http://www.dailycatholic.org/14penhay.htm




No Man Can Serve Two Masters Fourteenth Sunday after Pentecost
Comprehensive Catholic Commentary
by
Fr. George Leo Haydock
provided by
John Gregory


Editor's Note: We continue with this special feature provided by John Gregory with the Haydock Commentary found at the bottom of each page of the Douay-Rheims Bible. With the type so small in most bibles, we publish it here in larger type in conjunction with the Epistle and Gospel for the Sunday Mass, with the cogent comprehensive Catholic Commentary penned by Father George Leo Haydock. For the Fourteenth Sunday after Pentecost we come to Our Lord's words from St. Matthew 6: 24 that no man can serve two masters; that one cannot serve both God and mammom, which means riches and worldly things. Therefore we realize the words of St. Paul in the epistle to walk in the spirit and rail against the flesh for the world, the flesh and the devil is our downfall unless we heed Christ's counsel. He chastises us not because He's mad, but because He loves us and reassures us here how much the heavenly Father does too with his reference to those wonderful things of nature God has placed here on earth for man's use as He intended.

Epistle: Galatians 5: 16-22

16 I say then, walk in the spirit, and you shall not fulfill the lusts of the flesh.

17 For the flesh lusteth against the spirit: and the spirit against the flesh; for these are contrary one to another: so that you do not the things that you would.
Commentary on Verse 17 So that you[1] do not the things that you would. He does not say, so that you cannot do, as others falsely translate; as if men were under an absolute necessity of sinning, or doing ill; which is also contradictory to the foregoing words, walk by the spirit, and you will not accomplish the works of the flesh. (Witham) --- Here some suppose, says St. Augustine, that the apostle denieth that we have free liberty of will: not understanding that this is said to them, if they will not hold fast the grace of faith conceived, by which only they can walk in the spirit, and not accomplish the lusts of the flesh. (St. Augustine, in chap. v. Gal.)18 But if you are led by the spirit, you are not under the law.
19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are fornication, uncleanness, immodesty, luxury,

20 Idolatry, witchcrafts, enmities, contentions, emulations, wraths, quarrels, dissensions, sects,

21 Envies, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like. Of the which I foretell you, as I have foretold to you, that they who do such things shall not obtain the kingdom of God.
Commentary on Verse 19-21 Uncleanness, immodesty, luxury. In the Greek there are but two vices named; luxury is not mentioned; and, perhaps, the Latin interpreter put two words to explain one Greek word. (Witham) --- St. Augustine here sheweth that there are other damnable sins besides infidelity.22 But the fruit of the Spirit is, charity, joy, peace, patience, benignity, goodness, longanimity,
23 Mildness, faith, modesty, continency, chastity. Against such there is no law.
Commentary on Verse 22-23 The fruit of the Spirit is charity, &c. There are numbered twelve of these fruits in the Latin, though but nine in the Greek text, in St. Chrysostom; St. Jerome; St. Augustine, tract. lxxxvii. in Joan. p. 756. The difference may again happen by the Latin interpreter using two words to express one Greek word. It is observed, thatlonganimity and patience are in a manner the same; so are benignity and goodness; and so may be here continency and chastity. (Witham)24 And they that are Christ's, have crucified their flesh, with the vices and concupiscences.

