i.e. teaching) of the hypocritical Pharisees, and proceeds with instructions which find a very exact parallel in Mt. The particular points worth noting here are as follows: in 4 Jesus addresses his followers as ‘my friends’, new in Lk (cf. Jn 15:15); in 8–9 ‘the angels of God’ take the place of ‘my Father in heaven’ in Mt 10:32–33; in 12 ‘the Holy Spirit’ corresponds to ‘the Spirit of your Father’ in Mt. Mt’s context for the sin against the Holy Ghost is more suitable than Lk’s; in Mt it comes immediately after the accusation of using diabolical agency. Here Lk seems to have the disciples rather than adversaries in view, as though to say that a disciple who, after having believed in Jesus and received the Holy Ghost, should then deny him would be guilty of an unforgivable sin; cf. Heb 6:4–6. It is not a question of a sin of its nature unforgivable, for Lk knows that Peter himself will deny his Master. But the prospect here is of one who appears before God still denying Christ. Further 11–12 indicate that, since the Holy Spirit will speak through the disciples when they are brought before hostile judges, to deny Jesus then would be to sin against the Holy Ghost, cf. Mk 13:11.

§ d 13–34 The Detachment required in a Disciple—The section begins with an incident found only in Lk, followed by another of his special parables. The incident of 13–14 recalls the story of Moses in Ex 2:11–15. The teaching of the Parable of the Rich Fool is in tune with the note that runs all through these later discourses, the supreme importance of the soul and its salvation. If Lk omits the solemn warning of Mk 8:37, Mt 16:26b, it is here in a more graphic form. 21. ‘Rich towards God’; either the using of one’s wealth for God’s service; or laying up treasure in heaven in the form of spiritual goods; or, more probably, using wealth for almsgiving to those whom Lk makes the special friends of God; cf. 12:33; 16:19 ff. As St Ambrose finely says, ‘the hands of the poor, the houses of widows, are storehouses that endure for ever’. 22–34. Parallels in Mt 6:25–33; 19:21, with but little change. The ravens and the lilies are contrasted with the Rich Fool. In 25 ἡλικία seems best rendered by ‘span’ (of life) or ‘age’. Thus the Rich Fool is again recalled; he could not extend his life in order to enjoy his hoarded goods. 29b. An addition to Mt, or rather another expression for solicitude; to be ‘lifted up on high’ is to be suspended, therefore ‘be not in suspense’ about your needs. 31. Omit ‘and his justice’ which is a gloss from Mt 6:33. 32. A Lucan addition, thoroughly in keeping with this section, 9:51–18:30, which is remarkable for its alternation of severity and tenderness in the language of our Lord to his disciples; cf. 12:4, 7. For those who are faithful to the spirit of the Beatitudes which are here recalled the Kingdom of God is assured, cf. 6:20. 33–34. Lk here repeats the thought of Mt 6:19–20 and concludes with the same warning: set all your thoughts and desires on the all-important object. In Semitic imagery the ‘heart’ is the seat of consideration, not of affection.

