Category Archives: franciscan

Conflict in Jerusalem

Posted on by
Reply

This coming Sunday is the 26th Sunday in Ordinary Time, Lectionary Cycle A. Jesus has already entered Jerusalem (Matthew 21:1 ff) and been received by the people, proclaimed as Messiah, overturned the moneychanger’s tables (21:12-17), and had his authority questioned by the chief priests and elders. Jesus is performing signs and speaking in a way that the people are interpreting as Messianic – and there is a history there. Jesus is not the first messianic figure to come to Jerusalem and the chief priests and elders want to protect the people – although they have already concluded that Jesus is another false claimant. They have been amassing charges and accusations against Jesus and are simply waiting for the opportunity to bring him to trial and be done with him.

Unique to Matthew’s gospel, this short parable was, at its basic level of development, addressed to the chief priests and elders in defense of Jesus’ penchant for associating with sinners – those deemed unrighteous by the Jerusalem authorities. This is a dynamic that has been present in the gospel according to Matthew since the days on the banks of Jordan River when the same authorities came out to question John the Baptist.

That is perhaps why this round of the many encounters begins with reference to the Baptizer:

When he had come into the temple area, the chief priests and the elders of the people approached him as he was teaching and said, “By what authority are you doing these things? And who gave you this authority?” Jesus said to them in reply, “I shall ask you one question, and if you answer it for me, then I shall tell you by what authority I do these things. Where was John’s baptism from? Was it of heavenly or human origin?” (21:23-25)

It is the Jerusalem authorities that are put on the spot. The leaders are standing (likely) in the midst of people who responded to John’s proclamation and the good news proclaimed in Jesus’ words and works. How will they respond to this challenge to “fish or cut bait?”  They are leaders of this ancient faith – how will they live out that faith? This is part and parcel of a theme popular in the Matthean gospel: faith that is spoken, but not lived, is empty. Calling out, “Lord, Lord”  is not sufficient; the will of the Father must also be accomplished (see Matthew 7:21-23; 12:50;23:3-4). Promises and profession must be matched by performance.

Image credit: Parable of the Two Sons, Andrei Monorov, 2012 | CC BY SA 4.0 |

All these years later

Posted on by
2

Everyone remembers 9/11 differently. 93% of Americans over the age of 30 remember where they were and what they were doing when they received the news. For Americans 25 and under, the number drops of 42%. For Americans 20 years and younger, they were not yet born or not old enough to have a memory. Nonetheless 9/11 affected the nation. Want to know more? Read the Pew Research Center’s Two Decades Later, the Enduring Legacy of 9/11. Here and at your parish may we all actively remember and pray with and for 9/11 family members, survivors, and rescue and recovery workers for their service and healing.

A Fallen Brother

We Franciscans especially remember and pray for Fr. Mychal Judge, O.F.M., a member of Holy Name Province who was registered as the first victim number of the 9/11 attacks. A long-time fire chaplain, Father Mychal was in the lobby of towers praying for the people in the towers, the fire crew, and emergency responders. He witnessed people jumping from the building – and prayed for them too. When the first tower collapsed, the force of the collapse enveloped him in its devastation. He died doing what he loved. The NY Post photo of him being carried from the rubble has become a haunting icon of that day.

Where were you…?

On the morning of 9-11 I was in Cochabamba, Bolivia in the first few days of an immersion Spanish language course. On that morning, the Guardian of the friary came to my room, clearly animated about something, speaking rapidly in Castilian Spanish, pulling me by the arm to a room where there was a television. On screen were the scenes of the morning. We were watching CNN Español. The Guardian spoke no English. I did not speak Spanish. All I could do was watch in horror, guess at the meaning, and wonder what was I seeing? Only much later in the day did a bilingual brother arrive who could fill in the missing pieces of my understanding.  Later that week, watching CNN Español, I realized they were live streaming a funeral. Slowly I realized it was from St. Francis of Assisi, 31st Street NYC, our provincial “mother church.” Even more slowly did I realize it was a funeral for one of my brother friars, Fr. Mychal Judge, O.F.M. Home seemed even farther away that day.

A Prayer

On the anniversary of September 11, 2001, we call on God’s spirit within us to help deepen our response to our commitment to non-violence. We are so aware of the fear and violence that continues to permeate our world since 9/11. As we pray in remembrance of that tragic day, help us also to be people of hope who embrace a belief that a new vision is possible.

