http://www.dailycatholic.org/issue/15Jun/2pentsun.htm#haydock


Comprehensive Catholic Commentary
by
Fr. George Leo Haydock
provided by
John Gregory

    John Gregory provides the commentary for the Second Sunday after Pentecost from Father George Leo Haydock found in many Douay-Rheims version of the New Testament. In the short, the powerfully poignant and pertinent words in today's paragraphs from our Lord's mouth give us knowledge that He reaches out to the most disadvantage of souls for His mercy knows no bounds, but those who reject Him, who decide they do not want to partake at His banquet will find no comfort nor a place at the table. Wise words for those who are starving for the true Faith and feel the emptiness in the novus ordo. Leave the scraps and rotting menu of misery and come to the true banquet - the Traditional Latin Mass where the Holy Sacrifice is celebrated by true priests, men who have not rejected Christ's invitation. True Catholics do not hate their neighbor but love him out of their love for God as St. Paul relates in today's Epistle and one who has such love wants his neighbor to partake in the banquet offered by the Lord.


    Second Sunday after Pentecost

    Epistle: 1 St. John 3: 13-18
    13 Wonder not, brethren, if the world hate you.

    14 We know that we have passed from death to life, because we love the brethren. He that loveth not, abideth in death.

    15 Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer. And you know that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in himself.
        Commentary on Verses 14-15: We know that we have passed from death to life; i.e. from the death of sin to the life of grace: we know it by a moral certainty, when we experience in our heart a love of our neighbor. He that loveth not God and his neighbor, abideth in death. He that hateth his brother with a mortal hatred, or to a considerable degree, is a murderer.

    16 In this we have known the charity of God, because He hath laid down His life for us: and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren.

        Commentary on Verse 16: The charity of God, because He hath laid down His life for us. Jesus Christ, therefore, who laid down His life for us, was God. It is true at present the words of God are wanting in most Greek MSS., yet the Prot. Translation has them.

    17 He that hath the substance of this world, and shall see his brother in need, and shall shut up his bowels from him: how doth the charity of God abide in him?

    18 My little children, let us not love in word, nor in tongue, but in deed, and in truth.


    Gospel: St. Luke 14: 16-24

    16 But He said to him: A certain man made a great supper, and invited many.

        Commentary on Verse 16: By this man we are to understand Christ Jesus, the great mediator between God and man. He sent his servants, at supper-time, to say to them that were invited, that they should come; i.e. He sent His apostles to call the people of Israel, who had been invited to His supper on almost innumerable occasions: but they not only refused the invitation, but also murdered the Lord who had invited them. We may remark, that the three different excuses exactly agree with what St. John says: All that is in the world is the concupiscence of the flesh, and concupiscence of the eyes, and the pride of life. The one says, I have married a wife, by which may be understood the concupiscence of the flesh; another says, I have bought five yoke of oxen, by which is denoted the concupiscence of the eyes; and the pride of life is signified by the purchase of the farm, which the third alleges in his justification. S. Aug. de verb. Dei.

    17 And he sent his servant at the hour of supper to say to them that were invited, that they should come, for now all things are ready.

    18 And they began all at once to make excuse. The first said to him: I have bought a farm, and I must needs go out and see it: I pray thee, hold me excused.

    19 And another said: I have bought five yoke of oxen, and I go to try them: I pray thee, hold me excused.

    20 And another said: I have married a wife, and therefore I cannot come.

    21 And the servant returning, told these things to his lord. Then the master of the house, being angry, said to his servant: Go out quickly into the streets and lanes of the city, and bring in hither the poor, and the feeble, and the blind, and the lame.

    22 And the servant said: Lord, it is done as thou hast commanded, and yet there is room.

    23 And the Lord said to the servant: Go out into the highways and hedges, and compel them to come in, that my house may be filled.

        Commentary on Verse 23: Compel them to come in. This is almost the only expression in the New Testament, which can give to the intolerant a plea for persecution. The spirit of the gospel is the spirit of mildness, and the compulsion which it authorizes to bring infidels or heretics into the Church, is such as we use towards our friends, when we press them to accept of our hospitality. The great pope, St. Gregory, forbade the Jєωs to be persecuted in Rome, who refused to receive the faith of Christ "That is a new and unheard of kind of preaching," says he, "which demands assent by stripes."

    24 But I say unto you, that none of those men that were invited, shall taste of My supper.

http://www.newadvent.org/summa/2019.htm#article9

Article 9. Whether the goodness of the will depends on its conformity to the Divine will?

Objection 1. It would seem that the goodness of the human will does not depend on its conformity to the Divine will. Because it is impossible for man's will to be conformed to the Divine will; as appears from the word of Isaiah 55:9: "As the heavens are exalted above the earth, so are My ways exalted above your ways, and My thoughts above your thoughts." If therefore goodness of the will depended on its conformity to the Divine will, it would follow that it is impossible for man's will to be good. Which is inadmissible.

Objection 2. Further, just as our wills arise from the Divine will, so does our knowledge flow from the Divine knowledge. But our knowledge does not require to be conformed to God's knowledge; since God knows many things that we know not. Therefore there is no need for our will to be conformed to the Divine will.

Objection 3. Further, the will is a principle of action. But our action cannot be conformed to God's. Therefore neither can our will be conformed to His.

On the contrary, It is written (Matthew 26:39): "Not as I will, but as Thou wilt": which words He said, because "He wishes man to be upright and to tend to God," as Augustine expounds in the Enchiridion [Enarr. in Ps. 32, serm. i.]. But the rectitude of the will is its goodness. Therefore the goodness of the will depends on its conformity to the Divine will.

I answer that, As stated above (Article 7), the goodness of the will depends on the intention of the end. Now the last end of the human will is the Sovereign Good, namely, God, as stated above (1, 8; 3, 1). Therefore the goodness of the human will requires it to be ordained to the Sovereign Good, that is, to God.

Now this Good is primarily and essentially compared to the Divine will, as its proper object. Again, that which is first in any genus is the measure and rule of all that belongs to that genus. Moreover, everything attains to rectitude and goodness, in so far as it is in accord with its proper measure. Therefore, in order that man's will be good it needs to be conformed to the Divine will.

Reply to Objection 1. The human will cannot be conformed to the will of God so as to equal it, but only so as to imitate it. In like manner human knowledge is conformed to the Divine knowledge, in so far as it knows truth: and human action is conformed to the Divine, in so far as it is becoming to the agent: and this by way of imitation, not by way of equality.

From the above may be gathered the replies to the Second and Third Objections.