Thursday 8 November 2018

Nature of Christian Marriage


     
           Describe the Nature and Ends of Christian Marriage? (1055)
What are the Essential Properties of Christian Marriage? (1056)
What are Ratified and Consummated Marriages? (Can. 1061)

Introduction
Marriage in Christian understanding is basically a vocation, a call, an invitation with a solid purpose and effect. Therefore, before one enters into marriage one has to find out whether one can live a marital life. Christianity values marriage very highly and that union of man and woman in holy matrimony is seen as representing the union between Christ and the church (Eph 5:22-33). The love of the couple brings them closer to God and closer to an understanding of God’s love for his creation.
Christian Marriage
In the light of CIC 1015 &CCEO 776 a canonical definition of marriage can be formulated thus: “Marriage between the baptized is a covenant, which has been raised by Christ the Lord to the dignity of a sacrament, by which a man and a woman, by their personal consent, establish between themselves partnership of their love whole life, and which of its own nature is ordered to the well being of the spouses and to the procreation and upbringing of children.  The provision of CIC 1015 & CCEO 776 are based on the sources of LG 11, 41; GS 48; AA 11; and Humane Vitae 8
I. Nature of Christian Marriage
1. Marriage between the Baptized
It refers to Christian marriage, a marriage between a Christian man and a Christian woman. It is distinct from a natural marriage, a social institution, with its own civil effects.
Marriage is a human reality, a secular one. In one form or another it existed always. But for the believers in Christ it has a new dimension, as He raised it to a sacrament. It signifies and brings grace, it is a marriage “in the Lord” (I Cor 7:39).
Christian marriage is between the baptized man and woman. However, the fact of baptism alone is not enough. They must really believe in Christ and in the sacramentality of marriage. We cannot simply assume that all baptized are believers in Christ and in His teaching. The parish priest or his delegate must verify it. He should see if the proposed couples are actual believers. He should instruct them about various aspects of Christian marriage and prepare them for Christian marriage.
2. Marriage as a Covenant
Vat. II and CIC 1983 describe Christian marriage as a covenant. Marriage is enduring and exclusive covenant of love between a man and a woman. The notion of covenant describes the theological dimension of marriage. It is relationship, which recognizes the spiritual quality of the spouses, and their capacity to enter into an agreement which demands the gift of the whole person to each other.
It is biblical expansion. We have the theology of covenant, which is based on the biblical concept of covenant. All through the bible, God’s relationship with mankind is expressed in terms of covenant, a solemn treaty of love and fidelity, which God makes with His people. By this covenant God pledges himself irrevocably to love His people and never to desert them. They, in turn, are asked to pledge themselves to Him with a covenant. God will never change His love for them, no matter how they behave towards Him.
He loves them with a love, which has all the characteristics of married love; “even if a mother forgets her children, I will not forget you” (49:15). God loves mankind with a love which is faithful, dependable, unconditional, and irrevocable; a love which if patient and full of pity; a love which is tender yet strong, passionate but constant; a love which forgives to the point of foolishness and never ceases to welcome home the unfaithful partner.
(Cf. Hos.2:16-17; Jer. 2:2, 31:3; Isa 54:4-10, 49:15; song of Songs 8:6-7; Dt. 16:17; Jos. 24:19-20; Jer. 31:34; Mal 2:14…..)
A covenant is also a form of contract; but in it the details are not fixed at once. The rights and duties are not carefully outlined from the beginning. Fundamentally they are formal legal terms. Legalistic prescription of rights and duties are secondary the basic commitment of person’s infidelity and spontaneity is the essence of a covenant. It is primarily a personal relationship and mutual commitment. However, from the human point of view, it must be specified by legal terms and prescriptions together with warnings of what will happen if the covenant is violated. Thus, in the covenant the aspects of a legal contract are present, but they do not exhaust it.
®    Marriage Covenant is based on Love
Love is the basis of marital covenant. Pope Pius XI in his encyclical Casti Connubi wrote the love of husband and wife which pervades all the duties of married life hold pride of place in Christian marriage. GS 49 says “Love is and must be the strength and the basis of the whole of married life.
The best example for the husband-wife relationship in Eph 5:21-33. It uses the Christ Church relationship as the model for marriage. As the church is devoted to Christ, so are the wives to their husbands (Vv 22-24). It is not given as lordly authority but is admonished to love his wife according to the example of Christ (v 25). The total surrendering love of Christ for this church is a model and measure for the mutual love of man and wife in marriage. The attitude of the husband towards his wife should not be that of self assertion but self sacrifice.
The love of the husband for the wife should be sanctifying love (vv 26-27). It is expressed in terms of love. Love one another means accepting the other as a person. The self-sacrifice love of husband and wife becomes the source of sanctification of each other as Christ’s self-sacrifice resulted in the sanctification of the church, his Bride.
In the same way, husbands should love their wives as their own bodies (v. 28), as part of their total self. For no man ever hates his own flesh but nourishes and cherishes it, as Christ does the church” (v 29). In the Semitic language, the one who hates is the one who loves someone less than another. Naturally treating one with indifference is equal to hate the other whom he ought to love. The husband should have a caring love for his wife as he takes care of his own body. It implies a love for his wife, which is unselfish, and a relationship is care and trust.
3. Marriage is a Partnership for their Whole Life
The council teaches, “The intimate partnership of life and love constitutes the married state of life (intima communitas vitae consortium” GS 48. “Totius vitae consortium” is the Latin expression used in the canons CIC 1015 & CCEO 776, in order to formulate the council teaching on this matter.
communitas”, “communion”, “societas”, “coniunctio”, and”consortium” are words that could be juridically used in this regard. The code commission however, preferred the word consortium, since it is a much used term in relation to marriage. The Romans in fact called marriage a consortium.
The word consortium literally means a close association, partnership, connection and company of persons sharing the same fortune, fate and destiny. It is less than Communion, which is the closest of intimate relationship.
Marriage, as an intimate partnership of life and love, has its basis in the Bible (Gen 2:18). The Bible presents marriage in terms of “two becoming one flesh”, Jesus as a natural institution ordered to partnership and procreation.
Studies have been made on consortium. In his study of the term Coniunctio, communion and consortium, J. Huber concludes that the concept of coniunctio denotes the union of both bodies and minds that is matrimonium consummatum. Communion on the other hand, is a term used in the new code to described theological relations and it includes the totality of rights and duties of marriage, common living, communion of minds excluding communion of bodies.
The concept underlying consortioum stands for marriage itself and for the totality of the rights and duties obligations of marriage. It includes two things (a) communion of bodies, that is, the exclusive and perpetual right over the body for acts which are naturally apt for the generation of offspring; in this communion are included, Bonum Prolis,Bonum Fidei, (unity and exclusivity), bonum Sacramenti (indissolubility), and also to some extent bonum coniugis; (b) communion of souls (of persons) that is the right of mutuum adiutorium understood in its more profound Biblical sense.
CIC 1015.1/ CCCEO 776.1 refer to consortium without “coniugalis” while CIC 1098/CCEO 821 speaks of “consortium coniugalis vitae.” The three elements that have been consistently highlighted as being essential to the consortium vitae are the following:
1.      The consideration of the other as ‘a person’-a subject having his own identity, an autonomous centre of spirituality etc, towards whom one must display a certain degree of sensitivity.
2.      A decision or a willingness to establish a relationship of love with this other person which involves a certain degree of ‘understanding (appreciation) and caring’ (wanting the good of the person) and of ‘oblative love’ (offering oneself to build up the other).
3.      A willingness to share responsibility in the generation and upbringing of children.
‘Consortium Vitae’ is distinguished from mere cohabitation. It does not mean a mere sharing of bed and board of being under the same rood, but the right and the corresponding obligation of an all-embracing union-sexual, corporeal, spiritual, moral and intellectual.
4. Marriage as a Sacrament
The church teaches that marriage is a sacrament. The first Canon on marriage states that for the baptized “This institution has been raised by Christ our Lord to the dignity of a Sacrament.” (1055) The Second Vatican Council document Gaudium et Spes states “God himself is the author of marriage” (no.48).
The church sees marriage as a Sacrament because it wants to show that this occasion when two people say  ‘yes’ to each other has something to do with God. When the church gives blessings to marriage it declares it holy and whole, for it has placed it under God’s blessing. Under God’s blessing they will embark on the experience of mutual openness, understanding and love. 


In the east, the sacramental character of marriage was accepted and emphasized from the 5th century onwards in the West, it was fully recognized only after a long period of time. It was early Christian writers referred to marriage as ‘sacramentum”, “mysterion.”  However, only in the 13th century marriage was defined as one of the 7 sacraments. This was universally declared only by the council of trend in 16the century.
In the N.T we have no direct reference to the institution of marriage by Christ as a sacrament. The basic text to reference to it is Eph 5. The sacramentality of marriage is grounded in Christ’s saving work. It reflects the union of Christ with his church. Christ raised marriage to the sacramental dignity because it can be a means for growth in true charity, in unselfish love, mutual service for the spouses. When marriage is contracted between two baptized persons, by the very fact makes it a sacrament (CIC 1055.2).  Thus, persons, catholic or not, who baptized validly are capable of a sacramental marriage. If baptism takes place after marriage, the sacramentality is acquired then.
4.1 Reformer’s View
Reformers denied sacramentality of marriage because according to them there was no direct and explicit scriptural evidence that Christ established the sacrament of marriage. Consequently they rejected church’s juridical function in matrimonial matters. Luther: matrimony is not the sacrament of the new law because it lacks divine promise. , Calvin: Matrimony is not the sacrament in the full sense of the word.
4.2 Catholic Teaching
The General Council of Florence in its Decree for the Armenians in 1439 affirms the sacramentality of Christian marriage. The seventh (sacrament) is the sacrament of matrimony which is the sign of the union of Christ and the church. (ND 1803)
Since, because of the grace of Christ, matrimony under the law of the Gospel is superior to the marriage unions of the old law, the Holy Fathers, the councils and the universal church have with good reason always taught that it is to be numbered among the sacraments of the new law (ND 1807).
If anyone says that matrimony is not truly and properly one of the seven sacrament of the new law of Gospel instituted by Christ the Lord, but that it was devised in the church by men and does not confer grace, anathema sit (ND 1808).
5. Marriage as a Vocation
God calls a person to the vocation of Christian marriage as He calls a young man to be priest or brother or a woman to be a sister. The dignity and holiness of the married state had been recognized ever more clearly in 20th century. It is truly a sacred calling, which has an important place in the church. Thus, marriage is special vocation. It is not just something, which is suitable for some people but a necessary for full presentation of the message of salvation. It is God’s invitation to the majority of men and women to achieve love and union with him through a life of dedicated service.
6 Marriage as an Institution of New Law of Christ
Marriage is also a Sacrament and therefore an institution of the new law of Christ. The church ought to regulate Christian marriage by its own laws for the good of the Christian spouses, of the children born in the Christian family, and of the entire Christian people in order that all may attain that supreme bunum animarum of all church law which is sanctity.