God of the years, we call to you this day when the memories of 9/11 weigh so heavily upon our hearts. We recall with horror and renewed shock that day when airplanes flew into buildings and people perished. We remember our fear and anger, our confusion and sense of threat. We remember all that was lost to us that day: our sense of security, our peace, our innocence, our belief that we were safe beyond such random violence and death. Most of all we remember those who died in New York, Washington, DC, and Pennsylvania, their lives of promise extinguished in hatred.

God of all creation, you have taught us that faith is the substance of things hoped for and the evidence of things not seen. We live by hope in the future you hold for us and for Earth. Grant us, we pray, hope for the future generations that they may never know or inflict the horror and terror we recall this day. Strengthen our hope when it falters and teach us to strive in all we do to realize the hope that is in your word and witness.

Eternal God, in you our hope is boundless. You renew hope in us through the promise of a future in which no one shall be afraid or lift up a sword against a neighbor. We pray in hope for the peace of the world among peoples and nations, religions and cultures, until we become a beloved community reconciled to one another under your sovereignty.

Loving God, you inspire us with love for all creation. Give us today the strength and courage to transform the compassion of our hearts into acts of peace, mercy and justice. Forgive us for the arrogance that leads to moral blindness, for desires for vengeance and retaliation and for willingness to sacrifice others for our own security.

Empower us to shape a world marked by ways of life that lead to justice and peace. Fashion in us a people who are more ready to grow in understanding than eager to judge those who are different from us. Form us, a people determined to heal wounds rather than inflict them. We ask all of this in the name of Jesus who came among us to show us the way.

Amen

The Life of Francis of Assisi

Posted on by
Reply

Every year – or so it seems – very good biographies of St. Francis of Assisi are published. The ones published in the last 10 years all share some great qualities: readable and increasingly historical – introducing the “real” St Francis of Assisi to the world. You might ask why I say the “real” St Francis?

Did you know that statues of St Francis are the second most popular lawn/garden ornament sold every year – right behind pink flamingos.  Rather like the popular icon shown above. That is an image many people have of St Francis, certainly one reinforced by Franco Zefferelli’s film Brother Sun, Sister Moon, another in a long line of romantic interpretations of the poor man from Assisi.  Especially in the 20th century, Francis was portrayed as “a free spirit, a wild religious genius, a kind of medieval hippie, misunderstood and then exploited by the ‘medieval Church.’ Or perhaps they know him as the man who spoke to animals, a nature mystic, an ecologist, a pacifist, a feminist, a ‘voice for our time.’  For others he is the little plaster man in the birdbath, the most charming and nonthreatening of Catholic saints…. almost everyone has his or her own Francis” (Francis of Assisi, Augustine Thompson OP).

Want to know about the “real’ St. Francis. Here are 32 posts about the life of St. Francis. Read one a day and that will take you right up to the Feast Day, October 4th. So, here they are.

Francis of Assisi – An Introduction

Francis of Assisi – The Young Man

Francis of Assisi – Military Adventures

Francis of Assisi – Period of Crisis: San Damiano

Francis of Assisi – Period of Crisis: Leaving the World

Francis of Assisi – Period of Crisis: Embracing the Leper

Francis of Assisi – “And the Lord gave me brothers…”

Francis of Assisi – The Fraternity Grows and Someone Has to Lead

Francis of Assisi – An Exhortation to the Brothers

Francis of Assisi – The Itinerant Life of the Brothers

Francis of Assisi – The Disposal of Worldly Goods

Francis of Assisi – The Conversion of Clare

Francis of Assisi – A Reputation for Holiness and Miracles

Francis of Assisi – The Problems of New Growth

Francis of Assisi – Francis and Nature: Part I

Francis of Assisi – Francis and Nature: Part II

Francis of Assisi – A Sacramental View of Nature

Francis of Assisi – Francis and The Eucharist

Francis of Assisi – Integrating Into the Church

Francis of Assisi – The Word of God

Francis of Assisi – The First Missions

Francis of Assisi – The Crusades (Part 1)

Francis of Assisi – The Crusades (Part 2)

Francis of Assisi – The Crusades (Part 3)

Francis of Assisi – While He Was Away

Francis of Assisi:  Charism of the Founder – Vocation of the Friars

Francis of Assisi: Hierarchy of Authority – Hierarchy of Example

Francis of Assisi: Franciscan Rules

Francis of Assisi: An Approved Rule of Franciscan Life

Francis of Assisi: Up to Now….

