CIVIL RELIGIOUS DISCUSSION: All things Christianity

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Interesting discussion!

At first, absolutely. But then, and this is the part that gets confusing, the master admits the accusation. Or at least, uses it against that servant. "You think I'm this and that, and yet you still disappoint me?"

seems like this is a frequent device that gets used...in other words, "you're afraid of me and you still persist in disregarding my instructions?" He's pointing out the hypocrisy or disingenuousness of his response to his master...if you really were concerned about your judgement, if you really had faith, he's saying you'd done something productive....?

In the context of usury (getting interest), it gets stranger. The master is saying, "Since I'm such a sinner, why didn't you use a sinful mechanism to achieve what I wanted?" Clearly, the use of a question by the master could be a rhetorical device, but I'm still frustrated at not connecting to what the intent of that passage is.

I think again, he's pointing out his disingenuousness--he chose to do nothing or chase after his own idols while His master (Jesus) was away and is making flimsy excuses, etc.

The only way it kinda makes sense to me (right now) is that even the sinful behaviors of those disconnected from Him can still serve His purposes. Temptation is the corollary to free will. Without temptation, free will is meaningless - if there were only good choices, free will doesn't matter.

Which also is an argument for the existence of God...we'd only know what evil is because we have a reference of what is good. If there was no such thing as God, bad/evil is just a matter of opinion.

I think of someone with a beautiful singing voice. Even if a sinner, and singing about sinful things, the transcendent beauty of the voice can still make people aware of the beauty of God's gifts. That person has been given a gift. They aren't serving God's will with it, but it can still serve God's purpose.

Absolutely.

 

[T.Lex]

Interesting discussion!

Indeed.

One question that is unresolved in the parable is, "What were the servants supposed to do?" There is no explicit instructions stated. Rather, it almost sounds like the master said, "Hey, I'm leaving, here's some money. I trust you." It doesn't look like he said, "Make me more money." Rather, it was simply given to them.

Now, that's the real world. We grow up, we figure out what we're good at, but we most of us don't get a clear "calling." These servants had to try to figure out what to do with what they'd been entrusted with.

Personally, safeguarding it against loss seems reasonable. Ultra-risk-averse, but arguably also prudent.

But, to your point, the master WANTED them to take risk. The last servant was fearful of the wrath for losing it, but ignored what he really should've been afraid of: the wrath for not doing ANYTHING with it.

What if the 5er servant had only made 3, but had done his best? I'd like to think the master would've said, "Hey, not every pick will be a winner."

What if the 5er had lost it all, but had done his best? That's where it gets cloudy for me.

Of course, a subtext could be - like you say - a caution against paralysis by analysis. Act in accordance with the master's wishes, and it'll all work out. If you have to think about it too much, maybe that's not what the master wants you to do.

 

[historian]

What if the 5er servant had only made 3, but had done his best? I'd like to think the master would've said, "Hey, not every pick will be a winner."

What if the 5er had lost it all, but had done his best? That's where it gets cloudy for me.

I think that with the Master being who the Master is, if we use our gifts for Him, we will get interest. Remember, everyone doubled up. That doesn't happen IRL. Either that, or I need to know the name of the bank so I can invest

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Indeed.

One question that is unresolved in the parable is, "What were the servants supposed to do?" There is no explicit instructions stated. Rather, it almost sounds like the master said, "Hey, I'm leaving, here's some money. I trust you." It doesn't look like he said, "Make me more money." Rather, it was simply given to them.

Now, that's the real world. We grow up, we figure out what we're good at, but we most of us don't get a clear "calling." These servants had to try to figure out what to do with what they'd been entrusted with.

Personally, safeguarding it against loss seems reasonable. Ultra-risk-averse, but arguably also prudent.

But, to your point, the master WANTED them to take risk. The last servant was fearful of the wrath for losing it, but ignored what he really should've been afraid of: the wrath for not doing ANYTHING with it.

What if the 5er servant had only made 3, but had done his best? I'd like to think the master would've said, "Hey, not every pick will be a winner."

What if the 5er had lost it all, but had done his best? That's where it gets cloudy for me.

Of course, a subtext could be - like you say - a caution against paralysis by analysis. Act in accordance with the master's wishes, and it'll all work out. If you have to think about it too much, maybe that's not what the master wants you to do.

I think that with the Master being who the Master is, if we use our gifts for Him, we will get interest. Remember, everyone doubled up. That doesn't happen IRL. Either that, or I need to know the name of the bank so I can invest

I think we try to read things too literally sometimes. It'd been a lot easier for me if Jesus would have just said what He meant and threw in a few analogies to illustrate His point.

What if the middle guy had tripled the Master's money while the first guy only doubled his? Would he have been held in higher regard because qhe did more with less? What if the third guy had brought forth a legitimate excuse like he thought the first two were making foolish investments and so played it safe with the master's money so that not all was lost?

There are many combinations and permutations one could dream up with that could change the story. But I'm thinking the details are not so important as the message: if you believe in Jesus, you use whatever gifts you have to honor Him and advance His kingdom while you are on this earth. Those that don't, those that deny him, make their own morality, chase after also idols will be judged accordingly and get what they worked towards their entire time on earth--an eternity separated from God and all of his goodness.

 

[T.Lex]

I think we try to read things too literally sometimes. It's been a lot easier for me if Jesus would have just said what He meant and threw n a few analogies to illustrate His point.

What if the middle guy had tripled the Master's money while the first guy only doubled his? Would he have been held in higher regard because he did more with less? What if the third guy had brought forth a legitimate excuse like he thought the first two were making foolish investments and so played it safe with the master's money so that not all was lost?

These many combinations and permutations one could dream up with that could change the story. But I'm thinking the details are so important as the message: if you believe in Jesus, you use whatever gifts you have to honor Him and advance His kingdom hill you are on this earth. Those that don't, those that deny him, make their own morality, chase after also idols will be judged according and get what they worked towards their entire time on earth--an eternity separated from God and all of his goodness.

Well put.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Typing one handed, with the sun shining on you iPad screen makes for a lot of typos.

 

[foszoe]

So Sunday's gospel was a passage that I've never really connected with. It is the parable of the 3 servants who received a bunch of money from their master, and what they did with it.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew 25:14-30&version=NRSVCE

It follows the parable of the 10 bridesmaids, which seems pretty straightforward: be ready for anything.