II. Ends of Marriage
®    Gen.1:28 says “and God blessed them and said to them, be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it.” By generating children, the couples are cooperating with the divine will and plan.
®    Gen. 2:18 says “It is not good for man to be alone; I will make him a helper”. Adam calls Eve, flesh of my flesh, bone of my bone” (Gen 2:23), because they both constitute one being together. And the scripture completes, “therefore a man leaves his father and his mother and leaves to his wife, and they become one flesh’ (Gen 2:23ff). The expression of ‘one flesh’ asserts in a very concrete and vivid manner the mutual completion of man and woman effected through marriage.
®    The code of Canon Law 1917
Can 1012.1&2; 1013.1 and 1081.2 employed strictly juridical languages to describe marriage as contract than as a covenant. In clear terms this code stated that primary end of marriage is procreation and education of children and the secondary ends are mutual assistance of the spouses and remedy of concupiscence.
®    Casti Connubii - Pius XI (1930)
Pope Pius XI makes a distinction between primary ends and secondary ends of marriage.
*      Primary ends - procreation and education of children
*      Secondary ends - mutual love and remedy for concupiscence.
®    Vatican II- strikes a balance
The Vatican II has brought about a new understanding of the ends of marriage notion in hierarchical manner but as complementing each other.
The Vatican II in G.S 48 says, ‘by its very nature, the institution of marriage and conjugal love is ordered towards the begetting and educating of children and it is in them that it finds its crowning glory.
G.S. 49 says “conjugal love is an eminently human love because it is affection between two persons rooted in the will and it embraces the good of the whole person”
1. Spousal Well Being
In marriage the good of the spouses is of paramount importance and the good of both parties is wrapped up in the goodness of one. Christ’s love and gift to the church and those of the church become the model of the mutual love and the self-giving of man and woman (Eph 5:22-32). This divine plan of love and self-giving between two people joined in sacramental marriage, has to be permanent and indissoluble. Thus through the sacrament of marriage the husband and wife are enabled to help each other to live spiritually good lives, and to live together in harmony under the fatherly care of God, ultimately enabling their mutual sanctification in the marital vocation.
The importance end obtained through marriage covenant is mutual assistance and completion in love of the two spouses. In marriage man and woman ‘render mutual help and service to each other through an intimate union of their persons and their actions (G.S 48). Man and woman with their different gifts and abilities complete each other in this covenant in the most perfect way.

