4th Sunday in Ordinary Time (A)

Readings:

1. Zephaniah 2.3; 3.12-13
   Psalm 146.6-7, 8-9, 9-10  Response:  “Blessed are the poor in spirit; the kingdom of heaven is theirs.”
2. 1 Corinthians 1.26-31
3. Matthew 5.1-12a

Reflections on the Gospel Reading

The gospel readings for this Sunday and the next five Sundays in Ordinary Time are taken from Matthew’s Sermon on the Mount.  In chapters 5 to 7 of his Gospel Matthew has organized various teachings of Jesus into one long discourse.  Jesus’ “sermon” begins with the so-called beatitudes, and the first of these is:  “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.”  In many ways, understanding this first beatitude is a key to understanding the entire Sermon on the Mount.

It seems clear that Matthew has adapted the words of Jesus to suit his audience some fifty years later.  All the Gospel writers do this.  They were convinced that the same Jesus who spoke so eloquently many years ago was still present and speaking to the Church through his Spirit.  His words had relevance for all times, including theirs.

It is as though Jesus is seated with his disciples next to him, surrounded by a huge crowd from Syria, Galilee, the Ten Cities, Jerusalem, Judea, and from beyond the Jordan.  (Matthew 4.24-25)  Standing just behind them are the people of Matthew’s community, and at the very back of the crowd are today’s believers listening to the word of Jesus in continuity with all preceding generations of Christians.

In order, then, for us to understand the meaning of Jesus’ words for our time we need to establish a trajectory by seeking to understand what Jesus was saying to his audience and how Matthew adapted that message to listeners in the changed circumstances of his time and place.

Jesus’ Audience

Jerome H. Neyrey argues persuasively that Jesus addressed the original beatitudes (probably three or four) to his followers whose families had cast them out because of their joining his group.  (1998, 164-189)  Although Jesus’ beatitudes are cast in the form of wisdom sayings that can apply to a larger audience, their immediate purpose was to honor his followers.  They had transferred their allegiance to him from their families of origin, and they had suffered the stigma of public shame and dishonor.  The beatitudes, then, turned the accepted concepts of honor upside down.

Probably Jesus’ listeners heard something like this:¹

1. Honored the poor,
   yours is the kingdom of God.

2. Honored the weepers,
   you will laugh.

3. Honored the hungry,
   you will be filled.

They might also have heard something like the following, which was added or composed very early on, at the time when Jesus’ sayings were being translated into Greek.  (Davies & Allison 1988, 435)

4. Honored are you when people [lit. men] hate you, and when they exclude you and revile you and cast out your name as evil on my account. Rejoice and be glad, for your reward is great in heaven.

Davies and Allison argue that Jesus uttered these statements with Isaiah 61.1-2 in the background of both his and his listeners’ consciousness. (1988, 437-439)  Note how Isaiah’s proclamation of the Jubilee Year (the year of the Lord’s favor) is a source of hope to the oppressed and comfort to those who mourn.

The spirit of the Lord God is upon me,
        because  the Lord has anointed me;
he has sent me to bring good news to the oppressed,
        to bind up the brokenhearted,
to proclaim liberty to the captives,
        and release to the prisoners;
to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor, 
        and the day of vengeance of our God;
        to comfort all who mourn;

Jesus was addressing people who had broken ties with their families in order to follow him.  These people had been disowned and shamed by their families with severe social and economic consequences.  If they were farmers, they lost any source of sustenance and any inheritance that might be coming to them.  If they were artisans, they lost their stalls in the market.  If they were day laborers, their patron was no longer willing to find them employment.  Most people thought they got exactly what they deserved.  They were without honor, homeless, penniless, and reduced to begging.  That is, they were poor; they mourned their loss of honor and family ties; they and their families went hungry – all because of their commitment to Jesus.

Jesus is telling his followers that they are truly honorable because God honors them.  Not only will their fortunes be reversed in the future, but also right now they participate in God’s reign.  “In the Makarisms [beatitudes] (Mt 5:3-12), Jesus begins the Sermon [on the Mount] by undoing the shame which disciples suffered on his behalf.” (Neyrey 1998, 165) (2)

It is important to remember that in the Mediterranean World of Jesus’ time honor was everything.  Consequently, poverty was not primarily an economic concept.  In the world of the first century probably 85% of the people were poor in the sense of just having enough food, clothing, and shelter to barely survive. (Crossan 1991, 45-46.)  “Although most people had little wealth, they had sufficiency, and so were not classified as ‘poor.'” (Neyrey 1998, 170)

For the people of Jesus’ time a poor person was someone who could not maintain his or her status and so suffered loss of honor, which usually led to severe economic hardship as well.  (Neyrey 1998, 166.)  But not always.  A widow with lands and wealth but no son was considered poor.  Molina and Rohrbaugh put it this way.