But with the 3 servants, each one was given a significant amount of money, based on their abilities. Presumably, the more effective servant was given 5 units (each unit was comparable to several years worth of a laborer's wage - so this was a huge amount of money), and he "traded" for another 5 and was rewarded. A somewhat less effective servant was given 2 units, who "traded" for an additional 2, and was also rewarded. The third servant buried his, so as to keep only that amount, but not risk it. This was risk aversion to an extreme.

When the master returned, he was very angry at the third servant and threw him out.

Now, at the end, we learn something more about the master. He harvests crops that he does not plant, which is a problem. If these crops were planted by others, that's basically thievery. But anyway, the master goes so far as to tell the servant that, at the least, he should've given the money to the bankers and gotten interest. And that's kinda strange because usury was definitely a sin to Jews of that time. So, it is odd that it would be encouraged to participate in it, even if it was on the "interest bearing" side of the equation.

Anyway, only by abstracting it does it make sense to me. It is a variation of "hiding your light under a bushel basket." We are all given talents and abilities. We should put them to use for God. Safeguarding them for ourselves does not benefit Him or our greater community. That even extends to financial talents. If we can use our abilities to achieve financial success, then our greater religious community benefits with the greater tithing and related generosity.

The part about harvesting what the master does not sow is interesting to me, because in the more abstract context, it suggests that God does reap good works in areas that he does not obviously sow.

Anyway, I'm curious if there are other perspectives on this parable. I feel like there is a deeper meaning to it that eludes me.

The passage in question is read or referenced liturgically on at least 3 occasions. One is the Blessing of a new business or endeavor, it is referenced at the ordination of a priest, and also on the 16 Sunday after Pentecost with the Epistle reading being 2 Cor 6:1-10.

The connection to a new business or endeavor is straightforward.

For an ordination, and skipping over vast portions of the service. The Bishop will place the lamb, the bread to be consecrated for communion, into the hands of candidate, sometimes prostrated behind the altar, and admonish “Trust and Guard this until the Second Coming”. Then towards the end of the service, will address the new priest with the words, “Enter into the joy of your Lord” which, in Greek, exactly matched the underlying text in this parable.

For the 16 Sunday after Pentecost (16[SUP]th[/SUP] Sunday of Matthew), this passage is held up for the contemplation of the faithful and will occupy the rest of this post. The Epistle it is paired with is also not a coincidence. Now for the Orthodox, we believe our reading and interpretation of the Bible begins with the Gospels. That is why the Gospel book is kept on the altar whereas the Epistles are kept out at the readers desk. The Orthodox Lectionary is a one year lectionary so, barring special services or feast days, there are 52 Sunday readings. So colloquially speaking, if you were a gospel reading you would want to at least be one of the Sunday readings, not a weekday reading. That means you are considered more important!

First, an overview of Matthew. This gospel is all about hearing and doing or obeying. Not only are we to be hearing and doing but this doing should be so engrained in us that we do not consciously know that we are doing. A second point is that ALL parables are about the kingdom of heaven and a proper understanding of Matthew begins with the first point.

The 25[SUP]th[/SUP] Chapter is basically 3 parables, the 5 wise and the 5 foolish virgins, the parable of the talents, and the parable of the sheep and the goats. Recurring themes in all 3 are the preparation for and the advent of the Second Coming or Judgement, which can be but are not necessarily concurrent. In the parable of the 5 wise and 5 foolish, we learn that the preparation for the second coming occurs in this life, for they are roused from sleep which the Holy Fathers teach is a recognition of our physical death. The Bridegroom comes and the 5 wise virgins have prepared for his coming, go into the wedding feast, and the door is shut. The 5 foolish, who did not prepare for the Bridegroom are shut out. An additional recurring theme for the Gospels is watchfulness or nepsis and makes an appearance here. However we can be watchful all we want but if we are sitting in total darkness is it enough? No! Light is also needed and Who is the Light? Synergy. In the Greek language, the root word for mercy or acts of mercy and oil share the same root, eleison and eleios. This is not coincidental. Our lamp is lit by our acts of mercy, but the oil is received from others. This is important. What is the ultimate source of the oil, even if it is immediately received from others?

The second parable is the parable of the talents. We are told of a man preparing for a journey to a far country. St Jerome and others will associate this with the Resurrection/Ascension of the Lord and the Parousia. The Man is Jesus the Christ. So he calls servants to him and delivers his goods to them. Since we are in the kingdom, the servants are the bishops, priests, deacons, pastors, shepherds, and the laity who have declared themselves to be servants of the Master. One thing to note on the gifts is the generosity of the Master. 10 talents would be 30,000 days wages, 2 would be 12,000 days wages, and 1 would be 6000 days wages. Not paltry sums for any of the servants but we may also, knowing the end of the story, note that the most generosity is shown to the one’s who will put forth the greatest efforts while the one who will squander his talent is still given an opportunity to succeed indicating that the Master knows each of his servants intimately. This brings in the doctrine of synergy of which more shall be written in a little bit.

Now here we encounter some variation in translation, some like the KJV, attach the word immediately to the leaving of the Master, others to the action of the servants. St. John Chrysostom and other Fathers, also encountered textual variations and handled them very differently than we are inclined to in modern times. They would say if this is the correct text, here is how to understand it but if the correct text is this then understand it this way. We shall apply the same principle. The account of the Ascension is an immediate departure so we can understand the account as tying the departure to the Ascension directly, or, if immediately is tied to the servants, the lesson is there is no delay in the first two servants setting about the work of the master upon his departure. No procrastination. This would emphasize the theme of Matthew that we are to be listening and doing. The servants are given no indication of when the Master will return but they begin to do the will of the master.

Now how should we understand talents? The usual two would be money and abilities but let us consider another that could be classified as an ability but is not usually categorized as such. Suffering. How often do we consider our handling of suffering an ability? We should. St Paul speaks of a thorn in his flesh that he prays to be removed but God says no. The thief on the Cross accepts his suffering willingly because he knows it to be just and leading to salvation. This should lead to a consideration of chastisement vs punishment. God does not want to punish us but chastisement is unto salvation. That is the key difference. The thief was not being punished but chastised by the Lord, even if his crucifixion was a punishment by worldly justice.

Before considering the actions of the servants, let us develop the concept of synergy. Syn (Co) Ergos (work). We are coworkers with God. In the Epistle reading, vs 1,2, we see three key things to bring back to Matthew. We are working together (synergy) with Him. We are urged not to receive the grace (talents) of God in vain, and Now is the Day of Salvation. Then in vs 3-10 we see a list of talents (grace) which include abilities, sufferings, and even references to money. God freely gives but we must respond to the gift to activate it.