2. Procreation and Education of Children
Just as God’s love was so fruitful in the creation of mankind, so is the deepest union of man and woman in marriage is aimed at procreation. Thus with God the couple become co-creator. They partake of the call of God “to be fruitful and multiply (Gen 1:28) as a serious responsibility attached to their vocation to marital life. For this end He created them social beings and naturally inclined to each other and filled them with physically capacity to join together and beget children. This invitation or command therefore includes mutual help and nourishment for each other and to implant in their children the highest virtue of love. Therefore husband and wife are not only intimate companions in life and in love, but also producers and promoters of new lives. In God’s plan marriage is for the spreading and the expansion of human race through taking part in the procreative mission. The Bible places a high value on having children as one of the prime blessings of marriage, the decision to procreate is highly weighed in relation to the other intrinsic of marriage.
Marriage is basically a vocation to have children. On the natural plane the indissolubility exists ultimately to serve the good of children. Just as the child before birth needs the womb of his m other for protection and nurture, so as a young child and adolescent he or she needs the environmental womb of the family. Marriage has as its purpose not merely the procreation but also the education of children. In this direction G.S. (Gudium et Spes) states “Marriage and conjugal love are by their nature ordained toward the begetting and educating of children. Children are really the supreme gift of marriage and contribute very substantially to the welfare of their parents…Hence, while not making the other purpose of matrimony of less account, the true practice of conjugal love, and the whole meaning of the family life which result from it, have this aim: that the couple be ready with stout hearts to cooperate with the love of the Creator and Saviour, who through them will enlarge and enrich His own family day by day. Parents should regard as their proper mission the task of transmitting human life and educating those to whom it has been transmitted. (G.S 50)
Catechism of the Catholic Church therefore affirms this responsibility of the parents in the following statement: “Called to give life, spouses share in the creative power and fatherhood of God. Married couples should regard it as their proper mission to transmit human life, and to educate their children: they should realize that they are thereby cooperating with the love of God the Creator and are, in a certain sense, its interpreters. They will fulfill this duty with a sense of human and Christian responsibility.” (CCC 2367)
III.            The Essential Properties of Marriage
Can. 1056 says, “The essential properties of marriage are unity and indissolubility, which in Christian marriage obtain a special firmness in virtue of the sacrament. Therefore in the juridical setup these two elements are absolutely essential. To be more realistic the love between the spouses is expressed in all the aspects of their marital life and all the more in their sexual relationship. Sexual relationship between the couples expresses and nurture love and these results in procreation of children who are to be brought up in love. Love in marriage is genuine only in so far as the spouses strongly decide to carry on their union until death and to defend it from every attack from without. Though they may look silly, four words –only you forever—are the cornerstones of the edifice of marriage. So much so without these foundational values of unity and indissolubility there cannot be true marriage. Since Christian marriage is not only a symbol but also a participation in Christ’s covenant of unconditional fidelity and unbreakable union with his church. In Christian marriage the essential properties acquire a distinctive firmness and yield to no exception. Therefore, we can firmly hold that these unitive and permanent aspects of marriage are two sides of the same coin.
1. Unity of Marriage
Unity means that marriage by its nature consists of the union of one man with one woman. This notion therefore categorically rules out the concepts of polygamy which can be either polyandry, which is one woman having several husbands, or polygamy, that is one man having several wives at the same time. Unity is one of the essential features of every marriage, whether Christian or non-Christian. But as a matter of fact, in virtue of the sacramental dignity of Christian marriage, unity acquires a special significance.
The Catholic Church, throughout the centuries, has adhered to monogamous marriage as prescribed by the Lord. At the same time the prohibition of polygamy for Catholic is a dogma defined at the council of Trent. The second Vatican Council sums up the notion in the following statement: “Firmly established by the LORD, the unity of marriage will radiate from the equal personal dignity of wife and husband, a dignity acknowledged by mutual and total love (G.S 93)
Unity means the union of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others. Thus it is very important to understand that the juridical bond which is the foundation of marriage can arise only between a man and a woman, because this exclusively belongs to the very nature of marital unity. That is to say that a man and a woman conjugally unite themselves with each other, and with no one else. Another point to be noted here is that the foundation of marital unity is the equality of dignity between man and woman; however the sexual difference is to be a means by which one compliments and fulfills the other. This enables them to work together as spouses in accord with the dignity which belongs to them as persons. In fact this unity does not mean that it destroys the individuality of the neither couples nor does it merge them into one. Though ontologically united, each of them maintains their individuality, yet they belong to each other and become co-owners with a mutual and solitary purpose. This is how the biblical understanding of marriage as the union of two in one flesh becomes a reality in marriage. So much so, their intimacy is such that this particular man and woman alone are united as husband and wife in a marriage partnership for their whole life, which is the crux of the unitive aspect of marriage in the Christian understanding.
1.1 Monogamy in Scripture
It was true that polygamy was the order of the day among the patriarchs and kings. It was indeed a sign of affluence and prestige. Although prophets and the wisdom literature treated polygamy as an existing condition, they held monogamy as an ideal. Marriage was cited as an existing reality and as an example of fidelity to the covenant. Genesis 1,2, has it that man tells of woman, “she is flesh of my flesh and bone of my bones”, which is a clear indication that marital union in for the two and the two alone. Genesis 5:7 gives us a chronology of monogamous union on patriarchs. In the NT monogamous marriage was taken for granted,.. “what God has joined together , let no man put asunder (Mk 10:6-9; Mt 19:1-9).
1.2 The Teachings of the Church
Down through the centuries the Magisterium has consequently held marriage to be monogamous. Council of Trent clearly states: “If anyone says that it is lawful for Christians to have several wives at the same time and that it is not forbidden by the divine law anathema sit” (ND.1809).
Casti Connubii - 12 speaks “marriage will never be profaned by adultery or divorce. Firmly established by the Lord, the unity of marriage will radiate from the equal personal dignity of wife and husband, a dignity acknowledge by mutual and total love.
Familiaris Consortio 10 say, “by virtue of the covenant of married life, the man and the woman are no longer two but one flesh”. They are called to grow continually in their communion through day to day fidelity to the marriage promise of mutual self-giving.
1.3 Reasons for Unity
Christian marriage is a life of love and mutual sharing. The spouses exist for each other. The husband cannot live out his sex nature without existing for the sex nature of his wife and vice-versa. In fact, monogamy is the supreme expression of agape, a lifelong living for one another. Christian marriage is a covenant entered into by a man and woman of the whole of their life: it is a call to a life of mutual offering one another without any reserve every moment of their life.
Polygamy not only affects seriously the mutual love and personal love and unity of the spouses but also disrupts their mutual co-operation in education of their children. Polygamy even affects the propagation of human race as well. Legitimacy of children becomes difficult to be determined.
2. Indissolubility
Can.1141 says, “A marriage which is ratified and consummated cannot be dissolved by any human power or by any cause other than death. Indissolubility of marriage means that the event of marriage cannot be dissolved at will neither with the consent of the contracting parties nor by an extrinsic human authority except through the death of one of the parties. “The indissolubility is an essential point in catholic doctrine concerning marriage. With it stands or falls the significance of the sacrament of marriage as an image of the faithful love between Christ and his church. Thus it was Jesus who first, clearly expressed the view that marriage was intended by God to be permanent, and the Catholic Church has always retained this value and set it before its members as an ideal. The official teachings of the catholic church on marital indissolubility is that once a marriage is validly witnessed in a ceremony and consummated physically it cannot be dissolved by any human power, either by one of the partners or by any other individual. In this view, the marriage bond may ordinarily be dissolved only by the death of one of the partners.
It is because husband and wife become one flesh in sexual union, marriage is indissoluble. What therefore God has joined together let no man put asunder (Mt 19:6). For Jesus, indissolubility of marriage corresponds to God’s original and therefore to the nature of the marital relationship between husband and wife. They can make this binding commitment only if they trust that God will bless this marriage and enable the two partners to remain loyal to each other. Marriage does not derive from human intentions alone but, as a sacrament, calls on the grace of God, who alone makes a lasting union possible.
Indissolubility is in no way an option open to the free choice of the couples. It flows from the very nature of the love they pledging to each other. This is clearly stated by Vatican II: “As a mutual gift of two persons, this intimate union, as well as the good of the children, imposes total fidelity on the spouses and argued for an unbreakable oneness between them.” Therefore indissolubility is not something independent of the couple themselves. Their children, other people, the church and society may expect it from them but its reality lies in them.
2.1 Scriptural Evidence
A. Old Testament: As we read in Genesis, in the beginning God created woman from man and so she is the flesh of his flesh and bone of his bones and Jesus adds what God has put together let not man put asunder. Hence, intention of the creator was that this bond between the man and woman be indissoluble.
Prophets spoke marriage as a covenantal relationship. This covenantal relationship calls for fidelity and oneness. It is persons to person relationship. This relationship does not cease even in the consent of covenant is withdrawn by one on these parties. Hosea and Jeremiah also affirm the indissolubility of marriage and condemn infidelity or being unfaithful to such relationship.  Malachi 2:16 says, “I hate divorce, says Yahweh, the God of Israel (Jer 3:8, 50:1).
B. New Testament: Mk 10:11-13, “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another, commits adultery against her and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.
This text clearly shows a couple of elements:
1.      No exception to indissolubility
2.      Jesus categorically asserts that marriage is absolutely indissoluble. He made it amply clear that creator’s intention as found in Genesis 1&2. Hence, there is no legal ground for divorce. Civil authority would go against divine will if it dissolved marriage. Jesus means to say that indissolubility is the very nature of marriage.
The meaning of the phrase ‘except for unchastity’ is widely disputed. A theory championed by H.Baltenweilor and R.Schnackenburg elucidate that (unchastity) in Greek refers to illegal or illegitimate marriage between relatives. At the time of Jesus there were many gentile converts called proselytes. The Jews had given concession to them and if they married close relative, it was tolerated. But when they become Christian, the church held that if they had such unchaste relationships before becoming Christian they must give up even that i.e. separation of marriage of close relatives. Hence it is not an exception to indissolubility of a valid marriage but a separation commanded by the law of the people who are married illegitimately. We find a reference to it in Acts 15:20.
According to second theory except for unchastity is an actual exception to the norms of indissolubility. But then unchastity is understood variously. Its correct meaning depended on what precious little we can gather from the practices of the infant church. Scripture scholars are most unanimous on the fact that the phrase except for unchastity is an interpretation as it is conspicuously absent in the other synoptic gospels.
2.2 Reasons for the Indissolubility of Marriage
The stability and happiness of a marriage can more easily be attained if there is genuine love between the partners, if they are mature, if they understand that they must sacrifice for each other and for their children, and if they realized that marriage, by its very nature, must be permanent. The following are the few reasons why this marital indissolubility is very essential in marriage.
  1. Biblical Reason for the Indissolubility of Marriage
The biblical reason for the indissolubility of marriage can be drawn from the words “what therefore God has joined together let not man put asunder (Mk 10:9; Mt 19:6). These passages mentions the mind of God without exception there is an emphasis from God that they need to live an indissoluble life. Here God does not grant any exemption or exception. Male and female He called them to live one flesh. Therefore there is no indissolubility. We know that God created human being in His image and likeness as male and female and He blessed them saying increase and multiply (Gen 1:27-28). So in this sense not only man and woman are important here but also the third party i.e. God himself who made them and inaugurated the marriage. Therefore God is an active agent in the process of marriage. When the man and woman make the promises of marriage God unites them. Therefore they cannot break it. Thus from Bible perspective all marriages are indissoluble By Divine Law.
  1. Theological Reason for the Indissolubility of Marriage
It is true that Christ’s love is an unbreakable love. That is the reason St. Paul tells us that Christian marriage is the symbol of Christ’s union with the church and therefore it is a mystery (Eph 5:21-23). In fact Paul, by giving us the notion of a ‘great mystery,’ says that the Christian marriage is great, holy and sacred, because it reproduces the union of Christ with the church. Christians, as members of this church, must model themselves after this pattern. The union of Christ with His church, of which natural marriage represents and reproduces all the principles, thus becomes the ‘type’ of Christian marriage. Paul shows how this union is fully realized in the mystical bond between Christ and the church, of which Christian marriage is an image and reflection. Therefore we can say the law of marriage is nothing other than that which shines forth in the union of Christ with his church, and this union is definitive, faithful, fruitful, holy and sanctifying. As Christ loved the church unconditionally, the love that exists between the spouses should also be unconditional.
  1. Social Reason for the Indissolubility of Marriage
If we trace out the root causes of all the evils that exist in the society we reach to a platform where we realize that it is because of the broken families. Everyone those who are engaged in the immoral activities like stealing, murder, rape and any kind of unsocial activities will have a very pathetic story to tell about their families. Since the number of broken families is increasing day by day the crimes and all the immoral activities also will increase in an alarming rate. So it is clear that good citizens come only from the good families. So when we look indissolubility of marriage from a social point of view it is a must for building up a good society.
  1. The Ultimate Reason for the Absolute Indissolubility
All marriages are intrinsically indissoluble. Extrinsic indissolubility was provided for under the Mosaic Law through the legislation of Dt 24. Under the Christian dispensation all marriages are extrinsically dissoluble, at least in theory, with the exception of one that is ratun and consumatum. A ratified (ratum) marriage, i.e., a valid marriage between two validly baptized persons, is a sacramental marriage. The baptism of both parties can be either prior to contracting the marriage or subsequent to it. If one or both of the parties were not baptized at the moment of marriage, they contracted a natural bond of marriage. With valid reception of baptism by both parties this natural bond becomes sacramental, and the marriage which until that moment was natural becomes ratified, i.e. sacramental.
A consummated marriage is one in which the parties have performed after their marriage in a human manner the conjugal act. A sacramental marriage which has been consummated cannot be dissolved by any human power, not even the Roman Pontiff as the head of the church has the power to do so. When a ratified but non consummated marriage is dissolved by pope, the dissolution takes place not by merely ecclesiastical law or even by divine law that is natural or positive but antecedent to the use of the power of keys given by Christ to the church. The consummated marriages of Christian do not come under the power of the keys; by divine law they are exempt from it. And therefore they are absolutely indissoluble. So it is clear that a ratified and consummated marriage is by divine law absolutely indissoluble and was in no way completed in the power of loosing or dispensing that was grated to peter and his successors.
IV.             Dissolution of Marriage under Canon Law
The Catholic Church holds that a ratified and consummated marriage cannot be dissolved. However her power to dissolve a marriage which is ratified and but not consummated is affirmed by the magisterium and several centuries of practice of the church. Thus notion of absolute and relative indissolubility has been in her canonical tradition. Likewise, a ratified but non-consummated marriage can be dissolved by the Roman Pontiff, using his vicarious power as Vicar of Christ, for a just reason at the request of the parties. The following are the four occasions when the church gives concession to dissolve a marriage bond.
1. Dissolution of Ratified but Non-Consummated Marriage
A non-consummated marriage between baptized persons or between a baptized party and an unbaptized party can be dissolved by the Roman Pontiff for a just reason, at the request of both parties or of either party, even if the other is unwilling. This canon contemplates two requirements: (a) it must be established with moral certainly that the marriage has not been consummated and (b) there must be just reason. A marriage is consummated when the partners have met in the act of sexual intercourse after marriage contracted. Intercourse prior to consent is not considered to be consummation and therefore has no effect on marriage consent.
Canons 1697 to 1706 provide for dispensation from a ratified but non-consummated marriage. However, since this process takes time as recourse must be had to the Apostolic See the petitioner may also try for a decree of nullity of marriage at the diocesan tribunal level. For there is every chance that such a marriage might have been invalid on some canonical grounds. This is based on the rule of thumb according to which one need not ask authority to dissolve a marriage which is already null. However, a dispensation for the dissolution of a marriage bond is a special concession grated by the Holy Father in person. The other occasion where the special concession can be grated is in the case of a marriage contracted between a baptized and an unbaptized person or even between two unbaptized persons in favor of faith.
2. Dissolution of Marriage as per Pauline Privilege
Pauline privilege is a privilege whereby a legitimate marriage between two unbaptized persons, one of whom, after the marriage, had been converted to Christianity and baptized is dissolved in favor of the faith. It is based on an answer given by St. Paul regarding these types of cases. The problem was that the partner, not converted to Christianity, did not want to stay with the Christian spouse in peace, St. Paul stated that in such cases the Christian partner was free : I Cor 7:12-15. Did St. Paul mean ‘free to live separately’ or ‘free to remarry? The interpretation accepted and followed in practice in the church since 4th century is that he meant free to remarry but among exegetes there is no complete agreement on this point. It certainly appears to be the most logical explanation.
Those who do not accept this interpretation do not thereby deny the value of what is called the Pauline privilege. They base the dissolution of such marriages on the power in the church to dissolve such a marriage and not on a ruling given by the Apostolic. In short, this covers the case of marriage entered into by two non-baptized persons in which one of them still unbaptized is unwilling to live with the other at all or at least in peace without offence to the creator i.e., let does not the other spouse follow the Christian religion. This is a concession made in favor of the faith i.e., to show the partner, who seeks baptism in. catholic church, to be baptized and remarry or who has already become a catholic, to remarry and thus live a full Christian life in Catholic Church.
3. Dissolution of Marriage in Petrine Privilege
A natural marriage can be dissolved “in favor of faith” when one of the parties is not baptized. The term Pauline privilege is used because this privilege derives its authority directly from the power of the pope as the successor of Peter. The pope exercises his power as Vicar of Christ and the universal shepherd in this case. Accordingly, any other marriage which is not ratified and consummated and it not covered under the general concessions explained earlier could be dissolved by the Roman Pontiff in favor of faith
®    The cases which fall under these norms are:
1.      A marriage contracted between a baptized and unbaptized persons
2.      A marriage contracted between two unbaptized persons but to which none of the general concessions of the privilege of the faith apply because the requirement for their operation are not fulfilled.
3.      A marriage contracted between two unbaptized persons neither of whom seeks baptism in favor of faith of a third person.
®    In order that dissolution may be validly granted, the following three conditions are absolutely necessary
1.      Lack of baptism of one of the two spouses during the whole time of their married life.
2.      Non-use of the marriage after the baptism perchance received by the party who was not baptized
3.      That the person who is not baptized outside the Catholic Church yields freedom and ability to the catholic party to profess his own religion and to baptized and educate the children as Catholics: this condition must be safeguarded in the form of a promise.

