4th Sunday B

Jeff Bagnall • 26 January 2024

In the first reading ( Deuteronomy 18:15-20) , Moses relates the message that God will send a prophet to the people. This most probably meant at first that God would always send prophets to teach people God’s ways – to encourage, scold and challenge them. And there were in fact a series of prophets who were the mouth-pieces or spokes-persons of God, which is what the word prophet means (in the Greek προφητης). But later, perhaps following the yearning for a Messiah, this message from Moses may have been taken as an ideal Prophet who would speak God’s final words. Followers of Christ who came to realise that he was the very Word of God, took this as a foretelling of His coming. For us, as for all people across the ages, there is the problem of discerning the message of God to us, in general and to each of us individually in our different situations. Surely God’s message is in the Bible, but that needs interpreting, and the traditional teaching of the Christian Church plays a role in this. But in the end any individual application, comes from our own make-up, our circumstances and the myriads of people who communicate with us directly or indirectly. I think, that like a real parent, God wants us to heed all these and do the best we can – but we mustn’t harden our hearts or close our ears.

The second reading ( 1 Cor 7:32-35)  follows on from last week’s. Paul is answering a number of questions that the Corinthians have raised with him, either by messenger or by letter. They had many questions they wanted their first evangeliser to sort out for them in their particular situation. Some Christian converts from Judaism promoted strict observance of the Jewish laws even for non-Jewish Christians, thinking that in this way they could deserve God’s love and grace. But this is mistaken because we know that God loves us gratuitously and we are not worthy of any reward from God. Some people in Corinth, perhaps in reaction to the immorality for which their city was notorious or the supposed imminence of the end of time, promoted celibacy even within marriage. Paul thought there was no harm in this but that it was not necessary. Paul knows that there is a difference between what he suggests and the genuine imperatives from the Lord for good Christian living.  The Catholic Church generally requires celibacy for its priests and among the Christians in Paul’s day (i.e. in the very early Church) there was the thought that the end of the world would soon come and it may have been this that contributed to the ideas that some had, that freedom from the responsibilities and pleasures of marriage would help one to be ready for this End of the world.  Of course we should not decry the choice that some make for this kind of life but we also should not think less of those of us who choose to marry.  There is a great expression of God’s love in marriage at least equal to that in virginity.  Even in our present situation, most people do not think the end of the world is very near.  Whether or no, celibate or married individuals  must  love others as they would God – referred to as love of neighbour – but neither should be compulsory for anyone.

Mark in the gospel ( Mark 1:21-28) tells us of Jesus’ visit to the local synagogue where, as a visitor, he was invited to say some words. Jesus has confidence about any message of God for the people, because, as we now believe, He was the very Word of God incarnate into our humanity. The recipients of Mark’s preaching also had this belief, though perhaps only incipiently. In the story, the authority of the words of Jesus is recognised, interestingly even before His power over unclean spirits is exhibited. I notice that, in Mark’s gospel story, it is only the unclean spirit that actually recognises who Jesus is, and secondly, that there seems to be an aside, that the local leader of the synagogue and perhaps other teachers, don’t quite speak with the same personal confidence in what they say. We should be wary of thinking that we can earn God’s love (we have it anyway), and we should try to detect what God might be saying to us through the things and the people with whom we interact and the beliefs that we hold, and respond with confidence that we are doing the best we can. These are the ideas, perhaps, that we should take from the Word of God we hear each Sunday.

Jeff Bagnall was a lecturer for many years at Craiglockhart College teaching RE to many future Catholic Primary teachers.

by Jeff Bagnall 27 August 2026
It's not so long ago that we were reading of Elijah wanting to die because of his failure to inspire the people and because of a death-threat against him. Jeremiah was in a worse situation in Judah around the 7th century BC. In that land, regard for Yahweh and the Covenant was almost entirely abandoned, and God urged Jeremiah to preach about the inevitable political demise and eventual national disaster. He had a respite from his work for a short time during the reign of Josiah; for this king tried to reintroduce the recognition of the Law of God as found written in what we now see as the early books of the bible, especially Exodus, Leviticus and Deuteronomy. But this reform soon failed, and idolatry and fertility cults regained popularity. Despite extreme reluctance, Jeremiah began the work of his calling, which was to bring him general disfavour, occasional imprisonment or confinement and continued unpopularity. There was some upbeat aspects to his message at times, particularly the one about God wanting to set up a new covenant within the hearts of the people. He suffered a tormenting turmoil in his own life; it resulted both from his natural abhorrence of preaching against his own people and from the deep and inescapable inner compulsion to undertake the vocation given him by God – announcing the people's downfall. Doing God’s will is not always an obviously good thing! Our reading is his outcry at this personal conflict within him.
by Jeff Bagnall 19 August 2026
During the time of the prophet Isaiah, the kingdom of Judah was threatened by the Assyrian empire from the east. Isaiah had recommended trusting in God to save the people and God would be with them. But the king and leaders didn’t see it this way, they felt they would loose, and forfeit their privileged positions, if not their lives. They made some sort of a pact with the emperor of Assyria so that Jerusalem was spared, although the rest of the country was invaded. So Isaiah, as we read today , reprimand Shebna the royal steward, and announced a replacement, who will be the leader to make decisions in the future; he will have the symbols of office, the sash, the robe, the key to the ordering of the country’s affairs, and will keep them safe like the peg for a tent. This passage seems to be in the mind of Matthew when he writes of Peter receiving the leadership office in our gospel reading. But the historical events behind it challenge us severely in our relationship with our world and with God, just as the sermon on the mount in the New Testament does: if anyone wants your shirt give them your coat as well, if anyone strikes you turn the other cheek, love you enemies… (see Matthew 5:38-48).
Show More