So how are we to see the actions of the servants? The first two servants immediately set about the Master’s work upon reception of their talents. It is not said but can be conjectured that at first the servants had nothing. Upon on return of the Master, each servant recognizes his gift from the Lord but, interestingly says, “I have gained”. Synergy results in gain. God does not force or coerce us into action. He provides the grace we provide the action. Both receive the same praise from the Master and we do not hear of any grumbling concerning the amount. This implies a recognition that all things originate from God and all things are to be offered back to God. The first servant receives an 11[SUP]th[/SUP] talent but this also should call to mind that to whom much is given much will be required. We will return to this briefly in a moment.

So we come to the 3[SUP]rd[/SUP] servant. His statement is a statement of justification for his actions. Such statements are symptomatic of a prideful state. He takes possession of the talent and returns nothing. The servant also uses two key phrases that we should take not of. “I knew” and “I was afraid”. In the Icon of Christ, specifically in the Halo, are two Greek letters indicating that Christ is God. They stand for “I am”. God dwells in Kairos (an “eternal” moment” while we live in Chronos (linear time). Knowing in an indication of something learned in the past, but he knowledge leads to fear which is the realm of the demons who dwell in the past and present. The demons cannot dwell in Kairos for they cannot stand to be in the presence of God. The demons dwell in regret (the past) and anxiety or fear (the future). Now we know that the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom but this fear is better understood as being in awe. The most often given command in Scripture is “Be not afraid”. This servant fails to be synergistic for he returns to the Lord only what the Lord had given and adds nothing of himself. The servant is committing at the very least a sin of omission and St John Chrysostom brings this out in his discussion of the Lord’s statement concerning the Bankers. Synergy is not only God and me but God and us, me and you and God. Instead of fear, all the servant needed to do was seek the help of others, but he is withdrawn into isolation. This also is an indication of pride.

Finally a short note on reaping where not sown and gather where seed has not been scattered. The Jews were the people of God and had been given many advantages, the seed had been sewn, yet they were not bearing fruit. For this let us briefly discuss Romans. One key to understanding Romans is to understand the 6 different ways Paul uses the word Law in the letter. For the Jews they had the Mosaic law. The natural law that is written on the heart belongs to both the Jew and the Gentile. Now the Gentiles, who do not have Mosaic Law show the work of the natural law through their actions, they are commended. In the OT we also find people who are found to be righteous without the Mosaic Law, Noah, Abraham, Joseph are examples.

So what are some ways to apply this to ourselves?

Do we hide our Christianity? Do we dwell in remembrance of past sins as an excuse of not acting in the now, the day of salvation? Do we worry or fear the future? Are we good stewards of our household which should be a little church? Do we squander the grace of God given to us? Do we use our gifts to the magnification of the Kingdom or to serve ourselves?

 

[T.Lex]

As usual, excellent post, my friend. Much to think about and reflect upon.

If possible, I'd like to further address this:

Finally a short note on reaping where not sown and gather where seed has not been scattered. The Jews were the people of God and had been given many advantages, the seed had been sewn, yet they were not bearing fruit. For this let us briefly discuss Romans. One key to understanding Romans is to understand the 6 different ways Paul uses the word Law in the letter. For the Jews they had the Mosaic law. The natural law that is written on the heart belongs to both the Jew and the Gentile. Now the Gentiles, who do not have Mosaic Law show the work of the natural law through their actions, they are commended. In the OT we also find people who are found to be righteous without the Mosaic Law, Noah, Abraham, Joseph are examples.

But what of the master apparently admitting the fault of reaping/sowing where he did not plant? And even going so far as to suggest usury as a viable alternative?

If you recall, I am a firm believer in God's ability to draw people to Him in what many would consider unconventional ways. (I almost said "unorthodox".) And the very early church did struggle with "who" could be a Christian. But it feels like there is more to that passage than rhetorical flourish.

 

[foszoe]

It is difficult to tell the sense of the the master's response. Remember in the original Greek manuscripts there are basically a stream of letters with no spaces or punctuation.

Some English versions will end the Master's "statement" with a "?" Others with a period. I think reading it as an admission of fault would be farther than I would go.

The parables are always about the kingdom. The servants are where the Master has showered his blessings/law/grace. So it seems the best way to understand the servants to be those who were entrusted by the master and in the Bible up until this point that has been the Jews. However, as alluded to above, even those without the law have been shown to be righteous. It is these that should be equated with the non servants. There still is fruit to be reaped even though no planting had occurred as in the case of the Jews.

A second way to look at the statement is overtly as a question not an admission. It is not admitting that the servant's statement is correct but rather the Master is saying IF your understanding was correct then your actions do not match. In another place we read "why do you call me Lord, Lord and yet not do what I tell you?"

We could even see the statement as a combination of the two above.

Regarding usury, as above, the first way to understand the bankers are as fellow servants IN THE KINGDOM. Those who can help us gain a return on our talents. For example singing has been mentioned as a talent but perhaps seeking out a voice coach or learning to read music add value to that talent. Those who assist in such a manner could be the bankers in the kingdom.

If we choose to view the bankers in the context of OUTSIDE the kingdom, which is outside the normative tradition, I would also not see it as an explicit approval as usury but rather as usury is better than what you did for at least you have some return. So let me paraphrase slightly to illustrate this point. (IF) you know me to be an hard master seeking a return on my property, you could have, at least, deposited it with the bankers and had something to show for it upon my return.

Remember the first 2 did not divulge how they invested and neither would the 3rd have needed to, he could have shown some return since he "knew" that is what the master expected.

Biblical interpretation, removed from tradition is bound to leave its moorings. Some modern day interpretations no longer view the Master as Christ and take the view that the third servant is actually correct in his actions.

Some Patristic Quotes. Several contain the nuggets underlying the first post. Others may offer new and unique insights.

LETTER 402

Question from the same [brother] to the same [Old Man]: “Although I am slow in learning, nevertheless I am able to learn the Psalms more quickly. Tell me whether this has happened to me from God, or else from the demons in order that I might come to vainglory.” Response by Barsanuphius.