Francis of Assisi: A Time of Doubt

Francis of Assisi: The Stigmata

Instruction for the Community

Posted on by
Reply

This coming Sunday is the 23rd Sunday in Ordinary Time. The previous two Sundays have focused on the gospel narrative that is set at the site of Peter’s great confession of faith: Caesarea Philippi.  This is also the place where Jesus’ first passion prediction occurs which leads to Peter’s exclamation: “God forbid, Lord! No such thing shall ever happen to you” (16:22) – in effect denying the revealed nature and role of the messiah. Jesus corrects Peter in v.24: “Get behind me, Satan! You are an obstacle to me. You are thinking not as God does, but as human beings do.” Despite his confession of faith and the blessing in response to it, Peter initially rejects the possibility that Jesus’ messiahship could involve suffering.  This leads to Jesus’ instruction to the disciples about the true nature of the cross and the willingness to carry it in accordance with the will of God.

At this point in Matthew’s narrative the scene changes: “After six days Jesus took Peter, James, and John his brother, and led them up a high mountain by themselves. And he was transfigured before them” (17:1-2).  But even after the revelation of the glory of God in the experience of the Transfiguration, the disciples are still plagued by their “little faith” and their inability to perform great signs and wonders (17:16, 19) – almost a counterpoint to the glory just witnessed.  Yet in using the symbol of a mustard seed, Jesus still witnesses that through faith, he is present to the disciples.

The relentless movement towards Jerusalem continues as the disciples gather in Galilee (17:22).  This is a community gathered from the “faithless and perverse generation” (v.17).  Jesus’ witness of the second passion prediction serves to announce the focal point and bases upon which this new community gathers.  Nonetheless the gathered disciples are sorrowful because they as yet do not understand.  The disciples have a way to go, but slowly they are becoming church.

This perhaps the subtle but often overlooked element of Matthew’s narrative. Throughout the arc of the storyline Jesus has been addressing the gathering community. “But who do you say that I am?” is addressed not the singular “you” of Simon Peter, but the plural “you” of all the disciples – Peter is simply the one who steps forward to give voice to the response of the community.

Chapter 18 is considered by most scholars as containing the 4th of the 5 discourses, often labeling this section as “Instructions to the Community.”  The fourth major collection of Jesus’ teaching is concerned with relationships among Jesus’ followers, who are clearly seen as a distinct community (as 16:18 has led us to expect). Within such a community there is opportunity both to harm and to care for others, and the health and effectiveness of the group will depend on the attitudes to one another which are fostered. Matthew has brought much of the stories together in this compact form with a view to the needs of the developing church. It is not so much a ‘Manual of Discipline,’ with regulations parallel to those of the so-named document from Qumran, rather it is a guide to relationships within the community. It is only in vv.15–17 that specific procedures are set out, and those are not so much ‘disciplinary’ as pastoral.

Image credit: Sermon on the Mount (1877) by Carl Heinrich Bloch, Museum of National History at Frederiksborg Castle, Public Domain

A Question for a Lifetime

Posted on by
Reply

“Who do you say that I am?” It seems like one of those “fish-or-cut-bait” moments, doesn’t it? Peter and the disciples have been with Jesus for some time.  They have heard the sermons, listened to Jesus open up the deeper meaning of the Commandments, witnessed the miracles large and small, seen all the people healed, restored, and heard the amazing words of forgiveness and love. Wouldn’t it seem as though they have had enough time to know Jesus in a deep, intimate, and personal way?

“Who do you say that I am?”  I am not sure what the other disciples were thinking, pondering or what answer they were formulating, but Peter steps right up and responds: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” Short, sweet, succinct and …. What more could one say? It is the perfect answer. It is the answer that even now we are tempted to use, falling back on religious language we have inherited, language we know so well, words we could recite in our sleep. And sometimes I wonder if we give enough thought and attention to the question and the answer. Maybe we are just so used to the answer, or maybe we are a little timid wondering if our own answer would hold water, pass muster, or be bodacious enough.

Yet today’s gospel raises the question for each of us to consider: “Who do you say that Jesus is?”   Don’t use Peter’s answer; take your time and consider your own response. Start forming our own response. I think “start” is the correct word to use. The German poet Rainer Maria Rilke noted that some questions are such that they have to be lived so that one day in the future, you might well live your way into the complete answer.  I don’t mean that Peter’s answer is somehow provisional or that we eventually discover some different answer. Peter has it right. But perhaps some answers are so large that knowing the words is only the beginning. We have to spend a lifetime discovering what those words mean.

