Christ’s warning: The Banquet will go on—with or without you
Our Lord shows the terrible danger of refusing grace, even for things lawful in themselves.
Our Lord shows the terrible danger of refusing grace, even for things lawful in themselves.
Editor’s Notes
The Gospel on the Second Sunday of Pentecost recounts a parable told in the house of one of the Pharisees. In response to Our Lord’s teaching about humility, and giving without expectation of return, one of the men at table said, “Blessed is he that shall eat bread in the Kingdom of God.”
The Parable of the Great Supper is told in response to that comment, as if to ask: “But who, of those invited to this blessing, will accept it?”
This incident comes towards the end of Christ’s ministry, following his controversies with the Pharisees and Scribes and his many warnings against worldliness and carelessness.
In this part, Fr. Coleridge tells us…
How the Jews first rejected their call to the Church, and how the Gentiles became the chosen guests
That the divine call is not necessarily spurned in favour of evil, but rather lesser goods
Why the every man must guard against repeating this same attachment, pride and refusal.
He shows us that grace neglected leads to exclusion from the banquet both on Earth and in Heaven—and that we all must respond with humility and fidelity.
Our Lord in the Pharisee’s House
The Preaching of the Cross, Part II
Chapter VIII
St. Luke xiv. 1-35.
Story of the Gospels, § 111-3
Burns and Oates, London, 1887
Christ’s warning: The Banquet will go on—with or without you
How the call to the Church passed from Israel to the Gentiles
Parable of the Great Supper
‘But He said to him, A certain man made a great supper, and invited many. 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.
‘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.
‘And another said, I have bought five yoke of oxen, and I go to try them, I pray thee, hold me excused.
‘And another said, I have married a wife, and therefore I cannot come.
‘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.
‘And the servant said, Lord, it is done as thou hast commanded, and yet there is room.
‘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.
‘But I say unto you, that none of those men that were invited, shall taste of my supper.’
Explanation
It would seem, in the first place, that the great supper of which our Lord here speaks must be that ‘eating of bread in the Kingdom of God,’ of which one of the company had spoken to Him. That is, the great supper is the blessed feast of the eternal joys in the presence of God and our Lord, in the company of all the angels and saints, and the great multitude of the redeemed.
But, as the invitation of God in His Kingdom is not simply to Heaven, but to Heaven by means of the faithful use of grace on earth, we may well extend the meaning of the banquet to that feast of God which consists in all the various gifts of grace which are offered to us in the Church, all that God has prepared for us by the right use of which we may gain the future glories.
This feast is prepared of old from the beginning of the world, for there never has been a time when any child of Adam could not reconcile himself to God by penitence, faith, and the use of whatever means of grace were open to him.
But the feast of the Gospel is said to be prepared and ready, when the whole system, by means of which the fruits of the Precious Blood are brought home to the souls of men, is arranged and thrown open in the Church as the result of our Lord’s Passion, Resurrection, and Ascension.
Those who gave in their faith and submission to our Lord before that time, under whatever dispensation, may be said to have been invited and to have come in as far as possible, and thus they enjoyed the fruits of all that had been or was to be done by Him. In a special way the preaching of the Gospel by our Lord Himself was the announcement to the invited that they should come, for now all things are ready.
We must always remind ourselves that our Lord was now speaking to the Jews, and especially to those in authority among them, who, in relation to the Gentiles, were the first and original guests invited to the Gospel banquet. In this sense our Lord Himself may be considered as sent to announce the supper, and, after Him, the Apostles and preachers of the Church who spoke in His name. He had now been nearly three years preaching among them, and the result had been as the parable tells us, that the men invited would not come to the supper.
‘They began all at once,’ that is, one as soon as the others, ‘to make excuse.’ The Fathers see in the three excuses of which mention is made a reference to the threefold concupiscences which keep men from closing with the invitations of God. There is the concupiscence of the flesh, the concupiscence of the eyes, and the pride of life. Otherwise, there is the love of sensual pleasure, and the love of money and possessions, and the solicitude of earthly cares and business, which are like the thorns which choke the good seed in the parable of the Sower. The pride of life may be put with the love of possessions, the concupiscence of the eyes with the engrossment of secular cares, the concupiscence of the flesh with sensual pleasure.
All the objects which are thus set before men as the satisfaction of their hearts and minds are things in themselves not forbidden in the right degree. So there was no sin in the man who had bought a farm or a field, no sin in the man who had bought five yoke of oxen, no sin in the man who had married a wife. Yet our Lord makes the first two excuse themselves discourteously, and the third not so much excuse himself as bluntly refuse to come. They preferred these things to the supper to which they were invited, and to the favour of the lord whose invitation they disregarded.
