Free Republic

St. Elizabeth of the Trinity on Our Solitude with Triune Communion

St. Elizabeth of the Trinity (1880-1906) is a saint for our day, being recently canonized in 2016 and teaching us the path of contemplative prayer amidst our ordinary day-to-day lives. She lived as a cloistered Carmelite nun yet was united to a large number of lay people living in the world, especially through her letters to them. She shows them, and us, the healthy tension between solitude with God and communion with others. Solitude and communion in our lives are ultimately based on union with our God who is both One and Three.

Shortly before her death, she expressed her desire to pray in heaven for souls to be drawn more deeply into contemplative prayer: “My mission in heaven will be to draw souls by assisting them to go out of themselves in order to cleave to God by a wholly simple movement of love, and to keep them in this profound silence within, which will allow God to communicate Himself to them and to transform them into Himself” (Letter 335). We pray to E3 (as I affectionately refer to her) to accomplish this prayer in our lives. If you like rhymes: E3, pray for me! May our solitude and communion draw us deeper into our Beloved Three and communion with others!

There is a beautiful and somewhat paradoxical name of the Triune God in Elizabeth’s celebrated prayer to the Trinity. She calls the Trinity “Infinite Solitude.” Letter 330, written a couple weeks before her death to a family friend, shows the implications of being alone with such a God who is not just the Alone but Infinite Solitude. Communing with such a God in solitude meant that Elizabeth’s solitude also became infinite! Whereas initially solitude can feel confining, in the end, it breaks out into infinity when that solitude is spent in intimacy with the Triune God.

In the last stanza of her prayer, Elizabeth exclaims, “Trinity, my All, my Beatitude, Infinite Solitude, Immensity in which I lose myself!” Elizabeth’s solitude breaks out into infinity as her heart makes space for others and embraces them. Her solitude is expansive and infinite. 

Elizabeth’s infinite solitude, like ours, is enclosed with God alone while expanding to make room for everything in God’s wide embrace. This infinite solitude takes her out of herself and enlarges her outreach and sphere of influence to persons in the world. In solitude, she is given a mission and purpose larger than herself, reaching out to the whole world. In Letter 330, she tells Madame Gout de Bize that in heaven she will be actively thinking of her and will win for her a grace of intimate union with God. Even in heaven, her heart will be turned to others:

Oh, believe that up there, in the Furnace of Love, I will actively think of you. I will ask you, if you wish—and this will be the sign that I have entered Heaven—for a grace of union for you, of intimacy with the Master; I entrust to you what has made my life an anticipated Heaven: believe that a Being named Love dwells in us at all times of day and night and asks us to live in communion with Him, to receive all joy, as well as all suffering, as coming directly from His love; this lifts the soul beyond what is passing, beyond what is going on, beyond that which crushes, and gives it rest in peace, the cherishing love of God for His children. Oh, dear Madame, what waves of tenderness I feel rising from my heart to yours (L330).

In confiding her secret to Madame of how she lived her earthly life as an anticipated heaven, Elizabeth points to the God dwelling within; and this divine Being is “a Being named Love.” In being alone with the Alone, she is alone with the Three, and they are Love. The Three are an outpouring of self-giving love in the unity of the one divine nature.

The Trinity dwells in solitude with nothing other than God, but in a boundless Solitude without confines. There is an outpouring of love in their eternal processions, and there is a freely chosen outpouring of love in creation and redemption. This is the Being named Love who dwelt alone in Elizabeth’s heart, and so others had a place in her heart as well. Hers was a heart alone, yet expansive.

She tells Madame, “what waves of tenderness I feel rising from my heart toward yours.” She then reminisces about herself strolling with Madame along the ocean and tells her to return to those avenues and meditate, “along the avenues of Boaca. Go and meditate in one of them and there, before God, you will feel her whole soul close to yours, for in Him we will be one for time and eternity!” The word one here italicized is actually circled by Elizabeth in the original letter. So Madame is to imagine being with Elizabeth in a narrow avenue along the seemingly boundless ocean, while “waves of tenderness” rise from Elizabeth’s heart toward Madame’s. Perhaps the circled one, in the shape of the sea (!), is meant to convey that they are one in the ocean of God’s Love.

Simply taking in the scene of the broad and wide-open ocean before them while strolling in the narrow avenue, with waves of tenderness overflowing from Elizabeth, is breath-taking and laden with symbolism. The boundless ocean, among the natural world, is a fine image of God and His infinity. God is Infinite Solitude as an Ocean of Love. And the outpouring of Triune Love flows forth as waves of tender love flow out from Elizabeth’s heart and her own infinite solitude. Elizabeth and Madame are one in that Ocean of Love. There is no need for Elizabeth to leave her solitude in embracing Madame for both are contained in that Ocean of Love which is God, Infinite Solitude.

We do not know if this was Elizabeth’s deliberate intention in weaving together the images and ideas she did at the end of this letter as she prepared a “meditation” for her friend, as she called it, but whether intended or just intuitively expressed, the rich symbolism is there of the Ocean of Love that we abide in with a single-hearted devotion and find others dwelling in too. Solitude with the Triune God is not restrictive but expansive so that our solitude can also become infinite.

Alone with Infinite Solitude, our solitude becomes infinite. Alone with the Divine Being called Love, our solitude breaks out into infinity as we make space in our hearts for others. Our waves of tenderness for others need not draw us away from our solitude because they too are embraced in the Ocean of Love we dwell alone with. We are one with the others we find in this Ocean of Love while remaining distinct. For the Infinite Solitude Itself is One and Three. In this triune God is our All and our communion with others.

O my Three, my All, my Beatitude, infinite Solitude, Immensity in whom I lose myself! …Bury Yourself in me so that I may bury myself in You!

---

Editor’s Note: For more on St. Elizabeth of the Trinity, check out Fr. Ignatius’ new book, Named for Glory: St. Elizabeth of the Trinity’s Identity and Mission, available from Sophia Institute Press.

---

catholicexchange.com

Allegory of Charity

Francisco de Zurbarán

Prado

Catena Aurea by St. Thomas Aguinas

16:1–7

1. And he said unto his disciples, There was a certain rich man, which had a steward; and the same was accused unto him that he had wasted his goods.

2. And he called him, and said unto him, How is it that I hear this of thee? give an account of thy stewardship; for thou mayest be no longer steward.

3. Then the steward said within himself, What shall I do? for my lord taketh away from me the stewardship: I cannot dig; to beg I am ashamed.

4. I am resolved what to do, that, when I am put out of the stewardship, they may receive me into their houses.

5. So he called every one of his lord’s debtors unto him, and said unto the first, How much owest thou unto my lord?

6. And he said, An hundred measures of oil. And he said unto him, Take thy bill, and sit down quickly, and write fifty.

7. Then said he to another, And how much owest thou? And he said, An hundred measures of wheat. And he said unto him, Take thy bill, and write fourscore.

BEDE. Having rebuked in three parables those who murmured because He received penitents, our Saviour shortly after subjoins a fourth and a fifth on almsgiving and frugality, because it is also the fittest order in preaching that almsgiving should be added after repentance. Hence it follows, And he said unto his disciples, There was a certain rich man.

PSEUDO-CHRYSOSTOM. (Hom. de Divite.) There is a certain erroneous opinion inherent in mankind, which increases evil and lessens good. It is the feeling that all the good things we possess in the course of our life we possess as lords over them, and accordingly we seize them as our especial goods. But it is quite the contrary. For we are placed in this life not as lords in our own house, but as guests and strangers, led whither we would not, and at a time we think not of. He who is now rich, suddenly becomes a beggar. Therefore whoever thou art, know thyself to be a dispenser of the things of others, and that the privileges granted thee are for a brief and passing use. Cast away then from thy soul the pride of power, and put on the humility and modesty of a steward.

BEDE. (ex Hieron.) The bailiff is the manager of the farm, therefore he takes his name from the farm. But the steward, or director of the household, (villicus œconomus) is the overseer of money as well as fruits, and of every thing his master possesses.

