Daily Scripture Readings

Monday (July19, 2010)*

Daily Office Lectionary, The Book of Common Prayer, the Episcopal Church in the U.S.A., 1979; cf. The Revised Common Lectionary (RCL), Abingdon Press, 1992

Daily Lectionary, Book of Common Worship, the Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A., 1993

Daily Lectionary, Book of Worship Inter-Lutheran Commission on Worship, c. 1978 (2002 printing) ‡

http://www.satucket.com/lectionary/index.htm

http://www.pcusa.org/lectionary

YOU MAY NEED TO COPY AND PASTE THESE URLs IN YOUR BROWSER

‡ Daily Lectionary, Evangelical Lutheran Worship, ELCA, 2006. In the Evangelical Lutheran Worship book of 2006, the Daily Lectionary (pp. 1121-1153) is revised to correlate with the Sunday Lectionary (the Revised Common Lectionary) on the three year cycle: Year A, Year B (now current), Year C. “The readings are chosen so that the days leading up to Sunday (Thursday through Saturday) prepare for the Sunday readings. The days flowing out from Sunday (Monday through Wednesday) reflect upon the Sunday readings” (p. 1121).

Unless otherwise indicated, the scripture texts quoted are from The New Revised Standard Version (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers), 1989.

Monday

AM Psalm 41, 52

PM Psalm 44

Joshua 7:1-13

Rom. 13:8-14

Matt. 26:36-46

Macrina:

http://www.satucket.com/lectionary/Macrina.htm

Psalm 119:97-104

Ecclesiasticus 51:13-22; Philippians 3:7-11; Matthew 11:27-30

[Adelaide Teague Case]

http://www.satucket.com/lectionary/adelaide_case.htm

Psalm 119:33-40

Proverbs 4:1-9; Hebrews 5:11–6:1; Mark 4:21-25

Eucharistic Readings:

Micah 6:1-8; Psalm 14;

Matt. 12:38-42

Monday

Morning: Psalms 135; 145

Joshua 7:1-13

Rom. 13:8-14

Matt. 26:36-46

Evening: Psalms 97; 112

Monday

Morning Pss.: 5, 145

Numbers 32:1-6, 16-27

Romans 8:26-30

Matthew 23:1-12

Evening Pss.: 82, 29

 

Year C Daily Readings

Psalm 119:97-104

Exodus 18:1-12

Colossians 1:27-2:7

* Monday in the week of the Eighth Sunday after Pentecost, references for the week of the Sunday closest to July 20, Year Two

 

For the Lutheran Readings for today, and comments on them, see the Episcopal Readings in the file for July 5, 2010, two weeks ago. These traditions differ in relating readings to the weeks following Pentecost.

 

Episcopal and Presbyterian Readings:

 

Joshua 7:1-13

 

The Sin of Achan and Its Punishment

 

            7:1 But the Israelites broke faith in regard to the devoted things: Achan son of Carmi son of Zabdi son of Zerah, of the tribe of Judah, took some of the devoted things; and the anger of the LORD burned against the Israelites.

            2 Joshua sent men from Jericho to Ai, which is near Beth-aven, east of Bethel, and said to them, “Go up and spy out the land.” And the men went up and spied out Ai. 3 Then they returned to Joshua and said to him, “Not all the people need go up; about two or three thousand men should go up and attack Ai. Since they are so few, do not make the whole people toil up there.” 4 So about three thousand of the people went up there; and they fled before the men of Ai. 5 The men of Ai killed about thirty-six of them, chasing them from outside the gate as far as Shebarim and killing them on the slope. The hearts of the people melted and turned to water.

            6 Then Joshua tore his clothes, and fell to the ground on his face before the ark of the LORD until the evening, he and the elders of Israel; and they put dust on their heads. 7 Joshua said, “Ah, Lord GOD! Why have you brought this people across the Jordan at all, to hand us over to the Amorites so as to destroy us? Would that we had been content to settle beyond the Jordan! 8 O Lord, what can I say, now that Israel has turned their backs to their enemies! 9 The Canaanites and all the inhabitants of the land will hear of it, and surround us, and cut off our name from the earth. Then what will you do for your great name?”