The Greek term for “poor” should be understood in concrete terms, though not exclusively in economic terms.  The “poor” are persons unable to maintain their inherited honor standing in society due to misfortune or the injustice of others.  Because of this, they are socially vulnerable, that is, religiously, economically, politically, and domestically.  People who are maimed, lame, blind, and the like are “poor,” regardless of how much land they might own . . . .  It is social misfortune rather than economic misfortune that makes a person poor. (2003, 400)

The poor whom Jesus was addressing were not the working poor struggling to make ends meet; they were the begging poor deprived of all resources and without family, patron, or protector to intervene on their behalf.   According to Crossan about ten percent of the population fell into these unclean, degraded, or expendable classes.  (1991, 44.)  Peter put it succinctly when he said to Jesus, “Look, we have left everything and followed you.”  (Matthew 19.27)  Jesus replies, “Everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or children or fields, for my name’s sake, will receive a hundredfold, and will inherit eternal life.”  (Mt 19.29)

In summary, when Jesus said to his followers, “Honored are the poor, yours is the kingdom of God.” he was making a radically countercultural statement.  He was saying that those who for his sake had undergone social dishonor, which reduced them to the status of beggars, were truly honorable in God’s sight, and God would set things straight.  Their sacrifice would not be in vain.

Matthew’s Audience

Matthew’s ninth beatitude describes this situation where “they insult you and cast you out and utter every kind of evil against you falsely because of me.”  Each of the other eight beatitudes begins with a designation that the dominant culture of Jesus’ time would have considered shameful but Jesus considers honorable.  Jesus then shows the true honor of his followers in God’s sight by connecting each shameful designation with the reversal in store for them.

How does Matthew apply this saying to his audience, possibly in Damascus, some fifty years later?  Obviously, conditions have changed.  Not just individuals but whole extended families have become Christians.  Although it appears that the followers of Jesus have been excluded from the assemblies of other Israelites in the Diaspora [the Greco-Roman world outside of the Land of Israel], their honor status with the wider, gentile community had not been so radically compromised.  Following Jesus did not mean reduction to begging poverty.  Also, Christian missionaries depended upon the generosity of relatively wealthy sympathizers.  So, some Christians were probably relatively wealthy.

On the other hand, in the first century the members of the Jesus Movement were still at odds with the mainstream culture.  They were considered atheists because they refused to worship the gods of the various people with whom they lived.  Because of their refusal to be involved with killing, they did not serve in the army or hold public office.  Thus, these avenues of social advancement were closed to them.  To the extent that they were considered to be separate from their fellow Israelites/Jews, they were subject to denunciation and punishment for adhering to an unauthorized religion.  Many thought of them as strange because of their adherence to an esoteric Eastern religion.  In short, being a follower of Jesus (a proto-Christian) cost something in both social and economic terms.

Matthew is convinced that the words of Jesus have enduring value and that they apply to his present audience.  Consequently, he puts greater stress on the religious meaning of “poor” as the concept had developed throughout the biblical period.  Just as Jesus praised his first followers for their willingness to leave all things and entrust their destiny to God, so now the same Jesus is challenging Matthew’s audience to appropriate these countercultural values in the changed circumstances of their lives.

In spite of adjusting the words of Jesus to the needs of his time, it is remarkable how well Matthew retains the spirit of the words Jesus spoke to his contemporaries.  The fourth original beatitude remains in its key position at the end of the list, now becoming the ninth and last beatitude.  Neyrey has shown that each of the other eight beatitudes in Matthew’s list begins with a condition that was considered shameful by the dominant culture of the eastern Mediterranean world.  Each condition is turned to an honorable state in God’s eyes and promised an appropriate recognition or reward in the kingdom that is already breaking in upon believers. (1998, 164-189)²

Note how Matthew presents each of the first eight beatitudes.  (NRSV translation)

1. Blessed [how honorable] are the poor [Greek: ptochoí] in spirit,
   for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
   1. Shameful situation: The disciples are destitute, meek, humiliated, and oppressed.
   2. Reward: The disciples already enjoy the honorable status of belonging to the kingdom of heaven.

2. Blessed [how honorable] are those who mourn [Greek: pethoûntes],
   for they will be comforted.
   1. Shameful situation: Mourning related mainly to death.  Rejection by their family was equivalent to death, for all practical purposes. The disciples of Jesus mourn the loss of their relationship to their family of origin and of their honorable status within the community.
   2. Reward: God will comfort them.  (Note the use of “the divine passive”³ where God is the implied subject.)