Whatever God grants you, receive it with humility. For to learn the words of God easily does not actually come from the devil, but they are in fact a seed from God. If, however, one is not careful, then the devil, too, sows his own tares. If you want to humble your thought, give it the following example: “If one receives from the master certain silver coins, as in [the story of] those servants,7 but does not make some profit or increase, then what will happen?” And your thought will respond: “Whatever happened to that servant who hid the silver of the master.”8 Then you can say to your thought: “So do not feel proud, filling the air with fruitless words, because these shall be to my condemnation.”

Barsanuphius and John. (2007). Barsanuphius and John: Letters. (T. P. Halton, Ed., J. Chryssavgis, Trans.) (Vol. 114, pp. 39–40). Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press.

6. For it is as if a man about to go out on a journey called his servants and handed over to them his possessions,52 and the rest. The dividing of the money is unequal,53 although the difference should not be attributed to the one doing the dividing since the Lord says that each one had received according to his ability.54 Each servant received as much as he was capable, so it was his decision to oversee the handling of affairs seeing that he was the one making the purchases.55
The Lord indicates that he himself is the master of the house.56 The duration of his journey is the time57 given for repentance. He who sits at the right hand of God58 in heaven has provided the whole human race an opportunity59 for [responding in] faith and the works of the Gospel. Each servant accepted a talent according to his measure of faith;60 that is, each one accepted the preaching of the Gospel from the one preaching it. This [message] is the incorruptible possession of the Master, the patrimony of Christ, reserved for those who will inherit eternity.

7. That servant who received five talents is the faithful people under the Law. With this beginning he doubled his merit by rightly and appropriately fulfilling the task of the evangelical faith.61 In the settling of accounts, a careful check of procedures62 is made in order to insure the profit of the heavenly words and for distributing the talent as deserved. To the one who had been assigned five talents, ten in total were gained at the return of the master.63 In other words, this servant was found in the faith just as he was in the Law; he was obedient according to the ten precepts of the five books of Moses because of grace that comes through the Gospel’s justification.64 He is therefore told to enter the joy of the Lord, where he is received with the honor of Christ’s glory.

8. That servant who was assigned two talents represents the people of the pagans who have been justified by faith; by their profession of the Son and the Father, they have confessed our Lord Jesus Christ as God and man, both by the Spirit and by the flesh.65 For faith is from the heart, and confession from the mouth.66
These are the two servants who were assigned the talents. In the first case the whole mystery67 is realized in the five talents. In other words, what was known in the Law was doubled by the faith of the Gospel, so that the second one gained an increase of two talents by his effort.68 Even though there was a difference in the amount entrusted and returned, the reward given to both servants by the master was the same.69 By this we may know that the faith of the pagans has been put on the same level as those who believe according to the Law that they know.70 With the same praise, the second servant is also told to enter into the joy of the Lord. By doubling of the money we find that works were added to faith. What one believes in his mind,71 he accomplishes through deeds and actions.

9. The servant who received one talent and hid it in the ground72 is the people who abide by the Law, completely carnal and foolish, possessing no spiritual understanding nor entering the power of the Gospel’s preaching.73 Rather, it is on account of their jealousy of the pagans’ salvation that they hid the received talent in the ground. Neither did they use the talent nor offer it to others for their use. Instead, they thought that the Law was sufficient for salvation. When an explanation was demanded from the servant, he said, “I was afraid of you,”74 as though reverence and fear of the ancient commandments prevented the use of the Gospel’s liberty. And so he said, “Here is what belongs to you,”75 as if he had come to a halt in those things which the Lord commanded.

10. To hide that talent in the ground is to conceal the glory of the new preaching76 under the encumbrances of the bodily passion.77 He who denies that Christ the Lord—whose coming and Passion are derived from the Law—was sent for the salvation of the pagans, will not want to obey the Gospels. For he says, “I know that you are a hard man; you harvest where you have not sown, and gather where you have not seeded.”78 The present state of nature does not yield a harvest without seed, and there is no gathering without seeding. But this manner of speaking is wholly spiritual. We have said that this people, derived as they are from the Law, are ignorant neither of the Lord’s coming nor of the salvation of the pagans. But they are unfaithful because they knew the fruit of righteousness had to be harvested in the places where the Law was not sown and it had to be gathered among the pagans who were not scattered from the seed79 of Abraham.80 It is for this reason that this man is “hard,” specifically, one who would justify without the Law; who would gather without scattering, and who would harvest without seeding.

11. They will be entirely without pardon for hiding the preaching [of the Gospel] and for burying the talent assigned to them. They knew they were going to harvest without seed and gather what they had not sown. It would have been better to give the talent to the bankers,81 that is to say, to the entire human race, preoccupied with worldly affairs. At least the talent entrusted would be put to use for the master who demanded a profit from each investment. On account of this misuse, the talent that had been buried was taken away from the servant.82 Not only was the Gospel removed, but also the Law, and given to the one who had doubled his five talents. Thus the Lord declared, To everyone who has it will be given, and he will have an abundance; but he who has not, even what he has will be taken away from him.83 The one who has, is able to have more because it is easy to grow rich in the increase of wealth, whether by generosity or through work. But how will one do it who does not sustain a loss? To those who have the use of the Gospels, the honor of the Law is also conferred, but the one who has not faith in Christ, even what honor he seems to have from the Law, is taken away from him.

Hilary of Poitiers. (2012). Commentary on Matthew. (D. G. Hunter, Ed., D. H. Williams, Trans.) (Vol. 125, pp. 259–266). Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press.

Hear, at any rate, how Christ both reproved the teachers who buried the meaning of his message but how he also terrified those whom they taught. For after he said: “You should have deposited my money with the bankers,” he went on to add: “And on my return I should have demanded it back with interest.”72(9) What Christ showed by the parable was this. After hearing a sermon (for this is depositing the money), those who have received the instruction must make it produce interest. The interest from the teaching is nothing other than proving through deeds what you have been taught through words. Since I have deposited my money in your ears, you must now pay your teacher back the interest, that is, you must save your brothers. So, if you should just keep holding on to what I said and produce no interest by action on your own part, I am afraid that you will pay the same penalty as the servant who buried his talent in the ground. And for this he was bound hand and foot and cast into the darkness outside,73 because the words he heard brought no profit to others.
(10) So that we may not have this happen to us, let us imitate the servant who received five talents and the one who received two.74 Whatever you will be asked to spend to save your neighbor, be it words, money, bodily pain, or anything else whatsoever, we must not shrink back or hesitate. Then each of us, in every way, will multiply proportionately the talent given him by God. Then each of us will be able to hear those happy words: “Well done, good and faithful servant; because you have been faithful over a few things, I will set you over many; enter into the joy of your Master.”75 May we all gain this by the grace and loving-kindness of our Lord Jesus Christ through whom and with whom be glory and power to the Father together with the Holy Spirit, world without end. Amen.76

John Chrysostom. (1979). Discourses against Judaizing Christians. (P. W. Harkins, Trans.) (Vol. 68, pp. 240–241). Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press.