Maybe some are wondering, “well…preacher that sounds kinda’ fuzzy.” Afterall, it is a straightforward question which has an approved, creedal answer. It is a “heart-of-our-faith” question, requiring absolute certainty and conviction.  Jesus is our Savior.  Our Lord.  Our Redeemer.  Our King.  There’s nothing ‘unsolved’ about Jesus; the Son of God isn’t a murder mystery.  He’s the Way, the Truth, and the Life. The mystery isn’t uncertainty about who Christ is. The mystery is the inexhaustible depth of what it means to know him, love him, and follow him. The answer doesn’t change. What changes is the depth with which we understand the answer.

But you know…we are not unfamiliar with straightforward questions which have an expected answer requiring absolute certainty and conviction. Think about it! You have spent several years with your significant other, opening up to them, revealing more and more of yourself even as they do the same for you. You have shared moments of love, tenderness, and forgiveness too! Then comes the straightforward question: “Will you marry me?”

Hopefully the answer is “yes,” and boom!… there is nothing else to know. The question and answer were both wrapped in absolute certainty and conviction that this was the love of a lifetime. “I love you with all my life. I would die for you….” Of course, this is the love language we have inherited… words we know so well we can say them on the spur of the moment. And that’s ok because at the moment of the proposal, isn’t all known, all revealed, all uncovered? … ahhhhh…, not really.

Couples that have been married for a while can tell you there is more to be revealed each and every day after the proposal…after the wedding … after the first child…. After everything… In listening to stories from couples of long marriages, the language is different from the language used by fiancés. A new vocabulary arises that does not simply speak of the promise of love. It speaks of the trust and the experience of love that “bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things” (1 Cor 13:7)

Who do you say that I am? “The Love of my life” – it has one meaning at the moment of the marriage proposal. It is a different meaning 25, 30, 40, 50 and even 5 years into a life together. Married folks have lived the question and grown more deeply into the answer. They know what those words mean in a way they simply could not have known on the day of the proposal.

St. Peter had the same experience. This week he provides the succinct perfect answer. Next Sunday he will be on the hot seat when he suggests diverting Jesus from his destiny in Jerusalem. Jesus “turned and said to Peter, ‘Get behind me, Satan! You are an obstacle to me.’”  St. Peter falls in line and follows Jesus, defends Jesus, denies Jesus, is restored and forgiven. Peter spends the rest of his life living into the answer he gave at Caesarea Philippi. “I love you with all my life. I would die for you….” and St Peter does, dying a martyr’s death.

For now, feel free to use St. Peter’s answer. It’s a very good answer. It’s the right answer. But don’t stop with saying it. Begin living it. “Who do you say that I am.” Live it fully, deeply. Live it until it resonates within you, until you feel the love of Christ. Trust in that love, knowing that in its power you can bear all things believe all things, hope all things, and endure all things.

Who do you say that I am?  It is the question for a lifetime.

Amen.

Image Credit: Pietro Perugino, The Delivery of the Keys (c 1481–1482). Sistine Chapel, Vatican City | Public Domain

Christology: Three Questions

Posted on by
Reply

This coming Sunday is the 21st Sunday in Ordinary Time. The Gospel according to Matthew accepts and uses the main Christological titles found already in the Gospel according to Mark, including Christ/Messiah, Son of God, Son of Man, Rabbi, and Teacher. But in contrast to Mark, Matthew adds several new titles and emphasizes certain aspects of Jesus’ identity. Matthew’s Gospel begins by identifying Jesus as “the son of David, the son of Abraham” (1:1), showing Jesus’ Davidic/royal and Abrahamic/Jewish heritage, respectively.  Throughout Matthew’s Gospel, Jesus is presented as “the New Moses” for the people of Israel, and is given a variety of other titles, including Emmanuel, Savior, Prophet, and King of the Jews. It is in this light that our pericope asks its two questions.

