The 1962 Missal Epistle and Gospel for the 19th Sunday after Pentecost

Angelqueen.org ^ | Sunday, October 10, 2004 | The Father, The Son and The Holy Spirit

[AAABEST]

The 1962 Missal Epistle and Gospel for the 19th Sunday after Pentecost EPISTLE Ephesians 4:23-28 Brethren: Be ye renewed in the spirit of your mind, and put on the new man, who according to God is created in justice and holiness of truth. Wherefore, putting away lying, speak ye the truth every man with his neighbour, for we are members one of another. Be angry, and sin not. Let not the sun go down upon your anger. Give not place to the devil. He that stole, let him now steal no more: but rather let him labour, working with his hands the thing which is good, that he may have something to give to him that suffereth need.   GOSPEL Matthew 22: 1-14 At that time, Jesus spoke to the chief priests and the Pharisees in parables, saying: The kingdom of heaven is likened to a king, who made a marriage for his son; and he sent his servants, to call them that were invited to the marriage, and they would not come. Again he sent other servants, saying: Tell them that were invited: Behold, I have prepared my dinner; my beeves and fatlings are killed, and all things are ready; come ye to the marriage. But they neglected: and went their ways, one to his farm, and another to his merchandise; and the rest laid hands on his servants, and having treated them contumeliously, put them to death. But when the king had heard of it, he was angry; and sending his armies, he destroyed those murderers, and burnt their city. Then he saith to his servants: The marriage indeed is ready, but they that were invited were not worthy. Go ye therefore into the highways, and as many as you shall find, call to the marriage. And his servants going forth into the ways, gathered together all that they found, both bad and good; and the marriage was filled with guests. And the king went in to see the guests; and he saw there a man who had not a wedding garment: and he saith to him: Friend, how camest thou in hither, not having on a wedding garment? but he was silent. Then the king said to the waiters: Bind his hands and feet, and cast him into the exterior darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth. For many are called, but few are chosen.

[AAABEST]

Sunday Mass ping

[Arguss]

This Sunday, called on account of it's Gospel, Sunday of the marriage guests, reminds us that all men are called to heavenly bliss. ("Therefore, go out to the country roads, and invite to the wedding anyone you find")

The Jews have refused to take part in the heavenly feast. Therefore the Apostles and the Church, filled with the Holy Ghost at Pentecost, have turned towards the Gentiles. But the beatific union is announced, prepared for, and in a certain manner begun, by sacramental communion.

To take part in a marriage feast before the Jesus, it is necessary to wear a ceremonial garment, called the wedding garment.

Similarly, to receive the Body of Jesus at the Holy table, and to be in communion with His Divinity in Heaven, one must wear the nuptial robe of baptism and of the state of Grace. Therefore the apostle tells us to put on the new man. (epistle)

[AlbionGirl]

As always, AAABEST, thanks for posting this.

I listened to Mass this morning on EWTN Radio, 11 a.m EST. It was a High Mass, much of it in Latin, and the Priest was excellent. His sermon was wonderful.

He said that most Sin stems from ingratitude, and that the Lord despises ingratitude more than missing the Mark on the Letter of Law, which seemed to me to be correct.

Anyway, could the guests who were first invited be justly accused of ingratitude? And why when the servants go out and bring in any old guests they can, good and bad, as the Gospel states, does it not matter that the bad are present too?

What I'm really trying to get at, is that initially the King deems the first guest list as a bunch of unworthies, and justifibly so. But he seems to have had to settle for a mix of people he didn't even know to help celebrate this joyous occassion of his, and this confuses me somewhat.

[AAABEST]

This parable is certainly heavy with analogy and meaning. Both of your takes were in line with the priest's Homily today.

[Arguss]

I've always had trouble understanding that parable also, and thought it was very unfair to dispose of invited guests in that manner.

But understanding it in light of Baptism makes perfect sense.

You don't hear of the Church stressing Baptism as much these days. It doesn't fit in with modern ecumenism.

Pius IX actually went out on the street and took in a Jewish boy to Baptize him. The boy wen on to be a Priest. But the Pope took all kinds of heat for that one. He's still fighting that battle.

[AlbionGirl]

As I begin to read Scripture more I realize how much education and erudition is needed to properly interpret them.

I know it probably doesn't make much sense, but I still can't figure out why Cain's sacrifice was so displeasing to the Lord. I have to confess to quite a bit of sympathy for Cain, and I was always heartened by the Lord's protection of him, and also by the fact that his offspring were not judged to be unfit. If memory serves me correctly, anyway.

[sinkspur]

Pius IX actually went out on the street and took in a Jewish boy to Baptize him.