Matthew 25:24–25 (NASB)24 “And the one also who had received the one talent came up and said, ‘Master, I knew you to be a hard man, reaping where you did not sow, and gathering where you scattered no seed. 25 ‘And I was afraid, and went away and hid your talent in the ground; see, you have what is yours.’

Truly, the words of Scripture: “to make excuses to excuse sins”176 apply to this servant as well, as he adds the crime of arrogance to his laziness and negligence. For the one who ought to have confessed his inactivity and to have pleaded with the householder speaks evil instead. He claims that he has acted by wise counsel and that he was afraid of endangering the capital while seeking to make a profit on the money.

What he thought he had said as an excuse is turned into a charge against him. The servant is called “wicked” because he maligns his master, “lazy” because he was unwilling to double the talent. Thus he is condemned for arrogance on the first point and for negligence on the second. If, he says, you knew that I am hard and cruel, that I run after other people’s things and reap where I have not sown, why did this consideration not strike fear into you? You should have known that I was going to seek what was mine more diligently. Then you would have put my money, or silver, with the bankers. For the Greek word ἀργύριον means both. It says: “The things spoken by the Lord are pure utterances, silver examined and proven by fire, purified of earth seven times.”177 Therefore, the money and silver refer to the preaching of the Gospel and the divine words which must be given to the bankers and money-changers. These latter may refer to other teachers, for this is exactly what the apostles did in each province when they ordained priests and bishops. Or they may refer to all believers who can double the money and render it with interest, as they fulfill in deed whatever they have learned in words. But the talent is taken away and given to him who had made ten talents. We can understand this to mean that, although the master’s joy in the labor of each one is equal, that is to say, both for him who doubled the five into ten and for him who made two into four, yet the reward owed is greater to him who had labored more with the Lord’s money. This is exactly why the apostle says: “Honor the priests who are truly priests, especially those who labor in the word of God.”178 From what the wicked servant has dared to say: “You reap where you have not sown, and you gather where you have not scattered,” we understand that the Lord accepts the good life even of the Gentiles and philosophers. He regards those who behave justly one way, and those who behave unjustly in another way. Those who neglect the written law will be condemned in comparison with the one who serves the natural law.179

Jerome. (2008). Commentary on Matthew. (T. P. Halton, Ed., T. P. Scheck, Trans.) (Vol. 117, p. 288). Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press.

(3) To learn this, we must bring the parable to your attention. “A certain householder going abroad,” the text says, “summoned his servants and gave them some talents, to one five talents, to another two, to another one. Now, after a while he returned and his servants came to him. The one who had received five talents approached him with the words, ‘Master, you gave me five talents; but, behold, I have gained five talents in addition to them!’ ”4 Deep the gratitude of the servant, lavish the loving kindness of the master. What in fact did he say? “ ‘Well done, good and faithful servant; you have been faithful in a few things, I will put you in possession of many. Enter into the delights of your master.’ ”5 Since you have shown deep gratitude, he is saying, in what has already been entrusted to you, you are deserving of even greater things being confided to you. “Now, the one who had received the two talents approached him in the words, ‘Did you not hand over to me two talents? But, behold, I have gained two talents in addition to them.’ ”6 Very proper this man’s disposition, too, in regard to his master’s money, and accordingly he is given the same reward as the previous man. Why is it that the man who produced two talents was accorded the same commendation as the one who delivered five? Rightly so; it was not the zeal of the latter nor the indifference of the former that caused the greater or less profit but the rates of the borrowers. Surely the display of zeal by the one and the other can be paralleled; consequently they enjoyed the same reward.(4) The third servant, however, did not behave in the same way. Instead, what? He approached him with these words: “ ‘I knew you are a demanding person, harvesting where you haven’t sown, reaping where you haven’t scattered; so taking fright I went off and hid the talent in the ground. Behold, you have back what is yours.’ ”7 O, what wickedness of a servant! O, what extreme ingratitude, not only in doing nothing with the talent given him, but also in laying charges in return for the talent! This, you see, is what evil is like: it dulls the intellect and causes the person who has once strayed from the straight and narrow to fall down the precipice. Now, all this is said with reference to teachers lest they hide what has been entrusted to them instead of passing it on with all zeal to their disciples. But take heed now, dearly beloved, from the anger directed at this servant how the disciples also become responsible: not only is the money outlaid due but they are subject as well to an accounting with interest. So what does the master say to him? ‘ “Wicked servant.’ ” Fearful anger, threats sufficient to strike terror. “ ‘If you knew,’ ” he says, “ ‘that I harvest where I haven’t sown and reap where I haven’t scattered, you should have lent the money to the bankers, and on my return I could have looked for it with interest,’ ”8 meaning by money his precious words and calling you, the recipients, bankers. It was your task only to lend, he says, whereas it is for me to reclaim it from them, not simply what was lent but the interest on it as well. See, dearly beloved, how great a dread these words inspire. What then could they reply who had evinced neglect even in watching over what was lent them when they were required as well to declare interest on it?
(5) See the Lord’s loving kindness. In the case of material wealth, on the one hand, he forbids our taking interest. Why, and for what reason? Because both parties suffer great harm from it. You see, whereas [377] the poverty of one party is aggravated, the creditor by contrast heaps up for himself a multitude of sins along with the surplus of his wealth. Hence from the very beginning he laid down this law on the Jews with their rather materialistic mentality, namely, “You shall not lend money with interest to your brother or your neighbor.”9 So what sort of excuse could they claim who prove even more savage than the Jews, and who, despite the Lord’s favor and wonderful love, are found to be inferior to those under the Law and in fact even worse? In spiritual things, to be sure, he himself promises he will look for interest. Why? Because this spiritual interest is the opposite of material wealth. You see, in the former case the debtor is brought suddenly to extreme penury, whereas in this case, whenever the debtor gives evidence of deep gratitude, he enjoys more generous reward from above the more interest he pays. Accordingly let each of you, dearly beloved, when we lend to you on credit, feel the need to give evidence of double effort and vigilance, for one thing guarding what has been lent so that it may remain untouched, for another thing working to share it with others and guide many along the path of virtue, so that your profit in turn may be doubled to the advantage both of your own salvation and of the salvation of those others. If in fact you do this, you will render us happy (“Happy is he who speaks to listening ears,”10 Scripture says, remember), and you will cause this spiritual banquet to be laid more generously for you.