§ e 35–59 The Necessity of Watching—According to his usual fashion our Lord concludes his instruction with a call to action; cf. 6:46–49. The insistent note is one of ‘watching’ but the Greek γρηγορεῖν does not mean watching like a spectator; it is rather to be awake and active, ‘looking alive’ as we say. Thus the loins are to be girt, i.e. the skirts of the garments lifted up in preparation for labour and marching, as when the Israelites ate the first Pasch in Egypt, Ex 12:11; as the master in 37b girds himself to wait on his faithful servants. The parable (35–38) is peculiar to Lk in this form, but it contains the same lesson as the somewhat similar parable in Mt 25:1–13 which is proper to Mt. There is a strong note of allegory in 37b, for it is not the human fashion for a master to wait on his servants; but this is the Master of 22:27 and Jn 13:5. The conclusion then is that the disciple must be ready for his Master’s coming and not weary if he is long a-coming, a conclusion with which Mk ends the instructions of Jesus on the eve of the Passion, 13:33–37. But Lk omits the saying of Mk 13:32 and Mt 24:36 concerning the uncertain time of the coming of the Son of Man, the secret of which is reserved to the Father alone and not shared even by the Son according to Mk. 41–46: parallel with Mt 24:45–50 save for the introduction and the conclusion. This is the sole appearance of Peter in the Journey Narrative. The answer given by our Lord to his question seems to be a fuller explanation of the words of Mk 13:37, the conclusion of a similar instruction. Some see an allegory in the parable of 42–44: Peter is the steward set over all the other servants of the Lord. § f 47–48. Proper to Lk. Peter has asked whether his Master’s warning is meant for others besides the disciples. Here Jesus appears to say that everyone will be dealt with according to his correspondence with the light he has received; if the disciples have been shown special favour (cf. 10:23–24) then so much the more will be expected of them. The same lesson is applicable to the Jews in general who have been privileged to see and hear Christ. 49–50. Proper to Lk but recalling Mk 10:38–39; the patristic explanation is that the reference is to the fire of charity, since our Lord has come to baptise in the Holy Ghost and with fire; cf. 3:16; Rom 5:5. Lk may be recalling again the prophecy of Malachias to which he refers so often earlier; in Mal 3:2–3 the prophet foresees the coming of the angel of Yahweh ‘like a refining fire’ separating the good from the bad. This would carry on the idea of discrimination referred to in 42–48, where emphasis is laid on the standard of discrimination, i.e. fulfilment or non-fulfilment of the will of God. The thought of his Father’s will perhaps here suggests to Jesus what the fulfilment of that will entails for himself, and hence explains 50. Comparison with Mk 10:38–39 seems to show that the baptism here spoken of refers to the Passion. In what sense is our Lord ‘straitened’, i.e. hemmed-in, constrained, afflicted, until that baptism be accomplished? Perhaps it is an echo of Jn 12:32–34. Or is the source of his affliction the fact that while some accept his teaching, so many refuse? This is suggested by the theme of § g 51–53, which recalls the words of Simeon, 2:34–35; Jesus is a sign of contradiction. ‘To give peace on earth’ must not be interpreted as an infinitive of purpose, but of consequence; Lk has not forgotten the message of 1:79; 2:14; 7:50. Mt includes this warning of our Lord in the instructions given at the mission of the Apostles; 10:34–36. 54–59. Parallels in Mt 5:25–6; 16:2–23. The discourse thus concludes with a warning to the crowd about the urgency of the teaching just given; it is high time to be reconciled with God; the judgement of God looms and the result of that judgement is inescapable. Let them read the signs of the times, i.e. the appearance of John the Baptist and the coming of Jesus.

§ 759a 13:1–9 A Call to Repentance—Proper to Lk, carrying on the theme of the discourse just concluded. The fate of Israel is at stake, and the Jews will no longer find any advantage over other men. Indeed they will have the mortification of seeing themselves excluded from the Kingdom of God, while those whom they have despised as outcasts from God will be received, 25–30. Therefore while there is time let them bring forth fruits of repentance, a lesson emphasized by the Parable of the Fig-tree. The allegorical application is clear; Israel is receiving the most careful attention from the Divine Gardener, as the presence of Jesus proves, but failure to respond will entail speedy and final punishment. The note of impending disaster is increasing. 1. On Pilate’s slaughter of the Galileans, cf. § 72c.

10–17 Further Dispute about the Sabbath—Proper to Lk. The miracle which arouses the dispute exemplifies the above remark concerning God’s continued efforts to save Israel; but the response it calls forth from one who represents the leaders of Israel confirms the doleful prognostications of Jesus. In using the words ‘whom Satan hath bound these eighteen years’ he does not indicate diabolical possession, though they seem to indicate supernatural knowledge on his part, for the miracle was not asked for. See note above (§ 757f) on disease and diabolical influence.

