If you would like to catch up on some recent posts, here is a place where you can easily access some posts you might have missed. I hope it helps… enjoy.
Continue readingLifted Up
The first reading today is from the Book of Numbers 21:4-9:
With their patience worn out by the journey, the people complained against God and Moses, “Why have you brought us up from Egypt to die in this desert, where there is no food or water? We are disgusted with this wretched food!” In punishment the LORD sent among the people saraph serpents, which bit the people so that many of them died. Then the people came to Moses and said, “We have sinned in complaining against the LORD and you. Pray the LORD to take the serpents from us.” So Moses prayed for the people, and the LORD said to Moses, “Make a saraph and mount it on a pole, and if any who have been bitten look at it, they will live.” Moses accordingly made a bronze serpent and mounted it on a pole, and whenever anyone who had been bitten by a serpent looked at the bronze serpent, he lived.
The Book of Numbers is the title of the book in English, but the Hebrew title is, more commonly, bemiḏbar, “in the wilderness [of]”). “In the wilderness” describes the contents of the book much better than “numbers,” which is derived from the censuses described in later chapters. Our passage occurs after God has assigned them to wander in the desert for a generation because of their rebellion against the leadership of God. They seem to have to fight their way through the wilderness.
In the midst of this larger narrative, the Israelites have just won a military victory but still clear of the Edomites as they navigate towards the promised land. Along the way, the exigencies of life in the desert once again caused them to complain – and not for the first time. Even in the face of victories the Israelites’ basic character has not changed. They complain against both God and Moses because of a lack of acceptable water and food. Once more these people show themselves to be out of touch with reality as they long for Egypt and talk as if they had a choice about dying in the wilderness (cf. 11:4–6; 14:2–4). In previous times complaints about food had brought a divine supply of their needs (11:4–35), but now the response of God is to send a scourge of fiery serpents that kills many people. Again as before, the Israelites repent (11:2; 12:11; 14:40) and ask Moses to intercede with Yahweh (11:2; 12:11–13). When he does, God instructs him to construct a copper image of one of the lethal snakes and to set it on a pole where it can be seen. No one is saved from being bitten, but if one is bitten and chooses to obey God by looking at the copper snake, one will be cured from the lethal effects of the bite.
There is much speculation about the snake (“fiery” likely because of the burning associated with its bite) and why mounting a copper image of it is the means of cure. There is no firm agreement, but here is at least one interesting speculation. The people were “threatening” to return to Egypt, turning away from God towards evil. The Egyptian god Apep (also Apophasis) was the evil god who lost in battle to the sun god Re. Apep was the god of death, darkness and an opponent of light – and interestingly, was also the god of medicine and healing. But there was one catch: worshippers were not to look upon the snake god. To raise their eyes and look on the snake was to receive the judgment of death from Apep and know eternal darkness. To keep one’s eyes cast down in worship was to know healing.
The command from Moses for those who had been bitten – and presumably guilty of turning away from God – was to look upon their snake god. They were facing certain death from the snake bit and knew that only the true God would save them. If they had faith in Yahweh and looked upon the image of the snake who was no god at all, they were healed: “anyone who had been bitten by a serpent looked at the bronze serpent, he lived.” If they refused to admit their guilt and kept their eyes cast downward in false worship, then they died, ironically suffering the very opposite fate that their former worship promised.
During the Communion Rite of Mass over the years I have noticed that when the priest elevates the consecrated host and chalice then says, “Behold the Lamb of God…” In a good and true sign of reverence many Catholics bow their heads. But then the liturgical command is “Behold” meaning “see, gaze upon, observe.” It is a time in the Mass when we are to raise our eyes to the Lamb of God and see in the Holy Eucharist the One who, raised up on the cross, has rescued and redeemed us from the wilderness of our sins.