3. Blessed [how honorable] are the meek [Greek: praeîs],
   for they will inherit the earth.
   1. Shameful situation: The meek person is “one who does not give a riposte to challenges and does not respond in anger to insults.” (Neyrey 1998, 181)  In short he is a pathetic wimp.
   2. Reward: The meek man who, precisely because he is a follower of Jesus, did not respond violently when his land was unjustly seized will eventually “inherit the land.” (Neyrey 1998, 182.  See also Zephania 2.3; 3.12-13 – this Sunday’s first reading.)

4. Blessed [how honorable] are those who hunger [Greek: peinôntes] and thirst for righteousness,
   for they will be filled.
   1. Shameful situation: The new righteousness of Jesus that pries his followers away from their families seems shameful to the dominant culture.
   2. God will satisfy their quest for true righteousness. (“The divine passive” again.)

5. Blessed [how honorable] are the merciful,
   for they will receive mercy.  [literally:   for they will be given mercy (by God).]
   1. Shameful situation: To the dominant “macho” culture, forswearing vengeance against outrageous offenses and failure to exact payment for legitimate debts was shameful.
   2. Reward: God will show mercy to and forgive those who forgive offenses or debts.  (“The divine passive” again.)

6. Blessed [how honorable] are the pure in heart,
   for they will see God.
   1. Shameful situation: Neyrey does not incorporate this beatitude into his analysis.  However, disputes over purity or cleanliness are characteristic of Matthew’s Gospel.  Cleanliness was primarily a requirement of the temple priesthood.  They were not to appear before God with any uncleanliness or impurity.  In accordance with Exodus 19.6 (“You shall be for me a priestly kingdom and a holy nation.”) the Pharisees sought to spread observance of these temple purity requirements among the general populace.  It appears that Jesus’ stress on inward dispositions (purity of heart) was at odds with the Pharisees’ interpretation and practice, causing the “holiness” of Jesus and his followers to be subject to ridicule as shameful.
   2. Reward: Those who are clean or pure according to Jesus’ standards will have the reward of the temple priests.  They will see God.

7. Blessed [how honorable] are the peacemakers,
   for they will be called children of God.
   1. Shameful situation: The dominant culture considered it shameful for a man not to take revenge against a perceived wrong or insult or for a man who had offended another to ask for forgiveness.  Similarly, it was shameful for a third party to interfere with the assertion or defense of someone else’s honor.
   2. Reward: God will call them His children. (“The divine passive” again.”)

8. Blessed [how honorable] are those who are persecuted [cast out] for righteousness’ sake,
   for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
   1. Shameful situation: It was shameful to be rejected and cast out by one’s own family because of joining the followers of Jesus.
   2. Reward: Like the poor in spirit, they already enjoy honorable status in the kingdom.

To the word “poor” Matthew has added “in spirit,” (referring to one’s innermost being) “to avoid a purely economic interpretation of poverty.” (Meier 1990, 40)  Being poor in spirit does not mean having good intentions or being indifferent to wealth and possessions.  “Poor in spirit” is the opposite of “haughty in spirit.”  Already in the First Testament ‘poor’ referred “to those who were in special need of God’s help” and in time “came to be a self-designation for the meek, humiliated, and oppressed people of God.”  This is the sense of “poor in spirit” of Matthew’s beatitudes. (Davies & Allison 1988, 443)  It is almost identical to Matthew’s third beatitude, “Blessed are the meek.”

Also, it is important to note that the biblical authors do not contrast “spirit” with “matter.” They contrast “spirit” with “flesh.”  “Flesh” is any human reality apart from the power of God.  “Spirit” is any human reality aided by the power of God.  Thus, Isaiah can say, “The Egyptians are human and not God; their horses are flesh and not spirit.”  (Isaiah 31.3)  Our evangelical Christian friends would be quick to note that “spirit,” with or without a capital S, is a “power word.”  Being poor in spirit, then, is a dynamic concept.  It means aligning oneself with God’s will and actively seeking God’s kingdom, often against the grain of the dominant culture.

Like Jesus’ first followers, Matthew’s audience faced the challenge of putting all their trust in God, not in family or wealth.  Later on in the Sermon on the Mount Jesus says, “Give to everyone who begs from you, and do not refuse anyone who wants to borrow from you.”  (Matthew 5.42)  The message is clear.  God’s will comes first.  Wealth and possessions should not be the ultimate determiners of our lives.  “Strive first for the kingdom of God and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well.” (Matthew 6.33)

Today’s Audience

How do the gospel words of Jesus apply to us who strive to be his followers in the vastly changed circumstances of the twenty-first century?  What must we do to be praised for being “poor in spirit” in our time and place?

