Gospel Notes by Michael Whelan SM
And the crowds asked (John), “What then should we do?” In reply he said to them, “Whoever has two coats must share with anyone who has none; and whoever has food must do likewise.” Even tax collectors came to be baptized, and they asked him, “Teacher, what should we do?” He said to them, “Collect no more than the amount prescribed for you.” Soldiers also asked him, “And we, what should we do?” He said to them, “Do not extort money from anyone by threats or false accusation, and be satisfied with your wages.”
As the people were filled with expectation, and all were questioning in their hearts concerning John, whether he might be the Messiah, John answered all of them by saying, “I baptize you with water; but one who is more powerful than I is coming; I am not worthy to untie the thong of his sandals. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire. His winnowing fork is in his hand, to clear his threshing floor and to gather the wheat into his granary; but the chaff he will burn with unquenchable fire.”
So, with many other exhortations, he proclaimed the good news to the people (Luke 3:10-18 – NRSV).
Introductory notes
General
Luke 3:10-18 – like Matthew 3:1-12 – is dependent on Mark 1:1-8. Luke “freely omits and adds material” (Luke Timothy Johnson, The Gospel of Luke, Collegeville, MN: The Liturgical Press, 1991, 66).
Significant additions by Luke to Mark’s account are found in John’s message on repentance (metanoia) (3:7-9) and the saying on the winnowing fan (3:17) plus the detailed moral instructions to particular groups.
A significant omission by Luke from Mark’s account, is the reference to the way John the Baptist lived and dressed: “Luke omits the description of the Baptist’s ascetic mode of life (see Mark 1:6), probably because of the emphasis put here on ethical reform and concern for one’s neighbor. Even the essentials of life, a tunic to wear and food to eat, are to be shared with one’s less fortunate neighbors. Such a mode of preaching fits in with Luke’s counsels in general on the use of material goods” (Joseph Fitzmyer SJ, The Gospel according to Luke I–IX: introduction, translation, and notes (Vol 28), New Haven; London: Yale University Press, 2008, 469).
“However important John’s own message, Luke follows Mark in defining John’s role primarily as the precursor to the Messiah. Luke has him explicitly eschew that designation for himself, and point to a stronger than himself whose baptism would be in spirit and fire (3:16), a literary prophecy that will reach fulfillment only in Luke’s account of Pentecost. John describes himself as an unworthy servant of the one to come (3:16). Most of all, by having John imprisoned before Jesus’ public emergence, Luke establishes a sequence between the prophets. Jesus’ anointing with the Spirit is perceived by the reader as following after John’s ministry rather than overlapping it” (Luke Timothy Johnson, op cit, 67).
Specific
tax collectors: Probably those who collected tolls on the roadside – indirect taxes – under the supervision of people like Zacchaeus – see Luke 19:2. They are rejected by the rest of the Jews – see 15:1-2 and 19:2. Interestingly enough they accept both John the Baptist and Jesus himself – see Luke 5:27 & 29-30, 7:29-30 & 34, 15:1-2 and 19:2. “In Galilee, however, both the “tax-collectors” and the “toll-collectors” were less under Roman control than elsewhere because of Herod Antipas’ lengthy financial administration of his tetrarchy. Jews were often engaged in the collection of both direct and indirect taxes; they were in the direct employ of Roman occupiers and were used as tax-farmers in the indirect taxation system. Since the architelōnēs usually had to pay the expected revenue to the Romans in advance and then seek to recoup the amount, plus expenses and profits, by assessing and collecting the tolls, the system of toll-collection was obviously open to abuse and dishonesty. Various ancient tariff inscriptions in Greek and Aramaic testify to the attempts of governments to regulate the situation” (Joseph Fitzmyer SJ, op cit, 470).