AMBROSE. From this we learn then, that we are not ourselves the masters, but rather the stewards of the property of others.

THEOPHYLACT. Next, that when we exercise not the management of our wealth according to our Lord’s pleasure, but abuse our trust to our own pleasures, we are guilty stewards. Hence it follows, And he was accused to him.

PSEUDO-CHRYSOSTOM. (ut sup.) Meanwhile he is taken and thrust out of his stewardship; for it follows, And he called him, and said unto him, What is this that I hear of thee? give an account of thy stewardship, for thou canst be no longer steward. Day after day by the events which take place our Lord cries aloud to us the same thing, shewing us a man at midday rejoicing in health, before the evening cold and lifeless; another expiring in the midst of a meal. And in various ways we go out from our stewardship; but the faithful steward, who has confidence concerning his management, desires with Paul to depart and be with Christ. (Phil. 1:23.) But he whose wishes are on earth is troubled at his departing. Hence it is added of this steward, Then the steward said within himself, What shall I do, for my Lord taketh away from me the stewardship? I cannot dig, to beg I am ashamed. Weakness in action is the fault of a slothful life. For no one would shrink who had been accustomed to apply himself to labour. But if we take the parable allegorically, after our departure hence there is no more time for working; the present life contains the practice of what is commanded, the future, consolation. If thou hast done nothing here, in vain then art thou careful for the future, nor wilt thou gain any thing by begging. The foolish virgins are an instance of this, who unwisely begged of the wise, but returned empty. (Matt 25:8.) For every one puts on his daily life as his inner garment; it is not possible for him to put it off or exchange it with another. But the wicked steward aptly contrived the remission of debts, to provide for himself an escape from his misfortunes among his fellow-servants; for it follows, I am resolved what to do, that when I am put out of the stewardship, they may receive me into their houses. For as often as a man, perceiving his end approaching, lightens by a kind deed the load of his sins, (either by forgiving a debtor his debts, or by giving abundance to the poor,) dispensing those things which are his Lord’s, he conciliates to himself many friends, who will afford him before the judge a real testimony, not by words, but by the demonstration of good works, nay moreover will provide for him by their testimony a resting-place of consolation. But nothing is our own, all things are in the power of God. Hence it follows, So he called every one of his Lord’s debtors unto him, and said unto the first, How much owest thou unto my Lord? And he said, A hundred casks of oil.

BEDE. A cadus in Greek is a vessel containing three urns. It follows, And he said unto him, Take thy bill, and sit down quickly, and write fifty, forgiving him the half. It follows, Then said he to another, And how much owest thou? And he said, An hundred measures of wheat. A corus is made up of thirty bushels. And he said unto him, Take thy bill, and write fourscore, forgiving him a fifth part. It may be then simply taken as follows: whosoever relieves the want of a poor man, either by supplying half or a fifth part, will be blessed with the reward of his mercy.

AUGUSTINE. (de Qu. Ev. l. ii. qu. 34.) Or because out of the hundred measures of oil, he caused fifty to be written down by the debtors, and of the hundred measures of wheat, fourscore, the meaning thereof is this, that those things which every Jew performs toward the Priests and Levites should be the more abundant in the Church of Christ, that whereas they give a tenth, Christians should give a half, as Zaccheus gave of his goods, (Luke 19:8.) or at least by giving two tenths, that is, a fifth, exceed the payments of the Jews.

16:8–13

8. And the lord commended the unjust steward, because he had done wisely: for the children of this world are in their generation wiser than the children of light.

9. And I say unto you, Make to yourselves friends of the mammon of unrighteousness; that, when ye fail, they may receive you into everlasting habitations.

10. He that is faithful in that which is least is faithful also in much: and he that is unjust in the least is unjust also in much.

11. If therefore ye have not been faithful in the unrighteous mammon, who will commit to your trust the true riches?

12. And if ye have not been faithful in that which is another man’s, who shall give you that which is your own?

13. No servant can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.

AUGUSTINE. (ubi sup.) The steward whom his Lord cast out of his stewardship is nevertheless commended because he provided himself against the future. As it follows, And the Lord commended the unjust steward, because he had done wisely; we ought not however to take the whole for our imitation. For we should never act deceitfully against our Lord in order that from the fraud itself we may give alms.

ORIGEN. (in Prov. 1:1.) But because the Gentiles say that wisdom is a virtue, and define it to be the experience of what is good, evil, and indifferent, or the knowledge of what is and what is not to be done, we must consider whether this word signifies many things, or one. For it is said that God by wisdom prepared the heavens. (Prov. 3:19.) Now it is plain that wisdom is good, because the Lord by wisdom prepared the heavens. It is said also in Genesis, according to the LXX, that the serpent was the wisest animal, wherein He makes wisdom not a virtue, but evil-minded cunning. And it is in this sense that the Lord commended the steward that he had done wisely, that is, cunningly and evilly. And perhaps the word commended was spoken not in the sense of real commendation, but in a lower sense; as when we speak of a man being commended in slight and indifferent matters, and in a certain measure clashings and sharpness of wit are admired, by which the power of the mind is drawn out.

AUGUSTINE. (ubi sup.) On the other hand this parable is spoken, that we should understand that if the steward who acted deceitfully, could be praised by his lord, how much more they please God who do their works according to His commandment.

ORIGEN. The children of this world also are not called wiser but more prudent than the children of light, and this not absolutely and simply, but in their generation. For it follows, For the children of this world are in their generation wiser than the children of light, &c.

BEDE. The children of light and the children of this world are spoken of in the same manner as the children of the kingdom, and the children of hell. For whatever works a man does, he is also termed their son.

THEOPHYLACT. By the children of this world then He means those who mind the good things which are on the earth; by the children of light, those who beholding the divine love, employ themselves with spiritual treasures. But it is found indeed in the management of human affairs, that we prudently order our own things, and busily set ourselves to work, in order that when we depart we may have a refuge for our life; but when we ought to direct the things of God, we take no forethought for what shall be our lot hereafter.

GREGORY. (18. Mor. cap. 18.) In order then that after death they may find something in their own hand, let men before death place their riches in the hands of the poor. Hence it follows, And I say to you, Make to yourselves friends of the mammon of unrighteousness, &c.

AUGUSTINE. (Serm. 113.) That which the Hebrews call mammon, in Latin is “riches.” As if He said, “Make to yourselves friends of the riches of unrighteousness.” Now some misunderstanding this, seize upon the things of others, and so give something to the poor, and think that they are doing what is commanded. That interpretation must be corrected into, Give alms of your righteous labours. (Prov. 3:9. LXX.) For you will not corrupt Christ your Judge. If from the plunder of a poor man, you were to give any thing to the judge that he might decide for you, and that judge should decide for you, such is the force of justice, that you would be ill pleased in yourself. Do not then make to yourself such a God. God is the fountain of Justice, give not your alms then from interest and usury. I speak to the faithful, to whom we dispense the body of Christ. But if you have such money, it is of evil that you have it. Be no longer doers of evil. Zaccheus said, Half my goods I give to the poor. (Luke 19:8.) See how he runs who runs to make friends of the mammon of unrighteousness; and not to be held guilty from any quarter, he says, I If hare taken any thing from any one, I restore fourfold. According to another interpretation, the mammon of unrighteousness are all the riches of the world, whenever they come. For if you seek the true riches, there arc some in which Job when naked abounded, when he had his heart full towards God. The others are called riches from unrighteousness; because they are not true riches, for they are full of poverty, and ever liable to chances. For if they were true riches, they would give you security.

AUGUSTINE. (de Quæst. Ev. l. ii. q. 34.) Or the riches of unrighteousness are so called, because they are not riches except to the unrighteous, and such as rest in their hopes and the fulness of their happiness. But when these things are possessed by the righteous, they have indeed so much money, but no riches are theirs but heavenly and spiritual.

AMBROSE. Or he spoke of the unrighteous Mammon, because by the various enticements of riches covetousness corrupts our hearts, that we may be willing to obey riches.

