8 So they departed quickly from the tomb with fear and great joy, and ran to tell his disciples.

Following a great earthquake after the Angel moved the rock covering the tomb of Jesus, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary are informed that Jesus will appear to the apostles in Galilee. The angel appoints the women as the apostles to the apostles, they sent out to the ones who are going to be sent out.

They depart immediately in “fear” and great joy to inform the disciples. Some translations have this phrased as “awe” instead of “fear” and that’s because in our own time its hard to translate a word that essentially means neither. Fear in the modern context expresses a purely negative connotation and awe doesn’t encapsulate the submission to divine power, its an ancient concept that is kind of both fear and awe and kind of neither since modern English doesn’t really grasp the gravity of the framing.

9 And behold, Jesus met them and said, “Hail!” And they came up and took hold of his feet and worshiped him.

Jesus now appears to the women physically, it is important to stress that this is not a spiritual manifestation or illusion. Jesus greets them and Matthew tells us that the women “took hold of his feet and worshiped him.” This tells us two very important things. Jesus has physically resurrected and the women perceive him to be God.

10 Then Jesus said to them, “Do not be afraid; go and tell my brethren to go to Galilee, and there they will see me.”

Jesus now reaffirms the mission given to the women by the angel, and comforts them by telling them not to be afraid and they are to go to his “brethren” and tell them to go to Galilee where they will see him. Although not all of them will, Thomas will not be present. Jesus identification of his disciples as “brethren” points to the consummation of the New Covenant making them truly a part of his body. They are now family. His students are now his brothers, Jesus will briefly mention such things before his crucifixion but here it is concretised.

11 While they were going, behold, some of the guard went into the city and told the chief priests all that had taken place.

As the women go off to find the apostles, what is left of the Roman guard who were stationed at the tomb go off to Jerusalem to find the leaders of the Old Covenant people, the Chief Priests. Pilate himself placed these men to watch over the tomb because they had fears that Jesus’ disciples would steal the body away, the guards do not go to Pilate to inform him of their failure because this failing in a watch was punishable with execution, instead they go to the Chief Priests.

The supernatural occurrences that they have witnessed may also have played a part in their desire to go to the Chief Priests as what they have seen is not something that the Gentile administration would have believed. The guards tell the Chief Priests “all that had taken place”, this was presumably include the earthquake, removing of the rock by an angel and the appearance of Jesus.

12 And when they had assembled with the elders and taken counsel, they gave a sum of money to the soldiers

13 and said, “Tell people, ‘His disciples came by night and stole him away while we were asleep.’

14 And if this comes to the governor’s ears, we will satisfy him and keep you out of trouble.”

15 So they took the money and did as they were directed; and this story has been spread among the Jews to this day.

Matthew tells us that the Roman Guards who have gone to the Jewish leadership literally paid the Romans money to lie about what they had seen. The issue being that as we have previously mentioned, a failure in a night watch as a Roman Guard is punishable by execution, the Jewish leadership claim they will make defend their case if Pontius Pilate hears about what would happen. This is very beneficial for the guards, the Gentile administration of the region would have zero time for supernatural, especially as they pertain to the Jews’, “excuses” for failing in their duty. The Jewish leadership are also willing to line their pockets and defend them if the case comes up.

Matthew then continues by explaining to his readers that “this story has been spread among the Jews to this day.” This is a fascinating admission. First of all, good scholarship places Matthew’s authoring of his Gospel to the mid 50s. So it has been about 20 or so years since the event. At this point in Jewish history, the argument is not “Jesus didn’t exist” or “Jesus didn’t claim the things people say” both sides of the argument, Jews and Christians maintain he existed, said what he said and most importantly…his tomb was empty three days after his crucifixion. The difference of opinion is why it was empty, Christians saying he rose from the dead and the Jews spread the rumour that his body was moved by the disciples.

14 Then one of the twelve, who was called Judas Iscariot, went to the chief priests

The beginning of chapter 26 contains one of Jesus’ last death predictions about what is to come of the Son of Man. The Chief Priests and Elders, essentially the Sanhedrin, the governing head of the Old Covenant people have concluded together that they must kill Jesus and find a way to go about doing it in stealth. One of the ordained Bishops of the Church, Judas Iscariot, has decided to betray Jesus and has sought out the leaders of the Old Covenant to collude with them.

Judas is the Greek rendition of Judah, like apostle Thomas (originally Thoma) an “a” or “ah” sound at the end of the name in Greek is feminine so an “s” sound is added to make it masculine for a Greek speaking audience. His last name is widely debated, the most common theory is that Iscariot comes from the Hebrew Ish Qeriyot which means Man of Kerioth, Kerioth was a town in Judea so it could be a geographical distinction of origin. Another theory is that Iscariot comes from the Latin Sicarius meaning “dagger man” or “assassin”, this would associate Judas with a group of Jewish rebels who called themselves the “sicarii”, similar to the Zealots they were revolutionary terrorists against roman rule. The last theory, from some early church writers suggest that Iscariot meant “false one” or “liar” but that is based on Judas’ actions, not on linguistic evidence.

15 and said, “What will you give me if I deliver him to you?” And they paid him thirty pieces of silver.

16 And from that moment he sought an opportunity to betray him.

Judas is willing to betray Jesus for a price so he asks the leaders of the Jews what they are willing to give him in exchange for the betrayal. Judas has been referenced elsewhere in the Gospels as a lover of money, being in charge of the community funds of the apostles and helping himself to it. What is fascinating is that the Jews offer Judas thirty pieces of silver.

The Prophet Zechariah describes a Shepherd symbolizing God’s appointed leader being rejected and paid thirty pieces of silver which is then thrown into the Temple at a potter. Later in the Gospel Judas will cast his ill gotten silver back at Jewish leaders in the Temple and it will be used to buy a potters field. The Prophet Jeremiah does not reference thirty pieces of silver specifically but does mention a field purchase.

According to the Book of Exodus, the Mosaic Law defines that if a slave is “gored” by an Ox, the owner of the slave is to be compensated thirty pieces of silver. While “gore” (nagah) and “pierce” (daqar) are linguistically unrelated they converge prophetically in the crucifixion. Jesus will quote from Psalm 22, implying the entire psalm as per rabbinical tradition, whilst on the cross that Psalm includes the lines:

“Many bulls encompass me, strong bulls of Bashan surround me; they open wide their mouths at me, like a ravening and roaring lion.”