“And just as Moses lifted up the serpent in the desert, so must the Son of Man be lifted up, so that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life. For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him might not perish but might have eternal life.” (John 3:14-16)
Image credit: Moses and the Brazen Serpent | Esteban March (1610-1668) | Banco Santander Collection, Madrid | PD-US
The Aftermath of Pearl Harbor

Pearl Harbor was just the beginning of a remarkable series of rapid military victories across the Central and Southwest Pacific and Southeast Asia. From the 1939 occupation of Northern French Indochina, the aim of Japan had always been focused on the oil fields of the Dutch East Indies. The July 1941 occupation of Southern French Indochina was a preparatory move towards Thailand, Burma, the Malay Peninsular, and the city of Singapore. These were preliminary moves to the invasion of the Dutch East Indies.

The Path to the Dutch East Indies
December 8
- Invasion of Hong Kong. This important British colony and supply route for the Chinese Army was fully captured by Christmas Day.
- The first wave of IJN bombers attack Wake Island. The Marine Defense Force on the island with its limited air support repulses multiple attacks but finally falls on December 23rd.
- Bombing and amphibious landings occur in the Philippines (Luzon). Manila is declared an open city and occupied by the Japanese on January 2nd. The allied forces on the Bataan Peninsula surrendered April 9th, with the last stronghold, Corregidor, falling on May 6th.
- Japanese forces landed in northern Malay with concurrent landings in southern Thailand. The Malay peninsula was under Japanese control by January 18th leaving the Japanese army at the “gates” of Singapore.
December 10:
- The U.S. territory of Guam in the Marianas Islands was captured in a single day operation.
- The main British naval deterrent in the Southwest Pacific, HMS Prince of Wales and HMS Repulse, are sunk by IJN torpedo planes.
December 22:
- Japanese forces cross into Burma
- By March 7, Rangoon was controlled by the IJA
- By April 26, all of Burma was under Japanese control
February 15: British forces surrendered Singapore, the largest British military defeat in history.
Conquering the Dutch East Indies and their Oil Fields
- December 16: Japanese troops invade Borneo with the ultimate target of the oil fields of Balikpapan. Borneo was under Japanese control by February 1
- February 14: Sumatra was invaded with the ultimate target of the oil fields of Palembang. By March 28 the island was under Japanese control
- February 28: Java was invaded and under Japanese control by March 14.
Strategic Situation
By late May 1942 Japan had achieved nearly all of its initial war aims:
- Securing oil and resource regions
- Eliminating Allied naval forces in Southeast Asia
- Establishing a broad defensive perimeter stretching from Southeast Asia, to the Southwest Pacific, to the central Pacific, occupying all locales of significance.
However, the rapid expansion also stretched Japanese logistics and resources. Within days of the end of May 1942 Japan would face a turning point of the Pacific War at the Battle of Midway, where this string of victories would abruptly end.
Image credit: various photographs from Naval Aviation Museum, National World War II Museum, and US Navy Archive. Map from John Parshalls.