BASIL. (Hom. de Avar.) Or if thou hast succeeded to a patrimony, thou receivest what has been amassed by the unrighteous; for in a number of predecessors some one must needs be found who has unjustly usurped the property of others. But suppose that thy father has not been guilty of exaction, whence hast thou thy money? If indeed thou answerest, “From myself;” thou art ignorant of God, not having the knowledge of thy Creator; but if, “From God,” tell me the reason for which thou receivedst it. Is not the earth and the fulness thereof the Lord’s? (Ps. 24:1.) If then whatever is ours belongs to our common Lord, so will it also belong to our fellow-servant.

THEOPHYLACT. Those then are called the riches of unrighteousness which the Lord has given for the necessities of our brethren and fellow-servants, but we spend upon ourselves. It became us then, from the beginning, to give all things to the poor, but because we have become the stewards of unrighteousness, wickedly retaining what was appointed for the aid of others, we must not surely remain in this cruelty, but distribute to the poor, that we may be received by them into everlasting habitations. For it follows, That, when ye fail, they may receive you into everlasting habitations.

GREGORY. (21. Mor. cap. 14.) But if through their friendship we obtain everlasting habitations, we ought to calculate that when we give we rather offer presents to patrons, than bestow benefits upon the needy.

AUGUSTINE. (Serm. 113.) For who are they that shall have everlasting habitations but the saints of God? and who are they that are to be received by them into everlasting habitations but they who administer to their want, and whatsoever they have need of, gladly supply. They are those little ones of Christ, who have forsaken all that belonged to them and followed Him; and whatsoever they had have given to the poor, that they might serve God without earthly shackles, and freeing their shoulders from the burdens of the world, might raise them aloft as with wings.

AUGUSTINE. (de Quæst. Ev. l. ii. q. 34.) We must not then understand those by whom we wish to be received into everlasting habitations to be as it were debtors of God; seeing that the just and holy are signified in this place, who cause those to enter in, who administered to their necessity of their own worldly goods.

AMBROSE. Or else, make to yourselves friends of the mammon of unrighteousness, that by giving to the poor we may purchase the favour of angels and all the saints.

CHRYSOSTOM. Mark also that He said not, “that they may receive you into their own habitations.” For it is not they who receive you. Therefore when He said, Make to yourselves friends, he added, of the mammon of unrighteousness, to shew, that their friendship will not alone protect us unless good works accompany us, unless we righteously cast away all riches unrighteously amassed. The most skilful then of all arts is that of almsgiving. For it builds not for us houses of mud, but lays up in store an everlasting life. Now in each of the arts one needs the support of another; but when we ought to shew mercy, we need nothing else but the will alone.

CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA. Thus then Christ taught those who abound in riches, earnestly to love the friendship of the poor, and to have treasure in heaven. But He knew the sloth of the human mind, how that they who court riches bestow no work of charity upon the needy. That to such men there results no profit of spiritual gifts, He shews by obvious examples, adding, He that is faithful in that which is least is faithful also in much; and he that is unjust in the least is unjust also in much. Now our Lord opens to us the eye of the heart, explaining what He had said, adding, If therefore ye have not been faithful in the unrighteous mammon, who will commit to your trust the true riches? That which is least then is the mammon of unrighteousness, that is, earthly riches, which seem nothing to those that are heavenly wise. I think then that a man is faithful in a little, when he imparts aid to those who are bowed down with sorrow. If then we have been unfaithful in a little thing, how shall we obtain from hence the true riches, that is, the fruitful gift of Divine grace, impressing the image of God on the human soul? But that our Lord’s words incline to this meaning is plain from the following; for He says, And if ye have not been faithful in that which is another man’s, who shall give you that which is your own?

AMBROSE. Riches are foreign to us, because they are something beyond nature, they are not born with us, and they do not pass away with us. But Christ is ours, because He is the life of man. Lastly, He came unto His own.

THEOPHYLACT. Thus then hitherto He has taught us how faithfully we ought to dispose of our wealth. But because the management of our wealth according to God is no otherwise obtained than by the indifference of a mind unaffected towards riches, He adds, No man can serve two masters.

AMBROSE. Not because the Lord is two, but one. For although there are who serve mammon, yet he knoweth no rights of lordship; but has himself placed upon himself a yoke of servitude. There is one Lord, because there is one God. Hence it is evident, that the power of the Father and the Son is one: and He assigns a reason, thus saying, For either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other.

AUGUSTINE. (de Qu. Ev. lib. ii. q. 36.) But these things were not spoken indifferently or at random. For no one when asked whether he loves the devil, answers that he loves him, but rather that he hates him; but all generally proclaim that they love God. Therefore either he will hate the one, (that is, the devil,) and love the other, (that is, God;) or will hold to the one, (that is, the devil, when he pursues as it were temporal wants,) and will despise the other, (that is, God,) as when men frequently neglect His threats for their desires, who because of His goodness flatter themselves that they will have impunity.

CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA. But the conclusion of the whole discourse is what follows, Ye cannot serve God and mammon. Let us then transfer all our devotions to the one, forsaking riches.

BEDE. (ex Hier.) Let then the covetous hear this, that we can not at the same time serve Christ and riches; and yet He said not, “Who has riches,” but, who serves riches; for ho who is the servant of riches, watches them as a servant; but he who has shaken off the yoke of servitude, dispenses them as a master; but he who serves mammon, verily serves him who is set over those earthly things as the reward of his iniquity, and is called the prince of this world. (John 12:31, 2 Cor. 4:4.)

16:14–18

14. And the Pharisees also, who were covetous, heard all these things: and they derided him.

15. And he said unto them, Ye are they which justify yourselves before men; but God knoweth your hearts: for that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God.

16. The Law and the Prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it.

17. And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail.

18. Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery.

BEDE. Christ had told the Pharisees not to boast of their own righteousness, but to receive penitent sinners, and to redeem their sins by almsgiving. But they derided the Preacher of mercy, humility, and frugality; as it is said, And the Pharisees also, who were covetous, heard these things; and derided him: it may be for two reasons, either because He commanded what was not sufficiently profitable, or cast blame upon their past superfluous actions.

THEOPHYLACT. But the Lord detecting in them a hidden malice, proves that they make a pretence of righteousness. Therefore it is added, And he said unto them, Ye are they which justify yourselves before men.

BEDE. They justify themselves before men who despise sinners as in a weak and hopeless condition, but fancy themselves to be perfect and not to need the remedy of almsgiving; but how justly the depth of deadly pride is to be condemned, He sees who will enlighten the hidden places of darkness. Hence it follows, But God knoweth your hearts.

THEOPHYLACT. And therefore ye are an abomination to Him because of your arrogance, and love of seeking after the praise of men; as He adds, For that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God.

BEDE. Now the Pharisees derided our Saviour disputing against covetousness, as if He taught things contrary to the Law and the Prophets, in which many very rich men are said to have pleased God; but Moses also himself promised that the people whom he ruled, if they followed the Law, should abound in all earthly goods. (Deut. 28:11.) These the Lord answers by shewing that between the Law and the Gospel, as in these promises so also in the commands, there is not the slightest difference. Hence He adds, The Law and the Prophets were until John.

AMBROSE. Not that the Law failed, but that the preaching of the Gospel began; for that which is inferior seems to be completed when a better succeeds.

CHRYSOSTOM. (Hom. 37. in Matt. Pseudo-Chrys. Hom. 19. op. imp.) He hereby disposes them readily to believe on Him, because if as far as John’s time all things were complete, I am He who am come. For the Prophets had not ceased unless I had come; but you will say, “how” were the Prophets until John, since there have been many more Prophets in the New than the Old Testament. But He spoke of those prophets who foretold Christ’s coming.

EUSEBIUS. Now the ancient prophets knew the preaching of the kingdom of heaven, but none of them had expressly announced it to the Jewish people, because the Jews having a childish understanding were unequal to the preaching of what is infinite. But John first openly preached that the kingdom of heaven was at hand, as well as also the remission of sins by the laver of regeneration. Hence it follows, Since that time the kingdom of heaven is preached, and every one presseth into it.