We have to ask ourselves:  “What does being a Christian cost us socially and economically?  Most of us would probably have to respond:  “little or nothing.”  Next we have to ask:  “How attached are we to our wealth and possessions?  Do we live in solidarity with the poor?  In what way does our wealth and social status benefit “the wretched of the earth?”  There are many parts of the world in which being a Christian is a social and economic disability.  In what way do we extend a helping hand to our sisters and brothers in the faith?  In what way are we a sign to them of the approaching kingdom of God?

As Reginald Fuller wisely observes, “We must not so spiritualize the notion of the poor that we turn our back on the physically poor.” (1984, 117)  We need to look at our world where about 3 billion people are poor, some 1.3 billion of them barely surviving on less than one dollar a day.  Forty thousand children die each day from preventable diseases.  (Arias Sanchez, 44-46)  We also live in a society that honors the display of wealth.  The “best” people have fine homes, drive luxury automobiles, dine at fine restaurants, wear designer clothes, vacation at expensive resorts, and send their children to elite schools.  Our situation cries out to God for justice every bit as much as the situation Jesus faced.

Being “poor in spirit,” then, is not some sort of sentimental lack of attachment to wealth.  Those who are “poor in spirit” are powerfully attuned to the righteousness of God’s kingdom.  That is where their heart is and where their treasure lies (Matthew 6.21), even to the detriment of their personal possessions.

Given that understanding, we can measure whether we are  “poor in spirit.”

---

In preparing these reflections, in addition to the biblical texts, I consulted the following works:

Arias Sanchez – Oscar Arias Sanchez, “Disarmament” in Kerry Kennedy Cuomo, Speak Truth to Power:  Human Rights Defenders Who Are Changing Our World, An Umbrage Editions Book (New York:  Crown Publishers, n.d. [probably 2000]), pp. 44-47.

Brueggemann et al. 1995 – Walter Brueggemann, Charles B. Cousar, Beverly R. Gaventa, James D. Newsome, Texts for Preaching:  A Lectionary Commentary Based on the NRSV, Year A. (Louisville, KY:  Westminster John Knox Press, 1995), pp. 118, 124-126.

Crossan 1991 – John Dominic Crossan, The Historical Jesus:  The Life of a Mediterranean Jewish Peasant  (New York:  HarperSanFrancisco, 1991), pp. 45-46.

Davies & Allison 1988 – W. D. Davies and Dale C. Allison, Jr. A Critical and Exigetical Commentary on the Gospel According To Saint Matthew, Vol.I [Chapters 1 – 7], The International Critical Commentary on the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments, J. A. Emerton, C. E. B. Granfield, and G. N. Stanton, General Editors (London: T&T Clark, 1988), pp. 429-447.

Fuller 1984 – Reginald H. Fuller, Preaching the Lectionary.  The Word of God for the Church Today  (Collegeville [MN]:  Liturgical Press, 1984), pp. 114-117.

Funk et al. 1993 – Robert W. Funk, Roy W. Hoover and the Jesus Seminar, The Five Gospels:  The Search for the Authentic Words of Jesus , A Polebridge Press Book (New York:  Macmillan Publishing Company, 1993), pp. 138-139.

Harrington 1991 – Daniel J. Harrington, S.J., The Gospel of Matthew , Sacra Pagina Series Volume 1, A Michael Glazier Book (Collegeville [MN]:  Liturgical Press, 1991), pp. 77-83.

Malina & Rohrbaugh 2003 – Bruce J. Malina and Richard L. Rohrbaugh, Social-Science Commentary on the Synoptic Gospels, Second Edition  (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2003),41-42, 400-401.

Meier 1990 – John P. Meier, Matthew , A Michael Glazier Book [1980] (Collegeville [MN]:  Liturgical Press, 1990), pp. 37-43.

Neyrey 1998 – Jerome H. Neyrey, Honor and Shame in the Gospel of Matthew  (Louisville, KY:  John Knox Press, 1998), pp. 164-189.

NRSV – New Revised Standard Version – Bruce M. Metzger and Roland E. Murphy, Editors, The New Oxford Annotated Bible [with the Apocrypha] containing the Old and New Testaments.  New Revised Standard Version.  (New York:  Oxford University Press, 1994)

Pilch 1995 – John J. Pilch, The Cultural World of Jesus, Sunday by Sunday, Cycle A.  A Liturgical Press Book (Collegeville [MN]:  Liturgical Press, 1995), pp. 28-30.

---