            10 The LORD said to Joshua, “Stand up! Why have you fallen upon your face? 11 Israel has sinned; they have transgressed my covenant that I imposed on them. They have taken some of the devoted things; they have stolen, they have acted deceitfully, and they have put them among their own belongings. 12 Therefore the Israelites are unable to stand before their enemies; they turn their backs to their enemies, because they have become a thing devoted for destruction themselves. I will be with you no more, unless you destroy the devoted things from among you. 13 Proceed to sanctify the people, and say, ‘Sanctify yourselves for tomorrow; for thus says the LORD, the God of Israel, “There are devoted things among you, O Israel; you will be unable to stand before your enemies until you take away the devoted things from among you.” (Joshua 7:1-13, NRSV)

 

The following comments are repeated here from July 21, 2008 (Monday in the week of the Sunday closest to July 20, Year Two), when comments were repeated with editing and supplement from July 24, 2006 (Monday in the week of the Sunday closest to July 20, Year Two), when some comments were repeated with revision from July 19, 2004, in an email sent July 19, 2004, for July 19-25.

 

An overwhelming victory at Jericho is followed by a stunning defeat at Ai (yfahA, h~‘ay, apparently meaning “the Ruin,” though William L. Holladay distinguishes the place name from the word, yf9 (‘ î) (A Concise Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament, 1971, 10th corrected impression, 1988, s.v. * yfa, ‘ay, a place name, and yf9, ‘ î, “heap of stones, of rubble”). Even so, K. Lawson Younger says, “The name Ai (modern et-Tell) means ‘the ruin.’ The site, 3 km (2 mi) east of Bethel, was uninhabited during the Late Bronze age [to which the date of Joshua is usually assigned]” (NOAB, 3rd ed., augmented, 2007, on Josh. 7:2). Richard D. Nelson, says that “et-Tell” is “Arabic for ‘the Ruin’,” and adds, “During the period described in Joshua, et-Tell was at most a small unwalled village nestled amid the remains of a long-ruined city walled city from the third millennium BCE.” However, in spite of this concession, he adds, “As in the case of Jericho, this narrative [i.e. the two assaults on Ai] is folklore” (HarperCollins Study Bible, rev. ed., 2006, on Josh. 7:1-26). But we will assume that the narrator has reliable sources. One may at least wonder why the Israelites would report this sin and failure as “folklore”.

 

The narrator, of course, knows the outcome of the assault on Ai, and tells us before he reports the fact of the defeat. In the victory over Jericho, “Israel broke faith in regard to the devoted things [i.e. things devoted to destruction]: Achan son of Carmi son of Zabdi son of Zerah, of the tribe of Judah, took some of the devoted things; and the anger of the LORD burned against the Israelites” (Josh. 7:1). According to Nelson, “Details about Achan’s family background portend the procedure by which his crime will be uncovered (vv. 16-18)” (op. cit., on Josh. 7:1). The assault on Ai is preceded, as was the assault on Jericho, by sending spies to assess the situation. “Joshua sent men from Jericho to Ai, which is near Beth-aven, east of Bethel, and said to them, ‘Go up and spy out the land.’ And the men went up and spied out Ai” (v. 2). But these spies miscalculated the situation in their report on prospects for defeating Ai. “Not all the people need go up,” they reported; “about two or three thousand men should go up and attack Ai. Since they are so few, do not make the whole people toil up there” (v. 3). According to Robert C. Dentan and Leslie J. Hoppe, “The cause of Israel’s defeat is a too-optimistic report on Ai’s defenses” (NOAB, 2nd ed., on Josh. 7:3-5). According to Carol Meyers, “The attack on Ai does not mention God’s presence; the result is a severe routing” (The Jewish Study Bible, 2004, on Josh. 7:3-5). On the basis of the spies’ report, “about three thousand of the people went up there” (v. 4a), but the result was that “they fled before the men of Ai” (v. 4b). We are told that “the men of Ai killed about thirty-six of them, chasing them from outside the gate as far as Shebarim and killing them on the slope. The hearts of the people melted and turned to water” (v. 5). The place name ‘Shebarim’ occurs only here in the Bible (cf. Holladay, Lexicon, s.v. Myr9bAw4, š ev~rîm); it’s location is unknown. According to the International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, vol. IV, 1988, reprinted 1991, “Possibly the word is a common noun (note the definite article) meaning ‘the quarries.’ The LXX, however, reads a verbal form (so Syr. Pesh., Tg.) from š~bar; ‘break’ ” (s.v. Shebarim)

 