Pauline privilege requires interpellation similar to those used in a Pauline privilege case: besides, while the Pauline privilege cases can be decided at the local level, the Petrine privilege cases are to be sent to Rome as the Pope alone has power to dissolve such marriages.

Conclusion
Christian marriage is an unconditional commitment to each other. One grows in that union of love and fidelity which results in indissoluble unity. It is definite surrender to one another without calculation for the future. Certainly, it is a human manifestation of man’s total surrender to God since it is consecration to marriage for life. This nature of Christian marriage demands that everyone who is entering into such a marital covenant should sufficient knowledge of the essential ends and proper ties of marriage.

  Fr. Albert Leo, CPPS

Precious Blood Missionaries

Parables and Miracles are the expressions of the Reign of God.



I. Parables
1.      Meaning of the Gk word Parabole – and its relation to allegory, simile, and metaphor.
2.      The  Literary structure and characteristics of the Gospel Parables  and the core content of Jesus teaching
3.      Exegesis of some Parables about the Kingdom of God
a)      Nature of the kingdom (The Parable of the Sower and the Seed growing by itself)Mk 4:14-20.
b)      The challenges of the kingdom (The Parable of the Treasure)Mt 13:44-46.
c)      The Demands of the kingdom (The Rebellious Workers Mk 12:1-12 and the Twinparables of LK 16).

II. Miracles
1.      Meaning and the significance of the Biblical Miracles, in particular of Jesus’ miracles
2.      Exegesis of some Miracles performed by Jesus
®    Healing Miracles
a)      Miraclesareexpressions of God’s concern for the poor(The cure of Peter’s mother in law)
b)      Miracles give spiritual healing (Pronouncement stories - the cure of the man with a withered hand)
®    Exorcism Stories
c)      Miracles aremanifestation of God’s power over evil (The Gerasene Demoniac and Stilling the storm)
d)     The community building factor of the multiplication of the loavesand its Eucharistic and kingdom significance.

I. Parables are core content of Jesus’ Teaching
Introduction
Parables are the important material to construct the historical Jesus. They are stories told by Jesus using characters and events familiar to his audience. Nevertheless, it contains surprising elements with piercing truth for his listeners. Christ parables were designed to reveal the truth concerning the kingdom of God. Many a times he introduces it by saying “The kingdom of heaven is like.” On the other hand we also find Jesus using actions(Miracles)to teach about the kingdom of God. The Parables and the Miracles of Jesus here are presented as  the expressions of the kingdom of God. Jesus uses a narrative theology made up of human existence. In the synoptic we come across 33 parables in all.

I.    Meaning of the word Parabole
The English word Parable is the transliteration of the Greek word Parabole which in turn is translated in Hebrew as Mashal – to be like, represent, similar and covers a wide range of related categories such as similitude, metaphor, parable, allegory, fable, proverb, utterance, riddle, etc.In addition,The Greek word is derived from the combination of Para- along side of, and Ballein–“cast, place, or throw” means placing of things side by side for the sake of the comparison. Parabole literally means, “to set aside,” “to throw beside.” In the biblical background these term has the same function of bringing out the parallelism between two things, the elements of comparison being common to both. The parables contain one chief lesson with usually a short story. On the other hand, it deals with the ordinary events of life and it is global. Simile employs words such as ‘as and like’. When the simile extendedit becomes an allegory.Each element is given importance and explanation. Each part of the story gives us separate lesson,usually longer, unusual, and local. In addition, an extended metaphor becomes a parable.  It is poetical and creates a new meaning.eg. The parable of the Good Samaritan and the prodigal son.

2. Literary and structural characteristics parables
A.    Literary characteristics
Down through the centuries, human have found by the experience that stories become more effective if we follow certain rough rules in telling them, the followings are some of the rulesfound in Jesus parables. This helps us in the interpretation.
§      Rule of three
§      Rule of contrast
§      Use of direct speech and the rule of stress

B.     Structural characteristics
Banality – the material of the Gospel parables is taken from ordinary events of the daily lifeofthe poor common folk: sowing, reaping, cooking building, field, lamp etc. Jesus was familiarWith the Galilean milieu in the land of the Galilean farmer.
Novelty – it breaks down the course of the earth stories and creates an element of surprise. It
attracts the hearers.eg. The Good Samaritan. The novelty of the parables interrupts our normalway of viewing tings and presents the extraordinary within the ordinary. It is the new way ofexpressing the kingdom of God.

C.    Content of the parable
In the synoptic gospels the content of the parable of Jesusand the function of Jesus parables is to narrate what happens in the rule of God. The introductory formula “the kingdom of heaven may be compared” which is absent in theLucan special material, is the favorite expression of the first evangelist and it does not compare the kingdom of God directly with someonebut with something.It should be noted that in the parables of Jesus the kingdom of heaven is a symbolical expression if thereign of God in the human history, and God’s victory over the evil and is not to be understood in terms of the physical features of the kingdom of God.

3. Exegesis of some Parables about the Kingdom of God

3.1 Nature of the kingdom: The Parable of the Sower (Mk 4:1-9)
The three synoptic gospels also contain a detailed allegorized interpretation of Mk 4:14-20.

®    Literary observationMk 4:1-9
1.      Patternof Three:
§      There are three failingseeds: seed along the path, seed onthe rocky ground and seed among thorns.
§      There are also 3 seeds that succeed: 30, 60, and 100.
2.      Element of daily life:Not kings and rich farmers, but marginalized peasantsare the privileged characters
3.      Reversal of images: In the OT especially in the intertestamental books rule of God is explainedin terms of stars and sun, the gigantic phenomena. Nevertheless, Jesus uses the daily language. It is a revolutionarylanguage which converts our own concepts and images of the rule of God in our minds.



4.      Structure
§      Act I    is sowing.It is comedy and there is joy in sowing
§      Act II is failure of the seedshere there is tragedy, people walk on the seed and there is root failure           
§      Act III harvest extravagant joy, Double surprise: the tragic surprise of failure and the joyful surprise of the harvest.

®    Mathew and Mark
§      Mt follows Mk very closely with some minor changes.
§      Mk makes the distinction between the wasted seeding 5:3-7 and the fruitful seed in 4:8 by two formal features. The seed is described as some seed, other seed, and other seed. In 4:3-7 thus in Mk there is change from singular to plural between the units.Mt reverses the order30, 60, 100 to 100, 60, 30 fold. The climax is shattered in Mt. Thus Mt adopts abstraction and theologizing attitude.

®    Luke
He lost the contact with the daily life. He changed the rocky ground into rock. The reason is that he was from the urban set up. Therefore in Lk the details disappear. The growth of the seed is reduced to an abstract pattern. The wonder of the yield is taken for granted: Lk does not know 100 fold would be extravagant and miraculous.

®    Setting and meaning in the context of Jesus Life
Situatedin the Galilean ministry of Jesus, the parable echoes the discouragement that surrounded the group of the disciples when difficulties began arisingaftera short period of initial enthusiasm. Crowds and disciples began drifting away of God’s power. It works in small things and even in failure. “In spite of every failure and opposition from hopeless beginningGod brings the triumphant end which he has promised (Jeremias,The Parable of Jesus, 150.)

®    The Message
The message is not primarily an exhortation to give good fruits. It resides in the contrast between the weakness of the seed and triumph of life, between the power of God and the frailty of its appearance. In spite of apparent failure and setback, the rule of God is sure to come since it is God himself who comes inhis rule. It is God who abides in the humble patterns of daily life. Hearing and understanding the word produces the fruits. The accent is not on how people should heart the word of God but on the fact the kingdom of God will cer5atinly c0ome with a harvest beyond all expectation, but by way of failure, disappointment, and loss.

®    The purpose of the parable
In Mk and Lk – they look but do not perceive, and hear but do not understand; in Mt is because they look but not perceive, and hear but not understand

3.2 The coming of God’s kingdom:Parable of the seed growing by itself (Mk. 4: 26-29)

®    Literary analysis
No parallel although the parable of the weeds Mt 13:24-30 has some 6/7 words in commonPattern of 3x3 resulting in poetical rhythm.

®    The farmer: sows, sleeps, and rises, the seed sprouts and grows. The earth produces blade, ear, full if grain.Grain ripe, puts sickle, harvest has come.Settings in Jesus’ life Jesus’ own ministry is the point of concern: the apparent passivity of Jesus.

®    Message: The comparison is not between the kingdom of God and the man but the kingdom andwhat happens in the  parable .The true meaning of the kingdom of God comes in his ruleHarvest, sickle are the ref. Joel 3:13. Priority if Grace the seed grows by itself, naturally withoutthe visible cause. It comes into being without human efforts.

®    The Doctrine: In the parable the seed growing by itself Mk 4:26-29 Christ called the attentionto how physical seed germinates and grows because of the essential life in the seed. Similarly Christ said when the new form of the kingdom is introduced by the sowing of theseed of God’sword. Just as a sower’s work is completed when physical seed is put into the soil the humanresponsibility will end when the message has been proclaimed. In the unfolding of the kingdomprogram the development if the kingdom will not depend in human agency but in the power ofword thathas been proclaimed.

3.3 The Growth of the kingdom: The parable of the Mustard Seed (Mk4:40-32)
 In the parable of the Mustard Seed Christ revealed that the kingdom would begin with an insignificant beginning but grows to great proportions. The Mustard plant is an annual that can grow to tree size in one season. Thus it can be aplace of refuge for the birds that inits branches. Christ’s emphasis here was to contrast the size if the Mustard seed and the plant came forth from that seed. The new form of the kingdom began essentially with the 11 men. From that insignificant beginning it is so extensive that one could say when the book of Acts closed that the whole world had heard the Gospel
                  Mark carries the message of assurance and hope regarding the kingdom of God. He high lights as how Jesus himself must have used the parable Thus Mk laid stress on the following words in his reproduction if the parable, it is the smallest if a all the seeds on earth, yet when it grows it becomes the greatest of all shrubs.
                  Luke is different from Mk and Mt, since he writes to gentileswho are completely different to that of Mt and Lk. Lk emphasizes on the fact that is Jesus’ proclamation if the Reign of God the Good news of the gospel was growing and developing.

3.4  The challenges of the Kingdom (The Parable of the Treasure) Mt 13:44-46

®    Content: The great price of the kingdom is given to us freely. One should be ready to sacrifice anything for it.

®    Circumstances: Having sent away the crowds, Jesus went into a house and his disciples cameto him. He gave them interpretation of the parable of wheat and sickle and told them these two stories.