John Chrysostom. (1990). Homilies on Genesis 18–45. (T. P. Halton, Ed., R. C. Hill, Trans.) (Vol. 82, pp. 402–404). Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press.

Let us willingly listen to the reading of that also.1 What is it, then? What shall I say to you? In the Gospel, you have heard both the reward of the good servants and the punishment of the bad.2 The fault of that servant who was reproved and severely punished was this and this only, namely, that he would not put to use what he had received. He preserved it intact, but his master was looking for a profit from it. God is avaricious of our salvation. If such condemnation befalls the servant who did not use what he had received, what are they to expect who lose it? Therefore, we are dispensers. We expend; you receive. We expect a profit; on your part, live good lives, for that is the profit from our dispensing. Do not think that you are free from the obligation of dispensing. Of course, you cannot dispense your gifts as from this higher station of ours; but you can dispense them in whatever station you happen to be. When Christ is attacked, defend Him; give an answer to those who murmur; rebuke blasphemers, but keep yourselves far from any fellowship with them. If in this way you gain anybody, you are putting your gifts to use. In your own homes, take our place, for the title, bishop, signifies one who superintends, one who takes care of others by watching over them. In every home, therefore, a bishopric necessarily pertains to him who is the head of the household. It is a superintendence of the faith of the members of his household, lest any of them fall into heresy. It extends to the wife, to a son or a daughter; it extends also to a slave, for he also has been redeemed at so great a price. The apostolic teaching places the master above the slave, and the slave beneath the master,3 but Christ has given the same price for each of them. Do not neglect even the lowliest among your household. With all vigilance, attend to the salvation of those who are yours. If you do this, you dispense your gifts. Then you will not be slothful servants; you will not fear that horrible condemnation.

Augustine of Hippo. (1951). Commentary on the Lord’s Sermon on the Mount with Seventeen Related Sermons. (H. Dressler, Ed., D. J. Kavanagh, Trans.) (Vol. 11, pp. 293–294). Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press.

Again I admonish you, dearest brother, to restore with manifold interest before the tribunal of the eternal judge, the talents which our Lord today has entrusted to you to be multiplied by you like a good businessman. As far as you can, see to it that you do not bury the talent you received, like the useless servant. In other words, do not extinguish the light of doctrine because you are involved in worldly occupations. Instead, always tremble more and more, fearing that if you refuse to take time for the word of God, perhaps you will deserve to hear: “You worthless, lazy servant! Why didn’t you deposit my money with the bankers, so that on my return I could have had it back with interest?”11 May God avert from us what follows: “Throw this worthless servant into the darkness outside, where there will be wailing and gnashing of teeth.”12 Behold with what kind of sentence men will be condemned, if they are so much involved with occupations of this world that they are unwilling to listen to the Apostle when he says: “Devote yourself to the reading of Scripture, to preaching and teaching”;13 and that other text: “Do not forget that for three years, night and day, I never ceased warning you individually even to the point of tears.”14 If the Apostle preached the word of the Lord day and night to the people entrusted to him, in order that he might absolve himself in the sight of God, what will happen to us if we neglect to serve the salt of doctrine to the sheep entrusted to us on feasts or on Sundays? For this reason, with God’s help let us labor as much as we can to spend on the people committed to our care the spiritual coin of the Lord, not only in church, but also in assemblies, at banquets, and wherever we are. For our part let us distribute this coin, because when He comes He is going to demand interest. If we do this faithfully, we will be able, when we come before the tribunal of the eternal judge, to say with assurance, along with the prophet: “Look at me and the children whom you have given me.”15 Then in return for the multiplied interest of the talents we will merit to hear: “Well done! You are a good and reliable servant; come, share your master’s joy!”16 May He Himself deign to grant this, who lives and reigns for ever and ever. Amen.

Caesarius of Arles. (1956–1973). Saint Caesarius of Arles: Sermons (1–238). (H. Dressler & B. M. Peebles, Eds., M. M. Mueller, Trans.) (Vol. 3, pp. 182–183). Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press; Consortium Books.

WE KNOW your observance, dearly beloved, to be so devoted that you exercise your souls not only in the prescribed fasts, but in voluntary fasts as well. Still, to your eagerness we must add the encouragement of a reminder. In this way, if any are too irresolute in the practice of fasting, at least they will join us obediently for common abstinence on these days when it is our duty to celebrate the holy custom more carefully. We hope that we may deserve divine help against all our enemies through the humility of a fast. This matter has a special importance, as we show from authority and encourage from love. When we restrain our freedom in eating, we can concentrate on disciplining the body and giving alms to nourish the poor. In nourishing the poor, we refresh our own souls and change our worldly feasts into eternal delight.
2. Let the growth of holy desires succeed into the place of evil lusts. Let iniquity cease, but let justice never stop working. If no one has suffered wrong at your hands, let someone experience your assistance. It is a very small thing not to take others’ goods unless you are generous with your own. We are under the eyes of a just judge who knows how much and to whom he has given the means for good works. He does not wish his gifts to be idle, for he so distributes the measure of mystical “talents” to his servants that those who have liberally invested their loan will increase it, while those who preserved it unused will lose it.1
(2) Now, dearly beloved, since it is time to celebrate the fast of September, let us remind you in your holiness that we fast on Wednesday and Friday. On Saturday, however, let us together keep the vigil of blessed Peter the apostle. By his prayers and merits, may we deserve to be delivered from all trials, through Christ our Lord.

Leo the Great. (1996). Sermons. (T. P. Halton, Ed., J. P. Freeland & A. J. Conway, Trans.) (Vol. 93, pp. 368–369). Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press.]