the Messiah: Literally “the anointed”. David is referred to as “the anointed” (māšîaḥ) – see 2 Samuel 23:1-17. The Greek form of this Hebrew word, māšîaḥ, is Messias. For at least two hundred years before the birth of Jesus, “there had crystallized in Palestinian Judaism such an expectation. It developed out of the David-tradition in Israel, especially as this was presented in the Deuteronomist: David as the zealous worshiper of Yahweh, ‘chosen’ by him to rule over Israel in place of Saul (2 Sam 6:21) and favored not for himself alone, but insofar as his kingly role would affect all Israel. The oracle of Nathan (2 Sam 7:14–17) and the ‘last words of David’ (2 Sam 23:1–17) reveal Yahweh’s promise of a dynasty and explicitly refer to the historical David as ‘the anointed’ of the God of Jacob. That title of David is repeated in the Psalms (18:50; 89:39, 52; 132:10, 17). Jeremiah, who confronted the last of the Davidic kings before Nebuchadnezzar’s invasion, announced that Jehoiakim would ‘have none (i.e. no heir) to sit upon the throne of David’ (36:30); but he was also the prophet who uttered the promise of a ‘new covenant’ (31:31) and proclaimed the divine assurance that the people of Israel would ‘serve Yahweh their God and David their king, whom I will raise up for them’ (30:9). This ‘David’ was no longer the historical David, but a future occupant of the throne to be raised up by Yahweh. This ideal king will be a ‘David’ (Jer 33:15; Ezek 37:23–24). But in all these promises of a future, ideal ‘David,’ the title māšîaḥ is strikingly absent. The title occurs but twice in all the prophetic books: once applied to Cyrus, the Persian monarch (Isa 45:1); once to the reigning king of Israel, or perhaps to Israel itself (Hab 3:13). Though reference be made to the oracle of Nathan, ‘the coming of a messiah’ is never the phraseology used to announce the hope of a restored kingdom of David. The same absence is noted in the postexilic rewriting of the David story (compare 2 Sam 7:12, 16 and 1 Chr 17:11, 14). The first clear mention of māšîaḥ in the sense of a future anointed agent of Yahweh in the Davidic line is found in Dan 9:25, ‘from the going forth of the Word to restore and build Jerusalem to (the coming of) an anointed one, a prince, there shall be seven weeks.’ (We prescind here from the problems of interpretation—to whom this would refer; we note only the implied future context in which the title appears.) This Danielic usage, along with various references to ‘anointed figures’ in Qumran literature (1QS 9:11; 1QSa 2:14, 20; CD 20:1; 4QPBless 2:4; 4QFlor 1:11–13; 4QpIsaa 8–10:11–17), which attest the Essene expectation of Messiahs of Israel and Aaron, and the (probably Pharisaic) Psalms of Solomon (17:23, 36; 18:6, 8) reveal a clear Jewish expectation of the coming of a messiah (or messiahs) in the period prior to the emergence of Christianity. See further J. A. Fitzmyer, Concilium 20 (1967) 75–87; ESBNT, 115–121. This evidence indicates how the OT theme of a coming David as an anointed agent of Yahweh developed into an explicit expectation of a Messiah (with a capital M), or of several of them.
“Though Luke’s phrase, ho christos, ‘the Messiah’, is undoubtedly influenced by the early Christian use of the title in reference to Jesus of Nazareth, it would be an oversimplification to maintain that Palestinians of the time of John the Baptist could never have posed the question as framed by Luke. If we are right in thinking that John had at one time been a member of the Qumran community, then the curiosity of ‘all’ the people takes on a still further nuance in Luke’s presentation” (Joseph Fitzmyer, op cit, 471–472).