A different word in Hebrew is used but the species is the same. Ox’s are the same thing as Bulls, the only difference is that Oxen are castrated, Bulls aren’t, the castration makes the Oxen more docile. Then only a few verses later:

“Yea, dogs are round about me; a company of evildoers encircle me; they have pierced my hands and feet—”

Another fascinating parallel of a typological nature is found in the Book of Genesis. The leading brother of the original Twelve Patriarchs, Judah, will sell his innocent brother Joseph for twenty pieces of silver to the Ishmaelites.

“Then Judah said to his brothers, “What profit is it if we slay our brother and conceal his blood? Come, let us sell him to the Ishmaelites, and let not our hand be upon him, for he is our brother, our own flesh.” And his brothers heeded him. Then Midianite traders passed by; and they drew Joseph up and lifted him out of the pit, and sold him to the Ishmaelites for twenty shekels of silver; and they took Joseph to Egypt.“

Although the Mosaic Law later in the Hebrew’s history will proscribe thirty shekels of silver for a gored slave, the older Near Eastern customs that were shared among the varying groups of that region perceived twenty pieces of silver to be the standard price of a male slave. Joseph in his enslavement will eventually ascend to the right hand of Pharaoh and save his people. All acting as a historical prophecy of Christ’s divine mission.

17 Now on the first day of Unleavened Bread the disciples came to Jesus, saying, “Where will you have us prepare for you to eat the passover?”

The “first day of Unleavened Bread” is the start of the preparation of the Passover feast. The Passover was the yearly celebration and memorial that the Hebrews kept to “relive” their Exodus from Egypt. Originally they brought only unleavened bread for the Exodus because they had to leave in great haste but other time Hebrew traditions and extrapolations led the Jew’s of Jesus’ time to hold a great symbolic meaning over leaven, they certainly used it outside of this feast but they maintained that it was somewhat impure and affiliated with the Gentiles. On the first day of this preparation you would purify your whole household by removing all leaven from the house, it had gone beyond the idea of just not using it for the bread of the feast but outright stripping it from the home.

At this starting point of the preparation period of the feast, the disciples, ask Jesus “Where will you have us prepare for you to eat the passover?” This is an important question, typically you ate the Passover with your family but the disciple/ rabbi relationship turns the Rabbi and his students into their own family unit, Jesus operates his ministry mostly as a travelling teacher. So where is this big expanded family going to host their feast? A feast they must participate in as required by the Mosaic Law.

18 He said, “Go into the city to a certain one, and say to him, ‘The Teacher says, My time is at hand; I will keep the passover at your house with my disciples.’ ”

19 And the disciples did as Jesus had directed them, and they prepared the passover.

Jesus tells his disciples to go into Jerusalem and find a person who, we can assume, Jesus has already made plans with. The figure is never named but Church Tradition holds this to be Saint Mark the Evangelist the Gospel Author. Corroborating with the other Gospels we know it is a man who is fetching water, this might not seem weird to us but fetching water in their context was a woman’s job. Only one group had a normal practice of non-slave male water fetchers and that was the Essenes.

The Jewish Historian Josephus writes that a south-western portion of Jerusalem was the “Essene Quarter” The location of the house is in the south-west part of the city and near the Essene Gate. The apocalypticism of the Essenes was fertile ground for New Covenant evangelism and their near instant disappearance suggests that many joined the Nazarene sect which we would later know as Christianity. The Book of Acts tells us that the mother of John Mark (Saint Mark) had a large house that served as the first gathering spot for the Church, it is very likely the same building and therefore Saint Mark’s home.

20 When it was evening, he sat at table with the twelve disciples;

21 and as they were eating, he said, “Truly, I say to you, one of you will betray me.”

The amount of time here is not specified so it leaves the reader a lot of space to consider the question of when did Jesus eat the last supper, it could be an evening of a following day but scholars like Dr John Bergsma suggest that Jesus might be following a different calendar, there were in fact multiple in use by the Jews in the first century. One lunar and one solar. Jesus’ timing for the Passover, if it is the evening of the same day actually lines up the Essenes timing of the Passover who followed a different calendar than those of the Temple Cult but Jesus also doesn’t technically finish the Passover meal, this requires a little explaining and will will reference passages that do not occur in this reading.

The Passover meal, also known as the Seder meal follows a particular structure.

The Seder meal revolves around four cups of wine, each tied to a biblical promise from Exodus 6:6–7 and a specific part of the ritual:

1. Cup of Sanctification (Kadesh) – “I will bring you out” – Opener, blessing over wine.
2. Cup of Plagues (Maggid) – “I will deliver you” – Recounts Exodus & the Ten Plagues.
3. Cup of Redemption (Barech) – “I will redeem you” – Grace after meal (likely Jesus’ “cup after supper,” Luke 22:20).
4. Cup of Praise (Hallel) – “I will take you as My people” – Sung with Psalms 113–118.

It is after the second cup that you start eating the Passover. Matthew tells us that “as they were eating” and following todays readings Jesus will introduce his covenant, with a cup and unleavened bread blessings. So we can actually tell what part of the Passover meal they are in by the details Matthew gives us. The cup Jesus raises as his blood is the third cup but weirdly following that…they all just leave. No fourth cup of wine. At the conclusion of the Passover meal the presiding patriarch of the feast, who is doing all the talking, will bless and drink from the fourth cup and state “It is finished”. This is exactly what Jesus says after drinking from the wine vinegar from the Cross.

But, back to the text itself for today.

Matthew tells that Jesus declares to all present that one of those among them will betray him. Jesus has divine knowledge so this is not a shock for us but for apostles it would be. Most of all to Judas who had gone about behind his back already to sell him out for the thirty pieces of silver.

22 And they were very sorrowful, and began to say to him one after another, “Is it I, Lord?”

23 He answered, “He who has dipped his hand in the dish with me, will betray me.

The apostles are all in a state of sadness at this, they likely all feel like they have disappointed him in some way or another. They even all ask individually “is it I, Lord?” This is one of first expressions of humility from the disciples that strikes me the most, typically Jesus is having to correct them for being so puffed up with pride but each one of them seems to perceive that he may have actually betrayed Jesus in their actions. This could also be explained that they do not yet know the gravity of this betrayal.

24 The Son of man goes as it is written of him, but woe to that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed! It would have been better for that man if he had not been born.”