Jesus Predicts Desertion and Promises Reunion
31 Then Jesus said to them, “This night all of you will have your faith in me shaken, for it is written: ‘I will strike the shepherd, and the sheep of the flock will be dispersed’; 32 but after I have been raised up, I shall go before you to Galilee.” 33 Peter said to him in reply, “Though all may have their faith in you shaken, mine will never be.” 34 Jesus said to him, “Amen, I say to you, this very night before the cock crows, you will deny me three times.” 35 Peter said to him, “Even though I should have to die with you, I will not deny you.” And all the disciples spoke likewise. (26:31-35) Continue reading
Jesus Institutes the Eucharist
26 While they were eating, Jesus took bread, said the blessing, broke it, and giving it to his disciples said, “Take and eat; this is my body.” 27 Then he took a cup, gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you, 28 for this is my blood of the covenant, which will be shed on behalf of many for the forgiveness of sins. 29 I tell you, from now on I shall not drink this fruit of the vine until the day when I drink it with you new in the kingdom of my Father.” 30 Then, after singing a hymn, they went out to the Mount of Olives.(26:26-30) Continue reading
Jesus Predicts the Betrayal
20 When it was evening, he reclined at table with the Twelve. 21 And while they were eating, he said, “Amen, I say to you, one of you will betray me.” 22 Deeply distressed at this, they began to say to him one after another, “Surely it is not I, Lord?” 23 He said in reply, “He who has dipped his hand into the dish with me is the one who will betray me. 24 The Son of Man indeed goes, as it is written of him, but woe to that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed. It would be better for that man if he had never been born.” 25 Then Judas, his betrayer, said in reply, “Surely it is not I, Rabbi?” He answered, “You have said so.” (26:20-25) Continue reading
New Possibilities
The scene in today’ gospel (a woman caught in adultery) is a mixture of zealous righteousness that seeks to enact the law without pardon or quarter, the leadership who want to trap Jesus between mercy and the Law, and a woman caught in sin, fearing for her life. True righteousness would have some measure of concern for her soul. True righteousness would be free from deceitfulness, not hiding behind loyalty to Moses for other intentions.
This situation is apparently just an attempt to entrap Jesus (v. 6). If he is lax toward the law, then he is condemned. But if he holds a strict line, then he has allowed them to prevail in their merciless treatment of this woman and has opened himself up to trouble from the Romans, for he will be held responsible if the stoning proceeds. The leaders of Israel are putting God to the test in the person of his Son, repeating the Israelites’ historical pattern on more than one occasion in the wilderness at Meribah and Massah (Ex 17:2; Num 20:13).
When Jesus heard what the teachers of the law said, Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. This action has been variously interpreted. When the Pharisees and scribes kept on questioning him, Jesus straightened up and said to them, ‘If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her.’ According to the law, witnesses to a capital offense had to cast the first stone when the accused was condemned to death (Deut. 17:7). Jesus regarded the teachers of the law as witnesses to the offense. Therefore, they should begin the execution if it were to go ahead. But Jesus’ words challenged the accusers, implying that none of them was without sin and therefore they were in no position to condemn this woman. What sin Jesus was implying they were guilty of is not clear. Perhaps they too were guilty of adultery. Perhaps they were malicious witnesses in terms of Deuteronomy 19:15–21, because they were not interested in seeing justice done, but only in trapping Jesus.
An optimistic reading of Jesus’ call for the one without sin to cast the first stone is “all the people” have been turned away from their murderous intentions onto the path of life as they withdraw to reflect on their own sinfulness before God. Those who came to condemn ended up condemning themselves by not casting a stone.
Jesus is left alone, sitting on the ground, bent over and writing, with the woman standing before him. As Augustine says, “The two were left alone, misera et misericordia” (“a wretched woman and Mercy”; In Augustine’s commentary John 33.5). He straightens up and asks for a report of what happened, as if he had been totally oblivious to what took place as he concentrated on his writing on the ground. He does not ask her about the charges but rather about that aspect of the situation most heartening to the woman: Where are they? Has no one condemned you? (v. 10).
But there is one left who could still execute the judgment–the only one present who was without sin and thus could throw the first stone. Is she hopeful at this point or still quite frightened? We can only speculate as to whether the woman was familiar with Jesus and his embodiment of the mercy of God. In any case, she becomes a memorable example of the fact that “God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world might be saved through him” (3:17). Jesus says to her, “Neither do I condemn you. Go, and from now on do not sin any more” (8:11). Jesus grants pardon, not acquittal. Here is mercy and righteousness. He condemned the sin and not the sinner. But more than that, he called her to a new life. The gospel is not only the forgiveness of sins, but a new quality of life that overcomes the power of sin.
Without love, there is no forgiveness. With love, a whole new life is possible.