AMBROSE. For the Law delivered many things according to nature, as being more indulgent to our natural desires, that it might call us to the pursuit of righteousness. Christ breaks through nature as cutting off even our natural pleasures. But therefore we keep under nature, that it should not sink us down to earthly things, but raise us to heavenly.

EUSEBIUS. A great struggle befals men in their ascent to heaven. For that men clothed with mortal flesh should be able to subdue pleasure and every unlawful appetite, desiring to imitate the life of angels, must be compassed with violence. But who that looking upon those who labour earnestly in the service of God, and almost put to death their flesh, will not in reality confess that they do violence to the kingdom of heaven.

AUGUSTINE. (de Quæst. Ev. l. ii. q. 87.) They also do violence to the kingdom of heaven, in that they not only despise all temporal things, but also the tongues of those who desire their doing so. This the Evangelist added, when he said that Jesus was derided when He spoke of despising earthly riches.

BEDE. But lest they should suppose that in His words, the Law and the Prophets were until John, He preached the destruction of the Law or the Prophets, He obviates such a notion, adding, And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law should fail. For it is written, the fashion of this world passeth away. (1 Cor. 7:31.) But of the Law, not even the very extreme point of one letter, that is, not even the least things are destitute of spiritual sacraments. And yet the Law and the Prophets were until John, because that could always be prophesied as about to come, which by the preaching of John it was clear had come. But that which He spoke beforehand concerning the perpetual inviolability of the Law, He confirms by one testimony taken therefrom for the sake of example, saying, Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband, committeth adultery; that from this one instance they should learn that He came not to destroy but to fulfil the commands of the Law.

THEOPHYLACT. For that to the imperfect the Law spoke imperfectly is plain from what he says to the hard hearts of the Jews, “If a man hate his wife, let him put her away,” (Deut. 24:1.) because since they were murderers and rejoiced in blood, they had no pity even upon those who were united to them, so that they slew their sons and daughters for devils. But now there is need of a more perfect doctrine. Wherefore I say, that if a man puts away his wife, having no excuse of fornication, he commits adultery, and he who marrieth another commits adultery.

AMBROSE. But we must first speak, I think, of the law of marriage, that we may afterwards discuss the forbidding of divorce. Some think that all marriage is sanctioned by God, because it is written, Whom God hath joined, let not man put asunder. (Matt. 19:6.) How then does the Apostle say, If the unbelieving depart, let him depart? (Mark 10:9, 1 Cor. 7:15.) Herein he shews that the marriage of all is not from God. For neither by God’s approval are Christians joined with Gentiles. Do not then put away thy wife, lest thou deny God to be the Author of thy union. For if others, much more oughtest thou to bear with and correct the behaviour of thy wife. And if she is sent away pregnant with children, it is a hard thing to shut out the parent and keep the pledge; so as to add to the parents’ disgrace the loss also of filial affection. Harder still if because of the mother thou drivest away the children also. Wouldest thou suffer in thy lifetime thy children to be under a step-father, or when the mother was alive to be under a step-mother? How dangerous to expose to error the tender age of a young wife. How wicked to desert in old age one, the flower of whose growth thou hast blighted. Suppose that being divorced she does not marry, this also ought to be displeasing to you, to whom though an adulterer, she keeps her troth. Suppose she marries, her necessity is thy crime, and that which thou supposest marriage, is adultery.

But to understand it morally. Having just before set forth that the kingdom of God is preached, and said that one tittle could not fall from the Law, He added, Whosoever putteth away his wife, &c. Christ is the husband; whomsoever then God has brought to His son, let not persecution sever, nor lust entice, nor philosophy spoil, nor heretics taint, nor Jew seduce. Adulterers are all such as desire to corrupt truth, faith, and wisdom.

Catena Aurea Luke 16

Luke
	English: Douay-Rheims	Latin: Vulgata Clementina	Greek NT: Byzantine/Majority Text (2000)
	Luke 16
9.	And I say to you: Make unto you friends of the mammon of iniquity; that when you shall fail, they may receive you into everlasting dwellings.	Et ego vobis dico : facite vobis amicos de mammona iniquitatis : ut, cum defeceritis, recipiant vos in æterna tabernacula.	καγω υμιν λεγω ποιησατε εαυτοις φιλους εκ του μαμωνα της αδικιας ινα οταν εκλιπητε δεξωνται υμας εις τας αιωνιους σκηνας
10.	He that is faithful in that which is least, is faithful also in that which is greater: and he that is unjust in that which is little, is unjust also in that which is greater.	Qui fidelis est in minimo, et in majori fidelis est : et qui in modico iniquus est, et in majori iniquus est.	ο πιστος εν ελαχιστω και εν πολλω πιστος εστιν και ο εν ελαχιστω αδικος και εν πολλω αδικος εστιν
11.	If then you have not been faithful in the unjust mammon; who will trust you with that which is the true?	Si ergo in iniquo mammona fideles non fuistis quod verum est, quis credet vobis ?	ει ουν εν τω αδικω μαμωνα πιστοι ουκ εγενεσθε το αληθινον τις υμιν πιστευσει
12.	And if you have not been faithful in that which is another's; who will give you that which is your own?	Et si in alieno fideles non fuistis, quod vestrum est, quis dabit vobis ?	και ει εν τω αλλοτριω πιστοι ουκ εγενεσθε το υμετερον τις υμιν δωσει
13.	No servant can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or he will hold to the one, and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon.	Nemo servus potest duobus dominis servire : aut enim unum odiet, et alterum diliget : aut uni adhærebit, et alterum contemnet. Non potestis Deo servire et mammonæ.	ουδεις οικετης δυναται δυσιν κυριοις δουλευειν η γαρ τον ενα μισησει και τον ετερον αγαπησει η ενος ανθεξεται και του ετερου καταφρονησει ου δυνασθε θεω δουλευειν και μαμωνα
14.	Now the Pharisees, who were covetous, heard all these things: and they derided him.	Audiebant autem omnia hæc pharisæi, qui erant avari : et deridebant illum.	ηκουον δε ταυτα παντα και οι φαρισαιοι φιλαργυροι υπαρχοντες και εξεμυκτηριζον αυτον
15.	And he said to them: You are they who justify yourselves before men, but God knoweth your hearts; for that which is high to men, is an abomination before God.	Et ait illis : Vos estis qui justificatis vos coram hominibus : Deus autem novit corda vestra : quia quod hominibus altum est, abominatio est ante Deum.	και ειπεν αυτοις υμεις εστε οι δικαιουντες εαυτους ενωπιον των ανθρωπων ο δε θεος γινωσκει τας καρδιας υμων οτι το εν ανθρωποις υψηλον βδελυγμα ενωπιον του θεου

Chris Robinson: My Dad [our Jim Robinson] Passed Away Peacefully Monday Night (October 27th) In Our Home.
Jim still needs our prayers. Thread 2
Prayer thread for Salvation's recovery
Pray for Ukraine
Prayer thread for Fidelis' recovery
Update on Jim Robinson's health issues

Alleluia Ping

Please FReepmail me to get on/off the Alleluia Ping List.

KEYWORDS: catholic; lk16; ordinarytime; prayer;

For your reading, reflection, faith-sharing, comments, questions, discussion.

Vincent Liem de la Paz

Vicente Liem de la Paz (Vietnamese: Vinh Sơn Lê Quang Liêm) (1732 – November 7, 1773) was a Tonkinese (present day northern Vietnam) Dominican friar venerated as a saint and martyr by the Roman Catholic Church.St. Vincent Liêm was born 1732 at Thôn Đông, Trà Lũ village, Phú Nhai district, Nam Định province. His parents were Mr. Antôn and Monica Thiều Đạo. Perhaps due to an unhealthy condition at his birth, his mother baptized him and named him Vincent. In 1744, at the age of 12, Liêm joined the seminary in Lục Thủy. Recognizing his gifts of intelligence and piety, Fr. Espinosa Huy, O.P. sent him to study at St. John Lateran in Manila, the Philippines. Vincent Liêm received a Dominican habit and entered the novitiate on Sept 09, 1753. One year later, together with three country men, he made his religious profession and chose for himself the names Vincent Liêm de la Paz, meaning Vincent Liêm of Peace. He continued to study theology at the University of Santo Tomás for four more years and was ordained a priest in 1758. On Oct. 03rd of the same year, he embarked a ship and returned home to start his ministry. The ship arrived in Vietnam on January 20th, 1759.