Jesus speaking in the third person, using his prophetic title “Son of Man” says that essentially that everything that is going to happen has already been written about. The suffering servant in Isaiah, the Psalms of David, the rejected shepherd of Zechariah, Joseph being sold out by his brothers in Genesis. All the ancient parables or history of the Hebrew people act as fragments of a massive cosmic mosaic that show the end of the promised Messiah. In a more hidden way and especially as it relates to the “Son of Man” we see it in the Prophet Daniel. Before the prophet Daniel “Son of Man” was just a way of saying human but in the advent of his revelations “Son of Man” took on a messianic meaning and over time developed into the messianic hope of Israel’s redemption. Specifically with Daniel there is the Messianic timeline given to him by the Archangel Gabriel, the same angel who would deliver the Annunciation to Mary in Gospels. This timeline points to the coming of the “anointed one” Mashiach in Hebrew or Christos in Greek. This anointed one would be “cut off” in his last week. Cut off is a Hebraism for being executed. It is only so clear to us now because we’re two thousand years down the line and Jesus of course resurrected and ascended, it would have been impossible to line all these fragments up at the time, only the eyes of faith would have permitted someone to “see” this at the time.

25 Judas, who betrayed him, said, “Is it I, Master?” He said to him, “You have said so.”

Todays readings are an excerpt from Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount which occupies chapters five, six and seven. The following remarks follows the Beatitudes and Jesus calling his disciples the light of the world, salt of the earth etc. Todays readings act as a preface to Jesus’ comments on the Mosaic Law, basically an affirmation that he is not changing the Law or getting rid of it and states how important it is. This acts as a buffer of sorts before his audience hears what can sound like a refutation of the Law if misinterpreted.

17 “Think not that I have come to abolish the law and the prophets; I have come not to abolish them but to fulfil them.

The lectionary adds in “Jesus said to his disciples” but that is not here in the original text, Jesus is actually speaking to a large multitude of people. Jesus tells this multitude, probably after reading their hearts, “Think not that I have come to abolish the law and the prophets” The phrase “the law and the prophets” is basically short hand for the Old Testament literature that contained the statutes or laws of God. This would be the first five books of Moses and the written record of the messages received by the Prophets.

These statutes are not being abolished, they are being fulfilled. Many Jews had the notion that the Law was kind of the last step in salvation history before “the day of the Lord” the day of judgement. Even though prophets speak of a new eternal covenant that was coming, most assumed this was a part of that final day of days kind of moment. They didn’t understand that the Mosaic Law and the Prophets were actually just a middle stage in salvation history and pointed toward even greater things here on earth before the end of time. Jesus is informing them of this fact because without this explanation what he says after todays readings can sound like he is abolishing something.

Imagine someone got used to eating raw cookie dough, they thought that was the end product then someone else comes in saying it should be baked into little cakes. It can seem like your changing and destroying what that other person thought they wanted but you are actually taking it to its fulfilment, silly example I know but it makes my brain understand it better.

There are going to be aspects of the Mosaic era that end, animal sacrifices in a singular temple and circumcision for example. But these three things are all expressed in a divine way in the New Covenant, the eternal sacrificial lamb sacrifice that Jesus commands us to take part in with the Eucharist, the Holy Spirit dwells no longer in a single building but in every baptised person and circumcision of the heart. Instead of unsatisfactory animal sacrifices we have an eternal perfect sacrifice, instead of inhabiting a building God inhabits us and instead of being bound externally like a slave or cattle to the moral Law, we are invited through familial covenant with God to work for him like a Son following his Father.

18 For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the law until all is accomplished.

Jesus begins with his solemn introduction to important statements. “For truly, I say to you” or “Amen Amen I say to you”. This gravity of introduction helps us understand the context of the rest of the passage. Some interpret the “till heaven and earth pass away” to mean until three years later at the crucifixion or 40 years later at the destruction of the Temple but the gravity of Jesus’ opening seems a little much for that. It most likely means that the substance of these Laws, which all have New Covenant fulfilments or refinements will remain in perpetuity. Yes disciplines and expressions of liturgy change but their substance does not.

Not an “iota” which is the Greek term corresponding to the Hebrew letter “Yod” which is the smallest letter of the Hebrew alphabet and the “dot” in “not a dot” was a tiny extension used by Hebrew scribes to differentiate similar looking Hebrew letters. So not the smallest letter or the smallest accent detail of a letter will pass from the Law until the end of time essentially. The only thing that is changing is the interpretation of the Law, because the Jews got it wrong. Luckily Jesus is divine so he can’t make interpretative mistakes.

19 Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

Some people interpret Jesus here as referring to the Mosaic Laws but that doesn’t quite make sense considering he is going to be referring to the Kingdom of Heaven which relates to the New Covenant. When he says “whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments” he is referring to the ones he himself is about to give. This phrase also informs us that Jesus saw some commandments of his as having greater or lesser weight on them. Some things are more important than others.

He is basically saying that there are repercussions for how well you attempt to follow his commandments. This necessitates actually, honestly, attempting to follow them but failing in spite of that, doing this means you will be considered the least in the Kingdom of Heaven. So failure to be perfect in this life does not prevent you from getting to heaven but that doesn’t mean you will receive great rewards. There is definitely a scale system here being hinted at in the hidden realities of heaven. Those who are more obedient shall be considered great in the kingdom of Heaven. The more perfect you are, the more exalted you will be in Heaven.

33 “Hear another parable. There was a householder who planted a vineyard, and set a hedge around it, and dug a wine press in it, and built a tower, and let it out to tenants, and went into another country.

The chief priests of the Temple have just tried to pressure Jesus into explaining where his teaching authority comes from, he uses their earthly fear of John’ the Baptists fame to make them stop questioning. Then he gives a parable about two sons, one who does the work required by their father but said he wouldn’t and the other who said he would do the required work but doesn’t, this is to illustrate the sinful people who do repent versus the religious authorities who do not. Now Jesus is going to give a parable that demonstrates his relation to God the Father, the behaviour of the Old Covenant people until now and the repercussions for future disloyalty to God.

An estate owner, so a wealthy man with property plants a grapevine garden. He sets a boundary around it, builds a winepress to turn the harvest fruit into its final product, builds a tower and let tenants live on it while he himself goes away to a foreign country. God the Father is the estate owner, the boundary is the old covenant, the fruit are the body of people and the tenants are the authorities like the Pharisees and Priests. God gave authority to Moses and the Elders in the Old Testament, he delegated his authority to them, God of course is not actually absent but this is a pedagogical teaching method of letting the Israelites stand by themselves. This is illustrated in the parable as the estate owner leaving the country.