Image credit: Detail of “Christ and the Adulteress” Rembrandt, 1644 | National Gallery London | PD-US
Possibility of New Life
The scene in today’ gospel (a woman caught in adultery) is a mixture of zealous righteousness that seeks to enact the law without pardon or quarter, the leadership who want to trap Jesus between mercy and the Law, and a woman caught in sin, fearing for her life. True righteousness would have some measure of concern for her soul. True righteousness would be free from deceitfulness, not hiding behind loyalty to Moses for other intentions.
This situation is apparently just an attempt to entrap Jesus (v. 6). If he is lax toward the law, then he is condemned. But if he holds a strict line, then he has allowed them to prevail in their merciless treatment of this woman and has opened himself up to trouble from the Romans, for he will be held responsible if the stoning proceeds. The leaders of Israel are putting God to the test in the person of his Son, repeating the Israelites’ historical pattern on more than one occasion in the wilderness at Meribah and Massah (Ex 17:2; Num 20:13).
When Jesus heard what the teachers of the law said, Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. This action has been variously interpreted. When the Pharisees and scribes kept on questioning him, Jesus straightened up and said to them, ‘If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her.’ According to the law, witnesses to a capital offense had to cast the first stone when the accused was condemned to death (Deut. 17:7). Jesus regarded the teachers of the law as witnesses to the offense. Therefore, they should begin the execution if it were to go ahead. But Jesus’ words challenged the accusers, implying that none of them was without sin and therefore they were in no position to condemn this woman. What sin Jesus was implying they were guilty of is not clear. Perhaps they too were guilty of adultery. Perhaps they were malicious witnesses in terms of Deuteronomy 19:15–21, because they were not interested in seeing justice done, but only in trapping Jesus.
An optimistic reading of Jesus’ call for the one without sin to cast the first stone is “all the people” have been turned away from their murderous intentions onto the path of life as they withdraw to reflect on their own sinfulness before God. Those who came to condemn ended up condemning themselves by not casting a stone.
Jesus is left alone, sitting on the ground, bent over and writing, with the woman standing before him. As Augustine says, “The two were left alone, misera et misericordia” (“a wretched woman and Mercy”; In Augustine’s commentary John 33.5). He straightens up and asks for a report of what happened, as if he had been totally oblivious to what took place as he concentrated on his writing on the ground. He does not ask her about the charges but rather about that aspect of the situation most heartening to the woman: Where are they? Has no one condemned you? (v. 10).
But there is one left who could still execute the judgment–the only one present who was without sin and thus could throw the first stone. Is she hopeful at this point or still quite frightened? We can only speculate as to whether the woman was familiar with Jesus and his embodiment of the mercy of God. In any case, she becomes a memorable example of the fact that “God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world might be saved through him” (3:17). Jesus says to her, “Neither do I condemn you. Go, and from now on do not sin any more” (8:11). Jesus grants pardon, not acquittal. Here is mercy and righteousness. He condemned the sin and not the sinner. But more than that, he called her to a new life. The gospel is not only the forgiveness of sins, but a new quality of life that overcomes the power of sin.
Without love, there is no forgiveness. With love, a whole new life is possible.
Image credit: Detail of “Christ and the Adulteress” Rembrandt, 1644 | National Gallery London | PD-US
Authorizing War

It is one thing to plan war and conduct war games. It is quite another to authorize the war.
In the previous posts we have considered what lay behind the scenes in terms of the cultural, political, diplomatic, economic, industrial, and military capabilities – not just in the two nations, but with the factions that created strategy and moved the levers of power – the limitations each faced. Japan needed Southwest Pacific oil to fuel its ambitions. The United States needed Japan to stay “contained” as the defeat of Nazi Germany was the priority. The summer of 1941 had the world in a precarious and unstable balance – and then Japan invaded Southern Indochina and Nazi Germany invaded the Soviet Union. The world was like an automobile with brakes that were marginal at best on level ground and now the world tilted markedly downhill. The automobile was speeding up and blowing through one stop sign after another. The war was expanding at an exponential rate.