It remains for me to say a few words in answer to those infidel objections which certain people sometimes offer by way of sinful self-excuse. The Saviour, speaking in the Gospel, says that money and wealth are loaned to men by God in order that the loans may be returned with multiple interest, when He says to the very avaricious debtor:1 ‘wicked and slothful servant, you knew that I reap where I do not sow, and I gather where I have not scattered. Therefore you ought to have given My money to the bankers, and at My coming I would have received what is Mine with usury. Therefore take the talent from him and give it to him who has ten talents.’ And a little afterwards He said:2 ‘Cast the wicked servant into exterior darkness. There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.’Although these words can refer to another subject, they can be fittingly applied to our present discussion. Since the bankers mentioned by the Saviour are lightly understood to be the poor and needy, because money, which is distributed to such people, is increased, doubtless whatever is distributed to the poor is returned by God with interest. Hence, the Lord Himself elsewhere more openly orders the rich to distribute the riches of the world and to make to themselves little sacks which do not grow old.3 But His Vase of Election points out that riches are given to the wealthy by the Lord, in order that they may grow rich by good works.4

Salvian. (1947). The Writings of Salvian, the Presbyter. (L. Schopp, Ed., J. F. O’Sullivan, Trans.) (Vol. 3, pp. 319–320). Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press.

As usual, excellent post, my friend. Much to think about and reflect upon.

If possible, I'd like to further address this:


But what of the master apparently admitting the fault of reaping/sowing where he did not plant? And even going so far as to suggest usury as a viable alternative?

If you recall, I am a firm believer in God's ability to draw people to Him in what many would consider unconventional ways. (I almost said "unorthodox".) And the very early church did struggle with "who" could be a Christian. But it feels like there is more to that passage than rhetorical flourish.

PS. If you made it this far, have you asked your priest about it? They usually like these types of questions but they are not often asked because people don't want to "bother" them I would be curious of his response.

Also, the dates in the quotes are the publication dates in case someone does not recognize them as such. The quotes themselves are all (I think) from the year 100-600 AD.

 

[T.Lex]

That's a good point about asking one of the priests of my parish.

I do think the kernel of the admission/question is a rhetorical device, so more likely the latter than the former. I still feel there's something more to it, particularly after the most recent gospel, too, which spoke of dividing people.

That's essentially what the master is doing. Dividing his servants based on how they treated that with which they were entrusted. (Matthew 25:31-46.)

I'm still reflecting on the matters, too. There must be a reason this is sticking with me, and I am compelled to discern it.

 

[T.Lex]

Apologies for following up my own post with my own post.

In further reflection on Matthew 25:31-46 (the nations will be gathered and divided), I have a polite (I hope) query (geared mostly for the non-Catholic/non-Orthodox). And yes, this does follow up on the theme that I glean from past discussion regarding the role of actions consistent with faith.

The passage rather explicitly talks about the Son of Man gathering all the nations and dividing them based on what they did. Feed the poor, comfort the imprisoned, etc. It also suggests (strongly IMHO) that the charitable actions should not be from the sheep to the sheep, but even from the sheep to the goats.

As ever, I'm asking from a position of ignorance and lack of understanding. I mean no offense; this isn't a "gotcha" kind of thing.

 

[rvb]

I have a polite (I hope) query (geared mostly for the non-Catholic/non-Orthodox).

I don't see a question in there....

-rvb

 

[foszoe]

Apologies for following up my own post with my own post.

In further reflection on Matthew 25:31-46 (the nations will be gathered and divided), I have a polite (I hope) query (geared mostly for the non-Catholic/non-Orthodox). And yes, this does follow up on the theme that I glean from past discussion regarding the role of actions consistent with faith.

The passage rather explicitly talks about the Son of Man gathering all the nations and dividing them based on what they did. Feed the poor, comfort the imprisoned, etc. It also suggests (strongly IMHO) that the charitable actions should not be from the sheep to the sheep, but even from the sheep to the goats.

As ever, I'm asking from a position of ignorance and lack of understanding. I mean no offense; this isn't a "gotcha" kind of thing.

I was wondering when someone would tell me to shut up!

 

[T.Lex]

Apologies for following up my own post with my own post.

In further reflection on Matthew 25:31-46 (the nations will be gathered and divided), I have a polite (I hope) query (geared mostly for the non-Catholic/non-Orthodox). And yes, this does follow up on the theme that I glean from past discussion regarding the role of actions consistent with faith.

The passage rather explicitly talks about the Son of Man gathering all the nations and dividing them based on what they did. Feed the poor, comfort the imprisoned, etc. It also suggests (strongly IMHO) that the charitable actions should not be from the sheep to the sheep, but even from the sheep to the goats.

As ever, I'm asking from a position of ignorance and lack of understanding. I mean no offense; this isn't a "gotcha" kind of thing.

I don't see a question in there....

-rvb

Ah, fair point.

So, how is that passage interpreted to say that God does not judge based on actions?

I was wondering when someone would tell me to shut up!

"Not I," said the little red hen.

 

[rvb]

Ah, fair point.

So, how is that passage interpreted to say that God does not judge based on actions?

Is a sheep a sheep because of what it does?
It does not say he divides them based on their actions. He divides them. Sheep on one side, goats on the other (believers, non believers).
Behaviors may help indicate whether an animal is a sheet or a goat, but doesn't change which it is. Goats have reputations for being jerks, less "sheepish." But can a goat become a sheep by acting different? Or is he describing behaviors indicative of "sheep" and "goats?"

The sheep didn't do those things to get on Jesus' right side. That was just how they acted and treated their fellow man, err barn animals. Behavior indicative of a sheep.

Do you believe a non-believer gets into Heaven based on works?

-rvb

 

[T.Lex]

Is a sheep a sheep because of what it does?
It does not say he divides them based on their actions. He divides them. Sheep on one side, goats on the other (believers, non believers).
Behaviors may help indicate whether an animal is a sheet or a goat, but doesn't change which it is. Goats have reputations for being jerks, less "sheepish." But can a goat become a sheep by acting different? Or is he describing behaviors indicative of "sheep" and "goats?"

The sheep didn't do those things to get on Jesus' right side. That was just how they acted and treated their fellow man, err barn animals. Behavior indicative of a sheep.

Do you believe a non-believer gets into Heaven based on works?

I'll start at the end. I think God's capacity is infinite. I believe it is possible that God admits to Heaven whomever He wants.

The people were divided, like goats and sheep. It doesn't say "believer, non-believers." At all. In fact, it starts by saying He gathers all the nations. Everyone. Even if we take that to mean the Jewish "nations" (which would be odd, since Jesus tells his apostles/disciples to preach to everyone), it still can't mean believers/non-believers.