®    Interpretation: The treasure is hidden in a field. But it is not of that man’s one who found out. The custom of hiding things in the ground seems to be typical of the times. In Palestine there are always people digging around in the hope offinding hidden treasures: Treasures probably money left a long time ago and therefore pattern of a short drama in three acts.


®    Structure
1.      Act I: The Treasure is found
§      Finding is the first act
§      That is a place not of his own:It was a public place or his own field; he would have at leastaright on the treasure. Here very gratuitous.
§      He does not begin with human activity and only any kind of human right.
§      Totally gratuitous:antecedent grace.
2.      Act II: Sells everything
§      Total dispossession: The rich young man emphasized in Lk’s rendering of Jesus’s sayings inleavingeverything. (5:11-28, 12:33, 14:33, 18:22).
§      The Treasure makes one to become poor:Very disturbing Treasure.
§      In the joy of having found the treasure:Joyful dispossession, Joy of the kingdom and of the Beatitudes of the Good News.
3.      Act III: Buys the field
§      Against common sense he outs “all eggs in the same basket.” The risk of faith, the total investment in faith.
§      Doctrine: The important words are selling all that he had and bought the field. As the men foundthe treasure accidently and there is no merit of his own. So Christ mercifully admits us to thetreasure which is kingdom. But persons have to sacrifice all things to enter into this kingdom.

3.5  The Demands of the kingdom

A.    The Rebellious Workers Mk 12:1-12

®    Sociological setting
Unrest caused by absentee land lords and the profiteers of the agents: “and went to another country”. In away the revolted workers are expectedit meet with a certain measure of understanding, if not sympathy. At any rate, the story is not outlandish.

®    Context common to the 3
The parablebelongs to the Jerusalem ministry, as kind of prologue to the passion. Could in fact correspond to setting in Jesus’ life at the end of Jesus’ministry where the opposition and threats against him are getting more precise.

®    Literary analysis: Pattern of 3 in general (3 servants and son)
§      The plot introductory chorus v1. Adapted from the love song Isa 5:1-4with an ironical reversal of the popular song with a double surprising reversal
§      At the level of Isa 5:2 a romantic love song turns into fierce indictment
§      At the level of Jesus: the indictment does no longer bear onvineyard but on workers it is not the land but t particular human actors who are taken into task.

®    Structure
5 acts note the progression
Act 1.        Vv 2-3: beating
Act 2.        V 4: the head and the shame
Act 3.        V 5: killed
Act 4.        V 6-8: the son is killed
Act 5.        V9: the punishment


®    Message
In this context the dispossessed tenants are the Jewish elite who will be replaced by the common folk of sinners warning the elites. It refers to the Christological announcement.

®    Allegorizing
1.      In Mk
§      V 5- the sending of several other messengers afterthe one has been killed does not fit the narrative logic. There is an allegoricalreferences to traditionconcerning the martyrdom of many prophets  Mt23:29-37
§      The sending of the son can also be an allegorizing and christologising addition:If the first messengers had already been killed the landlord would not have sent his son. But it can also belong to the original story at the end of his ministry; Jesus could sense an imminent tragic conclusion.
§      V 6 - the addition of the beloved to the son is Christological Mk 1:11
§      V 9- giving the vineyard to others, gentiles called instead of chosen people.
§      V 10-11- constitutesin fact another parable, or Midrash on Ps 118:2. The image is no longer of field but of building. This connects with Jesus’ passion and to Christologize the parable. It becomes the predilection of the resurrection.

2.      In Mt
§      The allegorizing process continues; the messengers are killed at the outset v 35. The story becomes more unlikely but the theme of the killing of the prophets is made more explicit.
§      V 39- There is change of order unlike Mk’s account the son is first talent out of the vineyard andthenkilled. It is the story of Jesus executed outside the gate.(Heb 13:12)
§      V 43- Addition of Mt the new trustees are now the gentiles, submitting the Jewishpeople, context of Mattean Church in conflict with post scribal redefinition ofIsrael.

3.      In Lk
§      The messengers are not killed, just dismissed.
§      A more original form of the parable? Or did Lk feel that the sending of the son after the murder of the messengers would have been implausible?
§      V 15 - same change of order as in Mt.
§      V 18 - Lk’s own addition referring to the destruction of Jerusalem.

®    Conclusion
At level of Jesus, the parable evokes the mounting crisis that will lead to the rejection of the son. In Mk, it is beginning of the Christological allegorizing and theology of the cross. In Mt and Lk, together with Christological allegorizing and the allegory of the Gentiles joining Israel is added.

B.     The Twin Parables:The Rich Man and Lazarus (Lk 16: 19-31)
Within chapter 16, the two parables of dives and the steward constitute an antithetic parallelism: Money as a wall of division and money as a bridge. And the reference to the importance of the question of the rich and the poor and of theplace of the poor in the Christian Koinonia is vividly dealt.
The account is uniqueto Lk. so it is Lukanmaterial. The account contrasts the fact of the dependent poor and the heartless rich through a graphic picture of eschatological reversal. All the benefits that rich man possesses are lost in the next, while all the poor man lacks on earth is provided for him in the afterlife. The account is a warning that the possession of wealth now does not necessarily mean one will possess wealth later. It also calls on the wealthy to be generous with what they have to meet the needs of those who have nothing. One reaps what one sows. In Lk’s contrasting literary touch, Lazarus does not say a word. In the End, he needs no defending.

® Structure
Three parts:
§      The situation of the characters in this life(16:19-21)
§      The situation of the characters I the afterlife(16:22-23)
§      The rich man is painful pleading with Abraham during the afterlife when it is too late (16:24-31)

®    Settings
The parable has two settings: This life (16:19-21). This is a parable of reversal, since the situation in the two settings reverses.

®    Context
Still speaking about discipleship and still in the context of a shared meal, Jesus proposed yet another parable contrasting two people. Since the poor man in named, classic commentaries have used the name Dives for the rich man. There is a contrasting social condition, with nothing said about any other moral qualities they might have possessed; the Reversal is illustrated by means of a dialogue between Abraham and the rich man.
The focus of the story is introduced in terms of his wealth. Lazarus is the only figure in any of Jesus’ stories who received a specific name;the listeners are challenged to identify with one another of the characters. This parable serves LK’s concern about the proper use of material goods and the responsibilities of the rich toward the poor. It further emphasizes the requirement of faith for eternal life, not mainly indict the rich for any other sin but neglect of the poor.

®    Literary analysis
No triple pattern but double anti thesis of two acts
§      Act 1: antithesis of the rich inside and the poor outside
§      Act 2:reversed antithesis of the poor inside and the rich outside.

®    Conclusion
1.      The sin of the rich man: what is not said: Dives is not presented as a sinner. There is no description of vices, of sinful festivities. Instead what is said is  the total gap between rich and the poor. The little detail of the dogs emphasizes the distances between the world of the rich and that of the poor.
2.      The Value of Lazarus: What is not said: the parable does not say that Lazarus had the qualities of humility, of piety, of trust in God that befit poverty. There is no praise of poverty. Instead what is said is that the poor is in the bosom of Abraham, that he is of the side of God or rather that God is on his side “blessed are you poor yours is the kingdom of God.”
3.      The significance: God’s preferential love of the poor.
Lk views the problem as that of a lack of communion a great gap has been fixed so that those who might want to pass from here to you cannot do so and no one can cross from here to there (16:26) It is not God who made the gap it is the social gap dug by the rich between their world and that of the poor.



II. Miracles areexpressions of the Kingdom of God

Introduction
In the Bible, the miracles in general are not reported for their own sake. They are part of the campaign in favor of God’s people or part of the prophetic message. In other words, the meaning of Biblical miracles does not depend on their extraordinary character, but on their context. Miraculous divine interventions are frequent in the OT (Plagues of Egypt, crossing of Red sea, Manna, water and quails in the desert etc. But miracles performed for individual needs and purposes are found with frequency only in the Elijah and Elisha cycles (NJBC 1370:95).This is why Jesus was considered as a “New Elijah”. Wonder working was not an expected messianic activity. Non-miraculous but having equal significance are the symbolical gestures of the prophets, the meaning of which is closely related to their teachings. Miracle is a sign pointing to the always near and all directing God. It is faith which interprets an event as miraculous.

A. Meaning and the significance of the Biblical Miracles, in particular of Jesus’ miracles

1. Meaning
Miracles are occasional visible acts of power beyond human experience to account for or of human faculties to accomplish, though sometimes wrought human agency, something we cannot understand because it transcends our experience. A miracle is religious wonder that expresses in the cosmic order, a special and utterly free intervention of God’s power and love who gives human beings a sign of the uninterrupted presence of his word of salvation in the world.

2. Significance of Miracles
We come to know the significance of miracles from Jesus Himself. Mt 11:2-6, Lk 7:18-23 are the authentic words of Jesus. The traditional meaning is to prove the heavenly origin of Jesus and to show him as the son of God. Jesus did not work any miracles in order to call attention to his message or credential (Mk8:12). Modernists reject any kind of miracles and say that everything is due to the general law of motion. But according to the modern theologians today the miracles are good news in action and good news to the poor. They are tokens of the coming of God’s reign in Christ. They show the Kingdom of God in action God’s sovereign grace and forgiveness operative in Christ.

3. Terminology
 In the synoptics, the word used for miracle is dunamis. John uses two words; Semeion- sign and Ergon- works.   When Jesus himself refers to the miracles, the term ergon is used; while referring to what Jesus did, the evangelist uses the term semeion. This choice of words means that for the synoptics the Miracles are manifestations of God’s power at work in the Kingdom. For John, miracles are signs of God’s presence with his people and signs of God’s glory. The interest is not on the miraculous character but on the significance.

4. Characteristics of Miracles
  • Every miracle of Jesus has an emphasis on faith as pre-condition of the miraculous event. It is faith in Jesus; God – given power is posed in a healing manner. If faith lacks miracles were not wrought (Mt 6:5)
  • Jesus lays emphasis on the power of prayer.(Mk11:24)
  • Jesus Christ himself says that he was performing miracles by the finger of God. His mighty works are the tokens or signs of the divine spirit working in all its plentitude.