Liaison and Imperial Conferences
Japan’s movement toward war in 1941 can be understood most clearly by tracing the sequence of Liaison Conferences held between the Japanese cabinet and the Army and Navy high commands. These meetings held frequently between September and December 1941were the working sessions where policy was debated, revised, and gradually hardened. By the time the issue reached an Imperial Conference before Emperor Hirohito, the essential decisions had already been reached.
In the days leading up to the September Imperial Conference, several Liaison Conferences refined the document titled “Outline for the Execution of the Empire’s National Policy.” The key points of discussion were the impact of the American oil embargo imposed after Japan moved into southern Indochina, the demands of the U.S. to withdraw from China versus military expansion into Southeast Asia, and readiness of the military to support such a decision. The leadership adopted a dual-track policy: continue negotiations with the United States and prepare for war by late October if diplomacy failed. This policy was formally ratified by the Emperor at the Imperial Conference of September 6, 1941.
Following the September decision, Liaison Conferences focused on practical preparations for possible war. Major topics included Army planning for invasions of Malaya, the Philippines, and the Dutch East Indies and Naval strategy for neutralizing the U.S. Pacific Fleet. It was during this period that Navy planners finalized the concept for the carrier strike on Pearl Harbor. The Navy leadership, particularly Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto, argued that if war with the United States became unavoidable, Japan must begin with a surprise blow that would cripple the American fleet. The Pearl Harbor operation was being prepared in detail.
In October 1941 a political crisis in Japanese leadership led to the fall of Prime Minister Konoe and the rise of General Tojo into that leadership position. At this point the military was firmly in control of the majority of key positions and were able effectively control Liaison Conference recommendations.
New Liaison Conferences convened shortly after the formation of the Tojo government in late October 1941. Prime Minister Tojo initially ordered a review of the September war decision. Military and civilian leaders examined whether negotiations with the United States might still succeed. Several weeks of discussion produced two possible diplomatic Proposal A and B. Details of these two proposals were covered in the post November 1941. These proposals were intended as Japan’s final diplomatic effort. The U.S. response was described in that same post.
A Liaison Conference on November 5, 1941 decided how Proposal A and B would be delivered to the U.S. Department of State. If negotiations failed by early December, Japan would initiate the wider Asia-Pacific war. At this stage the IJN was completing the operational plan for Pearl Harbor. IJA forces were already assembling for offensives across Southeast Asia. The Imperial Conference later that day formally approved this policy.
Between November 10 and November 20 leaders monitored the progress of negotiations in Washington but the daily reports were not promising as Japanese diplomats reported that American leaders were unwilling to compromise on the core issue: Japanese withdrawal from China. Meanwhile, military preparations intensified: the Southwest Pacific invasion fleets assembled, troops moved into staging areas in southern China and Indochina, and Naval forces prepared to sail to Pearl Harbor. Although negotiations technically continued, the military assumed that war was increasingly likely.
On November 26 the Liaison Conference received the Hull Note effectively ending diplomatic efforts. As the discussion continued, the Kido Butai, the Pearl Harbor attack force set sail from Japan. The last decisive Liaison Conference took place on December 1. Leaders concluded that negotiations had failed and Japan’s strategic situation would worsen if it delayed implementing the already developed plans.
It was recommended that military operations should begin as planned; a recommendation immediately presented to the Emperor at the Imperial Conference of December 1, 1941. There the decision was formally approved by Emperor Hirohito to begin war against the United States, Britain, and the Netherlands.
Planning Pearl Harbor
The earliest known proposal for a surprise attack on the American Pacific Fleet came in January 1941. Admiral Yamamoto believed that if Japan went to war with the United States, it would have only a limited window of opportunity before American industrial power overwhelmed Japan. He therefore argued that Japan must begin the war by crippling the U.S. Pacific Fleet in a surprise strike. The concept departed sharply from traditional Japanese naval doctrine, which envisioned drawing the U.S. fleet westward across the Pacific for a decisive battle near Japan. Many naval leaders initially considered Yamamoto’s proposal risky and unrealistic.
