When a Jesuit deals with the topic of the Sabbath

Deutsch

When a Jesuit takes up the topic of the Sabbath and places this special day in the light of the Gospel, things usually get interesting. A truly insightful contribution from a “Loyola Brother” and his perspective on the Sabbath and the role of Jesus Christ.

Sabbath always in the sights of the adversary

The Sabbath, the 7th day of the week (“Saturday”), was a central theme from the very beginning of the still very young Christian communities, even if the topic was always kept very low-key. After all, the idea was not to stir up too much of a stir, otherwise people might seriously consider it. However, it was precisely this Sabbath, the Fourth Commandment of God (Info), that was rigorously rejected, especially in the religious centers of Rome and Alexandria, and replaced by the first day of the week (“Sunday” – the day of the sun).

The Sunday law of Emperor Constantine in 321 was merely an important milestone in the eradication of the Sabbath, but not the beginning (Info).

Instead of accepting the Sabbath, established by God at the conclusion of His creation (Genesis 2:2-3), as intended by the Creator, as His symbol of authority (Exodus 20:8-11) and as the liberator of fallen mankind from sin (Deuteronomy 5:12-15), God’s opponents preferred to weave fables and legends surrounding the 7th day of the week, both to erase God’s commandment from people’s minds and to introduce their own pagan-based sun worship day (“Sol Invictus”) for the 1st day for Christianity as well (Info).

When Jesuits deal with the Sabbath

It seems particularly interesting when the Jesuit magazine, “America – The Jesuit Review,” addresses this one, divinely instituted, blessed, and sanctified seventh day, the Sabbath, and even emphasizes its holiness. “The Holiness of the Sabbath,” is the title of the review. (Source). The author of this “Sabbath reflection” is a Jesuit.

Israel with a “separate God”?

The very first sentence clarifies a narrative that is also being pushed within the context of ecumenism. The author describes the sanctity of the Sabbath as a “fundamental characteristic of the religion of Israel.” As if the people of Israel had a different religion, if not even a “special, separate God” than Christianity. Their belief, according to the author, was that “every seventh day belongs to God.” This was one of the “great innovations of Israel’s religious imagination.” And indeed, Israel seems to have had a different God, for Israel has a God who established this Sabbath for the rest of all creation as an act of worship.

Although the author correctly points out that the Sabbath is also a day of remembrance for Israel’s rescue from slavery in Egypt (Exodus), even here the Jesuit maintains a seeming exclusivity for the then literal people of Israel.

Is the Sabbath a political issue?

The author continues his confusing inaccuracies. According to him, the Sabbath served as an “act of resistance” in the time of Jesus. Israel was conquered by the Romans several decades before the appearance of Jesus Christ. This statement alone is not entirely accurate, but clearly serves to cultivate the narrative of Israel’s separate customs. For what the Jesuit author calls Israel was actually only the land of Judah, including the small portion of the tribe of Benjamin. Around 930 BC, the entire land of Israel was divided into North and South Israel, with their respective capitals being Samaria and Jerusalem. In 721 BC, under King Hosea, North Israel, including Samaria, was razed to the ground by the Assyrians. It has ceased to exist since then.

But the remaining Judah and its former inhabitants, a tribe of twelve in total, are often lumped together with the term Israel.

Jesus a product of this environment

A separate group of Judah’s inhabitants were the Pharisees. The author highlights them as those who fought against foreign opposition to preserve their own culture. According to him, the Pharisees focused on three essential things: the enforcement of purity laws, the Sabbath regulations, and the Temple of Jerusalem. These were the basis for their “cultural resistance” against the Roman occupiers.

Jesus was a “product of this environment” and resisted the Pharisees’ logic, according to the author. Jesus, himself from the tribe of Judah, often associated with the Pharisees, and this is evidence that Jesus met their expectations. However, Jesus did not show the same “fearful reverence” toward the purity laws, the Sabbath regulations, and the Temple of Jerusalem as the Pharisees.

However, what Jesus Christ actually thought about the Pharisees is impressively recorded in chapter 23 of the book of Matthew.

Letting the cat out of the bag

As if people themselves didn’t read the Gospels—but the Jesuit might even be right about that. Otherwise, he would hardly be attempting to ascribe new content to the Gospels. According to him, the books of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John report that Jesus regarded these traditions, held dear by the Pharisees, as “divine wisdom.” God intended to educate people in righteousness and help them understand the mind of God. The Son of Man was “Lord of the Sabbath,” the author stated, so he and his followers were free to accept or abandon the Sabbath traditions without giving up the freedom or worship associated with them.

When a king proclaims, “I am Lord of my laws,” does this mean their abolition? Or when a householder emphasizes, “I am Lord of my house,” does this amount to the dissolution of the household? Few people would think that. But when Jesus says, “I am Lord even of the Sabbath” (Matthew 12:8), then this is the abolition of the Sabbath! What must have happened to convey such nonsense—to put it mildly? Often, seemingly small details are decisive. This is also the case with the Jesuit’s statement that Jesus “was” Lord of the Sabbath. No! Jesus “is” Lord of the Sabbath.

Jesus just a simple traveling preacher

The fact that the “Loyola Brother” does not regard Jesus Christ as God incarnate (John 1:1-3;14), but as a temporal phenomenon, coincidentally in the time of the Roman occupier, in the form of a simple itinerant preacher, is indirectly demonstrated by his summary:

“If today’s readings challenge us in any way, perhaps it is to rummage through our hearts and remind ourselves that the “Son of Man is Lord” of the things we might hold dear but which also might hold us back from a true relationship with God.“

The Son of Man is “Lord of things” that seem valuable to us, but can also hinder a “true relationship with God.” The actual statement: Jesus has nothing in common with God in this sense, and they are certainly not one (John 10:30). Rather, Jesus has the potential to turn people away from God.

Actually “exemplary”

In this sense, this Jesuit contribution is exemplary for the approach of distorting the Gospel with all the rhetorical skill at his disposal. Narratives are used, fundamentally different things are conflated, deliberate inaccuracies are simply cleverly done. But it is simply the reversal of the Gospel and the service of the one who claims dominion over the world for himself. The one who gave the beast “power and his throne and great authority” (Revelation 13:2). The books of Daniel and Revelation provide information about this (Info).

The Sabbath, God’s Fourth Commandment, was never a commandment established exclusively for the people of Israel. Jesus Christ emphasized this in Mark 2:27:
“And he said unto them, The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath:”
For the sake of “man,” and not for the sake of “Israelite”! (Info)

Apostle Paul already knew in his time that card-carvers and deceivers would enter the church. In his letter, he warned the church of Ephesus, the church that John on Patmos had named as the first church in Asia to be written to (Info).

Bible verses from King James Version (1611)