34 When the season of fruit drew near, he sent his servants to the tenants, to get his fruit;

Fruit needs to be harvested and there are seasons where that happens, when harvest season approaches the estate owner, far from the home country, sends servants to the tenants in the garden to harvest his fruit. It was typical of old agrarian societies to have a wealthy land owner, have people live on a land and work it. They get a place to live, they get fed and perhaps even glean a little of the harvest but the bulk of the harvest goes to the owner of it, in the parable the landowner, the character representing God the Father. In order to keep watch over his agrarian investment he would need to send messengers and servants between himself and the land if he did not go there himself.

35 and the tenants took his servants and beat one, killed another, and stoned another.

The tenants see the servant coming and beat one, murdering another and stoning one. This is of course the prophets, almost all of which after being sent to check on God’s human grape garden were brutally martyred.

36 Again he sent other servants, more than the first; and they did the same to them.

God the Father of course didn’t stop sending his prophets to correct his people and call them to repentance, neither does the landowner in the parable. Unfortunately the tenants keep doing the same as before, murdering them, stoning them and beating them.

37 Afterward he sent his son to them, saying, ‘They will respect my son.’

After all these horrific events where the servants have been murdered, stoned or beaten the landowner decides that if he sent his son, surely they would not act the same way. Maybe there was some mistake and the tenants are just horrifically confused about what is going on. This notion of sending a son is an ancient custom since all ancient societies perceive a son to be the perfect representation of a father, its essentially the same as the father going himself. It also adds a layer of immense trust, a son is the inheritor of the fathers property and status, by sending your son you are trusting the receivers with your legacy. The son in the parable is of course, The Son of God, Jesus himself.

38 But when the tenants saw the son, they said to themselves, ‘This is the heir; come, let us kill him and have his inheritance.’

When the evil and murderous tenants see the son coming their way, instead of saying this immense trust and mercy being extended by the landowner they see it as an opportunity to take even more ill gotten gains. The entire time they have been killing the servants, by implication, they have been hoarding the fruits of the harvest for themselves. Now they see the son and their immediate thought is “let us kill him and have his inheritance”.

39 And they took him and cast him out of the vineyard, and killed him.

The tenants seize the son of the landowner, casting him outside the vineyard and kill him. Jesus himself will be killed outside of the city so this is where we get into the prophetic future portion of the parable, as none of this has happened yet.

40 When therefore the owner of the vineyard comes, what will he do to those tenants?”

When the owner arrives, what will he do with those tenants? It’s a simple question that Jesus posits to his audience, including priests and Pharisees. This is likely pointing to the Middle Coming which occurs in 70 AD, destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple, this is implied by the New Covenant taking over the old in the following verse.

41 They said to him, “He will put those wretches to a miserable death, and let out the vineyard to other tenants who will give him the fruits in their seasons.”

His audience responds that of course the landowner will put the murderous tenants to a miserable death and put new tenants in charge of the this garden. Ones who are obedient and give him the harvest of the fruits whenever it is required. So the Old Covenant authorities will be punished and the New Covenant tenants will take over.

42 Jesus said to them, “Have you never read in the scriptures: ‘The very stone which the builders rejected has become the head of the corner; this was the Lord’s doing, and it is marvelous in our eyes’?

Jesus now quotes from the Psalms of David. Psalm 118. This is a messianic psalm as Jesus uses it to point toward himself, he is the stone that the builders reject yet this very stone will become the foundation stone of a New structure. A New Covenant.

43 Therefore I tell you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a nation producing the fruits of it.

Now Jesus explains the meaning of the parable, because of their rejection of him the entirety of the Kingdom of God will be taken away from them. Their authority will be null and void. It will be given to a nation instead. This is fascinating as this basically says the Gentiles themselves will be given the authority, something very tough to hear from a Jewish nationalist perspective which all the priests and Pharisees were.

45 When the chief priests and the Pharisees heard his parables, they perceived that he was speaking about them.

46 But when they tried to arrest him, they feared the multitudes, because they held him to be a prophet.

Upon hearing all of this the Chief Priests and Pharisees are completely aware that Jesus is speaking about them. There is no misunderstanding. Just like the moment with John the Baptist that we started off with as a contextual reference the Jewish authorities do not seem to be too worried about God’s judgement at all but about the earthly worries. They want to outright arrest him but fear the people who perceive Jesus to be a prophet. They themselves do not have a thread of an idea that God is involved at all. They see this all as a game of politics.

16 and Jacob the father of Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom Jesus was born, who is called Christ.

Matthew begins his Gospel with a tolodot. A toledot is a Hebrew term and framework concept for the accounts of something or generations of. The same concept is used in the Book of Genesis or Book of Genealogies. Many think that only John starts his Gospel by reaching back to Genesis, but Matthew does it right here in a rather hidden Jewish way. The purpose of a toledot is like a camera zoom on a main character of a movie, starting from the wide focus into the narrow. Though we only get the very last line of it in todays readings.

Joseph is presented as “the husband of Mary,” not the biological father of Jesus, Matthew uses this phrase to clearly state the virgin birth whilst also maintaining that they were legitimately married as according to Law in order to not infringe on it. Referring back to the start of the toledot, Matthew reaffirms Jesus’ identity as “Christ”, the Anointed one. So this narrative goes from Jesus is the Messiah, zooms out, zooms in and states that first statement again. The structure is very reminiscent of a proto-creedal statement, the Hebrew focus on lineage gives a flavour of inheritance instead of doctrine but the format is the same in the sense of its catechetical nature.

18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ took place in this way. When his mother Mary had been betrothed to Joseph, before they came together she was found to be with child of the Holy Spirit;

Matthew begins verse 18 with an explanation of how Jesus’ birth came about. This requires explanation because to the original audience this is a brand new concept. We take for granted our Christian legacy, we have two thousand years of writings and elaborations on the subject but to the Jew’s of the first century this was novel and it should be, because Jesus is novel.

First century Jewish marriages are divided into to stages, a betrothal which proceeds the consummation and the, for the lack of a better term, “full marriage” where the couple who have entered covenant with each other live together. In the first stage of the marriage process, Mary conceived by the Holy Spirit. This in itself is a mystery and we accept it on faith, it is before they live together that this occurs in the “fuller” stage of marriage. Joseph becomes aware of this.

19 and her husband Joseph, being a just man and unwilling to put her to shame, resolved to send her away quietly.

Despite not consummating the marriage, Joseph is still referred to as “her husband” this is important, even in the first stage of the Jewish marriage process without the consummation, he is still considered the husband.

Joseph is a just man and since he is not aware of the divine mystery that has occurred seeks to settle this situation quietly because he does not want to shame Mary. In this culture, as is similar to our own, if a women had conceived a child from a man who is not her husband, it would call for some public shaming. Worse than our own culture, the ancient Jews would practice the public punishing act of stoning the committers of adultery. So Joseph, being just, does not want to humiliate her not see her killed for adultery so he “resolves” to send her away quietly. This would be some subtle way of ending the marriage process without any public announcement.