If, as noted above, “the hearts of the people melted and turned to water” at the news of the defeat (v. 5), Joshua took it as hard (or harder than they). “Then Joshua tore his clothes, and fell to the ground on his face before the ark of the LORD until the evening, he and the elders of Israel; and they put dust on their heads” (v. 6). Younger points out the “traditional expressions of grief” used here, “tore his clothes . . . dust on their heads” (op. cit., on v. 6). Joshua questions the LORD in a tone that reminds us of Israel’s earlier complaints (e.g. Exod. 16:3):

 

Ah, Lord GOD! Why have you brought this people across the Jordan at all, to hand us over to the Amorites so as to destroy us? Would that we had been content to settle beyond the Jordan! O Lord, what can I say, now that Israel has turned their backs to their enemies! The Canaanites and all the inhabitants of the land will hear of it, and surround us, and cut off our name from the earth. Then what will you do for your great name? (Josh. 7:7-9, NRSV)

 

According to Younger, the word “Amorites” is used “here [as] a generic designation of the inhabitants of the land (see 24:15)” (ibid., on v. 7). But the LORD rebukes Joshua, “Stand up! Why have you fallen upon your face?” (v. 10), and explains, “Israel has sinned; they have transgressed my covenant that I imposed on them. They have taken some of the devoted things; they have stolen, they have acted deceitfully, and they have put them among their own belongings” (v. 11). By taking things put under the ban, they have put themselves under the ban. The LORD explains: “Therefore the Israelites are unable to stand before their enemies; they turn their backs to their enemies, because they have become a thing devoted for destruction themselves. I will be with you no more, unless you destroy the devoted things from among you” (v. 12). He tells Joshua to have the people sanctify themselves and prepare for the next day’s trial (v. 13). K. Lawson Younger explains the “cherem” principle of “holy war”: “There has been a covenant violation: a theft of God’s property, the devoted things (‘cherem’) from Jericho. Only sanctifying themselves and removing the devoted things [v. 13] can prevent Israel from being a devoted thing [v. 12]” (NOAB, 3rd ed. augmented, 2007, on Josh. 7:11-13). Joshua is to explain to the people as he instructs them about the remedy. “Proceed to sanctify the people, and say, ‘Sanctify yourselves for tomorrow; for thus says the LORD, the God of Israel, “There are devoted things among you, O Israel; you will be unable to stand before your enemies until you take away the devoted things from among you” ’ ” (v. 13).

 

Today’s reading breaks off at this point, and tomorrow’s moves on to the second battle of Ai, this time victorious for Israel (8:1-22). But in the meantime we note the process of selecting the guilty party, selecting from the tribes, and from the selected tribe the clans, and from the selected clan the households, and from the selected household, the individual (v. 14). In each case the “tribe” or “clan” or “household” or individual whom “the LORD takes” is selected, says Younger, “by the casting of lots (a device that when thrown yields the proper yes-or-no answer through divine assistance)” (ibid., on v. 14). By application of this process the tribe of Judah, the clan of Zerahites, the family of Zabdi, and finally, Achan son of Carmi was “taken” (vv. 16-18). As directed by Joshua (v. 19), Achan confesses (vv. 20-21). When messengers verify the confession by discovering the objects hidden in the ground under Achan’s tent (v. 22), and bring them forth (v. 23), then “Joshua and all Israel with him took Achan . . . with the silver, the mantle, and the bar of gold, with his sons and daughters, with his oxen, donkeys, and sheep, and his tent and all that he had; and brought them up to the valley of Achor” (v. 24). The consequence is described graphically: “Joshua said, ‘Why did you bring trouble on us (UnTAr4kaf3, ‘ a kart~nû)? The LORD is bringing trouble on you (j~r4KAf4y1, ya‘kork~ ) today.’ And all Israel stoned him to death; they burned them with fire, cast stones on them, and raised over him a great heap of stones that remains to this day” (vv. 25-26a). As we are told that “therefore the LORD turned from his burning anger” (v. 26b) we are also informed of the place name. “Therefore that place to this day is called the Valley of Achor (rOkfA qm,fe, ‘‘meq ‘~kôr)” (v. 26c). The place name “Achor” (rOkfe, ‘~kôr) resembles the verb for “bringing trouble on,” used here of Achan’s actions and the LORD’s response (cf. Holladay, Lexicon, s.v. rkafA, ‘~kar, “make someone taboo, cut someone off from social life”).

