Episode 143: 20th Sunday of Ordinary Time, Year C
In today’s episode, we focus four details in the second reading and Gospel reading for this upcoming 20th Sunday of Ordinary Time, Year C that relate to apologetics. Three of the four come from the second reading, which is taken from Hebrews 12:1-4, and the related apologetical topics are: the Communion of Saints, the doctrine of eternal security, and the divinity of Jesus. The detail in the Gospel reading, which is taken from Luke 12:49-53, has to do once again with the divinity of Jesus and the importance of truth.
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 four details in the second reading and Gospel reading for this upcoming 20th Sunday of Ordinary Time, Year C that relate to apologetics. Three of the four come from the second reading, which is taken from Hebrews 12:1-4, and the related apologetical topics are: the Communion of Saints, the doctrine of eternal security, and the divinity of Jesus. The detail in the Gospel reading, which is taken from Luke 12:49-53, has to do once again with the divinity of Jesus and the importance of truth.
Let’s start with the second reading, again, taken from Hebrews 12:1-4. The author writes,
Since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses,
let us rid ourselves of every burden and sin that clings to us
and persevere in running the race that lies before us
while keeping our eyes fixed on Jesus,
the leader and perfecter of faith.
For the sake of the joy that lay before him
he endured the cross, despising its shame,
and has taken his seat at the right of the throne of God.
Consider how he endured such opposition from sinners,
in order that you may not grow weary and lose heart.
In your struggle against sin
you have not yet resisted to the point of shedding blood.
The first detail that I want to highlight is the “cloud of witnesses.” This is a detail that Catholics commonly appeal to as support for the communion of the saints and for the intercession of the saints.
That these witnesses are in heaven is signified by the “cloud.” The cloud is an image that’s familiar within Scripture and represents God’s glory. Moreover, in the previous chapter, chapter 11, the author identified who these witnesses are: the Old Testament righteous saints who modeled the faith that makes us pleasing to God.
Now, for the Catholic who appeals to this verse for the intercession of the saints, the reasoning usually goes something like this: Why would these witnesses be witnessing Christians on earth journey to salvation without interceding for them? It doesn’t make sense, so it seems!
However, a Protestant might counter and say, “Wait a minute! You’re assuming that these “witnesses” are called “witnesses” because they’re witnessing Christians on earth. But given the previous chapter, the author is merely saying that those OT saints were “witnesses” to faith. Therefore, this can’t be referenced to make a biblical argument for the intercession of the saints.”
What can we say in response?
Well, even if we concede for argument’s sake that they are called “witnesses” because they witnessed to faith, the author still envisions them “witnessing” us Christians on earth because he describes Christians on earth running a race keeping our sights set on the goal: Jesus Christ. The imagery of running a race evokes the great crowd within an arena cheering the racers on. Given that the author speaks of the “witnesses” (the saints of old) and then immediately describes Christians running the race, it’s not much of a stretch to infer that these “witnesses” make up the crowd cheering us on in our race. And if they’re cheering us on, then we can reasonably infer that they would be praying for us as well.
Here’s what the Catechism of the Catholic Church has to say on this:
The witnesses who have preceded us into the kingdom, especially those whom the Church recognizes as saints, share in the living tradition of prayer by the example of their lives, the transmission of their writings, and their prayer today. They contemplate God, praise him and constantly care for those whom they have left on earth. When they entered into the joy of their Master, they were “put in charge of many things.”42 Their intercession is their most exalted service to God’s plan. We can and should ask them to intercede for us and for the whole world (par. 2683).
Okay, let’s now look at the second detail in this reading from Hebrews 12:1-4: the teaching that Jesus is the “leader and perfecter of our faith.” Most commentaries point out that “leader” here is a bad translation. The Greek word is better translated as “originator” or “author.”
Now, some Protestants appeal to this passage as evidence for the belief that once we’re saved, we’re always saved. The late Norman Geisler made this argument in his essay “A Moderate Calvinist View” in the book Four Views on Eternal Security (pg. 76). He writes,
“[Jesus]e begins [our faith], and he completes it (Phil. 1:6). Indeed, the author of Hebrews calls it “eternal redemption” (Heb. 9:12). It certainly cannot be eternal salvation if it lasts only for a short time and if one can lose it. And this eternal salvation was procured “once for all” some two thousand years before we were born.” (pg. 76).
There seems to be two arguments here. First, Jesus will complete what he begins, which for Geisler, means that the salvation Jesus gives a person initially he will finally give the person at their death. The second argument is that eternal redemption/life wouldn’t be eternal if it could be lost.
For a response to the second argument, check out my article “Don’t Take Eternal Life for Granted” at catholic.com. Concerning the first argument—the idea that whatever Jesus starts he will finish, I offer the following thoughts.
First, Geisler fails to realize that there is no faith in heaven. Recall St. Paul’s teaching in 1 Corinthians 13:12-13: “For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall understand fully, even as I have been fully understood.” The context of this statement is the contrast between love and faith and hope. He teaches us that love is the greatest among the three and that it never ends, the implication being that faith and hope do end in heaven. Concerning hope, you can’t hope for that which you possess. In heaven, we possess the good, God, that we currently long for. Concerning faith, you can’t believe that which you know directly. In heaven, we will know God directly, and thus faith will pass away.