20 But as he considered this, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, “Joseph, son of David, do not fear to take Mary your wife, for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit;

While Joseph is considering how to send Mary away quietly, an Angel appears to him in a dream. On a typological note this is very interesting, Joseph receives messages through dreams very much like the Joseph of the Book of Genesis receives messages through dreams. The Angel calls to him by the title “Joseph, Son of David” this is Joseph’s position in salvation history, not a sense to diminish his role but actually to raise it. He is the one who will bestow the royal lineage through the marriage covenant with Mary to Jesus. The Angel settles Joseph’s worries, the child is not from another man but of the Holy Spirit, he should not fear to take Mary as his wife.

21 she will bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins.”

The Angel continues telling Joseph that Mary will bear a son and he is charged with calling him Jesus. This is not a throw away detail, in this time period and culture it was the fathers responsibility to name the child and they would take a name from their family line to bestow upon the child. In this case the Angel says for Joseph to name the child “Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins.”

The Hebrew name “Yeshua” from which the anglicised latinized name Jesus comes from, means “God is my Salvation” or “God Saves”. This phrasing, if you pay attention, is a declaration of divinity in Chapter 1 of Matthew. He is basically saying “He is called God Saves but he is God and he will save his people”. Another explicit declaration is that this saving is from sins, not a worldly saving from the Romans or a restoration of the earthly kingdom, they are being saved from much deeper bonds.

24 When Joseph woke from sleep, he did as the angel of the Lord commanded him; he took his wife,

25 but knew her not until she had borne a son; and he called his name Jesus.

Joseph wakes up from his sleep and does exactly as the Angel told him, understanding that it was God, (“The Lord”) who commanded this through the Angel. He takes Mary to be his wife now that he knows, at least what has been revealed to him, of the divine plan for salvation.

The lectionary actually ends at verse 24 but for sake of context we will also talk about verse 25.”but knew her not until she had borne a son” This phrase is often misunderstood as implying that Joseph and Mary had marital relations after Jesus’ birth.

However, “until” (Greek: ἕως οὗ, heōs ) does not indicate change afterward. The term simply emphasizes what was true up to a certain point without making any claims about what happened after. For example:

2 Samuel 6:23: “Michal the daughter of Saul had no child until the day of her death”

Does not imply she had children afterward.

Matthew 28:20: “I am with you always, to (heōs) the close of the age”

Does not imply Jesus will abandon his disciples after the age ends.

Joseph fulfills his legal role as Jesus’ father by naming Him, as instructed by the angel (Matthew 1:21). This act underscores Jesus’ divine mission—“he will save his people from their sins”—and Joseph’s integral role in God’s plan for salvation.

1 Then said Jesus to the crowds and to his disciples,

Jesus addresses the crowds and his disciples. Moments like this indicate universal teaching and not a secretive or hierarchal principle that only applies to the disciples. Depending on the subject matter, for example does it hinge on the Old or New Covenant? Indicates whether or not it applies now or just in the Old. Some Old Covenant points will address prefigurments of New Testament concepts or frameworks that co-exist between the covenants, they just change in some capacity with the advent of the New.

2 “The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat;

Jesus tells his audience that the “scribes”, mosaic lawyers that sold their interpretive services to groups and individuals and “Pharisees”, the name of the most populous group/sect of Second Temple Jews in the New Testament period, “sit on Moses’ seat;”. This isn’t quite as it neglects context. I am sat on a seat right now, as are you probably. It doesn’t mean much. The word used is kathedra which is where we get “cathedral” from. It is where a throne of a Bishop resides. Although kathedra could be used in a casual context it is typically used as meaning an exalted seat occupied by men of eminent rank or influence. In this case, Moses’ is mentioned, the pre-eminent authority and giver of the Law in the Old Covenant.

Moses is the highest judge of the people in the wilderness, a judge has a seat. For both judgement and teaching. In the Old Testament, Moses sits as a judge.

“On the next day Moses sat to judge the people, and the people stood around Moses from morning till evening. […] When they have a dispute, they come to me and I decide between one person and another, and I make them know the statutes of God and his laws.” Exodus 18:13, 16

Moses then appoints others to share this responsibility. This authority was passed down through the generations all the way to the time of Jesus, have various reformations and evolutions along the way. Although the Old Testament doesn’t refer to a particular throne or judgement seat, it just implies it, we have to turn to tradition as a source for what Jesus is talking about.

Jesus himself spoke Aramaic, an ancient Semitic language and was the common tongue of the world before Greek took over. This was the language of the Targums, Aramaic paraphrases of the Pentateuch. This was how Jesus, his disciples and many others in their part of the world learned their Hebrew Bible, ironically not in Hebrew. In Targum Psudeo-Jonathan we read:

“And it happened on the next day that Moses sat on the seat of judgment to judge the people, and the people stood before Moses from morning until evening.”
(Tg. Ps.-J. on Exodus 18:13)

There we have our explicit seat that Jesus is referencing. For the sake of brevity, I’ll briefly explain some other things related to this. There were essentially two main offices of the Old Covenant, spreading out but coming from two specific people. Moses and Aaron. Moses the Judge and teacher, Aaron the High Priest. These offices come with a seat of authority in their respective fields. In the time of Moses, his seat was obviously higher than Aarons but over time things start to shift. By the time of Davidic Dynasty we have a full on physical Temple and Kingship that occupied a priest and judge position, it is at this point that the Priesthood takes over predominant authority. When Jerusalem is sacked, temple destroyed and the people exiled, neither kingship or priesthood offers anything, the temple and kingdom are gone. Those of the teaching authority then rise to prominence again as reading, studying and praying become the only aspects of religious life they are able to do. When the people come back to the Holy City after the exile, a new Temple is built, this teaching authority office still reigns supreme with the common Jew but all liturgical aspects of Jewish life which is a lot of it actually is determined by the Sanhedrin, a hybrid of teaching and priestly council operating directly under the High Priest of the Temple. It’s kind of messy and I am condensing what could be explained in several books so forgive me. Jesus however, clears all the mess of whatever human inclinations and politics aside and says outright that the teaching authority of Moses is still with the Pharisees.

3 so practice and observe whatever they tell you, but not what they do; for they preach, but do not practice.

