Episode 142: 19th Sunday of Ordinary Time, Year C
In today’s episode, we focus on several details from the second reading and Gospel reading for this upcoming 19th Sunday of Ordinary Time, Year C that are relevant for doing apologetics. The first details found in the second reading, which is taken from Hebrews 11:1-2, 8-19 have to do with the topics of justification and implicit faith. The details in the Gospel reading, taken from Luke 12:32-48 have to do with the doctrine of hell and the principle of proportionality when it comes to punishment.
Readings: Click Here
Looking for Sunday Catholic Word Merchandise? Look no further! Click Here
Hey everyone,
Welcome to The Sunday Catholic Word, a podcast where we reflect on the upcoming Sunday Mass readings and pick out the details that are relevant for explaining and defending our Catholic faith.
I’m Dr. Karlo Broussard, staff apologist and speaker for Catholic Answers, and the host for this podcast.
In today’s episode, we’re going to focus on several details from the second reading and Gospel reading for this upcoming 19th Sunday of Ordinary Time, Year C that are relevant for doing apologetics. The first details found in the second reading, which is taken from Hebrews 11:1-2, 8-19 have to do with the topics of justification and implicit faith. The details in the Gospel reading, taken from Luke 12:32-48 have to do with the doctrine of hell and the principle of proportionality when it comes to punishment.
Let’s start with the second reading, again, taken from Hebrews 11:1-2, 8-19. I’ll read the passage in its entirety. The author writes,
Faith is the realization of what is hoped for
and evidence of things not seen.
Because of it the ancients were well attested.
By faith Abraham obeyed when he was called to go out to a place
that he was to receive as an inheritance;
he went out, not knowing where he was to go.
By faith he sojourned in the promised land as in a foreign country,
dwelling in tents with Isaac and Jacob, heirs of the same promise;
for he was looking forward to the city with foundations,
whose architect and maker is God.
By faith he received power to generate,
even though he was past the normal age
—and Sarah herself was sterile—
for he thought that the one who had made the promise was
trustworthy.
So it was that there came forth from one man,
himself as good as dead,
descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky
and as countless as the sands on the seashore.
All these died in faith.
They did not receive what had been promised
but saw it and greeted it from afar
and acknowledged themselves to be strangers and aliens on earth,
for those who speak thus show that they are seeking a homeland.
If they had been thinking of the land from which they had come,
they would have had opportunity to return.
But now they desire a better homeland, a heavenly one.
Therefore, God is not ashamed to be called their God,
for he has prepared a city for them.
By faith Abraham, when put to the test, offered up Isaac,
and he who had received the promises was ready to offer his only son,
of whom it was said,
“Through Isaac descendants shall bear your name.”
He reasoned that God was able to raise even from the dead,
and he received Isaac back as a symbol.
Okay, I mentioned in the introduction that the apologetical topic which comes to the fore is justification. But the focus, in particular, is justification as a process—that’s to say, justification is not a one-time event of the past but has ongoing dimensions to it.
Consider what the author says in verse 8: “By faith Abraham obeyed when he was called to go out to a place that he was to receive as an inheritance.” This is a reference to Genesis 12:1-3. And the faith that Abraham exercised in Genesis 12 was a faith, which according to Hebrews 11:2, 6, is the kind that gave Abraham “divine approval” (v.2) and made him pleasing to God (v.6). This means Abraham responded to God’s call with a faith that justifies—a saving faith. So, Abraham was justified in Genesis 12.
Now, this is important because Paul teaches us that Abraham was also justified later in Genesis 15. In Romans 4:1-5, Paul gives us his teaching on Abraham’s justification and quotes Genesis 15:6 as the reference point. Paul writes,
“For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. 3 For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness.” 4 Now to one who works, his wages are not reckoned as a gift but as his due. 5 And to one who does not work but trusts him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is reckoned as righteousness.”
Notice Paul roots Abraham’s justification in the statement, “Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness.” This is a quote from Genesis 15:6.
So, Abraham was justified in Genesis 12 per Hebrews 11:6-8 and in Genesis 15:6 per Paul’s teaching in Romans 4:1-5.
But that’s not all.
In verse 17, the author of Hebrews references the faith that Abraham exercised when he offered up Isaac: “By faith Abraham, when put to the test, offered up Isaac.” This is a reference to Genesis 22. Given what we’ve said already about the type of faith the author of Hebrews envisions Abraham exercising here, we can conclude that Abraham was justified as well in Genesis 22.
This maps on perfectly with what James says in James 2:21: “Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he offered his son Isaac upon the altar?” Both James and the author of Hebrews teach us that Abraham was justified in Genesis 22.
So, Abraham was justified in Genesis 12, Genesis 15, and Genesis 22. This is significant because many Protestants believe justification is a one-time event of the past that is complete and not subject to preservation and growth. The example of Abraham proves this view to be false.
Now, a Protestant may counter that the reference to Abraham’s offering of Isaac doesn’t count because the “justification” that James speaks of there is not justification in the sight of God but rather justification in the sight of men. After describing Abraham’s offering of Isaac, James begins his concluding sentence about Abraham’s faith with “you see”: “You see that faith was active along with his works” (v. 22a). Perhaps James is saying Abraham’s offering of Isaac confirms for us that he had faith—not that his works justified him in the sight of God.
Even if this were true, we still have evidence for the process of justification by way of Abraham’s justification in Genesis 12 and then again in Genesis 15. But, as I argue in my book Meeting the Protestant Response, the assumption made in this counter argument isn’t true.