 

Tomorrow’s reading presents a brighter picture, victory in the second battle at Ai now that Achan has been removed. However, we should not make the hasty judgment that, in our own lives, all victories come from our faithfulness and all defeats come from our sin. There are usually other factors. But it was apparently necessary for Israel to learn early the need for loyalty and obedience, and the cost of disobedience and deception. The case of Achan reminds us of a similar lesson learned in the early church, in the case of Ananias and Sapphira. Peter asks Ananias, “How is it that you have contrived this deed in your heart? You did not lie to us but to God!” (Acts 5:4).

 

Romans 13:8-14

 

Love for One Another (Cp Mk 12.31; Jas 2.8)

 

            8 Owe no one anything, except to love one another; for the one who loves another has fulfilled the law. 9 The commandments, “You shall not commit adultery; You shall not murder; You shall not steal; You shall not covet”; and any other commandment, are summed up in this word, “Love your neighbor as yourself.” 10 Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore, love is the fulfilling of the law.

 

An Urgent Appeal

 

            11 Besides this, you know what time it is, how it is now the moment for you to wake from sleep. For salvation is nearer to us now than when we became believers; 12 the night is far gone, the day is near. Let us then lay aside the works of darkness and put on the armor of light; 13 let us live honorably as in the day, not in reveling and drunkenness, not in debauchery and licentiousness, not in quarreling and jealousy. 14 Instead, put on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make no provision for the flesh, to gratify its desires. (Romans 13:8-14, NRSV)

 

The following comments are repeated from relevant comments on Romans 13:1-14 of February 12, 2010 (Friday in the week of the Fifth Sunday after the Epiphany, Year Two), when comments were repeated from July 19, and 21, 2008 (Saturday in the week of the Sunday closest to July 13, and Monday in the week of the Sunday closest to July 20, Year Two), when comments were based on earlier comments, as noted there.

 

Paul’s instruction, “Owe no one anything, except to love one another; for the one who loves another has fulfilled the law” (Rom 13:8), reminds us of Jesus’ answer when asked about the great commandment. “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength” (Mk. 12:30, citing Deut. 6:5; cf. Mt. 22:37; Lk. 10:27). Jesus continues with the “second commandment,” the one Paul cites here: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself” (Mk. 12:31, citing Lev. 19:18; cf. Mt. 22:39; Lk. 10:27). The point is that the one who loves will have the right motivation and, to the best of his or her ability, will do the right thing and thus keep the law. We might see “Love the Lord your God” as a summation of the first four of the Ten Commandments (Exod. 20:1-12), and “Love your neighbor” as a summation of the last six (Exod. 20:12-17). Paul has our relation with other human beings in mind. He illustrates his point, “Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfilling of the law” (Rom. 13:10), by citing from the “second table” of the Decalogue the last four commandments, against adultery, murder, stealing and coveting (v. 9). But the love that really fulfills the law is more than just a feeling. Feelings are important, but they must lead to loving action. In Luke, when Jesus was asked, “And who is my neighbor?” he responded with the story of the Good Samaritan (Would we understand it in the same way as “the Good Palestinian”? Some of them live in the territory of ancient Samaria.)

 

Paul continues with what is called “an urgent appeal” (NRSV subheading, some editions). He reminds the readers of his, and their, eschatological expectations. “Besides this,” he says, “you know what time it is, how it is now the moment for you to wake from sleep. For salvation is nearer to us now than when we became believers; the night is far gone, the day is near” ( (vv. 11-12a). In comments here, C. K. Barrett reminds his readers that

 

it was pointed out above . . . that the whole exhortation of chs. xii, xiii is enclosed within an eschatological framework. In xii, 1 f. the reader is urged to dissociate himself from the present age; this requirement inevitably becomes more pressing when it is seen that the present age is hastening to its close, and that the Age to Come is near at hand. It is in this vein that this section of the epistle is concluded” (The Epistle to the Romans, Harper’s New Testament Commentaries, 1957, p. 252, on Rom. 13:11-14, with reference to earlier comments from p. 232, on 12:1-2).