Setting that aside, Jesus explains what the "sheep" actually did. He explains to the "goats" what they did not do. What other selection criteria is referenced?

Keep in mind, this follows directly from the parable about the money. That parable also focused on what the servants actually did, although not as explicitly.

To answer the other question, I think it is clear that "goats" and "sheep" are all part of the "nations." Goats CAN become sheep - and vice versa. The people are told to minister to the lowest so as to receive the greatest reward. Not to minister to other sheep.

So, yes, a sheep is a sheep at least in part because of what it does, in terms of that selection.

 

[rvb]

I'll start at the end. I think God's capacity is infinite. I believe it is possible that God admits to Heaven whomever He wants.

Sure, God and his capacity/power/abilities/etc is infinite. But John 3:18 tells us those who do not believe are condemned.

The people were divided, like goats and sheep. It doesn't say "believer, non-believers." At all. In fact, it starts by saying He gathers all the nations. Everyone. Even if we take that to mean the Jewish "nations" (which would be odd, since Jesus tells his apostles/disciples to preach to everyone), it still can't mean believers/non-believers.

Right. It's a parable. so it doesn't SAY believers and non-believers. All nations means that, believers/sheep can be from all nations. No longer is special favor afforded the Jewish people. Jews and Gentile alike can be saved through faith in Jesus.

Setting that aside, Jesus explains what the "sheep" actually did. He explains to the "goats" what they did not do. What other selection criteria is referenced?

Yes, and our actions are a reflection of our faith.

Keep in mind, this follows directly from the parable about the money. That parable also focused on what the servants actually did, although not as explicitly.

That parable is also, imo, more about believers/non-believers than actions. Those who believe share the good news, increase the harvest as directed in the great commission to the best of their abilities. The last servant claimed to believe, but didn't gain disciples, hid his given treasure (faith) in the ground, and claimed to be afraid of God but his actions didn't reflect it. Did he really believe?

To answer the other question, I think it is clear that "goats" and "sheep" are all part of the "nations." Goats CAN become sheep - and vice versa. The people are told to minister to the lowest so as to receive the greatest reward. Not to minister to other sheep.

So, yes, a sheep is a sheep at least in part because of what it does, in terms of that selection.

Yes, if you can convince a non-believer to believe, he becomes a sheep by my interpretation. He does not become a sheep by action alone, but by faith. So yes, minister to the goats. That's the great commission! But they need faith!

-rvb

 

[T.Lex]

Sure, God and his capacity/power/abilities/etc is infinite. But John 3:18 tells us those who do not believe are condemned.

But, we know that God can have many forms.

Setting that aside...

Right. It's a parable. so it doesn't SAY believers and non-believers. All nations means that, believers/sheep can be from all nations. No longer is special favor afforded the Jewish people. Jews and Gentile alike can be saved through faith in Jesus.

First, it isn't a parable. It is a metaphor. (Or, dangit, a simile? The one that uses "like or as." Jesus isn't telling a story, he's using an example that would be commonly understood.)

Second, the text (and foszoe will be proud) goes back to the ancient Hebrew goyim and Greek ethne. Both are translated differently in different contexts, but the use of "all" of them sends the message that it is all peoples. "All nations" is a fair rendition, because it reflects that people band together in groups, and ALL of those groups are brought before the Son of Man. All people, of every nation, are gathered before Jesus.

It might mean all non-Jews (if the emphasis is on the Hebrew) or all groups of people (if my understanding of the Greek is close). But, it has no connotation of believers v. unbelievers.

Yes, and our actions are a reflection of our faith.

That parable is also, imo, more about believers/non-believers than actions. Those who believe share the good news, increase the harvest as directed in the great commission to the best of their abilities. The last servant claimed to believe, but didn't gain disciples, hid his given treasure (faith) in the ground, and claimed to be afraid of God but his actions didn't reflect it. Did he really believe?

Yes, if you can convince a non-believer to believe, he becomes a sheep by my interpretation. He does not become a sheep by action alone, but by faith. So yes, minister to the goats. That's the great commission! But they need faith!

They do. I am absolutely not saying "acts alone." I guess I am saying "not faith alone." (I vote for leaving the "belief in what" question for another day.)

The separation is based on those who did certain things, and those who did not. Taken in parallel with the earlier verse, those who did certain things to the best of their abilities, and those who did not.

ETA:
Meant to include this link on the translation issue.
Mission Frontiers - The Meaning of Ethne in Matthew 28:19

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Talking about things in the Bible that makes you go "hmmmmm'... this one came across my FB feed tonight. What doe say the gang think about this alternative explanation?

What Is The Cup That Jesus Asked The Father To Take Away?

To me, since Jesus is God, He would have known he would make it to the Cross and fulfill God's will. This explanation is hardly any more satisfying than the usual ones mentioned at the start of the article.

 

[T.Lex]

I am always drawn to Christ's reflection at Gethsemane. To me, it reveals the human-ness (that, itself, a mystery) of Jesus. Indeed, He absolutely knew what needed to happen, but he also knew the pain - both physical and spiritual - that would follow.

The Apostles, the disciples, were His friends. He loved them. Yes, he knew from the beginning (literally) what needed to happen, and how He needed to make it happen. But, in that moment, on the cusp of so many things happening, His heart ached.

Of course, it also reflects the ultimate supplication. Not my will, but yours. Yes, He could have rejected the cup. He had a vote, too. But, He ultimately accepted it as what was necessary.

On the night before a trial or important meeting, or anything else where I will be a prominent participant, I am plagued with doubt. Have I done enough? Am I the right person to do this? What am I forgetting? Why me? Reflecting on Gethsemane, over the years, has helped with that.

At a basic level, by that point, those questions don't matter. Whatever brought me to that point is done, and there I am. It is not up to me to do anything more than I have; the result is in God's hands.

ETA:
Forgot to actually address your link.

That's interesting, and I've been aware of the medical thing for a long time. It does make some sense, at a basic level. But, it does change the "Your will be done" message. That explanation almost makes it seem like God the Father may've wanted Him to die in Gethsemane. In a way, it changes nothing about the larger theme of supplication and sacrifice.

And why would Jesus need an angel for physical healing? He'd taken care of that plenty of times before. Rather, I see it as spiritual ministering. A messenger directly from the Father to show support for what was happening in that moment.

Overall, I have no theological problem with that understanding of the passage, though. I can see how that understanding could touch people more deeply.