§ b 18–30 Three Parables of the Kingdom—The first two are among Mt’s collected parables of the Kingdom, 13:13–33; Mk 4:30–32, omitted in the Lucan parallel and reserved for this place where they are connected with the present context; cf. 12:32 and 51 ff. The comparisons which insist on the smallness of the beginnings serve to recall again the blindness and obstinacy of the majority of the Jews, and so provide an introduction to the third parable which foreshadows the reprobation of the Jews and the welcome accorded to the Gentiles; parallels in Mt 7:13–14; 25:11–12; 7:22–23; 8:11–12; 19:30. It will be noted that here, as often in the Journey Narrative, the teaching is occasioned by an interruption from the audience; 10:25; 11:1, 27, 45; 12:13, 41; 13:1. 24–25. Omit ‘but’ at the beginning of 25 (not in Gk) and join the two verses together as one parable, according to some commentators, though they appear separately in Mt 7:13–14 and 25:10–12. The entrance to the Kingdom is narrow in the sense described by our Lord, i.e. severe renunciation is the condition of entrance. 26 gives a strong allegorical turn to the parable, thus identifying Jesus with the master of the house who admits to or excludes from the Kingdom. 28. ‘There’, i.e. in that place which means exclusion from the Kingdom; outside the door, where they are shut out from the society of the patriarchs and consequently no longer true children of Abraham; cf. 16:22; 3:8; Gal 3:7 ff. ‘Weeping and gnashing of teeth’, here alone in Lk but oftener in Mt, expressing sorrow and terror; βρυγμός means the chattering of teeth with fear rather than gnashing them with rage. 30. As in Mt 19:30 and 20:16.

§ c 31–35 Lament over Jerusalem—Cf. Mt 23:37–39, where there is almost verbal correspondence with 34–35. Mt has the better context, where Jesus is at or near Jerusalem, while in Lk he is in Peraea, the territory of Herod Antipas; Peraea however extended to the west of Jordan and its frontier approached Jerusalem. He is in the neighbourhood of Machaerus where Herod had executed John; hence perhaps the warning in 31. It does not seem clear whether these Pharisees are well-disposed, or merely plotting to get Jesus into Judaea and within their power. His answer fits either case; he will not go up to Jerusalem until the time appointed for him to die there, and until that time nothing shall stop him from carrying out the mission bestowed on him by his Father. 32. The day here spoken of is not to be taken as the natural space of time. ‘I am consummated’, τελειοῦμαι, ‘I reach the end’. 35. Omit ‘desolate’, which has been added from Mt 23:38. ‘Your house’ seems to mean the temple; a foreboding of the cessation of the Mosaic worship. 35b seems to foretell the greeting on Palm Sunday (cf. 19:38) but its parallel in Mt 23:39 follows Palm Sunday. Hence the conclusion of the commentators that our Lord is here speaking of a future event that will take place after his Passion; according to some, his second coming; according to others, the time foretold by St Paul, Rom 11:25, when the Jews shall be converted and recognize Jesus as the Messias.

§ d 14:1–6 Healing of the Dropsical Man on the Sabbath—The miracle and the following counsel given to the Jews, 7–14, find no parallel in Mt and Mk. Lk seems to make them the setting for the Parable of the Great Supper which carries on the theme of the previous two chapters: the refusal of the Jews to accept Jesus and the consequent prediction of the incorporation of the Gentiles in the Kingdom of God. After the miracle Lk places the comparison of 5 which he had omitted in 6:6–11, his parallel with Mt 12:9–13; Mk 3:1–6, where it appears. The Greek reads ‘son or ox’ in place of V7464g and D7465V ‘ass or ox’; but the meaning remains the same: a work of charity and mercy such as Jesus had performed was a fulfilment rather than a breach of the Sabbath.

