This coming Sunday is the 15th Sunday in Ordinary Time. In the context of Jesus’ ministry the parable serves to explain why it is that the good news of the kingdom meets with such a varied response as we have seen in chapters 11–12, from enthusiastic acceptance to outright rejection. The fault lies not in the message, but in those who receive it.

People are both inadequate in themselves to respond as the word of the kingdom requires (compacted and shallow soil), and also exposed to competing pressures from outside (tribulation and persecution, anxieties and lures, and behind them all the evil one himself). The wonder is not that some do not produce fruit, but that any do. But here lies the parable’s encouragement both to Jesus’ followers then and to all who since then have preached this same gospel; not all will respond, but there will be  some who do, and the harvest will be rich.

Image credit: “The Sower” Vincent van Gogh (June 1888), Van Gogh Museum, Public Domain

This coming Sunday is the 15th Sunday in Ordinary Time and we have been considering Jesus’ parable of the sower who went out to sow. In the parable there are three primary images: sower, seed, and ground. While there may be some differences in emphasis or specific details, the general understanding of the three images and their interconnection can be summarized as follows:

The sower draws from the OT prophetic tradition of God sowing his seed in the chosen people in the form of the Covenant Law with the purpose of having that fruit multiply. Fulfilling that prophetic role, now the sower represents Jesus or any person who spreads the message of the Gospel, proclaiming the word of God.

As mentioned above, the seed represents the word of God, in the OT given through the Law and Prophets and now given through Jesus, the fulfillment of the Law and Prophets and the Living Word of God. For Christians this means the message of the Gospel. It refers to the teachings and truths found in Scripture and Tradition that have the potential to take root in people’s hearts and transform their lives. The seed symbolizes the divine truth and the message of salvation through Jesus Christ.

The ground represents the condition of the human heart or the receptivity of the hearers to the message of the Gospel.

In the context of Matthew’s gospel, much of the chapters previous to Mt 13 have, in one way or another, dealt with the people’s reception or rejection of the mission. In this light, while all three elements—the sower, the seed, and the ground—are important to the parable’s message, the primary focus is on the varying responses of the different types of soil to the sower’s scattering of the seed.

As Christians we are responsible to sow the seeds of faith and proclamation of the Kingdom of Heaven – in our place and time and circumstance. We have to “equip” ourselves with “seed,” that is the Word of God and our own relationship with Jesus. We are responsible to “check our feet” to ensure we are planted in fertile, rich soil.  And this also means to examine our own heart and consider how we are responding to the Word of God in our lives. Have allowed that Word to take deep root in our life? Are we bearing fruit? Then our example can shine before others!

Image credit: “The Sower” Vincent van Gogh (June 1888), Van Gogh Museum, Public Domain

What did they hear?

This coming Sunday is the 15th Sunday in Ordinary Time. Matthew 13 is a “day of parables.” The parable of the sower is spoken in public to great crowds (vv. 1–3), but its explanation and the teaching about parables are spoken only to the disciples (vv. 10–11). More parables are then spoken to ‘the crowds’ (v. 34), but the crowds are again left behind (v. 36), and the second explanation and further parables are spoken to the disciples in ‘the house’ (which Jesus had left in v. 1). The unresponsive crowds are thus clearly distinguished from the disciples to whom alone explanation is given, and this distinction is spelt out in vv. 11–17.

The structure of our gospel reading is a bit odd:

• the parable of the sower and the seed (vv.1–9)
• a passage explaining parables and the need for their explanation (vv.10–17), and
• lastly an explanation of the parable of the sower and seed (18–23).

Despite the traditional title of the parable, “The Sower and the See,” the real focus is on the seed and their yields.  More important than the fate of the four different plantings is the contrast between the three unsuccessful planting and the fourth superabundantly successful one.

The parables focus on the seeds is an allegory for those who hear the word of the kingdom proclaimed. The parables describe the varying receptiveness to what they hear; all hear the same word. Yet each type of person is identified as what was sown in a certain place (v.19). This might strike us as odd since we are biased to understand the “seed” as the Word of God proclaimed, but understanding of the parable rests on the interaction of the unvarying seed with the various types of ground. It is interesting to note that the traditional German title is, Gleichnis vom viererlei Acker, “Parable of the four types of ground.” [France 2007, 503]

• seed sown on the path… without understanding: To understand is more than an intellectual grasp of the message; cf. the contrast in 7:24ff. between hearing and ‘doing’ the word. The word which is only heard is easy prey for the evil one. It is a non-starter.
• seed sown on rocky ground …receives it with joy: But to start is not necessarily to finish. Here the word is received (not ‘understood’) with joy, but joy without understanding and commitment cannot last: lasts only for a time is literally ‘is temporary’. Tribulation is a general term for suffering which comes from outside; persecution is deliberately inflicted, and usually implies a religious motive. Falls away is literally ‘is tripped up’ (cf. 5:29–30); it is not a gradual loss of interest, but a collapse under pressure. This scenario would be familiar to those who farmed the rocky land of Galilee, where the bedrock is often close to the surface.
• seed sown among thorns …  This time the soil is good, but it is already taken up. The world (as opposed to the kingdom of God) offers both anxiety and lures (the normal meaning of this word, apatē, is ‘deceit’), each occupying the attention and energy in a way that prevents even good soil from bearing fruit
• seed sown on rich soil: Hearing is matched with understanding, and the consequences are a superabundant yield.