Because this authority is rooted in God, even if it is temporary as it only applies to the Old Covenant, they must actually practice what they are told to practice by these teachers. It is not rooted in themselves, this was conferred by God on to Moses and his successors. This rooted in God and not themselves business will apply to the rest of the reading as well so keep that in mind. They are to observe, that is listen to everything these teachers say but they should not imitate their lives however. Despite this divinely conferred office, they do not practice what they preach so abide by the authority placed by God but do not abide by their deviations.

4 They bind heavy burdens, hard to bear, and lay them on men’s shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with their finger.

The authority of teaching gives them the power to “bind and loose”. This meant the binding of obligations or loosing of them. When is absolute adherence necessary and when can exceptions be made for the Law. The Pharisees had gotten into the practice, likely through a true zealous love of God, to bind the strict observances of the levitical priesthood, onto normal people. The whole multiple washings of the arms to the elbow, ritual cleaning of pots and items that are physically already clean for example. This is hard to bear for normal people and the Pharisees were laying it on men’s shoulders. Whilst they, in their typically well-to-do lives didn’t mind this. Imagine a modern scenario of a wealthy person berating a homeless person for not being environmentally minded, that is sort of what is going on. The Pharisees have the power to loose they bonds on poorer people who struggle but refuse.

5 They do all their deeds to be seen by men; for they make their phylacteries broad and their fringes long,

6 and they love the place of honor at feasts and the best seats in the synagogues,

7 and salutations in the market places, and being called rabbi by men.

Jesus tells his audience that these men, who occupy a divinely appointed seat of authority, are in fact not perfect people. This does not invalidate their authority however, interesting. They do all their acts piety, the praying, the fasting, the almsgiving all to be seen by others and be considered holy. They wear broad phylacteries. These are leather bindings around the arms or head holding a box with scripture inside it, you’ve probably seen some modern Jew’s wear them. The bigger the box the more holy, or so these Pharisees thought. The box itself is actually the phylactery, not the bindings. The fringes of their garments, again a similar action. The idea being the tassles represented the Law, well the longer the fringes or tassles, the holier you are. It’s all a physical charade of false piety. They dressed like this so in public they would be greeted with reverence. People would presume holiness just by looking at them. By this action they are assuming the root of their holiness is their own actions, their own garments and so on instead of true holiness which is conforming yourself to God.

8 But you are not to be called rabbi, for you have one teacher, and you are all brethren.

9 And call no man your father on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven.

10 Neither be called masters, for you have one master, the Christ.

These passages if interpreted literally, would contradict other parts of scripture and we know scripture can’t contradict itself. So how does it fit? It fits with the point we made earlier. Where is your teaching authority rooted? Where is your fatherhood rooted? It must be rooted in the true authority and true master namely Christ. We are called to be co-rulers with him because we are in him. We are not masters or teachers in and of ourselves. That would be empty and foolish like considering yourself holier than others because you taped scripture to your forehead.

11 He who is greatest among you shall be your servant;

12 whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted.

Now Jesus teaches of the great reversal. The greatest of those in the New Covenant will be servants. The Pope himself is considered the Servant of Servants. The high authority God gives you, the more you are expected to serve others, not yourself. Those that exult themselves, puff themselves up will be humbled by God’s justice but those who assume the lowest place and humbles themselves will be exalted when Christ raises them up to judge angels.

43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’

Continuing through excerpts of the Sermon on the Mount of Matthew’s Gospel, Jesus, as he has said previously, is not abolishing the Law but fulfilling it. Jesus will continue his teachings that fulfil the Law and correct the Jews on where they went wrong. We have established already that the Law given through Moses was legitimate but also pedagogical. For example. Thou shall not kill, more literally “Do not commit murder of innocent life” the Hebrew word for “kill” has a specific meaning.

This Law was not just about not killing innocents, it was supposed to act a lesson to the Old Covenant people that life was sacred. We do not have the authority to end innocent life. All people regardless of what they believe have this inherent dignity because of their image being made like that of God. So the Laws were rules but they were also lessons that taught something. The Hebrews weren’t just rigid Law abiders but also thought that the Law taught something as well, unfortunately they typically made the wrong presumptions about what that Law was teaching. This is what Jesus does here.

Jesus quotes from Leviticus 19:18:

“You shall not take vengeance or bear a grudge against the sons of your own people, but you shall love your neighbour as yourself: I am the LORD.”

As we can see from this verse, it does not say “to hate your enemy”. Some commentators perceive this as Jesus just using contrasts as a teaching tool but the truth is, this is exactly how the Jews of Jesus’ day interpreted it. They did hate others. They took this Law from God and made presumptions on its pedagogical content. This was not what God intended for this Law however, so he has come as Man in order to fulfil it and correct them.

44 But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you,

Jesus’ fulfilment of this Law is that it was not meant for us to presume we should hate everyone other than our neighbour but to extend that love out to all. We should be clear on what “love” is in this context. It is not the wishy-washy “be nice” to people or the modern preoccupation of eros centred love but that of disinterested love. Self-less willing for the ultimate good for another. This is why it is connected to praying “for those who persecute you”. Prayers are petitions to God for both ourselves and others conformation to His will.

45 so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven; for he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust.

The reason for this disinterested, self-less love, the willing for the ultimate good of all people is because that is exactly what God does/is. He desires for all men to be saved. He makes the sun rise on the evil and good, the rain on the just and the unjust. If we want to be sons of our Father in Heaven, we must imitate this type of love for all people.

46 For if you love those who love you, what reward have you? Do not even the tax collectors do the same?

47 And if you salute only your brethren, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same?

Jesus now takes the way the Jews live now, comparing it to the previously defined standard that God holds to. He does it my pointing out that if their behaviour is not different to the people they consider the worse sinners, what reward could they possible expect? God’s standard is to love all, even those that do not extend the same good will towards you. That’s what God does. Whereas withholding this goodwill towards others is no different than the tax-collectors, who the Jews typically perceived as the worst sinners of all.

Jesus does the same thing again, this time extending out even further. This behaviour of withholding good will from others, is no different than Gentiles. This would have quite a lot of sting to those prideful Jews who misinterpreted the Law from Leviticus as only applying to their fellow Israelites. Now you’re not only no better than a sinning Jew, but no better than people who aren’t even in God’s covenant at all.

48 You, therefore, must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

It’s a tall order but considering we are to become Son’s of God, it makes sense that we have to be perfect like our Father in Heaven is perfect. We can’t do this ourselves but through his Grace.