Now, the author of Hebrews tells us that Jesus is the author and perfecter of faith. This can’t possibly refer to Jesus giving us final salvation because there is no perfect faith in final salvation, since final salvation is heaven itself. The perfection of faith, whatever that is, must only apply to this life.
As to what the author is referring to, he’s teaching us that at whatever stage we’re at in the life of faith, the faith itself and its exercise is a gift. It has its origin in Jesus—he gives it to us. It is preserved by Jesus. And Jesus causes it to grow insofar as he moves us to perform acts of faith. For these reasons, we can say that Jesus is the author and perfecter of our faith.
Second, even if we grant for argument’s sake that we could apply this to final salvation, the mere affirmation that Jesus is the author and perfecter of a person’s faith who dies in friendship with Christ doesn’t entail that all those who have faith initially are secure in their salvation. These are logically two different conceptual ideas. Let me explain.
If Peter dies in friendship with Christ and receives the eternal life of heaven, who is ultimately responsible for Peter initially receiving that faith and dying with that faith to receive final salvation? Jesus. Thus, Peter can rightfully say, “The faith within me had its origin and perfection in Jesus Christ.”
But that doesn’t logically entail the idea that Judas who had the same kind of faith initially died with that faith perfected in friendship with Christ, such that he died receiving the eternal life of heaven, like Peter. It’s logically possible that he had such faith but then lost it and thus died outside of friendship with Christ.
The author is not teaching that whoever has faith Christ will definitively secure the eternal life of heaven for him. Rather, the author is teaching us that whoever begins in faith and ends in faith to receive eternal salvation does so because of Jesus, the author and perfecter of faith.
Thus, a Protestant can’t appeal to Jesus being the author and perfecter of our faith as evidence for the doctrine of eternal security.
A third detail worthy of highlight in this second reading is the author’s teaching that Jesus is “seated at the right of the throne of God.” I submit that within the Christian tradition, this became not only a signal that Jesus is the Messiah—given that Psalm 110:1 speaks of the Messiah sitting at the right hand of God, but that it also signaled his divinity.
Recall from Jesus’ trial in Mark 14:63-64, the high priest charged Jesus of blasphemy in response to Jesus who said, “You will see the Son of man sitting at the right hand of Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven.”
Given this backdrop, its likely that when the author of Hebrews speaks of Jesus sitting at the right of the throne of God he’s thinking of this revelation given by Jesus at the trial, and consequently views it as signaling Jesus’ divinity.
Well, that does it for the second reading. Let’s now turn briefly to the Gospel, which, again, is taken from Luke 12:49-53. Jesus says,
“I have come to set the earth on fire,
and how I wish it were already blazing!
There is a baptism with which I must be baptized,
and how great is my anguish until it is accomplished!
Do you think that I have come to establish peace on the earth?
No, I tell you, but rather division.
From now on a household of five will be divided,
three against two and two against three;
a father will be divided against his son
and a son against his father,
a mother against her daughter
and a daughter against her mother,
a mother-in-law against her daughter-in-law
and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law.”
I think here too we have a hint at Jesus’ divinity. The gist of Jesus’ teaching is that loyalty to him is even more important than family unity. Now, think about that. How could relationship with him be more important than familial relationships? The only one who rightful claim over familial relationships is the one who is the author of such relationships—namely, God.
Thus, for Jesus to claim such authority over families is a claim to be God.
Now, a question often arises here that’s not particularly apologetical in nature but nevertheless a good question: “Is Jesus advocating for division within families? I thought Jesus came to bring peace?”
First, Jesus is not advocating for division as an end in and of itself. Rather, he’s teaching that friendship with him is most important, even if that means family will reject you for it.
Secondly, we must note that it’s not Jesus, who is truth, that causes the division. Rather, it’s the choice among those who choose to not live in accord with the truth. So, the division is an effect of sin, not Jesus.
Thirdly, the peace that Jesus promised to give us is the peace that we have with Father in being justified—that’s to say, not being subject to condemnation. And that peace can only be had in living in accord with the truth.
So, we shouldn’t expect perfect unity with family members and friends unless we have that unity in Christ.
Conclusion
Well, my friends, that’s all I have for this episode of the Sunday Catholic Word. The second reading and Gospel reading for this upcoming 20th Sunday of Ordinary Time, Year C give us quite a bit to think about when it comes to doing apologetics.
- We have material to prompt us to think about and defend the intercession of the saints,
- We have material that gives us an opportunity to talk about the doctrine of ‘once saved, always saved,’
- We have material that shows us the early Christians believed Jesus was divine, and
- We have material that shows us Jesus himself believed he was divine.
- Finally, we have material that prompts us to think about whether we’re willing to pay the high price of losing even family over fidelity to Christ.
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 20th Sunday of Ordinary Time, Year C. Until next time, God Bless.