He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire: Luke has already told us that John proclaimed a “baptism of metanoia” – see 3:3. That “baptism” is symbolized by the immersion in the Jordan. He now tells us that Jesus “will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire”. The Greek word baptisma – “baptism” – has an interesting story behind it: “The Gk verb for ‘baptize,’ baptizein, is formed from baptein, ‘dip,’ and means ‘dip frequently or intensively, plunge, immerse.’ By Plato’s time and onwards it is often used in a figurative sense (e.g., in the passive, ‘soaked’ in wine, Plato Symp. 176 B). It appears 4 times in the LXX: 4 Kings 5:14 (Naaman in the Jordan), Jdt 12:7 (purification), Sir 34:25—Eng 34:25 (purification after touching a corpse), Isa 21:4 (figuratively of lawlessness). The noun baptisma is only used in Christian literature, where it refers to the baptism of John or to Christian baptism. The word baptismos is used in a wider sense for dipping, washing (of dishes Mark 7:4), of ritual washings (Heb 9:10); John’s baptism, Joseph. Ant. 18.117; Christian baptism, Col 2:12 [variant]. A synonymous noun is loutron ‘bath’ used of both ordinary and ceremonial baths, but in the NT only with reference to baptism. The corresponding verb louein ‘wash, bathe’ is encountered in its everyday use in, e.g., 2 Pet 2:22 and John 13:10. It refers to ceremonial baths in Lev 15:11 and to Christian baptism (probably) in the compound form apolouein in 1 Cor 6:11. (L Hartman, “Baptism” in D. N. Freedman (Ed.), The Anchor Yale Bible Dictionary (Vol. 1), New York: Doubleday, 1992, 583).
Both Luke and Matthew add “and fire” to Mark’s “Holy Spirit.” In Luke-Acts, of course, the reference is to Pentecost. There both spirit and fire appear (Acts 2:3, 19), in a “baptism in the Spirit” explicitly contrasted to that of John (Acts 1:5; 11:16).
Welcome!
In today’s Gospel – Luke 3:10-18 – we are told that “even tax collectors came to be baptized” by John. These are men who make a living out of collecting tolls from their own people on behalf of the Roman occupiers. According to Luke, the religious authorities – and perhaps many others in the community? – despised these people. For example, at the beginning of Chapter 15, where we find the three stories of loss – including that of the prodigal son – Luke tells us: “All the tax collectors and sinners were coming near to listen to him. And the Pharisees and the scribes were grumbling and saying, ‘This fellow welcomes sinners and eats with them.’”
John’s response to the “tax collectors” is therefore striking. Not only does he not shun them, he gives them an ethical way to continue collecting the tolls: “‘Collect no more than the amount prescribed for you.’” In John’s response we are introduced to a theme that will become a feature of Luke’s Gospel. It can be summed up in one word: Welcome!
Brendan Byrne SJ calls his book on the Gospel of Luke, “The hospitality of God”. Byrne reminds us that “Dante famously gave Luke the title scriba mansuetudinis Christi—not an easy phrase to translate but perhaps ‘narrator of the winning gentleness of Christ’ might catch the sense” (Brendan Byrne, Introduction to The Hospitality of God: A Reading of Luke’s Gospel, Liturgical Press. Kindle Edition).
Aside from John’s motivation, we might wonder about the motivation of the “tax collectors” who come to John – and later, to Jesus – and seek his guidance? A troubled conscience? The beginnings of a recognition perhaps that there is “something more” to life than they have so far grasped? A stirring of the longing to love and be loved that besets every human heart? Whatever the case may be, there is at least one clear message: Everybody is welcome! Like the sheep, the coin and the prodigal son, they too are “lost” and waiting to be “found”.
To be is to be “lost”. What we do with that “lostness” will define our lives – for better or worse. We have two options: Flee or face the reality. Flight may be manifest in various addictions, violence, greed or simply busyness. Facing the reality of who and what we are is a journey of surrender and purification, of listening and discerning, of waiting and acceptance. Luke’s description of Mary is instructive: “Here am I, the servant of the Lord; let it be with me according to your word” (1:38). And God says: “Welcome!”
The hospitality of God is never withdrawn. It is always there for us. We can say that the “welcome mat” of God is everywhere, on every path we take, in every encounter we make. God waits for us. What is more, the “Welcome!” does not depend on our right behavior or our social standing or even our virtue. It is a matter of God’s mercy.