20 For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.

Todays readings are an excerpt from the Sermon on The Mount, Jesus’ typological fulfilment of Moses giving the Hebrew people the Law from the Mountain. This section of Matthew occupies chapters five, six and seven. In the verses previous, Jesus adamantly proclaims he is not here to abolish the Law but to fulfil it. This tells the purpose of his teachings, the Law was not an end to and of themselves. But was a part of God’s divine pedagogy, his method of teaching his people. This gives us context for why he says what he says in todays readings.

The righteousness of the Pharisees and Scribes, a lot of the time we assume they were all liars and scum but that is not what the Gospels actually show us. Yes in many cases their are people that fail in their obligations to the Law but on the most part these were the most rigid of Law adherers. They lived the Law and died by the Law. This is the problem that Jesus is actually highlighting, the Law was not an end of itself but was supposed to raise the Hebrew people up to higher standard, the eventual end is divinisation, being like God. The Law simply does not do this, it only makes them more virtuous than most pagan cultures. If your righteousness does not go beyond clinging to the Law you will not inherit the Kingdom of Heaven, the beatific vision.

21 “You have heard that it was said to the men of old, ‘You shall not kill; and whoever kills shall be liable to judgment.’

Jesus now refers to one of the Laws of the Decalogue, you shall not kill. Whoever does is liable to judgement. This statement is still true and Jesus confirms that.

22 But I say to you that every one who is angry with his brother shall be liable to judgment; whoever insults his brother shall be liable to the council, and whoever says, ‘You fool!’ shall be liable to the hell of fire.

The point of the Law against killing innocents was not to cling to a check list of do’s or don’ts. The purpose was to make the person see the value that God placed on others. The higher standard isn’t just about not killing people, it extends inward toward the intentions we have toward people. Murder isn’t a random action but an extension of anger and animosity towards another and therefore perceiving their right to life or dignity as a person made in the image God less than others, especially less than yourself.

So being angry with your brother is like teasing the action of murder. You will be liable to judgement for this as well. Those that insult others, another connected action to that of murder because of animosity shall be liable to the council. The same goes for calling your brother a fool, they will be brought before the Sanhedrin, the council of 70 Hebrew elders that administrated the Jewish people under the guidance of the High priest of the Temple. Calling your brother a fool will cause you to answer for it in hell fire.

Jesus is in fact displaying gradients of sin and their respective punishments. Anger against another requires “judgement”. The word in Greek here is krisei in this context it is the least of the gradients of sin and is sometimes translated as “court” or “tribunal”. Local secular authorities is the most likely fit.

Those that insult their brother go before the council. “Insult” is not really a good translation as it disconnects from the ancient context. The word used is actually the Aramaic “Raca“ and it essentially means “worthless”. Considering that “worthless” in Hebrew (Beliyal) was also the name given to the Evil One among various Hebrew groups in Second Temple Judaism this is much worse than generally insulting someone.

The word for “council” is synedrion which is where we get our English transliteration of Sanhedrin. This is not a random council but the Religious authority structure, in the Old Covenant it was the Seventy Elders that served under the High Priest.

The final infraction is calling someone a “fool”. At least that is what our English translation says, some render it as “renegade”. Kind of confusing such varying ideas of a term right? The Greek word is “mōros” and without the cultural contextual weight behind it, it can be a confusing word to translate. The most literal translation would be “atheist”. That is the point of what it is. To be Godless, in ancient times this was synonymous with being retarded and an idiot. People go around these days identifying as such, our cultural context does not see the gravity behind this insult though individually we might. Imagine going up to someone you know at Church and accusing them of being an atheist, now the gravity might make a little more sense. The punishment for this is the harshest, hell fire. Gehenna. We should also understand that this is to do with calling someone Godless that isn’t a professed atheist. It is basically standing in and denying someones faith in God that they profess. The punishment if left unrepented is eternal damnation.

23 So if you are offering your gift at the altar, and there remember that your brother has something against you,

24 leave your gift there before the altar and go; first be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift.

Now Jesus offers the creature of advocacy that we have in material space. Time. You still have time to mend these things. If you are going to offer your gifts at the Temple and remember your brother has something against you, you should mend that relationship before you give your offering. It’s simple but appeals to relentless forgiveness of God in doing so. Your offering to God will be more if you mend your communion with others.

25 Make friends quickly with your accuser, while you are going with him to court, lest your accuser hand you over to the judge, and the judge to the guard, and you be put in prison;

26 truly, I say to you, you will never get out till you have paid the last penny.

Make friends with those who accuse you during the time you still have on the way to the court, mending that communion between you and him will release you from the legal proceeding. If you don’t he has every right to bring you to the judge who will hand you over to the guard who puts you in prison. You will not leave that prison until every penny has been paid in recompense for what you did. Many point to this as a veiled teaching on purgatory and I do see what people are getting at, especially with the previous mentions of Gehenna (damnation).

7 “Ask, and it will be given you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you.

Following his teaching on forgiveness, where Jesus cements the notion of God’s justice. He continues to illuminate essentially the hidden realities of that justice. In the context of judging others, Jesus makes it that if you do not judge, you will not be judged. This is an invitation to be like God and it requires you to “desire all men to be saved” and not usurp God’s authority of Judgement.

Elsewhere Jesus has spoken about the hypocrites, how they receive, as according to God’s justice, exactly what they want. They pray publicly specifically in order to be praised in by others in public, they receive their reward but are denied the actual fruits that true prayer is for, intimacy with God. It is rooted in intent of your heart. This context helps explain todays readings. Ask and you will receive, seek and you will find, knock and it will be opened to you. It’s rather simple but if your hearts intent is truly God you will receive him. This is where the importance of purging ourselves of earthly desires comes from. Sometimes in order to correct out hearts intentions we have to sever things out of our life that draw us to earthly attachments.

8 For every one who asks receives, and he who seeks finds, and to him who knocks it will be opened.

Jesus continues his point, elaborating on it. This repetition is common of rabbinical teachers. Saying the same thing multiple times and even adding real world subjects or frameworks to further concretise the meaning of the teaching. This Jesus will do later. The key again, is intent of heart, saying words idly, as Jesus warns against, will get you know where.

9 Or what man of you, if his son asks him for bread, will give him a stone?

10 Or if he asks for a fish, will give him a serpent?

Now Jesus provides a normative natural framework that his audience can easily understand. With this as a the frame of reference, his lesson should be easier for them. Everyone understands familial relationships so the framework Jesus sets up is one of a father and son. If the son is hungry and asks for bread, you understand full well that you would give him bread to eat and not something ridiculous like a stone. The same goes if he asked for a fish, you would not offer him a snake that could kill him instead. This is simple but this normal natural framework is required for the grander, divine invisible mysteries of God. Something our senses cannot comprehend.