Image credit: “The Sower” Vincent van Gogh (June 1888), Van Gogh Museum, Public Domain

This coming Sunday is the 15th Sunday in Ordinary Time. “A sower went out to sow.” As France [2007, 504] notes, in a primarily agrarian society the choice of agricultural imagery for parables needs no special explanation; three of the parables in this chapter are set on the farm. It is estimated that 90% of Israelites worked in some aspect of agriculture. There was also already a tradition in the prophetic books of using agricultural imagery, primarily in judgment narratives (e.g., Is 32, 35 and 44; Jer 31 and 51; Joel 3; and Amos 8).

“And as he sowed, some seed fell on the path,and birds came and ate it up. Some fell on rocky ground, where it had little soil. It sprang up at once because the soil was not deep, and when the sun rose it was scorched, and it withered for lack of roots. Some seed fell among thorns, and the thorns grew up and choked it. But some seed fell on rich soil, and produced fruit, a hundred or sixty or thirtyfold.” (Mt 13:4-9)

The seed falling on the beaten earth beside the path, where it could not penetrate, may be the few grains which inevitably go beyond the intended range in broadcast sowing, though it is also possible that the technique envisaged is of sowing before plowing in which case the birds got to the seed before the path could be plowed up and the grain buried. This seed is totally wasted.

The second scenario would be familiar to those who farmed the rocky land of Galilee, where the bedrock is often close to the surface. While there is promising initial growth, the point of the parable focuses on the inability of the growing plants to sustain themselves when the heat is on and the shallow soil is quickly parched.

In the third scenario the danger comes not from the inadequate resources in the soil, but from competition. The luxuriant growth of the thorns shows that there is nothing wrong with the soil here; the problem is that it is already occupied and there is no room for a new type of vegetation. The plants do not necessarily die, but they cannot produce grain because of the competition for light and nourishment. There has thus been a progression in the first three scenes: the first seed never started; the second started well but did not survive; the third may even have survived, but produced nothing. But none of them are of any use to the farmer.

In contrast to the first three scenarios, the seed that lands in rich soil produces a bountiful harvest.

What is Jesus implying with his parable? Maybe a better question is what did the people hear?

Image credit: “The Sower” Vincent van Gogh (June 1888), Van Gogh Museum, Public Domain

This coming Sunday is the 15th Sunday in Ordinary Time. In the previous post we considered the definition of a parable. In this post we’ll consider the context leading up to this gospel. Last Sunday’s gospel was composed on the final pericope in Matthew 11; today our gospel begins with Mt 13:1.  One can rightly ask, “What happened to chapter 12?”  As it happens, Matthew 12 is not used on any Sunday or Solemnity in the church’s celebrations – and with respect to bible study, that is a critical omission because Mt 13:1-23, the Parable of the Sower along with its explanation, is Jesus’ response to the events of chapter 12.

In the New American Bible (NAB) translation used by the Church for its proclamation of the gospel, Mt 12 “headers” include the following:

• Picking Grain on the Sabbath – Jesus’ status as the authoritative interpreter of the law is exemplified in the incident of the disciples’ plucking and eating grain on the sabbath.  The account ends with the clear message: “… the Son of Man is Lord of the sabbath.” (v.8)
• The Man with a Withered Hand – The question of sabbath observance continues as Jesus initiated a challenge to the Pharisees rooted in his earlier question to them: “If you knew what this meant, ‘I desire mercy, not sacrifice” (v.7). This account ends with the Pharisee plotting to put Jesus to death.
• The Chosen Servant – In the midst of the rising opposition to Jesus from the Pharisees, Matthew pauses and places Jesus’ response in the context of the OT Servant of the Lord. Jesus was fully aware of the rising opposition (v. 15) but continued his healing activity (vv. 15–16). His modesty and gentleness in the face of hostility are viewed as the fulfillment of Isa 42:1–4.
• Jesus and Beelezebul – The healing of a possessed man who was blind and mute provides the occasion for exploring the source of Jesus’ power. The healing (v. 22) produces two reactions: wonder on the part of the crowds whether Jesus is the Son of David or Messiah (v. 23), and hostility from the Pharisees, who are convinced that he is the instrument of Satan (v. 24).
• A Tree and its Fruits – Jesus takes the offensive with three warnings: (1) Closeness to Jesus is absolutely essential, and the Pharisees must recognize it or run the risk of being on the wrong side when God’s kingdom comes (v. 30). (2) The only unforgivable sin is attributing the work of the Holy Spirit to an evil spirit, as the Pharisees were doing in the case of Jesus. Failure to recognize the Son of Man for what he is may be understandable and even pardonable, but failure to recognize the source of his power is inexcusable (vv. 31–32). (3) The Pharisees’ opposition to Jesus stems from their wickedness, and in the final judgment they will be judged with regard to their willingness or unwillingness to confess that Jesus is empowered by the Holy Spirit (vv. 33–37).
• The Demand for a Sign – Despite all the miracles that Jesus had already worked, the scribes and Pharisees ask for more signs.  The basic meaning of the sign of Jonah seems to involve the preaching of repentance to non-Jews and its acceptance by them. In verse 40, Matthew has given a second interpretation of the sign of Jonah: the three days spent by the prophet inside the fish (see Jonah 2) were a type or a foreshadowing of the three days between Jesus’ death and his resurrection.
• The Return of the Unclean Spirit – The passage about the evil spirit’s return is joined to the sign of Jonah by its reference to “this evil generation” (vv. 39, 45), and to the entire section beginning at 12:22 by its concern with evil spirits.
• The True Family of Jesus – The long treatment of unbelief and rejection that began in the missionary discourse of chapter 10 and continued in the incidents of chapters 11–12 concludes with the definition of the true family of Jesus as those who do God’s will.