In 1738, King Philip V of Spain opened the Colegio de San Juan de Letran and the University of Santo Tomas (UST) in the Philippines to Chinese and Tonkinese students, since China and Tonkin did not have Christian educational institutions. The Dominican fathers decided to let Liem with four other Tonkinese (Jose de Santo Tomas, Juan de Sto. Domingo, Pedro Martir and Pedro de San Jacinto) study in the Philippines.

Vicente took the trivium and the quadrivium in Colegio de San Juan de Letran, now the equivalent of elementary and secondary education. He finished a degree of lector of humanities at Letran. He would pursue his collegiate education at the University of Santo Tomas while residing at Letran. In September 1753, after completing his studies at UST, he entered the Dominican order, along with his four Tonkinese companions. A year later, they made their solemn professions. On January 28, 1755, he received the tonsure and minor orders at the Church of Sta. Ana. In 1758, de la Paz was ordained priest under the Dominican order. On September of that year, he passed the examinations to hear confessions. On October 3, he started his journey back to Tonkin. He arrived on January 20, 1759.

Fr. Vincente Liêm de la Paz had ministered his people for 14 years as a seminary professor as well as a priest. His first assignment was to teach at the seminary of Trung Linh. He then served in many parishes, such as Quất Lâm, Lục Thủy, Trung Lễ, Trung Lao, and Lai Ổn. The book The Catholic Church in Vietnam, vol. I, describes his services as follows: “His ministries were not limited within parishes, but expanded to the villages of non-Catholic regardless of the obstacles and threats during the persecution under the Lord Trịnh Sâm (1767-1782). Everywhere he ardently loved and helped everybody. He exhorted everybody to be courageous, consoled the sorrowful and encouraged the faithful to be strong and not to be afraid of any difficulty and danger.”

Preaching under any condition (2 Tim 4:2)

On the feast of Our Lady of Rosary, October 2nd 1773, while Father Vincent was directing a parish mission at Lương Đống (Thái Bình), he was arrested and sent to Trần Văn Hiển in Xích Bích. Mr. Trần hoped to extort some ransom and imprisoned Fr. Vincent for 12 days. When this plan failed, he sent Fr. Vincent to Phố Hiến and turned him to a government officer. Fr. Vincent met Fr. Jacinto Castaneda, O.P. in prison there. On October 20 1773, both Dominican priests were forced to carry a yoke stamped with four words “Hoa Lang Đạo Sư” then sent to Thăng Long. During this time, the history of the Church at Bắc Hà recorded an important debate among the four major religions: Confucianism, Taoism, Buddishm, and Catholicism. The content of the debate was written in a small book titled: “Hội Đồng Tứ Giáo” – The Council of Four Religions. This council was called by an officer of Lord Trịnh Sâm (1767-1782). The debate lasted for three days. “During the debate, the Catholic representatives applied the Apologetic methodology and also used the classic references from Chinese literatures to explain their theory so clearly that they earned the officer’s admiration.” According to historian Gispert, the author of “Sử Ký Địa Phận Trung”, the two priests were Fr. Castaneda Gia (Jacinto) and Fr. Vincent Liêm – probably Fr. Liêm was the author of “The Council of Four Religions.” These two priests were condemned to death by decapitation under Trịnh Sâm, and on November 7, 1773, the soldiers brought them both to the execution ground. For St. Vincent Liem and Fr. Gia, the words of St. Paul were true: “I suffer for the Gospel and being chained like a criminal; but the Word of God is not chained” (2Tim 2:9). Even chains, beatings, and suffering could not chain the Word of God and Jesus’ messenger will always preach the Word in season and out of season, nothing could prevent them from preaching the Word, not even imprisonment and death (2Tim 4:2).

Live oR Die for the Faith

When escorting the prisoners passing by the imperial palace, the officer ordered both priests to stop to hear the king’s condemnation or release. One officer said: “Gia and Liêm were condemned to death because they are priests of a banned religion, Hoa Lang.” Another officer also added in a loud voice: “The Hoa Lang religion was banned, but up to now there has been no Vietnamese condemned to death because of this religion. Therefore, Mr. Liem should receive a general amnesty for he is Vietnamese.” Fr. Liêm, however, on the one hand wanted to save Fr. Gia and on the other hand wanted to die for his faith, raised his voice in objection: “If Fr. Gia is condemned to death for religious reason, I should deserve the same sentence. He and I both are priests; if the law of the country does not condemn me, neither should it condemn Fr. Gia. Since I am Vietnamese, I should obey the rule of my own country more than the foreigners. If Fr. Gia is killed and I am released, the sentence would not be fair. I would like to request that we should have the same sentence. That would be fair.” Then both priests were escorted to the execution ground of Đồng Mơ to be beheaded. Both were praising God, murmuring the Act of Contrition, reciting the “Creed”, and singing “Salve Regina.” As the drums and gongs were beating, the executioner decapitated Fr. Liêm with one slash of the sword and Fr. Gia with three slashes. That day two Dominican priests, one native and one foreigner, had borne witness to Jesus Christ by their own lives.

The First Vietnamese Martyr

According to the words of the officer who wanted to set Fr. Vincent Liêm free, Fr. Vincent was the first Vietnamese martyr decapitated at Bắc Hà. He probably didn’t know that back in 1630-1631, a Vietnamese Catholic layman named Phan Sinh, a royal attendant, was killed for his faith. Perhaps this death was not recorded because there was no official warrant. In any case, Fr. Vincent Liêm was the first Vietnamese clergyman and the first Vietnamese Dominican priest shedding blood for the faith. The Vietnamese Dominican Friars of the Vicariate are so proud to have as their patron the first Dominican martyr who had shed his blood on their ancestral soil. Pope Pius X beatified Fr. Vincent Liem together with Fr. Jacinto Castaneda on April 15, 1906, and Pope John Paul II canonized them on June 19 1988.

The Saint of all CATHOLICS IN NORTH OF Vietnam

Among hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese Catholics who shed their blood for their faith during 300 years of persecution, many had no names. However, the patron of the Vietnamese Dominican Vicariate, not only was numbered among the 117 Vietnamese Martyrs honored by the universal church, he also was known under few different last names. According to The Catholic Church in Vietnam, some called him Fr. Vincent Phạm Hiếu Liêm, some others called him Vincent Phan Hiếu Liêm, and still others called him Vincent Nguyễn Hiếu Liêm. Fr. Vũ Thành, in his book Dòng Máu Anh Hùng, Vol. I, called him Vincent Lê Quang Liêm. Unfortunately, we don’t know exactly what his true last name is since we don’t have any official document for cross reference. It may be that people wanted to impose their last names on him to show their devotion to him or to claim him as their own families’ member. If this is the case, St. Vincent Liêm is truly the saint of all the people of Bắc Hà. However, in his letters sent to his friends, he signed as Vincente de la Paz, O.P. (Vincent of Peace – The Catholic Church in Vietnam, Vol. I, p. 416). The name that he chose reflects his intention to be a sign of peace and unity. As the first Vietnamese martyr on the soil of Vietnam, he has become the seed that brought true peace to those who believe in Jesus as God and Savior. However, when we simply greet him as Vincent Liêm – the name given by his parents, we really consider him to be our true brother of the Vicariate family. It is in this family’s love that the Vietnamese Dominican Friars of the Vicariate remember him and choose him to be our patron saint. He is truly our brother and model of faith, hope, love, wisdom, and especially the desire to pursue truth through open dialogues with respect and humility. More importantly, the Vietnamese Dominican Friars also would like to follow his love for mission, wisdom, reverence and courage and to be ready to preach the Word whether convenient or inconvenient (2 Tim 4:2).