§ e 7–14 Advice on Humility and Charity—It may seem strange to find our Lord as a guest in the house of an important Pharisee after the recent denunciations; but it may be explained by the fact that he is still in Peraea where perhaps the local Pharisees have had little previous contact with him. Lk gives a picture of the Pharisees which is quite in accord with the character of them painted by non-biblical Jewish writings. We are not to suppose that our Lord is advising them to practise false modesty in order to get the better of their fellows. It is suggested that he is again attacking their hypocrisy because they seek an opportunity for self-aggrandisement even in the exercise of the sacred obligations of hospitality. Note that Lk calls this a parable. Does he mean that it is a comparison with the way in which the Pharisees consider themselves invited as by right to the chief places in the wedding-feast of eternal life with God in his Kingdom? Such a disposition secures exclusion rather than admittance. Cf. Prov 25:6–7 which perhaps inspires the parable and gives an allegorical turn to it.

§ f 15–24 Parable of the Great Supper—The similar parable of Mt 22:1–10 is substantially the same though with differences of detail which add to the allegorical significance, e.g. the King makes a marriage for his Son (the Incarnation), he sends his servants (the Prophets) to call men to the feast; they reject the invitation and kill the messengers (cf 11:47–51), etc. Lk’s parable cannot be so treated; its plain application is that God wills good to men and his benevolent design will be accomplished whatever obstacles wicked men put in the way. It is obviously related to the Kingdom of God about which our Lord has lately been speaking, 12:31; 13:18, and it repeats the teaching of these chapters about the importance of allowing nothing to interfere with the soul’s salvation. But the possibilities of allegorical interpretation, for the Pharisees who heard it and for us who read it, are clear: those first invited are the religious leaders who consider themselves as the rightful heirs of the Kingdom, or else the nation which prided itself on being God’s Chosen People; the poor and wretched of the city brought in to take the place of these could represent the ‘accursed multitude that knoweth not the Law,’ Jn 7:48–49, with the publicans and sinners; while the outcasts from the highways and hedges might be the Gentiles. By the more gentle rebukes Jesus had addressed to the Pharisees gathered with him at table, 7–14, he had prepared them for the severe warning of this parable, viz. that they were in a fair way to lose their places at the great feast of the Kingdom of God through the contemptuous way in which they had received the invitation of God’s chief ambassador, who is now telling them for the last time that the feast is ready.

§ 760a 25–35 The Disciples of Jesus must count the Cost—The logical link between this and the parable is found in the reprobation of those who rejected the invitation through self-love; he who wishes to imitate Jesus in his devotion to the Kingdom of God must have that detachment which grows out of complete self-surrender. There is a parallel in Mt 10:37–38, but Lk expresses the warning more bluntly with that severity which is one of the marks of the Journey Narrative. Note how this warning is addressed not merely to the intimate disciples but to ‘great multitudes’. In 13:17 Lk shows us great enthusiasm among the people after the healing of the infirm woman; doubtless an enthusiasm rising from Messianic expectations of the traditional sort. Our Lord appears to turn on them and say: ‘If you wish to follow me, this is what I expect from you; now follow if you dare’. If anyone allows wealth, family affection, even love of life to interfere with the claims of discipleship, then such a one is not fit to be a disciple. Even the prospect of seeing oneself marching in a file of condemned men must not make the true disciple hesitate. The two parables that follow, 28–33, proper to Lk, are meant to illustrate this lesson: count the cost before undertaking the duties of discipleship. They also contain the following implied contrast: in worldly affairs, like building and going to war, money and goods are essential to success; the opposite is true in the great affair of the world to come. ‘Every one of you that doth not renounce all that he possesseth cannot be my disciple’, surely a divine claim to make. The sense of these parables is not that long consideration is required before a man makes up his mind to be a Christian, but rather that a resolution is demanded fit for every eventuality; and the eventualities may be severe. Even the parable of salt, 34–35, used by Mt 5:13a to show the duty of a disciple to serve as a purifying and enlightening principle for his fellowmen, is here used only in the sense of the warning in Mt 5:13b. Failure to stick to one’s resolution as a loyal disciple is severely condemned, and the favourite formula of 35b is used to draw serious attention to the point. On ‘hating’ father and mother, cf. § 693d.