5. Types of Miracle stories
§      Pronouncement miracle stories- Mk 3:1-6 It concerns the basic question. Is it lawful to heal someone on the Sabbath? It is not merely a miracle story but deals with an issue inside the story.
§      Miracle stories proper- It has 3 stages, namely; setting (the healer, intensity of the suffering) actual cure by gesture (word from Jesus, spittle Mk8:23) and the result (gets up and walks Jn 5:9)
§      Exorcism - The exorcism of Jesus or better called as deliverances, were not in the manner of Jewish exorcists or anybody else. Jesus Christ cast out demons with a word (Mt.8:16) not by magic incantations.
§      Healing Miracles - All throughout synoptic we find Jesus Christ engages himself in healing the sick and suffering.
§      Resuscitations: - The resuscitation reported in the Bible testifies to the divine power to give life and attest to reality of the promised resurrection of the dead to eternal life.Mt.11:2-6; Lk.7:18-23.
§      Nature Miracles – Apart from the exorcisms, healing, rising from the dead, Jesus Christ has performed other miracles, which are usually classified as nature miracles.Mk 4:35-41; 6:30-44;Jn 2;1-11; Lk 5:4-11; Mt 21:18-22.

6. Miracles and the Kingdom of God
The advent of the kingdom of God is basically linked to Jesus Christ’s salvific activity on earth. Miracles of Jesus are clearly connected with his messianicship. Jesus Christ appears not as a triumphant and conquering Messiah, but as a servant of God who obediently accomplishes the will of God. The healing ministry of Jesus Christ is particularly stressed by Matthew, has the context of his messianic entry into Jerusalem. The miracles of Jesus stress the fact that salvation is made available to all those in greater need. Jesus Christ’s miracles are closely connected with his messianic call and become the messiah’s concern and predilection for the destitute.

7. Jesus on the significance of his miracles: Mt 11:2-6 = Lk 7:18-23

7.1   A genuine saying of Jesus: The pericope bears the characteristic of Jesus’ own words: a) Semitic style  b) no explicit Christology, c) enigmatic “parabolical” style

7.2  Exegesis: (starting from the end) 
V.6 “Happy who takes no offence in me” John the Baptist took offence because Jesus’ action did not correspond to his messianic expectations (cf.Mt3:7-10). He takes offence at the nature of his messiah ship and of the kingdom which he brings about through the ministry. The kingdom does not entail the judgment of the wicked as was preached by John the Baptist.
In general, people moving with Jesus were disappointed by the humble character of his actions. For them, Jesus wasted his messianic energies in insignificant miracles with poor, insignificant people. His Messianic power was exercised in marginal Galilee, not in Jerusalem and with unimportant people.
    V.5 Jesus recalls various sayings of Is (29:18; 35:5ff; 42:18), especially Is 61:1 “Good news to the poor by deeds as well as by words” such is indeed the messianic policy corresponding to God’s mind. Therefore, Jesus’ miracles are Good News to the poor in action. His answer calls for a reversal of triumphalistic messianic expectations. In accordance to the mind of God and to the prophecies, he is a Messiah for the poor, exercising his action in the context of their humble life.


7.3 Significance
§      During his life time, Jesus was recognized as wonder worker. The point of the discussion is not about the fact which is taken for granted but about the significance.
§      The point of Jesus’ miracles are not their extraordinary character.Jesus’friends take offence because the miracles are too plain. The point of the miracles is to be found in their significance i.e. good news to the poor in action. Miracles are language carrying the same message as the Beatitudes.

8. Miracles are expressions of God’s concern for the Poor
In the healing miracles, Jesus reveals the God of small things, a God who manifests himselfasan extraordinarily concerned with the poor, the suffering, and the little ones.
The format of the healing miracles
·         Setting is often intended to create suspense
·         The cure with words/ gestures of the healer
·         Results on the healed person and on the onlookers

B. Exegesis of some Miracles performed by Jesus

v  Healing Miracles
1. Miracles areexpressions of God’s concern for the poor
Healing of Peter’s Mother in Law (Mt. 8:14-15; Mk 1:29-31; Lk4:38-39)

1.1 Context
§      In Mk-Lk it is one of the first miracles in contrast with solemn presentation of Jesus in Baptism, Temptations, first preaching and exorcism, now this is an “insignificant miracle.” This insignificance should be noted. It is not a “Prodigy”: as in the Beatitude of the poor, Jesus reveals God as “the God of small things”; a God who manifests himself and his nature more in his concern for the poor and the little ones than in grand demonstrations of power.
§      It represents typical day in Capernaum and that on a Sabbath day, illustrating “the epiphaneia of our Saviour Jesus Christ who abolished death and brought life and immortality to light through the Gospel” (2 Tim1:10)
§      In Mt- It is one of the 10 miracles reported in Mt 8-9. This miracle is put in the third position only, it loses the importance it has in Mk-Lk

1.2 Structure
Short as it is. It shows all the features of a miracle story. It could be taken as a paradigm of this literary form. But 3 differences are to be noted:
*      the insignificance of the miracle,
*      the disproportionate healing action (“he lifted her up”),
*      the unexpected reaction(“she served them”).

1.3 Exegetical Comments:
§      V.29, 30 (“and at once” or “immediately”) - a mannerism of Mk (42 times in Mk out of 54in N.T, Mt accounting for 7 more).Also it connects this periscope with the Sabbath context (V.21).The Busy day in Capernaum is a Sabbath day.“Simon, James and John” (as in 5:37; 9:2; 13:3; 14:33) – the inner circle of disciples to be witness of important things.
§      V.31 “he helped her up” RSV and NRSV more literally: “lifted her up.” Still more literally “raised her up” used here is one of the technical verbs for the resurrection (Mk14:28; 16:6; 1Cor15:4 etc), reference to “the power of his resurrection”(Phil 2:10)
§      “she served them”: attitude of the disciple following the Master (Mk 10:43-45).It is not only a healing; it is also discipleship story.

1.4 Synoptic comparison
§      Mt 8:14ff much shorter; narrative reduced to minimum; ecclesiological name of “Peter” instead of homely name of “Simon” and Peter singled out among other disciples; Ecclesiologizing: “He saw…, he touched…, she served him”; focusing on Jesus; Christologizing: “He touched”: the healing action reduced to minimum: the greater the authority the lesser the exertion.
§      Lk 4:38ff closer to Mk with skillful Lukan modification: “great” fever to stress the importance of the miracle.
*      “Standing over her, he rebuked the fever”: impressive picture inLuke’s manner and demonizing fever.
*      “They besought him for her”: Prayer of intercession: importance of prayer in Luke. The shift of “immediately” to the reaction of the healed women: stress on discipleship.

1.5 Conclusion
a)      At the level of Jesus
Historical: the early church would not have invented this kind of insignificant miracle. Moreover the story suggests an eyewitness. The Marken account particularly could be put in “I” form.  It is also typical of significance of Jesus’ miracles. Their significance is not to be found in the extraordinary character but in their correspondence with Jesus’ teaching of God’s concern for the poor. “God of small         things”
b)     Redaction
Narrated by each evangelist from the view point of their literary andtheological specificity:
·               Mk vivid narrator: stress on “the power of resurrection” and the response in “serving”
·               Mt abstract report: Christologizing and Ecclesiologizing concern.
·               Lk as a good “painter”;stress on prayer and demonology. In Lk “standing over her, he rebuked the fever” Lk has demonized the fever, for the word ‘rebuked’ is commonly used in exorcism (Acts 20:10; 1Kgs 17:21) the healing miracles shows that Jesus has the power over the evil of fever. Lk precisely presents healing from fever as a kind of exorcism, which meant it to be a victory over Satan.

2. Miracles give spiritual healing

2.1 Pronouncement stories - the cure of the man with a withered hand(Mk 3: 1-6)
According to Bultmann, this is a pronouncement story, where the healing story provides the context for a pronouncement.

2.2 Context
This is the climax of the 5 controversies stories. This opposition points to the cross evoked in conclusion in V.6. The Sabbath is not only Sabbath of creation but also Sabbath of Calvary.

2.3 Structure
Healing stories took place mostly between two characters: the person to be healed and the healer. Other characters remained in the background. Here is a third character takes a major place: the opponents, Pharisees.The sick man remains in the background. There is no description of the case and of the result of the healing. It is more a story of opposition to Jesus than of healing. The debate takes the major place. The healing is only a frame, so a typical “pronouncement story” where the healing is merely a frame for the words. It explains the fact that Jesus is the Lord of Sabbath. The high point lies in the conflict rather than in the act of healing.

2.4 Exegetical comments
§      V.1 “withered hand’: dry, dried up, dry land (Mt 23:15); the man is a silent participant in the episode.
§      V.2 “watching” has a sense of hostility- the opponents are silent before the sovereign word of Jesus. It is not a sign of consent but hardness of hearts; their silence provokes the anger of Jesus; they had become insensitive to both the purpose of God and the sufferings of man’s stubbornness and lack of feeling.
§      V.5 restoring to an earlier condition (Acts1:6); cure.
§      V.6 the conspiracy points forward to the passion narrative. For the Pharisees, Jesus constituted a threat to the true religion and ancestral tradition. For Herodians he was a threat to the peace and stability of the tetrarch. Ironically, the guardians of the Sabbath determine to do harm and to kill.

Mt: a) For the description of the healing, Mt is not shorter than Mk because Mk is already as sketchy as possible given the literary form of pronouncement story.
b) The argument of Jesus is different:                                                                  
®    Problem: “it is lawful to heal on Sabbath?” problem discussed by rabbis. There was agreement that it could be done in danger of death.” Any danger to life takes precedence over the Sabbath.” Opinion diverged depending on the severity of the illness or the urgency to break the observance of Sabbath.
®    Response: The case of the cattle falling into the pit on Sabbath day is also a rabbinical debate. The rigorist answer of the Dead Sea essence was that nothing could be done. Other rabbis said that the animal could be helped to come out itself. Without being actually pulled out. The common sense response of ordinary poor people was that the animal could be rescued. Jesus argues on that common practical agreement. The dawning of the reign of God carried with it the implication of new creation. No more appropriate day for the Messianic work of restoration than the Sabbath. So in Mt the background and the viewpoint is that of the Jewish Christian community and of its subsisting rabbinical structures and culture. This would have been closer to the facts in Lk 14:5 (another context).
In Mk-Lk, the background and viewpoint are those of the gentile world. Mk-Lk have practiced “inculturation”, “contextualization”. The point is the liberation from oppressive understanding of the Law. Jesus is the Lord of the Sabbath. Law cannot be barrier in the way of the Kingdom of God which consists in doing good and saving the fallen man even on a Sabbath. The message could be summarized in the words of Paul: you have been called to freedom Brothers, only do not use your freedom as an opportunity for the flesh but through love become slaves to one another. For the whole Law is summed up in a single commandment: “you shall love your neighbour as yourself” (Gal 5:13-14)

v  Conclusions on Healing Miracles
1)      Jesus was recognized and welcomed as a healer by his contemporaries: this is a solid feature of what we can reconstitute of the historical Jesus.
2)      In the narratives, the literary form of healing is followed but often disrupted so as to point out to the deeper dimensions of the miracles and put the stress on faith, forgiveness of sins, and option for the poor, liberation from all forms of alienation. Another literary form is that of pronouncement story. In this periscope both literary are intertwined.
3)      As regards sources, Mk seems to be the first, with possible echoes even of eyewitness.Mt summarizes Mk. Lk is more scrupulous in the use of his sources: he gives a literary polish to the artless style of Mk and gives his own theological turn by deft little retouching of the narrative.
4)      In the three gospels, the general perspective does not stop with the wonder of healing but goes to faith and forgiveness of sin. Title “power of the resurrection” is in the background. But it is also the power of the cross: power in weakness, for the little ones.
5)      In their redaction, Mk context evokes the perspective of Calvary. Mt and Lk give a Christologizing and Ecclesiologizing hermeneutics.