He spent time at Tonkin on evangelizing the Tonkinese people. However the Tonkinese authorities did not agree with this. On October 2, 1773, he and his two assistants were arrested at Co Dou. He and his assistants were beaten up, after which they traveled on foot to the village of Dou Hoi. There he met another Dominican priest, Jacinto Castaneda. They were presented to the Vice Governor and to the Royal Minister. They were thrown to a cage for a night. The arrival of a High Minister prompted their transfer to Kien Nam, where the King held his court. While under detention, they still managed to preach Catholicism to the people. Later they were taken to Tan Cau, then to the house of Canh Thuy. Finally they were brought to the King where they were tried. Their trial led for the King to be angry and they were thrown to jail. After several days, the King brought down the guilty verdict with the penalty of beheading. The execution occurred on November 7, 1773. After the execution, the Christians who were present at the site carried away the bodies of de la Paz and Castaneda, where they were laid to rest at the town of Tru Linh. Several more Christian missionaries were put to death by the Tonkinese authorities.

The process of beatification of de la Paz and Casteneda, as well as other Dominican martyrs, was initiated through Vicar Apostolic Bishop Ignacio Delgado, O.P. They were beatified by Pope Pius X with his feast day on November 6. Pope John Paul II announced the canonization of de la Paz on June 19, 1988, with his feast day on November 24.

References

Attwater, Donald and Catherine Rachel John. The Penguin Dictionary of Saints. 3rd edition. New York: Penguin Books, 1993. ISBN 0-140-51312-4.

---

sites.google.com/site/vietnamesemartyr

Christ the Redeemer

Andrey Rublev, iconographer

1420s
Tretyakov Gallery, Moscow

Catena Aurea by St. Thomas Aguinas

CHAP. 16

16:1–7

1. And he said unto his disciples, There was a certain rich man, which had a steward; and the same was accused unto him that he had wasted his goods.

2. And he called him, and said unto him, How is it that I hear this of thee? give an account of thy stewardship; for thou mayest be no longer steward.

3. Then the steward said within himself, What shall I do? for my lord taketh away from me the stewardship: I cannot dig; to beg I am ashamed.

4. I am resolved what to do, that, when I am put out of the stewardship, they may receive me into their houses.

5. So he called every one of his lord’s debtors unto him, and said unto the first, How much owest thou unto my lord?

6. And he said, An hundred measures of oil. And he said unto him, Take thy bill, and sit down quickly, and write fifty.

7. Then said he to another, And how much owest thou? And he said, An hundred measures of wheat. And he said unto him, Take thy bill, and write fourscore.

BEDE. Having rebuked in three parables those who murmured because He received penitents, our Saviour shortly after subjoins a fourth and a fifth on almsgiving and frugality, because it is also the fittest order in preaching that almsgiving should be added after repentance. Hence it follows, And he said unto his disciples, There was a certain rich man.

PSEUDO-CHRYSOSTOM. (Hom. de Divite.) There is a certain erroneous opinion inherent in mankind, which increases evil and lessens good. It is the feeling that all the good things we possess in the course of our life we possess as lords over them, and accordingly we seize them as our especial goods. But it is quite the contrary. For we are placed in this life not as lords in our own house, but as guests and strangers, led whither we would not, and at a time we think not of. He who is now rich, suddenly becomes a beggar. Therefore whoever thou art, know thyself to be a dispenser of the things of others, and that the privileges granted thee are for a brief and passing use. Cast away then from thy soul the pride of power, and put on the humility and modesty of a steward.

BEDE. (ex Hieron.) The bailiff is the manager of the farm, therefore he takes his name from the farm. But the steward, or director of the household, (villicus œconomus) is the overseer of money as well as fruits, and of every thing his master possesses.

AMBROSE. From this we learn then, that we are not ourselves the masters, but rather the stewards of the property of others.

THEOPHYLACT. Next, that when we exercise not the management of our wealth according to our Lord’s pleasure, but abuse our trust to our own pleasures, we are guilty stewards. Hence it follows, And he was accused to him.

PSEUDO-CHRYSOSTOM. (ut sup.) Meanwhile he is taken and thrust out of his stewardship; for it follows, And he called him, and said unto him, What is this that I hear of thee? give an account of thy stewardship, for thou canst be no longer steward. Day after day by the events which take place our Lord cries aloud to us the same thing, shewing us a man at midday rejoicing in health, before the evening cold and lifeless; another expiring in the midst of a meal. And in various ways we go out from our stewardship; but the faithful steward, who has confidence concerning his management, desires with Paul to depart and be with Christ. (Phil. 1:23.) But he whose wishes are on earth is troubled at his departing. Hence it is added of this steward, Then the steward said within himself, What shall I do, for my Lord taketh away from me the stewardship? I cannot dig, to beg I am ashamed. Weakness in action is the fault of a slothful life. For no one would shrink who had been accustomed to apply himself to labour. But if we take the parable allegorically, after our departure hence there is no more time for working; the present life contains the practice of what is commanded, the future, consolation. If thou hast done nothing here, in vain then art thou careful for the future, nor wilt thou gain any thing by begging. The foolish virgins are an instance of this, who unwisely begged of the wise, but returned empty. (Matt 25:8.) For every one puts on his daily life as his inner garment; it is not possible for him to put it off or exchange it with another. But the wicked steward aptly contrived the remission of debts, to provide for himself an escape from his misfortunes among his fellow-servants; for it follows, I am resolved what to do, that when I am put out of the stewardship, they may receive me into their houses. For as often as a man, perceiving his end approaching, lightens by a kind deed the load of his sins, (either by forgiving a debtor his debts, or by giving abundance to the poor,) dispensing those things which are his Lord’s, he conciliates to himself many friends, who will afford him before the judge a real testimony, not by words, but by the demonstration of good works, nay moreover will provide for him by their testimony a resting-place of consolation. But nothing is our own, all things are in the power of God. Hence it follows, So he called every one of his Lord’s debtors unto him, and said unto the first, How much owest thou unto my Lord? And he said, A hundred casks of oil.

BEDE. A cadus in Greek is a vessel containing three urns. It follows, And he said unto him, Take thy bill, and sit down quickly, and write fifty, forgiving him the half. It follows, Then said he to another, And how much owest thou? And he said, An hundred measures of wheat. A corus is made up of thirty bushels. And he said unto him, Take thy bill, and write fourscore, forgiving him a fifth part. It may be then simply taken as follows: whosoever relieves the want of a poor man, either by supplying half or a fifth part, will be blessed with the reward of his mercy.

AUGUSTINE. (de Qu. Ev. l. ii. qu. 34.) Or because out of the hundred measures of oil, he caused fifty to be written down by the debtors, and of the hundred measures of wheat, fourscore, the meaning thereof is this, that those things which every Jew performs toward the Priests and Levites should be the more abundant in the Church of Christ, that whereas they give a tenth, Christians should give a half, as Zaccheus gave of his goods, (Luke 19:8.) or at least by giving two tenths, that is, a fifth, exceed the payments of the Jews.

16:8–13

8. And the lord commended the unjust steward, because he had done wisely: for the children of this world are in their generation wiser than the children of light.

9. And I say unto you, Make to yourselves friends of the mammon of unrighteousness; that, when ye fail, they may receive you into everlasting habitations.

10. He that is faithful in that which is least is faithful also in much: and he that is unjust in the least is unjust also in much.

11. If therefore ye have not been faithful in the unrighteous mammon, who will commit to your trust the true riches?

12. And if ye have not been faithful in that which is another man’s, who shall give you that which is your own?

13. No servant can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.

AUGUSTINE. (ubi sup.) The steward whom his Lord cast out of his stewardship is nevertheless commended because he provided himself against the future. As it follows, And the Lord commended the unjust steward, because he had done wisely; we ought not however to take the whole for our imitation. For we should never act deceitfully against our Lord in order that from the fraud itself we may give alms.