 

Witherington credits V. P. Furnish with a similar view, and agrees himself: “Vv. 11-14 present what can be called an eschatological sanction . . . V. 11 argues that one should do just what Paul has been insisting on in vv. 1-10, especially considering the time on the eschatological clock” (op. cit., p. 317 on Rom. 13:11-14). Barrett says that the “salvation [that] is nearer to us now than when we became believers” (v. 11) is not, in Paul’s mind here, “salvation in a pietistic way as something that happens to us in our experience, but as a universal eschatological event” (op. cit., on v. 11). “Let us then lay aside the works of darkness,” says Paul, “and put on the armor of light” (v. 12b). “This language of baptismal disrobing and re-robing,” says Witherington, “is used here not to indicate what happens at baptism, but to exhort that audience to continue to shed the old ways of this world and clothe and equip themselves in ways to fend those ways off, and to live in newness of life. Christians are to walk properly as (wJV, hÇs) in the day. Thus, in some sense, the eschatological day or its light is already at hand, for Christians can walk in it.” On Paul’s continuation, “let us live honorably as in the day, not in debauchery and licentiousness, not in quarreling and jealousy” (v. 13), Witherington says, “hÇs here means ‘as is actually the case.’ Believers are already standing under the sign of a new day. Thus Paul uses this eschatological language in an ‘already and not yet’ fashion” (ibid.). “Instead,” says Paul, in conclusion here, “put on (ejnduvsasqe, endysasthe) the Lord Jesus Christ, and make no provision for the flesh, to gratify its desires (v. 14). The verb for “put on” here, ejnduvomai (endyomai), in the middle voice of ejnduvw (endyÇ), “to put any kind of thing on oneself, clothe oneself in, put on, wear something” (Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gingrich [BDAG], A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and other Early Christian Literature, 3rd ed., 2000, s.v. ejnduvw, endyÇ). (Cf. Witherington’s reference to “baptismal disrobing and re-robing” (above). This refers not to putting up a good front, as we sometimes say, or putting on an actor’s mask, but rather in putting “on the Lord Jesus Christ”; we are committing ourselves to him and becoming absorbed in his way of life.

 

Matthew 26:36-46

 

Jesus Prays in Gethsemane (Mk 14.32-42; Lk 22.39-46; cf. Jn. 18:1)

 

            36 Then Jesus went with them to a place called Gethsemane; and he said to his disciples, “Sit here while I go over there and pray.” 37 He took with him Peter and the two sons of Zebedee, and began to be grieved and agitated. 38 Then he said to them, “I am deeply grieved, even to death; remain here, and stay awake with me.” 39 And going a little farther, he threw himself on the ground and prayed, “My Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from me; yet not what I want but what you want.” 40 Then he came to the disciples and found them sleeping; and he said to Peter, “So, could you not stay awake with me one hour? 41 Stay awake and pray that you may not come into the time of trial; the spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak.” 42 Again he went away for the second time and prayed, “My Father, if this cannot pass unless I drink it, your will be done.” 43 Again he came and found them sleeping, for their eyes were heavy. 44 So leaving them again, he went away and prayed for the third time, saying the same words. 45 Then he came to the disciples and said to them, “Are you still sleeping and taking your rest? See, the hour is at hand, and the Son of Man is betrayed into the hands of sinners. 46 Get up, let us be going. See, my betrayer is at hand.” Matthew 26:36-46, NRSV)

 

The following comments are repeated here from July 21, 2008 (Monday in the week of the Sunday closest to July 20, Year Two),when comments were repeated from July 24, 2006 (Monday in the week of the Sunday closest to July 20, Year Two):

 

The accounts by Matthew and Mark of Jesus’ prayer in Gethsemane are quite similar. Matthew adds a little to Mark’s words, “Sit here while I pray” (Mk. 14:32b), “. . . while I go over there and pray” (Mt. 26:36b). Luke only has the Lord direct the disciples to “Pray that you may not come into the time of trial” (Lk. 22:40). See the separate file, Gethsemane. Where Mark names three disciples, Matthew substitutes “the two sons of Zebedee” for “James and John” (Mk. 14:33a; Mt. 26:37a), a trivial difference one might think, but Luke only refers to “the disciples” in general (Lk. 22:39, 45). In Mark, Jesus is “distressed and agitated” (Mk. 14:33b), saying “I am deeply grieved, even to death; remain here, and keep awake” (v. 34). For “distressed,” Matthew has “grieved” (Mt. 26:37b), which is repeated (with Mark) in verse 38, “I am deeply grieved, even to death; remain here, and stay awake with me” (Mt. 26:38; Mk. 14:34, with “keep awake” for “stay awake with me”). Matthew and Mark add that, “going a little farther, he threw himself on the ground and prayed” (Mt. 26:39a = Mk. 14:35a). “The language and action are very strong,” says Richard A. Horsley (NOAB, 3rd ed., augmented, 2007, on Mk. 14:33-35). The contrast with Luke’s version is remarkable, especially the shorter version in which Luke 22:43 and 44 are absent. (Note the double square brackets which set these verses off in the NRSV, and text note d, “Other ancient authorities lack verses 43 and 44; cf. the summary by Bruce M. Metzger, “Nevertheless, while acknowledging that the passage is a later addition to the text [of Luke], in view of it’s evident antiquity [indicated by citation in various early Church Fathers] and its importance in the textual tradition, a majority of the [United Bible Societies editorial] Committee decided to retain the words in the text but to enclose them within double square brackets,” A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, 1971, p. 177 on Lk. 22:43-44). For his own reasons, Bart D. Ehrman judges these two verses to be “not original to Luke but . . . a scribal addition to the Gospel.” He adds, “These are the only verses in the entire Gospel of Luke that undermine this clear portrayal [of Jesus, as understood by Ehrman]” (Misquoting Jesus, 2005, p. 144). “Luke,” he says,

