The Grain That Dies Is Due to Bring Forth Life.
Gospel: Matthew 26:14–27:66
Fr. Jijo Kandamkulathy CMF
Claretian Missionaries
The dearest learning of the Lenten seasons is: God has not miraculously saved Christ from a difficult situation. He has not obstructed the injustice and the death of his Son. In him God has made it known that he does not overcome evil by hindering it with miraculous interventions but by taking away its power to harm, even making it a time of growth for the man. It is difficult to assimilate this logic of God. It is difficult to accept that “unless a grain of wheat falls to the earth and dies, it remains alone; but if it dies, it produces much fruit” (Jn 12:24).
Matthew particularly insists on the repudiation of violence and the use of weapons. Only he reports the words of Jesus to Peter, who tried to defend him with a sword: “Put your sword back into its place, for all who take hold of the sword will die by the sword” (Mt 26:52). Tertullian, the famous apologist of the I-II century, commented: “Disarming Peter, Jesus took away the weapons from the hands of every soldier.” A few decades later, the biblical scholar Origen echoed, “We Christians no longer grip the sword; we don’t anymore learn the art of war because through Jesus we have become children of peace.”
One of the issues close to Matthew’s heart is the universalism of salvation. Israel cannot consider herself as the only and jealous depositary of the promises. She played the role that the Lord entrusted to her: to prepare the coming of God’s kingdom. Now she is expected, first among the guests, in the banquet hall (Mt 22:1-6). Unfortunately, Israel rejected the invitation. In the early Christian community, it is experienced as a painful laceration, like a sword that pierces the soul (Lk 2:35), as “a thorn in the flesh” (2 Cor 12:7). The maximum expression of this refusal is the cry: “His blood be on us and on our children” (Mt 27:25).
The nonsensical interpretation of this phrase has had tragic consequences: hatred, absurd accusations, violence, and Christians supporting the persecution of the Jews. The meaning attributed to it by Matthew was totally different. The Jews had chosen violence and rejected the reign of peace announced by Jesus. The evangelist wants to warn of the danger of repeating the same mistake.
Another incident reported only by Matthew is the death of Judas. This disciple is the symbol of all those who, for a time, follow Jesus. Then they are aware that Jesus does not realize their dreams of glory and their thirst for power. They abandon him and even turn against him.
If we free ourselves from the stereotypes for a moment, we can experience respect and compassion for the plight of this man. It seems that, in the group of the apostles, he had no friends. When he saw the only one who loved him go to his death, he must have felt terribly alone to carry the weight of his mistake. He’s gone, unfortunately, to vent his remorse, his inner torment to the wrong people, the temple priests who used him. If he had turned to Christ, his life would end in another way.
Finally, only Matthew speaks of the guards placed in custody of the tomb (Mt 27:62-66): they are a sign of the triumph of evil. Their presence testifies that the righteous is defeated, the deliverer silenced, locked forever in a tomb. It is the experience that we have: evil always gives the impression of being assured of a final triumph, such as to consider as dreams the poor, the weak and the defenseless’ hope for justice. God, however, ensures his unexpected intervention. His angel will roll every stone that prevents the return to life and will sit on it (Mt 28:2). The soldiers, placed to defend injustice and iniquity, will flee in terror from his light (Mt 28:4).
Indebted to Fr. Fernando Armellini SCJ
© Claretian Publications, Macau
Cum Approbatione Ecclesiastica
全属于祢 
您必须登录才能发表评论。