As we approach the end of the Church year and Advent draws near, the
mood of the liturgy changes perceptibly and becomes eschatological.
This is in accord with tradition, for in ancient times Advent
started earlier and laster longer. The Church of England now
sensibly designates the last three Sundays of the church year
“Sundays before Advent.”
Reading I: Proverbs 31:10-13, 19-20, 30-31
Proverbs’ picture of the virtuous woman is a beautiful one,
though it is hard to see its connection with today’s other
readings. Perhaps the last verse will help us: “Give her a
share in the fruit of her hands,” a thought that is found also
in the parable of the talents: the profitable servants are given a
share in their earnings.
But to concentrate on this point detracts from the main thrust of
both readings.
The First Reading is a picture of a gracious wife and mother who
practices love for both God and neighbor in that state of life into
which it has pleased God to call her.
Responsorial Psalm: 128:1-2, 3, 4-5
The second stanza fits in admirably with the Old Testament reading.
It also balances the picture: the God-fearing wife (Prov 31:30) is matched by a God-fearing husband (Ps 128:1, 5).
Note the typically Old Testament concern with the community. Its
ideal is not just the happiness of an individual family—the welfare
of the family enriches the life of the whole community.
The same thought was present in the second stanza of Prov 31. The graces and virtues of the good housewife are not confined to
the home but are extended to the community at large through concern
for the poor.
The marriage services emphasize that a Christian home should not be
self-centered but should reach out in blessing to the community
around it.
Reading II: 1 Thessalonians 5:1-6
Paul is apparently replying to a question from his correspondents
concerning “the times and the seasons,” that is, the
precise date of the parousia, which Paul’s original preaching
had led them to expect imminently. Paul rejects the inference. There
is one thing they need to know: the end will come suddenly (cf. Mk 13:32 and Acts 1:6-7).
Despite these warnings of Scripture, however, curiosity over the
date of the end has continued to exercise the minds of Christians
ever since, and ignorant and unscholarly fanatics claiming to know
the date of the parousia can always win a ready hearing.
But the Book of Revelation is about events in the first century, not
the twentieth century or any other. The experience of history shows
that announcements of the exact date of the end have invariably been
proven wrong. As fundamentalists, such fanatics should take 1 Thes 5:1-6, Mk 13:32, and Acts 1:6-7 to heart!
Jesus’ parable of the thief in the night (Mk 13:35 par.; Lk 12:39f.) is one that the Thessalonians apparently knew already (1 Thes 5:2)—an interesting indication that Paul may have transmitted more
Jesus tradition than the letters suggest. By citing this parable,
Paul elevates the parousia hope from one of curious speculation to
one of existential attitude. The Christian must always live on
tiptoe, as if the parousia were coming at any moment.
But there is more to it than “as if.” In a manner
typical of his teaching (cf. Rom 13:11-14), Paul insists that the End has in some sense already come.
Christian believers are already children of the light and the day.
The imperative is based on an indicative: Be what you are, children
of the light and the day.
Here is the final answer to the fanaticism of parousiac excitement.
It is not a matter for idle curiosity but one of living here and now
in the power of the future that we have already begun to participate
in through baptism.
When I read the short form of this gospel, I rubbed my eyes in
astonishment. Is the reading meant to stop at Mt 25:20? Surely it should at least include Mt 25:21. Otherwise the caption refers to nothing in the text. Hopefully
the long form will be used lest the reading lose its whole
point. [Webmaster note: the short form in the Second Typical Edition of
the Lectionary ends with verse 21.]
As with the parable of the ten virgins, we may distinguish three
stages in the history of the tradition:
1. At the Jesus level it was a story told from life. The owner of an
estate had to go on a long journey, so he left his money to three
servants in trust, lest it remain idle during his absence. Two of
them put it to wise use, made capital gains, and were commended by
the master on his return. But a third servant carefully hoarded it
and, on the master’s return, gave him back the exact sum he
had been entrusted with. Instead of commending the third servant for
his caution, the master rebuked him and handed the money over to the
most enterprising of the three servants.
When Jesus first told this story, he must have applied it to
something quite concrete in his ministry. Perhaps he was condemning
the Jewish religious authorities. They were like the third servant,
so carefully bent on preserving in its purity the tradition with
which they had been entrusted that they lost their openness for new
things and refused to accept Jesus’ message.
2. In the early community the parable was moralized by the addition
of the maxim “For to all those who have, more be given, and
they will have an abundance; but from those who have nothing, even
what they have will be taken away.” In addition, the parable
was allegorized. The master was equated with Christ, his departure
with the ascension, and his delayed return with the delay of the
parousia. The words “enter into the joy of your master”
are inserted so that the reward becomes participation in the
messianic banquet.
3. Matthew places the parable in his sequence of parables following
the Synoptic apocalypse that culminates with the Son of Man coming
to judge the church. The faithful servant now stands for
those Christians who hear the teaching of Christ and follow it; the
unprofitable servant represents those who do not keep the new law
enunciated by Jesus for the church.