ORIGEN. (in Prov. 1:1.) But because the Gentiles say that wisdom is a virtue, and define it to be the experience of what is good, evil, and indifferent, or the knowledge of what is and what is not to be done, we must consider whether this word signifies many things, or one. For it is said that God by wisdom prepared the heavens. (Prov. 3:19.) Now it is plain that wisdom is good, because the Lord by wisdom prepared the heavens. It is said also in Genesis, according to the LXX, that the serpent was the wisest animal, wherein He makes wisdom not a virtue, but evil-minded cunning. And it is in this sense that the Lord commended the steward that he had done wisely, that is, cunningly and evilly. And perhaps the word commended was spoken not in the sense of real commendation, but in a lower sense; as when we speak of a man being commended in slight and indifferent matters, and in a certain measure clashings and sharpness of wit are admired, by which the power of the mind is drawn out.

AUGUSTINE. (ubi sup.) On the other hand this parable is spoken, that we should understand that if the steward who acted deceitfully, could be praised by his lord, how much more they please God who do their works according to His commandment.

ORIGEN. The children of this world also are not called wiser but more prudent than the children of light, and this not absolutely and simply, but in their generation. For it follows, For the children of this world are in their generation wiser than the children of light, &c.

BEDE. The children of light and the children of this world are spoken of in the same manner as the children of the kingdom, and the children of hell. For whatever works a man does, he is also termed their son.

THEOPHYLACT. By the children of this world then He means those who mind the good things which are on the earth; by the children of light, those who beholding the divine love, employ themselves with spiritual treasures. But it is found indeed in the management of human affairs, that we prudently order our own things, and busily set ourselves to work, in order that when we depart we may have a refuge for our life; but when we ought to direct the things of God, we take no forethought for what shall be our lot hereafter.

GREGORY. (18. Mor. cap. 18.) In order then that after death they may find something in their own hand, let men before death place their riches in the hands of the poor. Hence it follows, And I say to you, Make to yourselves friends of the mammon of unrighteousness, &c.

AUGUSTINE. (Serm. 113.) That which the Hebrews call mammon, in Latin is “riches.” As if He said, “Make to yourselves friends of the riches of unrighteousness.” Now some misunderstanding this, seize upon the things of others, and so give something to the poor, and think that they are doing what is commanded. That interpretation must be corrected into, Give alms of your righteous labours. (Prov. 3:9. LXX.) For you will not corrupt Christ your Judge. If from the plunder of a poor man, you were to give any thing to the judge that he might decide for you, and that judge should decide for you, such is the force of justice, that you would be ill pleased in yourself. Do not then make to yourself such a God. God is the fountain of Justice, give not your alms then from interest and usury. I speak to the faithful, to whom we dispense the body of Christ. But if you have such money, it is of evil that you have it. Be no longer doers of evil. Zaccheus said, Half my goods I give to the poor. (Luke 19:8.) See how he runs who runs to make friends of the mammon of unrighteousness; and not to be held guilty from any quarter, he says, I If hare taken any thing from any one, I restore fourfold. According to another interpretation, the mammon of unrighteousness are all the riches of the world, whenever they come. For if you seek the true riches, there arc some in which Job when naked abounded, when he had his heart full towards God. The others are called riches from unrighteousness; because they are not true riches, for they are full of poverty, and ever liable to chances. For if they were true riches, they would give you security.

AUGUSTINE. (de Quæst. Ev. l. ii. q. 34.) Or the riches of unrighteousness are so called, because they are not riches except to the unrighteous, and such as rest in their hopes and the fulness of their happiness. But when these things are possessed by the righteous, they have indeed so much money, but no riches are theirs but heavenly and spiritual.

AMBROSE. Or he spoke of the unrighteous Mammon, because by the various enticements of riches covetousness corrupts our hearts, that we may be willing to obey riches.

BASIL. (Hom. de Avar.) Or if thou hast succeeded to a patrimony, thou receivest what has been amassed by the unrighteous; for in a number of predecessors some one must needs be found who has unjustly usurped the property of others. But suppose that thy father has not been guilty of exaction, whence hast thou thy money? If indeed thou answerest, “From myself;” thou art ignorant of God, not having the knowledge of thy Creator; but if, “From God,” tell me the reason for which thou receivedst it. Is not the earth and the fulness thereof the Lord’s? (Ps. 24:1.) If then whatever is ours belongs to our common Lord, so will it also belong to our fellow-servant.

THEOPHYLACT. Those then are called the riches of unrighteousness which the Lord has given for the necessities of our brethren and fellow-servants, but we spend upon ourselves. It became us then, from the beginning, to give all things to the poor, but because we have become the stewards of unrighteousness, wickedly retaining what was appointed for the aid of others, we must not surely remain in this cruelty, but distribute to the poor, that we may be received by them into everlasting habitations. For it follows, That, when ye fail, they may receive you into everlasting habitations.

GREGORY. (21. Mor. cap. 14.) But if through their friendship we obtain everlasting habitations, we ought to calculate that when we give we rather offer presents to patrons, than bestow benefits upon the needy.

AUGUSTINE. (Serm. 113.) For who are they that shall have everlasting habitations but the saints of God? and who are they that are to be received by them into everlasting habitations but they who administer to their want, and whatsoever they have need of, gladly supply. They are those little ones of Christ, who have forsaken all that belonged to them and followed Him; and whatsoever they had have given to the poor, that they might serve God without earthly shackles, and freeing their shoulders from the burdens of the world, might raise them aloft as with wings.

AUGUSTINE. (de Quæst. Ev. l. ii. q. 34.) We must not then understand those by whom we wish to be received into everlasting habitations to be as it were debtors of God; seeing that the just and holy are signified in this place, who cause those to enter in, who administered to their necessity of their own worldly goods.

AMBROSE. Or else, make to yourselves friends of the mammon of unrighteousness, that by giving to the poor we may purchase the favour of angels and all the saints.

CHRYSOSTOM. Mark also that He said not, “that they may receive you into their own habitations.” For it is not they who receive you. Therefore when He said, Make to yourselves friends, he added, of the mammon of unrighteousness, to shew, that their friendship will not alone protect us unless good works accompany us, unless we righteously cast away all riches unrighteously amassed. The most skilful then of all arts is that of almsgiving. For it builds not for us houses of mud, but lays up in store an everlasting life. Now in each of the arts one needs the support of another; but when we ought to shew mercy, we need nothing else but the will alone.

CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA. Thus then Christ taught those who abound in riches, earnestly to love the friendship of the poor, and to have treasure in heaven. But He knew the sloth of the human mind, how that they who court riches bestow no work of charity upon the needy. That to such men there results no profit of spiritual gifts, He shews by obvious examples, adding, He that is faithful in that which is least is faithful also in much; and he that is unjust in the least is unjust also in much. Now our Lord opens to us the eye of the heart, explaining what He had said, adding, If therefore ye have not been faithful in the unrighteous mammon, who will commit to your trust the true riches? That which is least then is the mammon of unrighteousness, that is, earthly riches, which seem nothing to those that are heavenly wise. I think then that a man is faithful in a little, when he imparts aid to those who are bowed down with sorrow. If then we have been unfaithful in a little thing, how shall we obtain from hence the true riches, that is, the fruitful gift of Divine grace, impressing the image of God on the human soul? But that our Lord’s words incline to this meaning is plain from the following; for He says, And if ye have not been faithful in that which is another man’s, who shall give you that which is your own?

AMBROSE. Riches are foreign to us, because they are something beyond nature, they are not born with us, and they do not pass away with us. But Christ is ours, because He is the life of man. Lastly, He came unto His own.

THEOPHYLACT. Thus then hitherto He has taught us how faithfully we ought to dispose of our wealth. But because the management of our wealth according to God is no otherwise obtained than by the indifference of a mind unaffected towards riches, He adds, No man can serve two masters.