James explicitly teaches that Abraham’s faith was “completed by works” (v. 22b) by offering Isaac. The Greek word used for “complete,” teleioō, means “to complete, bring to an end, finish, accomplish . . . to make perfect.”[i] How can Abraham’s faith be made complete if he is justified merely in the sight of men? If Abraham’s work of offering Isaac confirmed merely for us that he had faith, then Abraham’s work would have no effect whatsoever upon his faith, and still less make it “complete.” But this contradicts what James teaches in verse 22.
Furthermore, James’s emphasis on Abraham’s faith being made perfect indicates that it’s the same faith that justified him when he first believed. James speaks of Abraham being justified by his obedience in verse 21 and then indicates that his faith was completed by works in verse 22. And without breaking his train of thought, James quotes Genesis 15:6 in verse 23: “Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness.” All Protestants agree that this event refers to Abraham being justified in God’s sight.
James quotes Genesis 15:6 in direct connection with Abraham’s justification by works and gives no indication that the two must be viewed in contrast with each other. This tells us that the justification James has in mind in verse 21 (Abraham’s justification by works) is the same justification spoken of in Genesis 15:6 (“Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness”). It’s a justification in the sight of God, not men.
Abraham’s justification in the sight of God is further confirmed by Abraham being called “the friend of God” as a result of his obedient action. For James, Abraham’s offering of Isaac set off a chain reaction. His faith was “completed by his works,” the “Scripture was fulfilled” whereby Abraham was reckoned as righteous, and he was called “the friend of God.”
We know that God is the one valuing what was done, because after the angel intervenes and stops Abraham from killing Isaac, God says, “For now I know that you fear God, seeing you have not withheld your son, your only son, from me” (Gen. 22:12). God valued what Abraham had done, and thus Abraham stood justified in God’s sight. God reiterates his approval of Abraham in Isaiah 41:8, when he calls Abraham “my friend.”
So if Abraham was justified in the sight of God by offering Isaac, which happens in Gensis 22, then we have further evidence that justification is not a one-time event in the past but a process. Furthermore, this would provide us evidence that our justification by works that James speaks of (2:24) is like Abraham’s justification, justification by works in the sight of God.
The next detail in this second reading that I think is worth highlighting is the author’s affirmation that all the Old Testament holy ones that he lists in Hebrews 11 died with justifying faith. He writes,
All these died in faith.
They did not receive what had been promised
but saw it and greeted it from afar
This provides biblical justification for the Catholic notion of the implicit desire for baptism. The Church teaches that a person be saved without the sacrament of baptism on account of a desire for the sacrament. For some, this desire is explicit, like in the case of catechumens. The Catechism talks about this in paragraph 1259.
However, throughout the theological tradition it’s been taught that some could have an implicit desire for the sacrament, and thus be saved on account of such an implicit desire. The Catechism also address this in paragraph 1261, stating, “Every man who is ignorant of the Gospel of Christ and of his Church, but seeks the truth and does the will of God in accordance with his understanding of it, can be saved. It may be supposed that such persons would have desired Baptism explicitly if they had known its necessity.”
The “saints” in the Old Testament that the author of Hebrews lists in chapter 11 would fall within this category of those who have an implicit desire for baptism. As the author says, “They did not receive what had been promised but . . . greeted it from afar,” the implication being they had a desire to whatever God would reveal in the fullness of time.
So, this idea of some outside the visible boundaries of the Catholic Church being saved on account of an implicit desire for the sacraments of salvation has roots in the teaching of the Epistle of Hebrews.
Okay, let’s now turn to the Gospel reading, which, again, is taken from Luke 12:32-48. This is the parable of the faithful/watchful servant and the unfaithful/unwatchful servant. I’m not going to read the whole passage. But here’s the relevant portion of the passage that I want to focus on (vv.45-46):
if that servant says to himself,
‘My master is delayed in coming,’
and begins to beat the menservants and the maidservants,
to eat and drink and get drunk,
then that servant’s master will come
on an unexpected day and at an unknown hour
and will punish the servant severely
and assign him a place with the unfaithful.
Now, notice Jesus says the unfaithful servant will be assigned a place with the unfaithful. What does this imply? He will not be with the faithful. And presumably not among the faithful in the master’s house. Thus, the unfaithful servant is excluded from the community of the faithful in the master’s house on account of his sin. Furthermore, there’s no indication that this unfaithful servant will be permitted back into the master’s house with the community of the faithful.
What do we call the permanent exclusion from the community of God’s faithful? Hell.
Thus, Jesus affirms the real possibility of hell, which cuts against any idea that hell is incompatible with the revelation of Jesus.
Conclusion
Well, my friends, that’s all I have for this episode of the Sunday Catholic Word. The second reading for this upcoming 19th Sunday of Ordinary Time, Year C doesn’t sell us short when it comes to material for apologetics.
- We have evidence that justification is a process and not a one-time event of the past,
- We have at least a principle that roots the idea of the implicit desire for baptism, and
- We have evidence that Jesus doesn’t view hell as incompatible with his love.
As always, I want to thank you for subscribing to the podcast. And please be sure to tell your friends about it and invite them to subscribe as well through any podcast platform that they use. You can also access the archived episodes of the Sunday Catholic Word at sundaycatholicword.com.
You might also want to check out the other great podcasts in our Catholic Answers podcast network: Trent Horn’s The Counsel of Trent, Joe Heschmeyer’s Shameless Popery, and Jimmy Akin’s The Jimmy Akin podcast,” all of which can be found at catholic.com. And if you want to follow more of my own work, check out my website at karlobroussard.com
One last thing: if you’re interested in getting some cool mugs and stickers with my logo, “Mr. Sunday podcast,” go to shop.catholic.com.
I hope you have a blessed 19th Sunday of Ordinary Time, Year C. Until next time, God Bless.
[i] A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 996.