v  Exorcism Stories
3. Miracles are manifestation of God’s power over evil
The exorcism Jesus performed to show that the Kingdom of God is present here and now. All thethree synoptic  agree that the casting out of the demons was the most significant aspect of
Jesus’ministry.The Beelzebul passages (Mt12:25-29; Mk3: 23-27; Lk11:17-22) clearly depict the power of Jesus over demons. Jesus’ exorcisms were not merely isolated incidents of compassion for individual oppressed by malevolent forces. They were direct demonstrations of the power and the presence of the rule of God

A. The Gerasene Demoniac (Mk 5: 1-20; Mt 8:28-34; Lk 8:26-39)
This miracle contains mission significance. The rule of God, the liberation from the evil one reaches all nations through the demoniac now freed from all the forces of evil.Mk gives explicit command of the proclamation. It shows that the liberated person is sent to announce the victory of God and the consequent coming of the rule of God. The advent of the kingdom of God is manifested in deeds as well as in words. At the end V.17 the comedy turns into a tragedy. God’s power subdues all the forces of evil, and invites man to accept the triumph of the word of God.

1. Mk 5: 1-20
He presents a dramatic construction in 3 acts with spectacular reversals of situations.

®    Act I - Jesus’ victory over the devil (Vv 1-13)
      Scene I: Introduction to the characters
§      v.1 the stage
§      v. 2-5 a hopeless case( tombs 3 times, chains 5 times and the villain; it was a popular belief that the cemeteries were haunted by demons
§      v.5 describes the present condition of the demoniac
§      v.6 resumes the story; enters the hero which may be post-resurrectionalso the cry of the demoniac in the following verse: “Jesus, son of the MostHigh God”(v.7)
      Scene II: The Battle
§      vv.7-8 the devil has the upper hand: he shouts; Jesus repeatedly tells the devil to go out, the devil tries to make him powerless by the use of his name
§      v.9 the knowledge of the name carries with it power over the adversary(Gen 32:29).By boasting of his name ,the devil gives a hold to Jesus.
§      v.10 Jesus’ victory ; the demons are associated with a particularlocality (Lk 11:24)


      Scene III: The devil routed: Vv 11-13
§      From the view point of the devil, the cease fire would enable them to say “at home.”
§      From the view point of the gentiles, it would not be a shameful solution since pigs were sacrificial animals in the suoveaurile sacrificium of the Romans
§      From the viewpoint of the Jews and of the Christians reader, it is a             comic solution: unclean; swines are quite a fitting dwelling place for the devils. And the devils go to the sea, symbol of chaos and death.

®    Act II - Jesus defeated by men (vv14-17)
      Scene I:           v14 a new set of characters enters the scene: people of the town
Scene II:         the dilemma vv 15-16: a contrasted picture: the healed man (use of three participles) but the loss of swine: not the way Mk summarizes the dilemma:   “what happened to the demoniac and to the swine”.
Scene III:        v.17 Jesus is rejected and he is considered as a public danger. The loss of pigs looms larger than the salvation of people. The comedy has turned into tragedy. Almighty God who has power over everything and even over the all the forces of evil has called humanity to love and therefore has given it the liberty to accept or reject the proffered love. The human being can defeat the purpose of all powerful God: a cruelly ironical interpretation of Gospel history and of the whole Bible history of God’s gift to humanity. The cross looms over the horizon.

®    Act III The Victory of The Word (vv18-19)
Yet the rejection of Jesus is not the end of the story. The demoniac’s request to stay with Jesus reflects discipleship but discipleship is not mere comfortable feeling of companionship. It is a mission the liberated person is sent to announce the victory of God’s mercy. After the cross there will be the march of Good News. The apparent defeat of Jesus turns ultimately into the triumph of the Gospel.

2. Mt: 8:28-34
He summarizes the story.  But v.28 has 2 demoniacs (as 2 blind men in 9:27 and inJericho in 20:29and 2 asses in 21:7) by summarizing he loses the dramatic Markan construction.
It becomes one of the series of the 10 miracles of Mt8-9. Yet the rejection of Jesusinv.34,without any reason being given and without dilemma being described, becomes a“flat ending” (NJBC), the significance of which being only that the time of the nations has not yet come that for the time being they perceive Jesus only as a dangerous sorcerer.

3. Lk 8:26-39
The main point of Lk’s account will be to make the distinction between the poor victim     and the devilish power.
§      v.27- description toned down to evoke more compassion than horror. Part of the Markan description of the possessed man is pushed back to v.29 where it becomes an account of what the devil have done to the poor creature. A distinction is made between the victim in            its sad plight and the alienating role of the devil.
§      v.28 I beseech you, omitting by God “ the devil does not invoke God”
§      v.30 Many devils had entered him: again a better distinction between the victim and thedevils
§      v.31 abyss : a term from Greek mythology is borrowed to render Sheol(cf 8:31)
§      V.33 omission of the number of swines: already at time of Luke, the loss of so many pigs was a problem
§      Vv 36-37 was saved (not healed as the Gospel parallel): the exorcism becomes aparadigm of integral “Salvation” . There is no longer dilemma between salvation andswines which are not mentioned. Jesus’ rejection in the following verses is no longer due to the choice between pigs and of piety. Also the idea that the time of the Gentiles has not yet come: it will be only in the Acts of the Apostles
§      v.39 note the parallelism between what God has done and what Jesus has done.

Conclusion
®    Literary Conclusion: vivid but confused style of Mk polished by Lk who follows the            general structure and even the details of the Markan account, while Mt reduces the report           to a skeptical outline
®    Theologically : In Mk the stress is on the victory of the Rule of God over that of Satan.         But with the awesome possibility for humanity to nullify this victory: the stronger one          has come (Mk 3: 27).Yet he has still to undergo the “defeat” of the Cross. In Lk the       exorcism becomes a paradigm of Salvation from any form of alienation. In Mt the        account reduced to mere outline becomes one of the several miracles illustrating the       power at work in Jesus.

B. The Stilling of the Storm (Mk 4: 35-41; Mt 8: 23-27; Lk 8: 22-25)

®    Background
The background for this story was possibly the ancient Near East idea of the sea as symbolizing the abode of the powers of chaos and evil that struggle against God. By controlling the storm at sea, Jesus does what God does and defeats the forces of evil. In the OT, God’s work in creation is described as a conquest of the sea or seaDragon(Gen1:2;Ps89:10; Job 9:8; 26:12-13) and is paralleled by his deliverance of Israel (Ps 74:2-14; Is 51:9; Ex 15:8; Is 63:12-13).So the story is not exactly a “nature miracle”; like the exorcisms, illustrates the victory of God through Jesus over the forces of chaos and evil.

1. Mk 4: 35-41

®    Preceding context: This miracle as well as the 3 miracles that ensue, follow the four parables of Mk 4 and is redactionally connected with them by being ascribed to “same day, as evening came” This connections intends to show that the advent of the kingdom is manifested in deeds as well as in words. Jesus goes to the other side of the lake either because of the pressure of the crowd or to find a new sphere of his ministry as in 1:35.

®    Subsequent Context: the exorcism of the Gerasene demoniac with which it is bracketed as another exorcism.
This aspect of exorcism appears in the way in which the miracle is reported in v.39: he rebuked as in 1:25; 9:25 and silence shut up which is the exorcism formula of 1:25. It denotes the binding of a person by a spell so as to make him powerless to harm. The sea is personalized as evil power, which is defeated and subdued by the advent of God’s rule. The miracle cures the lack of faith of the disciples it is not the lack of faith in the power of Jesus but of faith in God’s providence.

2. Mt 8: 23-27
He did not shorten the story as much as usually: he must have found a particular interest in it.
®    Context: the story comes after two sayings on discipleship: it will illustrate the ways of discipleship.

®    Exegesis
§      v.23 - He got into the boat; the disciples followed him. Mk was more natural: the fishermen take the initiative; they take Jesus with them. In Mt, Jesus is the majestic leader and the boat is the boat of the Church, of the community. Temporal statements are wanting.
§      v.24 - Instead of Mk’s great storm of wind. Mt has an earthquake (at sea). The word occurs frequently as part of the description of the eschatological trails.(Mk13: 8, Mt 24:7, Lk 21:11, Mt 27:54, Rev 6: 12, 8:5; 11:13,19; 16:18) the incident becomes a symbol of the plight of the disciples caught in the convulsions of a dying world(cf. Jn 16:21-22)
§      v.25 - Instead of the spontaneous and familiar cry of distress of Mk, we have a liturgical invocation: Lord save us
§      v.26 - In Mk, Jesus does immediately the needful and sets things right .Then only he will question the disciples. In Mt, we first get a short homily. Then will follow the saving deed. The problem is no longer that of a boat in danger. It is the Church in trail till the end of the world and therefore there is time for homilies and call to faith.
§      V.27 - The men: which men? Mt did not even mention like Mk (v.36) that other boats were there. They are “the men who are encountered by the through preaching,”

®                Conclusion: Mt has ecclesiologized the story by making it symbolical of the present position of the community of the disciples in anticipated eschatology and of the faith attitude which will give them strength in these times of trails

3. Lk 8: 22-25
§      He has removed what he considered to be irrelevant details “taken as he was”, “other boats,” the waves beating the boat, the cushion….
§      He has dignified the narrative by removing the too familiar cry: “you do not care…” and reciprocally watering down the reproofs of the disciples: “why afraid?”

v  Conclusion on Exorcisms
1)      As regards historical facts, exorcism takes an important part in the ministry of Jesus. The first miracle recorded by Mk is an exorcism (1:21-28). Three other exorcisms are described in detail (4:35-41; 5:1-20; 9: 14-29). In addition, global mention of exorcising activity is made in 1:34-39; 3:1 (for Jesus) and in 6: 7-13 (for the disciples).In 3:22-30, the significance of his activity is discussed in terms of his exorcisms.
2)      As regards their significance exorcism must be viewed as signs of the advent of God’s rule overthrowing the satanic forces in the apocalyptic outlook prevailing in Jesus’ times. The world and humanity were perceived as enslaved to Satan’s rule, distorted and dehumanized by devilish forces. Viewed in this context, Jesus’ exorcisms appear as an element of the campaign of God’s rule liberating humanity and the cosmos from the evil forces. The exorcisms have not just individual relevance. They have the dimensions of the kingdom: socio- political and ecological.
3)      The Socio political aspect can be developed from a liberationist point of view: devilish dehumanized condition caused by socio-economic injustice; oppressive Roman colonialism symbolized by “legion”, antagonistic to God’s rule, destroyed by the power of the Gospel. It all amounts to giving their relevant names to the “legion” that be devils today’s world, the societal names of sin without losing sight of the deeply personal dimensions of sin.
4)      The ecological aspect appears in the episode of the Gerasene demoniac with the symbolism of the tombs, of the sea that swallows the pigs: sin as death and salvation as life. The “exorcism of the sea” particularly raises the question of the ecological aspect of exorcisms. The idea that Satan’s rule affects the cosmos is not just an outdated superstition. It is just the question of analyzing presently the evil forces that vitiate the universe and go against God’s loving purpose in creation. The development of sciences and techniques, the increasing human control over the forces of nature has too often led to a return to chaos.