11 If you then, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven give good things to those who ask him!

If they as fallen human beings riddled with concupiscence can understanding feeding your children when they need it, is God, the all-powerful Father of all not going to do better? Is it such a stretch to see that reality? Of course it isn’t it is completely logical despite our senses screaming the opposite at us sometimes.

12 So whatever you wish that men would do to you, do so to them; for this is the law and the prophets.

Jesus ends on the Golden Rule, something that even secular people who have never read the Bible seem to understand, although not always put into practice. Treat others as you would want to be treated but Jesus also does another thing in this statement. He says that this Golden Rule is the entire summary of the Law, that being the Law of Moses and the preaching of the Prophets.

7 “And in praying do not heap up empty phrases as the Gentiles do; for they think that they will be heard for their many words.

Jesus has just told his disciples how not to pray like the hypocrites do, the main focus being that your intent is what matters. Intent relies on the justice of God, those who pray in order to be seen by men, will in fact receive it but there are no supernatural divine rewards for such prayer. Through all the examples he gives he makes the focus the individuals intent. It is of great importance to acknowledge that as his point as it serves as the connection between the Hebrew hypocrites and the Gentiles.

As he directs his disciples to pray in this passage he says when praying do not “heap up empty phrases” as the Gentiles do. This phrase in Greek is battalogeō. Typically Catholic apologists focus on the English translation of “babbling” or “stammering” how scripted prayers or reciting scripture be that?, Protestants in their polemic with the Catholics focus on “vain repetitions”, as this is how they regard the medieval Catholic acts of piety like the Rosary. I think the focus should be on the context of the previous passages, intent. A better way to translate this phrase in English would be “speak idly” or without intent.

In the context of the gentiles, when do they speak idly? Envisioning the supernatural framework of gentile worship as a human one might be helpful. Imagine a violent and tyrannical king and the members of his court. The members of the court are terrified of the king but to save their own lives they heap up idle words like “you’re so gracious” and “you are so wise” in order to not have their head chopped off. This is the angle that gentiles worship from. Fear, the intent of their heart is not inline with the words they speak. All gentiles are under supernatural slavery of the devil and serve demons until they are baptised into God’s family.

This is not how you are to pray to God.

8 Do not be like them, for your Father knows what you need before you ask him.

Do not imitate the gentiles because they do not have a familial relationship with an all powerful God, but we do. To make this familial connection clearer, God the Father is referred to as ours. As an all knowing and all powerful God he already knows what you need. Saint Augustine on his commentary on the Lord’s Prayer makes it clear and I’ll summarise. The issue is not aligning God to our needs but aligning ourselves to God’s providence. We should accept it like we accept gravity, no one gets emotionally tumultuous over the rules of physics, nor should we over He who made all of it.

9 Pray then like this: Our Father who art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name.

We are to call God “Our Father” as that is what the relationship he invites us into. He is in heaven. God does not need to hear us say this, we say it for our benefit to direct our intent to whom it belongs.

Saint Augustine in his Letter to Proba said:
“Thus, when we say: Hallowed be your name, we are reminding ourselves to desire that his name, which in fact is always holy, should also be considered holy among men. I mean that it should not be held in contempt. But this is a help for men, not for God.“

10 Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, On earth as it is in heaven.

“And as for our saying: Your kingdom come, it will surely come whether we will it or not. But we are stirring up our desires for the kingdom so that it can come to us and we can deserve to reign there. When we say: Your will be done on earth as it is in heaven, we are asking him to make us obedient so that his will may be done in us as it is done in heaven by his angels.”

11 Give us this day our daily bread;

Now here it sounds odd in English with the repetition of “this day our daily bread” but that is because the Greek for the word “daily bread” is epiousion. There was a common Greek word used in the New Testament for “daily” and it isn’t used here, ir is “hemeran“. Epiousion is a completely unique Greek word not used anywhere else in Greek literature, whatever the Aramaic word was that Jesus used, Matthew felt the need to invent a word for it. Saint Jerome translated it as “super-substantial bread”. Epiousion is a compound of two words “epi” meaning super and “ouisa” which means “substance”. It is easy for Catholics because if you said “super-substantial bread” that we are recommended to take daily, we would just say “Oh yeah, the Eucharist” unfortunately many man-made ecclesial bodies have desired to rip that out of the Christian life because, well, it seems too much like the Catholic Church but that is exactly what Jesus founded for us on Earth.

Saint Augustine thought it had two meanings, one being the one we just mentioned but it also encapsulates normal sustenance.

“When we say: Give us this day our daily bread, in saying this day we mean “in this world”. Here we ask for a sufficiency by specifying the most important part of it; that is, we use the word “bread” to stand for everything. Or else we are asking for the sacrament of the faithful, which is necessary in this world, not to gain temporal happiness but to gain the happiness that is everlasting.“

12 And forgive us our debts, As we also have forgiven our debtors;

Saint Augustine said:
“When we say: Forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us, we are reminding ourselves of what we must ask and what we must do in order to be worthy in turn to receive.“

Jesus will elaborate later but this is again about our conformation to God’s will. An invitation to be like him. He desires all men to be saved and will forgive any sin that man repents of. We are to forgive others as willingly as God forgives. The condition of our debts being forgiven, rely on our release of debts (forgiveness) of others.

13 And lead us not into temptation, But deliver us from evil.

It’s not that God would lead us into temptation that would cause us to fall, we are only ever given what we can actually cope with but that ability of “ours” to cope is not really our own strength but his. This line is a confession of his power being what saves us.

Saint Augustine said:
“When we say: Lead us not into temptation, we are reminding ourselves to ask that his help may not depart from us; otherwise we could be seduced and consent to some temptation, or despair and yield to it. When we say: Deliver us from evil, we are reminding ourselves to reflect on the fact that we do not yet enjoy the state of blessedness in which we shall suffer no evil. This is the final petition contained in the Lord’s Prayer, and it has a wide application. In this petition the Christian can utter his cries of sorrow, in it he can shed his tears, and through it he can begin, continue and conclude his prayer, whatever the distress in which he finds himself. Yes, it was very appropriate that all these truths should be entrusted to us to remember in these very words.“

14 For if you forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father also will forgive you;

15 but if you do not forgive men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.

And here is Jesus’ elaboration on the debts of sin component, he is repeating himself and elaborating to make it extremely clear. If you are forgiving of us, God will forgive you. If you do not forgive others, God will not forgive you. Keep this in mind at all times.