AMBROSE. Not because the Lord is two, but one. For although there are who serve mammon, yet he knoweth no rights of lordship; but has himself placed upon himself a yoke of servitude. There is one Lord, because there is one God. Hence it is evident, that the power of the Father and the Son is one: and He assigns a reason, thus saying, For either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other.

AUGUSTINE. (de Qu. Ev. lib. ii. q. 36.) But these things were not spoken indifferently or at random. For no one when asked whether he loves the devil, answers that he loves him, but rather that he hates him; but all generally proclaim that they love God. Therefore either he will hate the one, (that is, the devil,) and love the other, (that is, God;) or will hold to the one, (that is, the devil, when he pursues as it were temporal wants,) and will despise the other, (that is, God,) as when men frequently neglect His threats for their desires, who because of His goodness flatter themselves that they will have impunity.

CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA. But the conclusion of the whole discourse is what follows, Ye cannot serve God and mammon. Let us then transfer all our devotions to the one, forsaking riches.

BEDE. (ex Hier.) Let then the covetous hear this, that we can not at the same time serve Christ and riches; and yet He said not, “Who has riches,” but, who serves riches; for ho who is the servant of riches, watches them as a servant; but he who has shaken off the yoke of servitude, dispenses them as a master; but he who serves mammon, verily serves him who is set over those earthly things as the reward of his iniquity, and is called the prince of this world. (John 12:31, 2 Cor. 4:4.)

Catena Aurea Luke 16

Luke
	English: Douay-Rheims	Latin: Vulgata Clementina	Greek NT: Byzantine/Majority Text (2000)
	Luke 16
1.	AND he said also to his disciples: There was a certain rich man who had a steward: and the same was accused unto him, that he had wasted his goods.	Dicebat autem et ad discipulos suos : Homo quidam erat dives, qui habebat villicum : et hic diffamatus est apud illum quasi dissipasset bona ipsius.	ελεγεν δε και προς τους μαθητας αυτου ανθρωπος τις ην πλουσιος ος ειχεν οικονομον και ουτος διεβληθη αυτω ως διασκορπιζων τα υπαρχοντα αυτου
2.	And he called him, and said to him: How is it that I hear this of thee? give an account of thy stewardship: for now thou canst be steward no longer.	Et vocavit illum, et ait illi : Quid hoc audio de te ? redde rationem villicationis tuæ : jam enim non poteris villicare.	και φωνησας αυτον ειπεν αυτω τι τουτο ακουω περι σου αποδος τον λογον της οικονομιας σου ου γαρ δυνηση ετι οικονομειν
3.	And the steward said within himself: What shall I do, because my lord taketh away from me the stewardship? To dig I am not able; to beg I am ashamed.	Ait autem villicus intra se : Quid faciam ? quia dominus meus aufert a me villicationem. Fodere non valeo, mendicare erubesco.	ειπεν δε εν εαυτω ο οικονομος τι ποιησω οτι ο κυριος μου αφαιρειται την οικονομιαν απ εμου σκαπτειν ουκ ισχυω επαιτειν αισχυνομαι
4.	I know what I will do, that when I shall be removed from the stewardship, they may receive me into their houses.	Scio quid faciam, ut, cum amotus fuero a villicatione, recipiant me in domos suas.	εγνων τι ποιησω ινα οταν μετασταθω της οικονομιας δεξωνται με εις τους οικους αυτων
5.	Therefore calling together every one of his lord's debtors, he said to the first: How much dost thou owe my lord?	Convocatis itaque singulis debitoribus domini sui, dicebat primo : Quantum debes domino meo ?	και προσκαλεσαμενος ενα εκαστον των χρεωφειλετων του κυριου εαυτου ελεγεν τω πρωτω ποσον οφειλεις τω κυριω μου
6.	But he said: An hundred barrels of oil. And he said to him: Take thy bill and sit down quickly, and write fifty.	At ille dixit : Centum cados olei. Dixitque illi : Accipe cautionem tuam : et sede cito, scribe quinquaginta.	ο δε ειπεν εκατον βατους ελαιου και ειπεν αυτω δεξαι σου το γραμμα και καθισας ταχεως γραψον πεντηκοντα
7.	Then he said to another: And how much dost thou owe? Who said: An hundred quarters of wheat. He said to him: Take thy bill, and write eighty.	Deinde alii dixit : Tu vero quantum debes ? Qui ait : Centum coros tritici. Ait illi : Accipe litteras tuas, et scribe octoginta.	επειτα ετερω ειπεν συ δε ποσον οφειλεις ο δε ειπεν εκατον κορους σιτου και λεγει αυτω δεξαι σου το γραμμα και γραψον ογδοηκοντα
8.	And the lord commended the unjust steward, forasmuch as he had done wisely: for the children of this world are wiser in their generation than the children of light.	Et laudavit dominus villicum iniquitatis, quia prudenter fecisset : quia filii hujus sæculi prudentiores filiis lucis in generatione sua sunt.	και επηνεσεν ο κυριος τον οικονομον της αδικιας οτι φρονιμως εποιησεν οτι οι υιοι του αιωνος τουτου φρονιμωτεροι υπερ τους υιους του φωτος εις την γενεαν την εαυτων εισιν

Alleluia Ping

Please FReepmail me to get on/off the Alleluia Ping List.

NOTE THE DATE: FRIDAY

KEYWORDS: catholic; lk16; ordinarytime; prayer

For your reading, reflection, faith-sharing, comments, questions, discussion.

collegiate church of Saint-Léonard, Haute Vienne

November 6: Saint Leonard of Noblac, Hermit

In search of God through prayer and solitude

---

Leonard was born at the end of the 5th century in a castle near Orléans, in what is now France. His family, connected to the Frankish court, had ancient roots and probably Roman origins. He received solemn baptism from Saint Remigius, Bishop of Reims, who became a deeply influential spiritual guide for him. Clovis, King of the Franks, served as his godfather and granted him the power to free prisoners whom he deemed innocent; Leonard used this privilege to help many oppressed people.

When he was offered a position of prestige within the Church, he refused, preferring instead a simple, contemplative life in a monastery near Orléans. As a young man, he had been educated to be an exemplary citizen, a brave soldier, and a man of the court, but he felt a strong calling toward prayer and the spiritual life. Deeply inspired by the life of Jesus—especially His childhood—Leonard sought always to follow His example of obedience.

Despite his dedication to helping the poor, Leonard felt the need to withdraw into solitude for a life of meditation and purification. For this reason, he gave all his possessions to the needy and embraced the monastic life, with the blessing of Saint Remigius. His brother decided to follow him on this path. The two were welcomed into an abbey, but after the abbot’s death, Leonard went farther afield, seeking an even more secluded retreat in the forests of Aquitaine.

There he lived in a hut made of branches beneath a great tree. He dug a well and built a small church dedicated to Mary and an altar in honor of Saint Remigius. King Clovis, grateful to him for helping the queen during childbirth, granted him the forest that he could travel around on a donkey within a single day. This area became the heart of his settlement, which later took the name Noblat in his honor.

Leonard died in 559, surrounded by his followers, who already regarded him as a saint. Around his monastery grew a community that took the name Saint-Léonard-de-Noblat.

His cult spread widely, especially from the 11th century onward. Notable figures such as Bohemond of Antioch and Richard the Lionheart venerated him as a saint, giving thanks for miracles attributed to his intercession. His tomb became an important pilgrimage site, and the church built in his honor was elevated to the status of a royal basilica. The veneration of Saint Leonard spread throughout Europe, reaching Italy through the Normans, particularly in the South.

He is often depicted as a monk or abbot, holding chains and shackles that symbolize his role as protector of innocent prisoners. He is also the patron saint of several cities and professions and is invoked for many needs—from difficult childbirths to animal diseases, and for protection against bandits and natural disasters.

---

vaticanstate.va

Christ the Good Shepherd

Bartolomé Esteban Murillo

c. 1660
Oil on canvas, 161 x 123 cm
Museo del Prado, Madrid