4. The community building factor of the multiplication of the loavesand its Eucharistic and kingdom significance.

A Community Miracle: Multiplication of Loaves(Mk 6: 30-44 == Mt 14:13-21 = Lk 9:10-17; Mk 8: 1-10 = Mt 15: 32-39)

1. Old Testament
§      The Bible makes frequent reference to food. Particularly manna, narrated in Ex 16: 1-35, symbolizes all the gifts of God, especially his Word (Dt 8:3; Ps 78:24; Wis 16: 20-26).
§      Eating together at banquet is a sign of fellowship and of covenant: covenant between Isaac and Abimelech (Gen 26:26-30), Jacob and Laban (Gen 31: 54); Sinai covenant sealed with a communion banquet (Ex 24:11).From there derives the meaning of “communion sacrifice” (Lev 3).
§      The eschatological fellowship with God and with the people is symbolized by a banquet (Is 25:6-10: banquet “For all the peoples”; 55:1-2).

2. New Testament
§      For Jesus, eating with the marginalized is a sign of fellowship with them (Lk 5: 29-32; 15:2): “He is a glutton; he loves wine; he is a friend of publicans and sinners” (Lk 7:34). In Lk particularly, banquets are places of revelation and communion (7:36-50; 11:37-52; 14: 1-24).
§      This is the background of the Last Supper, banquet of the New Covenant. The bread is the body and the wine is the blood of the covenant but it remains nonetheless a meal taken together, an anticipation of the eschatological banquet. It will be ‘the breaking of the bread” (Lk 24:31-35; Acts 2:42-46). The first Eucharistic Heresy will be a failure to make of the Eucharist a real Sacrament of Christian Brotherhood (1Cor 11: 17-22).
§      The significance of the miracle of the multiplication of loaves lies in the giving of thanks and in the fact that they had received from him consecrated food. Because he is the future Messiah, this meal becomes Messianic feast. With the morsel of bread which he gives his disciples to distribute to the people, he consecrates them as partakers in the coming Messianic feast and gives them the guarantee that they, who have shared his table in the time of His obscurity, would also share it in the time of His glory. In the prayer he gave thanks not only for the food but also for the coming of the Kingdom of God and all its blessings. It is the counterpart of the Lord’s Prayer where he so strangely inserts the petition for daily bread between the petitions for the coming of the Kingdom and for the deliverance from the peirasmos.

3. Context
§      For the general context, see above. As for the immediate context, it gives the account of strong messianic implications from the outset
§      Both accounts of Mk6 and 8 and particularly of Mt preface the account with a reference to Jesus’ “compassion”, a solemn introduction that invites to look beyond the simple food distribution. The setting in the “desert” (vv 32-35) suggests the feeding of Israel in the desert.
§      Mk 6:34 evokes also the theme of the Good shepherd reference to the messianic promise of the coming of the Shepherd that will gather the scattered flock of Israel (Is 40:11;Ez 34; cf.Lk15; Jn10; Mk 13:27ff; 16:7). The theme of the shepherd surfaces again in the allusion to the “green pastures” of Mk6:39= Ps 23:2
§      In Mt, hearing the violent death of John the Baptist by Herod, Jesus withdraws into a lonely place; where he multiplies the loaves, followed by the walking on the water.
§      Lk places it in the context of the return of the disciples after their mission and the note on Herod followed by Peter’s declaration.

4. Exegetical observations

1. Mk 6: 30-44
§      vv.30-32: necessity of rest for the 12
§      vv.33-34: the crowd and Jesus; the enthusiasm of the crowd, and Jesus’ compassion which moves him to teach.
§      vv.35-39: role of the disciples
§      v.35 disciples’ preoccupation for food
§      v.36 responsibility given to disciples: “You give them……” and their failure.
§      v.39 “companies” by hundred and fifties (= Lk 9: 14): like the Israelites in the desert (Ex 18:25) and the Qumran community, organized by “thousands, hundreds, fifties and tens”. It is not an unruly starving mass; they become the people of God in readiness for the messianic times.
§      v.39b “green grass”: cf. Ps 23:2 allusions to theme of the Good shepherd gathering his flock.
§      v.41: the wording is obviously taken from the Eucharistic celebration. The miracle is an anticipation of the Eucharist and vice versa; the Eucharist carries all the implications of this Messianic banquet. The mention of fish does not tally with Eucharistic symbolism. The fish has been given different explanations (NJBC p. 610). Is it not simply a survival of a concrete recollection that resisted Eucharistic allegorizing and points to the historicity of the account?
§      v.41b ministerial role of disciples who now do by Christ power what they could not do themselves. In Mt 14:19, the “ministerial” role of the disciples is brought out ( “ they gave to the crowds”) just as their incomprehension had been toned down in v. 17
§      v 42  they were satisfied; the abundance of the Messianic times (Is 55:1)
§      v. 43 broken pieces also a Eucharistic term acc.to Dida 9. The number 12 may suggest the totality of the people of Israel: not only those present are invited to take part in the Messianic banquet: those who are not physically present have also a share.

2. Mt 14:13-21
§      v.13 It is the news of the killing of John the Baptist ,which makes Jesus withdraw to a lonely place.
§      v. 14 Jesus’ compassion for the crowd manifests itself in the act of healing; sheep – shepherd image is absent
§      v.16 “they have no need to go” is emphatic.
§      v.21: mention of women and children




3. Lk 9:10-17
§      v.10 precision of place: Bethsaida
§      v.11 The Kingdom of God is the content of his teaching; healing is also mentioned.

4. Mk8 and par
The miracle seems to take place in Decapolis, and it is Jesus who expresses his concern for the crowd.
§      v.2-3 the compassion is more humanistic than in Mk6; the compassion is expressed in direct speech. But the theme of the Good Shepherd has disappeared as well as the green grass, the arrangement by hundreds and fifties, i.e. the allusion to the OT.
§      vv.6-7 the fish kept separately: clearer Eucharistic structure.
§      v.8 in v.4 ,the question is “How to satisfy so many?” and in v.8, it is realized.
§      vv.5 and 8 ‘loaves’ and ‘7 baskets full’ 7 may symbolize the plentitude of the Nations as 12 symbolizes Israel.
Mk 6 may represent a Judeo-Christian tradition with Mk8 being a later Hellenistic Version.

5. Mt 15: 32-39 the miracle takes place in Galilee; otherwise, not much divergence from Mk.

Conclusion
®    Message
a)      Not a “nature miracle” but a “community miracle”. The episode does not deal wit ha marvelous transformation of an object but with the gathering of the Messianic people by the Good Shepherd and his ministers. The episode evokes the themes connected with the formation of the people of God: covenant, abiding presence of the merciful Lord, joy of the anticipated heavenly banquet, togetherness of an effective Koinonia.
b)      The obvious Eucharistic symbolism means that the Eucharist also has all the significance of this community- building act of Jesus.

®    Historicity
a)      The explanation popularized by Barclay belongs to the outdated rationalistic approach of the 19th century. It is not an explanation of the text but of a story we invent to supply what we consider to be the deficiencies of the text.
b)      Hunter suggests that everything could be historical except the 12/7 baskets left over, the alternative being that the miracle really happened.
c)      John suggests that it was a critical turning point for Jesus (equivalent of temptation of loaves) and for the people (temptation to make Jesus King)

Conclusion on Jesus’ Miracles in the Synoptic Gospels

®    Jesus’ miracles in the Synoptic Gospels must be viewed in the anthropological context of a world- past and present- filled with wonders. Viewed in this context, the significance of the miracles does not reside in their uniqueness or their greatness. It must be found in the meaning they have as message. They are words in action (St.Augustine). They are the factual expressions of the good news of the advent of God’s rule to the poor. The miracles of Jesus are not just great; they are meaningful.
®    Jesus’ miracles must be viewed in the cultural context of the apocalyptic outlook prevailing in Jesus’ times. The world and humanity were perceived as enslaved to Satan’s rule, distorted and dehumanized by devilish forces. Viewed in this context, Jesus’ miracles appear as an element of the campaign of God’s rule liberating humanity and the cosmos from the evil forces. The Miracles of Jesus are not just a matter of healing but of saving
®    Jesus’ miracles must be viewed in the literary context of miracle stories in general. Viewed in this context, they show the features of the various literary forms of miracle stories (healing, exorcism, pronouncement stories). But more significant are the breaks in the structure, emphasizing faith (Jairus, the women), forgiveness of sin (paralytic), acceptance and rejection of Jesus (the Gerasene demoniac). The miracles of Jesus are not just stories; they are Gospel
®    The miracle of Jesus must be seen in the redactional context of the theology of each evangelist: theology of discipleship and of the Cross in Mk, theology of the church in Mt, theology of salvation and of its stages in Lk. The miracles of Jesus are the entire Gospel of Mt, Mk, Lk in a nutshell.
®    When we understand the miracles of Jesus in this way, the point of issue of the preacher consists in interpreting this factual language, to translate in today’s language the advent of God’s rule and its challenge to conversion, to name the evil forces, which meet us today as they met Jesus.

  Fr. Albert Leo, CPPS

Precious Blood Missionaries