The First Question: Who do people say that the Son of Man is?
Clearly the local “buzz” places Jesus among the greats of Jewish religious history.  Not only are all prophets, but all are already dead and thought to be resurrected or alive in heaven.  Elijah was whisked away to heaven in a fiery chariot, Herod thought John the Baptist was already raised from the dead, and there were non-biblical accounts of Jeremiah resurrected.  In other words, they place him in the cadre of prophets raised from the dead.  The first question, more literally phrased is “Who are the humans saying that the son of the human is?” The Greek anthropos (human being, person; mankind; man – EDNT 1:100) is used twice in the sentence.  There is indeed high praise in the “buzz,” but there is not enough for their faith to crossover and grasp the real identity of Jesus of Nazareth.

The Second Question: But who do you say that I am?

The “you” in the second question is emphatic and plural. It was not a question addressed just to Peter, but to the whole community. As in the first question, the word “saying” is present tense = “continue to say” or “keep on saying.” It is not a one-time declaration, but a repeated confession. Peter answers the question addressed to the whole group.  In Matthew’s narrative Peter sometimes represents the disciples, sometimes represents all believers, sometimes plays a unique role in founding the new community, and sometimes is just Simon/Peter. It is a valid question to ask which “Peter” is portrayed answering Jesus’ question?  Given the context of the verses that follow, there is something happening that is more than a simple, impulsive response.  In this scene Simon/Peter is answering for and on behalf of the new community emerging from discipleship to Jesus

The Response: You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God

Many have written about the lack of a consensus among 1st century Palestine about the meaning of “Messiah.”  All that can be said with certainty, whether Messiah be king or pauper, “Messiah” was a word of hope connected to God’s divine providence.  Just what shape that hope would take was not clear – even to Peter, the one who had confessed it.  By vv.22-23 it is clear that Peter’s understanding does not encompass the idea of a Messiah who suffers and dies.

Up to v.16, the account closely parallels Mark 8:27–29. But in v.16 Matthew seems to add to Mark’s narrative when he includes a further specification of Jesus’ identity “the Son of the living God.” It is not clear whether that is a modifier to “Messiah” or a separate title.  Most scholars hold that Matthew wants us to grasp that Peter’s confession, despite the potentially misleading nature of Messianic language and Peter’s own failure to grasp its practical implications, is telling us more. The addition goes beyond a merely nationalistic fervor to an awareness of Jesus’ special relationship with God.  The adjective living (which has a good Old Testament pedigree) may perhaps have been included to contrast the one true God with the local deities.

Image Credit: Pietro Perugino, The Delivery of the Keys (c 1481–1482). Sistine Chapel, Vatican City | Public Domain

The Feast of St. Clare of Assisi

Posted on by
Reply

Peter said to Jesus, “We have given up everything and followed you. What will there be for us?” Jesus said to them, “Amen, I say to you that you who have followed me, in the new age, when the Son of Man is seated on his throne of glory, will yourselves sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. And everyone who has given up houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or children or lands for the sake of my name will receive a hundred times more, and will inherit eternal life.”  (Mt 19:27-29)

Today across the Church universal and especially among the Franciscan communities, we celebrate the Feast of St. Clare of Assisi. It is a very appropriate gospel chosen for the feast day. In the gospel we hear: “Peter said to Jesus, ‘We have given up everything and followed you. What will there be for us?’” It is a replay of the rich young man who comes to Jesus and asks what more must I do to inherit the Kingdom of God. Jesus tells him to sell everything he has and give it to the poor and then follow Jesus. At least the rich young man supplies the answer to what’s in it for him – even as he walks away sad.

Clare could rightly be called “a rich young woman.” She was born into one of the majores families of Assisi, the nobility with homes “up town”, wealth, land and privilege. She did not want… at least not in the traditional measure.

Continue reading →

In case you might be interested….

Posted on by
1

A great number of the good folks who subscribe to the FriarMusings blog receive the daily email(s) as posts are published. And so, rarely use the website to access content. So, in case you might be interested… the website displays the posts from newest to oldest, but there is also a menu system which allows you to access groups of posts.

“Francis of Assisi” is a gateway to 23 posts which cover the life of the saint and is a good way to get a detailed yet still beginning entree into his story.

These links give you access to detailed commentaries on each of the Sunday gospels across all the liturgical years, although I will admit I have been better about keeping the commentaries updated on the parish website.

“The Pacific” is a place to access the series on the Asia-Pacific War (1937-1945). “World War II” is the first series (written in 2025); “World War 2” is the follow-on series written in 2026.

Just case you might be interested.