Gospel: St. Matthew 6: 24-33

24 At that time Jesus said to His disciples: No man can serve two masters. For either he will hate the one, and love the other: or he will sustain the one, and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon.
Commentary on Verse 24 Behold here a fresh motive to detach you from the love of riches, or mammon. We cannot both serve God and the world, the flesh and the spirit, justice and sin. The ultimate end of action must be one, either for this or for the next life. (Haydock)25 Therefore I say to you, be not solicitous for your life, what you shall eat, nor for your body, what you shall put on. Is not the life more than the meat: and the body more than the raiment? Commentary on Verse 25 A prudent provision is not prohibited, but that over-solicitude which draws the soul, the heart, and its affections from God, and his sweet all-ruling providence, to sink and degrade them in empty pursuits, which can never fill the soul. (Haydock) --- Be not solicitous;[4] i.e. too solicitous with a trouble and anxiety of mind, as appears by the Greek. --- For your life; lit. for your soul, which many times is put for life. (Witham)26 Behold the birds of the air, for they neither sow, nor do they reap, nor gather into barns: and your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are not you of much more value than they?
 27 And which of you by taking thought, can add to his stature by one cubit?
Commentary on Verse 27 Why should the children of God fear want, when we behold the very birds of the air do not go unprovided? Moreover, what possible good can this anxiety, this diffidence procure them? Almighty God gives life and growth, which you cannot do with all your solicitude, however intensely you think. Apollo may plant, Paul may water, but God alone can give the increase. (1 Corinthians iii. 6.) Of how much greater consequence is it then to love and serve Him, and to live for Him alone! (Haydock)28 And for raiment why are you solicitous? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow: they labour not, neither do they spin.
 29 But I say to you, that not even Solomon in all his glory was arrayed as one of these.

30 And if the grass of the field, which is today, and tomorrow is cast into the oven, God doth so clothe: how much more you, O ye of little faith?
Commentary on Verse 30 "O ye of little faith;" that is, of little confidence in God and his providence. (Menochius)31 Be not solicitous therefore, saying, What shall we eat: or what shall we drink, or wherewith shall we be clothed?
 32 For after all these things do the heathens seek. For your Father knoweth that you have need of all these things.
Commentary on Verse 32 It is not without reason that men are in such great fear and distress, when they are so blind as to imagine that their happiness in this life is ruled by fate. But such as know that they are entirely governed by the will of God, know also that a store is laid up for them in his hands. (St. Chrysostom)33 Seek ye therefore first the kingdom of God, and his justice, and all these things shall be added unto you.
Commentary on Verse 33 [5] Your Father knoweth; he does not say God knoweth, but your Father, to teach us to apply to him with greater confidence. (St. Chrysostom) --- He that delivers himself entirely into the hands of God, may rest secure both in prosperity and adversity, knowing that he is governed by a tender Father. (St. Thomas Aquinas)

 

http://www.newadvent.org/summa/1116.htm#article3

 


Article 3. Whether fate is unchangeable?

Objection 1. It seems that fate is not unchangeable. For Boethius says (De Consol. iv): "As reasoning is to the intellect, as the begotten is to that which is, as time to eternity, as the circle to its centre; so is the fickle chain of fate to the unwavering simplicity of Providence."

Objection 2. Further, the Philosopher says (Topic. ii, 7): "If we be moved, what is in us is moved." But fate is a "disposition inherent to changeable things," as Boethius says (De Consol. iv). Therefore fate is changeable.

Objection 3. Further, if fate is unchangeable, what is subject to fate happens unchangeably and of necessity. But things ascribed to fate seem principally to be contingencies. Therefore there would be no contingencies in the world, but all things would happen of necessity.

On the contrary, Boethius says (De Consol. iv) that fate is an unchangeable disposition.

I answer that, The disposition of second causes which we call fate, can be considered in two ways: firstly, in regard to the second causes, which are thus disposed or ordered; secondly, in regard to the first principle, namely, God, by Whom they are ordered. Some, therefore, have held that the series itself or dispositions of causes is in itself necessary, so that all things would happen of necessity; for this reason that each effect has a cause, and given a cause the effect must follow of necessity. But this is false, as proved above (Question 115, Article 6).

Others, on the other hand, held that fate is changeable, even as dependent on Divine Providence. Wherefore the Egyptians said that fate could be changed by certain sacrifices, as Gregory of Nyssa says (Nemesius, De Homine). This too has been disproved above for the reason that it is repugnant to Divine Providence.

We must therefore say that fate, considered in regard to second causes, is changeable; but as subject to Divine Providence, it derives a certain unchangeableness, not of absolute but of conditional necessity. In this sense we say that this conditional is true and necessary: "If God foreknew that this would happen, it will happen." Wherefore Boethius, having said that the chain of fate is fickle, shortly afterwards adds--"which, since it is derived from an unchangeable Providence must also itself be unchangeable."

From this the answers to the objections are clear.