"Took in"? He "took him in" over the parents' objections.

We call that "kidnapping" here in the States.

[AlbionGirl]

Was that Jewish boy Abe Foxman?

[Arguss]

It was quite a story worldwide, and may in the end keep Pius Blesed IX from being Canonized.

Personally I think he got a bad rap for doing his God given duty.

The seizure of a little boy in June 1858 from his parents was to become a worldwide scandal, and it centered on Pius IX.

Edgardo Mortara, the small son of a Jewish fam­ily, became gravely ill; and, thinking he was about to die, the Catholic servant in the home secretly bap­tized him. But the little boy recovered.

In June 1858, it came to the attention of the pa­pal police that a baptized Catholic was living in the home of a Jewish family! According to papal-con­trolled civil law, Edgardo had to be removed from that home.

The papal police broke into the home that night and took the six-year-old child from his parents. Pius may not have initiated the action, but he fully approved of it—and personally took the little boy as his own.

In a memoir, Edgardo later recalled how the pope would hide him under his great red cloak and say. "Where is the boy?" Then, opening the cloak, he would show him to all those standing nearby, "Here he is!"

But news of the abduction created an international scandal. The New York Times ran 20 articles on it in a month. The New York Herald declared there was "colossal" interest in the matter. To think that the Catholics in Rome would steal a little boy from his parents, and then the pope would raise him!

Pius IX's public response to the outcry was pub­lished worldwide. To a Jewish delegation he said, "The newspapers can write all they want. I couldn't care less about what the world thinks." And to the Jews, partly released from the Jewish Ghetto, he added this threat, "Take care. I could have made you go back into your hole."
To back up his words, he once again confided the Jews to the ghetto area of the city, and rescinded their civil rights. In 1870, Pius IX publicly declared them to be "dogs. . there are too many of them in Rome, and we hear them howling in the streets." At these words, throughout the world anti-Catholic feel­ing only intensified.

As for Edgardo, when not by the pope's side. he grew up in a home funded by taxes on the Jews. He later became a Catholic priest and lectured on "the miracle" of his conversion to Catholicism.

[AlbionGirl]

And to the Jews, partly released from the Jewish Ghetto, he added this threat, "Take care. I could have made you go back into your hole." To back up his words, he once again confided the Jews to the ghetto area of the city, and rescinded their civil rights. In 1870, Pius IX publicly declared them to be "dogs. . there are too many of them in Rome, and we hear them howling in the streets." At these words, throughout the world anti-Catholic feel­ing only intensified.

How is it possible for a Catholic, much less the Pope, to have this kind of cognitive dissonance as it relates to the Jewish People? How could he call those who the Messiah springs from dogs? Jesus, and thus Salvation, is from the Jews. That kind of hard-heart is evil, and beyond evil, incredibly stupid for so educated a man.

[Arguss]

All of that! Many, right in the Vatican, wished he had never been made Pope, and he almost wasn't, but a veto to the conclave had arrived too late.

But in spite of his many controversies he was a very Holy man, and accomplished many good things, including the Immaculate conception, infaliblity of the Pope, and defeat of many heresies. He held a strict line against the modernists.

[AlbionGirl]

Very interesting story. Are you pretty well versed on the history of a lot of Popes?

Don't know why I thought it might have been Abe Foxman. Probably because I don't know the sequence of Popes at all. But I thought that Foxman underwent something similar, although I'm not sure of the details.

[Canticle_of_Deborah]

I could see this gospel interpreted on two levels; one more common and the other mystical. On the common level, we are called to be Christians through baptism. Some never accept the invitation, while others accept but fail to live a Christian life (the clothing metaphor?).

On the mystical level as written about by St. John of the Cross, all Christians are invited in baptism to journey on the mystical path towards union with God. Many never accept the invitation at all, prefering worldly attachments. Of those who achieve the level of proficiency, very few attain perfect union with God.

I think of the latter when I hear the Scripture "many are called but few are chosen."

[AAABEST]

Yes. This Gospel is not for the faint of heart.

Some of us wouldn't dream of going to a wedding dressed inappropriately yet we - even as believers - are at the same often time very careless in how we present ourselves to our God.

This teaching (and others) show us why the "we're all saved and going to heaven" theory is so awfully flawed. We really do get to choose how we are "dressed" and only our Lord will decide if it's fitting.

[AAABEST]

You know if you post on these threads you automatically get added to the Sunday ping list.

Sorry but it was your own doing.

[Grey Ghost II]

We call that "kidnapping" here in the States.

Kidnapped or not, it was his only chance at Heaven.

[sinkspur]

But in spite of his many controversies he was a very Holy man,

No man is holy who calls the Jewish people "dogs."