Chapter 12 tells how widespread is the opposition (or resistance) to Jesus’ saving message: Pharisees, the people, and perhaps even those closest to Jesus – his disciples and family.  Signs of power and healing only lead to requests for more signs. Why do people not believe? Is there any explanation for the condition of things we have arrived at by the end of Matthew 12? Indeed there is; the explanation begins with simple words: “A sower went out to sow” (13:3)

Image credit: “The Sower” Vincent van Gogh (June 1888), Van Gogh Museum, Public Domain

This coming Sunday is the 15th Sunday in Ordinary Time in Lectionary Cycle A. We read from Matthew 13, known as a “day of parables.” What is a “Parable”? Definition: “At its simplest a parable is a metaphor or simile  drawn from nature or common life,  arresting the hearer by its vividness or strangeness,  and leaving the mind in sufficient doubt about its precise application to tease it into active thought.” (C. H. Dodd, The Parables of the Kingdom, New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1961, p. 5)  Less accurate, but perhaps more to the point – when heard, a parable should give you pause and turn your world upside down.

As captivating as Jesus’ parables are, we do not always have the full cultural context for grasping the nuance. Consider the parable of the “Prodigal Son.” Unless one understands the honor-and-shame culture of 1st century Palestine, some of the impact will be lost. The parable of the “Talents” loses some of its edge when one does not understand the significance of the amount in play and why in the world someone would in fact bury the funds. The parable of the “Good Samaritan” is reduced to the parable of a “good guy willing to help” unless one knows who the Samaritans are and what the Jews hearing the story would have thought of a Samaritan being the “hero” of the parable. But then again, that is why we study the Bible in every generation.

Given Dodd’s definition of a parable, what are the implications of this definition? Felix Just, SJ offers that:

• The meaning of most parables is not so obvious, or at least it shouldn’t be. If we assume we know what Jesus is talking about, we are probably missing the main point; if we are too familiar with the story (having heard it so often before), we might not think carefully enough about its real meaning.
• Most parables contain some element that is strange or unusual. They should cause you to say, “Wait a minute! That’s not how farmers do their work! That’s not what kings usually do! That’s not what normally happens in nature!” And this strange element should cause you to think!
• Parables do not define things precisely, but rather use comparisons to describe some aspect of how God acts or interacts with human beings. Yet to say “A is like B” does not mean that “A is identical to B in all respects”; so one should be careful not to misinterpret or misapply the parables.

Pope Benedict XVI, in his Angelus message (July 10, 2011), commented on why Jesus used parable. He said that for Jesus the parable was “autobiographical” because “it reflects the experience of Jesus himself and of his preaching” as “different effects are achieved depending on the kind of reception given to the proclamation.” Pope Benedict said that Jesus makes a distinction between the general crowd and the apostles. “To those who have already decided for him, he can speak openly of the Kingdom of God” while to others he must speak in metaphor “to stimulate precisely the decision, the conversion of heart” needed. Jesus’ parables “require effort to interpret, challenging one’s intelligence but also one’s freedom.”  In grace, one has to decide to engage the parable. “God does not force us to believe in Him, but draws us to Himself through the truth and goodness of his incarnate Son. Love, in fact, always respects freedom…After all the real ‘Parable’ of God is Jesus himself, his person, under the form of his humanity, hiding and yet revealing the same deity.” In this way “God does not force us to believe in Him, but draws us to himself through the truth and goodness of his incarnate Son.”

Image credit: “The Sower” Vincent van Gogh (June 1888), Van Gogh Museum, Public Domain