How many times have you heard a homily preached on the poor apostles, poor fishermen. Has it ever sounded goofy? Have you ever thought about the wealthy apostles? I will not presume to make such a definitive statement that the priests have all been wrong who have spoken about the poor apostles, but I do challenge you to think about the arguments I make and question yourself, "Could the apostles really have been some of the wealthiest people in Israel?"
One of the arguments I hear frequently is a quote from Jesus, "It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for one who is rich to enter the Kingdom of God." Most people forget to add the rest of the conversation though, "All things are possible for God," and we should not forget, in the Jewish tradition wealth is a sign of God's favor.
So there is Jesus standing in Peter's boat calling Peter to follow Him. Let's put this scene into perspective. The two markets for fish were in the towns of Caesarea and Tiberius. Peter is in the family business, his family are commercial fishermen. This is no small operation. Once the fish are taken out of the Sea of Galilee they have to be delivered to the market as fresh fish, so they have to be iced. Then someone needs to stay at the market and sell the fish. How many boats were in their fleet? At least two, of course, but there is nothing that says there were not more. These were not small boats either. They were big enough to fit Jesus and all His apostles on board. This is no small investment. Before outfitting a fishing boat today you will easily spend 2.5 million dollars. The nets alone cost 200,000 dollars or more. Then you need hooks, charts, repair equipment, and what else?
Then there is Matthew, the tax collector. Could he be "Peter's IRS Man" or his business accountant, advising Peter's family on the ins and outs of Roman tax law, making a decent living on a portion of the lucrative fishing industry in the Sea of Galilee?
How about Joseph of Arimathea? He was one of the wealthiest men in the Roman Empire. He traded tin from England. He was also the great uncle of the Blessed Virgin. That is why Jesus ended up in his tomb. Mary's marriage was arranged with Joseph when she was a young teen. With such a wealthy family would her parents arrange a marriage to a poor carpenter, or was St. Joseph more than a craftsman of simple hand tools? Could a carpenter really be more like a home builder? In that case, Jesus would have been born into wealth, only to gain more from the Kings of the East who paid him homage. There were three gifts, but were there only three kings? Did each of them only bring one gift each, or could there have been a wagon train coming from the east with each king bringing gifts of gold, frankincense and myrrh? I will place myself in their shoes. If I were a king, with plenty of wealth at my disposal, and I knew of the birth of a King in the west, someone so special I thought it important to travel hundreds of miles to bring Him gifts at His birth, be certain I would bring a gift worthy of the moment, not a small token of my admiration.
Now it is getting late, but I will finish this post soon.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Dear Joel,
Good food for thought. I must confess I never viewed these things this way before, so thanks alot brother.
From George (he asked me to post it)
"Hello Joel I'm a good friend of Sophocles and Costa. I agree with Soph, you have some very interesting view points,and it really made me think. But I have a question for you to help us validate Christ and his family's poverty? I agree that the wise Kings would've brought wealthy gifts (especially since they were Kings) knowing the little child was Christ our God. And we know The Virgin Mary and Joseph knew he was Christ our God. So when they presented Jesus (our Christ and God) on his 40 day blessing they would also have given an expensive gift (animal) in tradition of sacrifice to God. And during that time a wealthy gift for sacrifice was a bull or large animal. What was the animal they gave in sacrifice?"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That is interesting. I read somewhere or heard a lecture that each of the gifts were symbolic.
Hullo Costa,
It gives me great pleasure to see you here. I am glad to have yuor audience.
Hello George,
Thank you for posting, and I am happy to make your aquaintance. The sacrifice made for the birth of our Lord was two turtle doves. The sacrifice was prescribed in the Law though and no one ever sacrificed a bull or a large animal for the birth of a child. You can find the prescription in the Book of Leviticus Chapter 12, which calls for a lamb and a turtle dove or two turtle doves.
I do understand an arguement can be made for the Holy Family's poverty on the basis that they offered two turtle doves in lieu of a lamb and a turtle dove but any argument made on the basis of of not offering a bull or other large animal is unmerited.
Hey dude, me again. I wrote another response to Joel, please post it for me. And I'll get a blog soon so you don't have to keep doing this. Love you Brother
In Christ, Goerge
Dear Joel,
Bull, large animal, lamb, same diff. haha. Thanks for the correction and thanks for allowing me to join your blog. Anyway, as I read Liviticus it says that a sacrifice should be a lamb for burnt offering and A pigeon or A turtledove for a sin offering when the women is clean (40 days after giving birth to a male).
And as we read verse 8 it says, "IF A WOMEN CANNOT AFFORD A LAMB, she shall bring two doves or two pigeons, one for a burnt offering and the other for a sin offering, and the priest shall perform the ritual to take away her impurity, and she will be ritually clean"
Now we look at Luke Ch.2 verses 22-24. "Now when the days of her purification according to the law of Moses were completed, they brought Him to Jeruselum to present Him to the Lord (as it is written in the law of the Lord, 'Every male who opens the womb shall be called Holy to the Lord'), and to offer a sacrifice according to what is said in the law of the Lord, " A pair of turtledoves or two young pigeons"
Obviously, as we read Liviticus, the ones who are poor offer TWO turtledoves or TWO pigeons. And Luke our beatuiful Saint, Doctor, and first Iconographer of our Church, writes that Christ's parents brought Him to the temple on His Forty Day blessing, beacause Mary was considered clean then, and offered TWO turtledoves or TWO pigeons in sacrifice to God. So we can see they were clearly in poverty according to scripture and St. Luke's confirmation in his Gospel. I'm sure you already know all this but I wanted to try my best to scholastically prove my point. Talk to you soon Joel.
Thank you for welcoming me Joel
Well, I was going to write more soon and now it is a week later and I still have not finished the post. Actually I have not even been thinking a lot about it this past week.
Some of the other things I thought about was the fact that the apostles had to be told not to bring anything on the road with them. I know that is not an argument that holds a lot of water but it is something I thought about. I am not sure if anyone reading this has ever had nothing, but I have. During that time I did not need to be told not to bring anything on the road with me, that was just a matter of the way things were. Nothing was going on the road with me because I had nothing to take. There have also been times when I had more than nothing and if I were to go on the road, I would have brought some of it with me. That is just the way things were. I had stuff and it was coming with, I would have had to of been told not to bring it.
What about James and John asking to be placed one on the left and one on the right hand of Jesus after He comes into His kingdom? To me this sounds like arrogance born of riches. I just can not imagine a pair of brothers from the slums of downtown DC asking the Speaker of the House to put one on the left and one on the right. How much greater are they asking when they speak to God that way?
How about the birth of the Church? I know the apostles were able to perform miracles but did those look like a purse that was able to buy passage for four to Thessalonica with seven mites left over? I find that hard to believe. Any venture in evangilization takes a lot of money. The apostles were told to trust in God to have their needs met but we also know that Paul worked as a tent maker while he was on the road to help offset the burden of his living expenses. I have never been on a mission, but I have had a job in which I travel, and let me tell you, money goes quickly! I didn't travel in luxury but there was no way I ever could have done what I did without the backing of very deep pockets. We know that the entire world was evangilized by the apostles. The entire known world heard the Gospel before 100 AD. That took a lot of money.
Post a Comment