 

has completely omitted Mark’s statement that Jesus ‘began to be distressed and agitated’ (Mark 14:33), as well as Jesus’s own comment to his disciples, ‘My soul is deeply troubled, even unto death’ (Mark 14:34). Rather than falling to the ground in anguish (Mark 14:35); and rather than praying three times for the cup to be removed (Mark 14:36, 39, 41), he asks only once (Luke 22:42, prefacing his prayer, only in Luke, with the important condition, “If it be your will.” And so, while Luke’s source, the Gospel of Mark, portrays Jesus in anguish as he prays in the garden, Luke has completely remodeled the scene to show Jesus at peace in the face of death. The only exception is the account of Jesus’s ‘bloody sweat,’ an account absent from our earliest and best witnesses. (Ehrman, pp. 142-143)

 

Whether Ehrman has properly characterized Jesus as he appears throughout Luke’s Gospel remains to be seen. His point here, as I see it, is more about some aspects of the scribal tradition–a point about Church history, so to speak–than about the historical Jesus. Luke may well have underplayed the distressing aspects to present Jesus as an “example to the faithful of how to remain firm in the face of death” (Ehrman, p. 141), but this difference in emphasis can be seen as rounding out the story of Jesus, not necessarily “misquoting” in the sense of falsifying. “A brief criticism of Ehrman’s perspective on the early church and the New Testament textual tradition in general is presented by Gary M. Burge (“Jesus out of Focus,” Christianity Today, vol. 50, no. 6 [June, 2006], pp. 24-29; see especially pp. 27-28 and the inserted section, “The Lapsed Evangelical Critic,” p. 26).

 

Jesus prays, “My Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from me; yet not what I want but what you want” (Mt. 26:39b): “Abba, Father, for you all things are possible; remove this cup from me; yet, not what I want, but what you want” (Mk. 14:36). Matthew includes the wording of the second prayer, “My Father, if this cannot pass unless I drink it, your will be done” (Mt. 26:42b). Though both Matthew and Mark present three separate prayers, alternating with three times of returning to find the disciples sleeping (Mt. 26:40,43,45; Mk. 14:37, 40, 42), the substance of the prayers is similar to Luke’s version. “Father, if you are willing, remove this cup from me; yet, not my will but yours be done” (Lk. 22:42). In all three versions there is a request to be spared from the ordeal Jesus knows is coming, tempered by reference to “what you [the Father] want” (Mt. 26:39; Mk. 14:36), the statement, “your will be done” (Mt. 26:42), or “not my will but yours be done” (Lk. 22:42. If falling to the ground indicates that Jesus “lost his composure,” so to speak (Mt., Mk.), in the continuation he certainly regains it. The reading ends with his words, “See, the hour is at hand, and the Son of Man is betrayed into the hands of sinners. Get up, let us be going. See, my betrayer is at hand” (Mt. 26:45-46; cf. Mk. 14:41-42). If Jesus ended his prayer at that time with, “Thy will be done,” can we, his followers, do less?

 

As noted above, for the Lutheran Readings for today, and comments on them, see the Episcopal Readings in the file for July 5, 2010, two weeks ago. These traditions differ in relating readings to the weeks following Pentecost.

 

Ronald D. Worden, Ph.D.

rdworden@hgst.edu

deanworden@comcast.net