One class of men, figured in the first of the three, are too fond of property and position to care for the things of God, another class is too much devoted to temporal cares, and another class loves bodily pleasure so much as to have no care for the best interests of the soul. This last class, represented by the man who says he has married a wife, and so cannot come, is in this respect worse than the other two, because engrossment in carnal delights not only shuts out the care for spiritual things, but it deadens and brutalizes the soul even more than the other concupiscences.
The three classes who excuse themselves
It may be said that if our Lord is speaking, in the first instance, of the rejection of the invitation of God by the Jews and their rulers, it might be expected that He should attribute their blindness and obstinacy to motives other than those of the three common concupiscences.
It might be expected that He would speak of their pride and self-seeking, the worldly and political motives of interest which made them so anxious that the state of things, in which they found themselves so much considered, so well off as to all material interests, and which made them enjoy so much influence with the people, should not be interfered with and endangered, as might have been the case if they had encouraged the movement of the multitude to put their faith in Him.
But, as a matter of fact, it is a truth of experience that these common concupiscences are at the root of all such action as theirs. The great need of these men was repentance and conversion, such as might have been theirs if they had sincerely made themselves disciples of St. John, and so fit for the reception of the Gospel truths.
And thus the picture which paints the generality of mankind in their resistance to grace is a true description of them also, and of their resolute indifference to the teaching which might have brought them within the reach of their salvation, the first-fruits of which would have been a humble docility to the Divine Teacher Himself.
Inadequacy of human language
In any description of the dealings of God with men in human language and imagery, there must always be something left out on account of the inadequacy of the vehicle in which the representation is conveyed.
In the case before us no human image can convey any true idea of the richness of the banquet which God has prepared for those who will accept it, nor, again, of the misery of those who do not close with the invitation, nor, again, of the dignity of Him Whose offer is so contemptuously neglected. All these are elements in the state of things which is represented in the parable, which the parable itself can only leave untouched, to be understood by those who can fill up the picture, to some extent, for themselves.
Yet these explain the severity with which these men are dealt with, by explaining the crime which they commit when they turn away from the offers made them. They are not in any sense independent of God, as the invited guests may have been of the lord in the parable. They do not understand that the invitation is a most loving command from One Who has a right to command, they do not understand what they decline, and at what danger to themselves they decline it.
Thus there is more reason in the indignation of God against the Jews, and others like them, than in the anger of the lord against the invited guests. But our Lord does not dwell on this any further than to make the lord say at the end of the parable that not one of them shall taste of his supper.
The main point on which He now insists is the immense love of God for the souls of men, and His burning desire that His banquet shall not have been spread in vain. The lord of the banquet sends out once and again, but not to entreat them who have rejected his overtures to enter into themselves and withdraw their refusal.
There is something in the counsels of God which resembles some action of this kind. For we find in a later parable that He is represented as sending over and over again to the wicked husbandmen, and at last sending His Son. But here our Lord puts forward the other aspect of the truth. The lord turns away at once from the invited guests. He sent first into the streets and lanes of the city for the poor, the lame, the feeble, and the blind.
Then, when there was still room, he sends outside, the highways and hedges must be searched, men are to be compelled to come in, that his house may be filled. It matters not that those who eat of the banquet are the poor and the feeble and the blind and the lame, or even strangers to the city, wayfarers, wanderers, outcasts.
The banquet-chamber must be filled, and filled with men who had not been invited and then rejected the invitation.
If we are to understand by these first invited guests, the Jews to whom our Lord was now preaching, it is natural to look to those who were not Jews as represented by those who are brought in to supply the forfeited places.
But who are the these newly invited guests, and what do the various classes represent?
Subscribe now to never miss an article:
Our Lord in the Pharisee’s House
Christ’s warning: The Banquet will go on—with or without you
How the call to the Church passed from Israel to the Gentiles
Here’s why you should subscribe to The Father Coleridge Reader and share with others:
Fr Coleridge provides solid explanations of the entirety of the Gospel
His work is full of doctrine and piety, and is highly credible
He gives a clear trajectory of the life of Christ, its drama and all its stages—increasing our appreciation and admiration for the God-Man.
If more Catholics knew about works like Coleridge’s, then other works based on sentimentality and dubious private revelations would be much less attractive.
But sourcing and curating the texts, cleaning up scans, and editing them for online reading is a labour of love, and takes a lot of time.
Will you lend us a hand and hit subscribe?
Follow our projects on Twitter, YouTube and Telegram:
I would love to see commentary on the passage from Romans 11:26, "And so all Israel will be saved, as it is written: 'The Deliverer will come from Zion, he will turn away ungodliness from Jacob.'". For some reason, I don't think the verse means what the Modernists would have us believe. Regardless, I would like to hear what Fr. Coleridge has to say about it. +