Two Parables

Posted on by
Reply

This coming Sunday is the 17th Sunday in Ordinary Time. “Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a merchant searching for fine pearls. When he finds a pearl of great price, he goes and sells all that he has and buys it. Matthew apparently intends the parable of the treasure to be interpreted together with the parable of the pearl, which immediately follows. The two parables do have common features: (I) In each case only a brief vignette of a crucial situation is given, without enough details to evaluate them as realistic stories. The interpreter should, therefore, be wary of filling in the gaps from pious imagination, but concentrate on what the parable does, in fact, portray.

(2) The primary common feature is surely central to the meaning of each: The protagonist goes and sells everything for the sake of the one thing. This is the action of both the plowman and the merchant. This movement of the story as a whole is to be compared with the kingdom of God, for the kingdom is “like” neither the “treasure” of v. 44 nor the “pearl” of v. 45, but in each case somehow like the story as a whole. In each case, the protagonist acts with the single-minded response of the “pure in heart.” From the story in Mark 10:17-31, Matthew and his community had long known of the kingdom’s demand of “all,” and of one who had failed (cf. esp. Mark 10:21, where selling everything and giving it to the poor is connected with true “treasure”).

R.T. France [France, 2007, 541] notes that the two parables are also different: (1) The plowman is doing his regular work, not looking for or expecting anything special, when he comes upon the treasure quite by accident. The merchant is actively seeking, knows what he is looking for, and still finds something beyond all his expectations. The kingdom can become real in either way (cf. 9:2, 22). (2) The great joy of the plowman is emphasized, but is altogether absent from the merchant. This does not mean that the merchant’s selling everything in order to obtain the pearl was joyless, but it does mean that (subjective) joy is not the main point of either parable. (3) What the merchant did, although it may not have measured up to everyone’s understanding of common sense, was unquestionably legal. The same cannot be said of the plowman, whose action may have been questionable, both legally and morally (we are not given enough details to know for sure). The disposition of buried treasure found on someone else’s property was widely discussed in Roman legal discourse. Some of Matthew’s readers may have expected a law-abiding plowman to have reported his find to the owner of the field rather than cashing in on it himself. Sensitive contemporary readers may wonder about the ethics of cheating the owner of the field out of his treasure, even if it was perfectly legal. The story does not legitimize the man’s actions. Jesus was certainly able to use questionable actions of characters in his parables to picture the urgency of acting to gain the kingdom while the opportunity is there (cf. Matt 12:29’s use of breaking-and-entering imagery, and more subtly, Luke 16:1-13).

In the story of the pearl, there is no moral or legal question at all, but still a surprising and provocative action. In the first-century Mediterranean world, the pearl was often a symbol of the highest good (as diamonds sometimes are in modern Western culture). Thus salvation is pictured in the Gnostic “Hymn of the Pearl” as the finding and safe return of a pearl lost in an alien land. Some scholars see both the parable of the treasure and the parable of the pearl as advent/reversal/action, expressed in the parallel sets of verbs in vv. 44 and 45-46: finds/sells/buys.” The advent of the kingdom, sought for or not, brings about a reversal of values, leading to the crucial action that obtains the new. This action, puzzling and out of step with those who live by the old values, is central in each of these parables. [France, 2007, 541]

Image credit: The Pearl of Great Price, by Domenico Fetti, 17th century |Kunsthistorisches Museum Wien, Bilddatenbank | Public Domain

A Pearl of Great Price

Posted on by
Reply

This coming Sunday is the 17th Sunday in Ordinary Time. Pearls were as highly valued in the ancient world as they are today, and were a conspicuous way of displaying wealth (1 Tim 2:9; Rev 17:4; 18:12, 16). Huge pearls are the gates in the symbolic new Jerusalem (Rev 21:21). But there is a subtle difference between this and the preceding parable.

The man, likely a hired workman, who obtains the buried treasure risks everything to possess it, but he gains wealth upon which he can live. The pearl merchant is presumably a person of some substance already having great wealth. He impoverished himself to acquire something supremely beautiful and valuable which he could admire and display but could not live off unless he sold it again.

What the two parables share in common is the issue of priorities. The fact that what the dealer had to sell included presumably other, lesser, pearls might however have led the hearers to reflect on the value of the kingdom of heaven in relation to other competing ideologies; once you have it, you need no other. Hence the emphasis on the fact that this is just one pearl, whose value eclipses all others put together.

Image credit: The Pearl of Great Price, by Domenico Fetti, 17th century |Kunsthistorisches Museum Wien, Bilddatenbank | Public Domain