During the February and March of 1941, Yamamoto directed staff officers in the Combined Fleet to study the feasibility of an attack on Pearl Harbor. Key planning questions included: could aircraft carriers approach Hawaii undetected? Would torpedoes function in the shallow waters of Pearl Harbor? Could a carrier-based strike destroy enough ships to delay American operations? The staff undertook the planning of possibly launching a large-scale carrier attack from long distance. This meant transiting almost 3,000 miles of the Pacific undetected, achieving surprise as it launched coordinated aircraft strikes from six carriers (a feat no navy had ever attempted).
By September, as national policy debates intensified in Tokyo, the Navy began extensive fleet training exercises. Carrier aircrews practiced long-range navigation, coordinated multi-carrier launches, torpedo attacks against ships in shallow harbor waters, and training primarily in the remote northern Kagoshima Bay, whose geography resembled the harbor at Pearl Harbor – and was far away from prying eyes. Meanwhile, Japanese intelligence monitored American fleet movements in Hawaii. By October the Pearl Harbor operation had matured into a complete war plan. In early November the full attack force began assembling in northern Japan. Kido Butai, the Combined Fleet, includes six carriers with supporting forces consisting of battleships, cruisers, destroyers, submarines, and supply ships.
On November 26 the Japanese carrier force sailed from Hitokappu Bay in the Kuril Islands. The fleet moved under strict radio silence across the North Pacific along a remote northern route designed to avoid shipping lanes. The route was also outside the range of American reconnaissance and was further aided in that winter weather in the North Pacific discouraged patrol flights and submarine picket patrols.
At dawn on December 7 (December 8 in Japan) the IJN fleet was 300 miles north of Oahu. Aircraft from the carrier task force launched the attack on Pearl Harbor. There were two waves of aircraft struck that attacked Battleships and airfields (Navy, Army and Marine) across Oahu. The attack severely damaged the U.S. Pacific Fleet and brought the United States into the war.
What the United States did not want, what Japan concluded was inevitable and necessary, was now underway. 13 million had already died in the Asia-Pacific War. Another 17 million would perish before it was over.
Image credit: various photographs from Naval Aviation Museum, National World War II Museum, and US Navy Archive
The Disciples Prepare Passover
17 On the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread, the disciples approached Jesus and said, “Where do you want us to prepare for you to eat the Passover?” 18 He said, “Go into the city to a certain man and tell him, ‘The teacher says, “My appointed time draws near; in your house I shall celebrate the Passover with my disciples.’” 19 The disciples then did as Jesus had ordered, and prepared the Passover. (26:17-19)
Despite the intrigue, these verses show us Jesus in charge of the situation. He knew the priests’ purpose before they had formulated it (v. 2), and he is already well aware of Judas’ role (vv. 21–25). He now initiates the process which will lead without interruption to its climax on the cross. Its context, we are not allowed to forget, is the Passover, and it is with Jesus’ ‘Passover’ meal, giving startling new meaning to a familiar ritual, that the process begins. Continue reading
Judas Agrees to Betray Jesus
14 Then one of the Twelve, who was called Judas Iscariot, went to the chief priests 15 and said, “What are you willing to give me if I hand him over to you?” They paid him thirty pieces of silver, 16 and from that time on he looked for an opportunity to hand him over. (26:14-16)
There is only one previous reference to Judas (10:4) – even there we were informed that Judas betrayed Jesus. In these few verses we discover the nature of that betrayal: (a) it is at Judas’ initiative, and (b) Judas asks for money. The text gives no reason for the betrayal, but the actions stand in stark contrast to the woman (26:6-13) who has just anointed Jesus’ head – something Jesus identifies as a preparation for burial – which Judas is seemingly arranging. Continue reading