15 octobre 2026 – jeudi de la 28^ème semaine du TO

Ep 1, 1-10; Lc 11, 47-54

Homélie

Ce texte d’Évangile que nous venons de lire est la continuation de celui que nous avions hier.

Dans l’Évangile de Luc, tout l’enseignement de Jésus se situe dans un contexte de lutte entre le royaume de Dieu dont Jésus annonce la venue et les forces du mal, représentées d’abord par le tentateur au désert, puis par l’opposition de plus en plus forte que les Pharisiens et les Scribes offrent à Jésus, jusqu’à sa longue montée vers Jérusalem, où les forces du mal sembleront avoir triomphé de lui quand il est mis à mort et déposé au tombeau, en attendant la victoire finale du Fils de Dieu le matin de la résurrection.

October 13, 2026 – Tuesday of the 28th Week in Ordinary Time

Mal 1:14b–2:1, 2b, 8–10; 1 Thess 2:7b–9, 13; Matt 23:1–12 

Homily

           The two readings we have just heard are so clear that they hardly need any commentary!

           Jesus’ attitude toward the Pharisee who had invited him to dine at his home—and toward the Pharisees in general—in the Gospel account we have read is marked by a severity rarely found in His words.  This speaks to the importance of the message conveyed by His words.

           Jesus is full of understanding and mercy toward all human weakness. But He is extremely severe toward any form of hypocrisy. And it is hypocrisy that is at the heart of this story.

           The practice of the law—of any law, and therefore also of our monastic rules—has meaning only if it truly corresponds to a disposition of the heart.

           The same message is conveyed to us in Paul’s words to the Galatians regarding circumcision. We are not saved by any rite or observance whatsoever. Salvation is a pure gift from God, an act of love that asks only to be received with love. Any observance of the Law finds its meaning when it is an expression of such love.

Armand Veilleux

October 18, 2026                                                                                    29th Sunday "A"

Is 45,1.4-6a ; 1 Th 1,1-5b ; Mat 22,15-21

H O M I L Y

    When the Pharisees, the Scribes and the Priests brought Jesus to Pontius Pilate  in order to have him sentenced and executed by the Roman authorities, they used the following accusation against him: "We found this man inciting our people to revolt; opposing payment of tribute to Caesar..." (Luke 23,2).  In fact, the most certain and well‑attested fact about Jesus of Nazareth is that he was tried and executed by the Romans on a charge of high treason.  It is important therefore to analyze attentively what happens in the scene reported by this morning's Gospel, since it is that scene that will be used by the Jewish authorities to have Jesus executed as a political agitator. 

    Jesus was full of understanding of human weakness and was shockingly compassionate with all kinds of sinners.  But if there was one thing he could not stand, it was hypocrisy.  He could no stand the hypocrisy of the Jewish authorities, that made them oppress politically, socially and economically their own people in the name of religion.  And he certainly could not stand the hypocrisy that would consist today in seeing in this Gospel the foundation for a so‑called distinction between politics and religion that allows us at times to keep our social and economic behavior from being influenced by the Gospel.  In reality such a distinction is a purely modern, pagan, concept.

    The people of Israel lived under Roman rule.  And there is ample evidence in the Gospel to show that Jesus wanted Israel to be liberated from the Roman imperialism just as much as the Zealots, the Pharisees, the Essenes or anyone else wanted it.  But his preoccupation reached much farther than that of any of those groups.  He wanted to reach to the root cause of all oppression and domination: man's lack of compassion.  If the people of Israel were to continue to lack compassion for one another, would the overthrowing of the Romans make Israel any more liberated than before?  If the Jews continued to live off the worldly values of money, prestige, group solidarity and power, would the Roman oppression not be replaced by an equally loveless Jewish oppression? 

    Jesus was much more genuinely concerned about liberation than the Zealots were.  They wanted a mere change of government (nowadays man would talk of “change of regime”)  from Roman to Jewish.  Jesus had no problem with that;  but he wanted first of all a change that would affect every sphere of life.  He saw what no one else had been able to see, that there was more oppression and economic exploitation from within Judaism than from without.  The middle‑class Jews who were in rebellion against Rome were themselves oppressors of the poor and the uneducated.  The ordinary people had to suffer far more on account of the oppression of the scribes, Pharisees, Sadducees and Zealots than on account of the Romans.  The protest against Roman oppression was hypocritical.   And this is the point of Jesus' famous answer to the question about the paying of taxes to Caesar. 

    In practice Roman rule meant Roman taxation.  For the Phari­sees, paying taxes to the Roman overlord meant giving to Caesar what belonged to God, namely, Israel's money and possessions.  But for Jesus this was a rationalization, a hypocritical excuse for avarice.   It had nothing to do with the real issue.

In their question, they ask whether it is legitimate  to pay the taxes.  In his response, Jesus does ot speak about paying, but rather about giving back.  "Give back to Caesar what belongs to Caesar and to God what belongs to God".  That answer reveals that Jesus saw the real motive behind all the fuss that the Jews made about the taxation issue: greed for money.  Those who ask the question are themselves in possession of Roman coins.  Those coins had on them Caesar's name and his image.  It was not God's money but Caesar's money.  If you refuse to give back to Caesar what belongs to Caesar then it can only be because you are a lover of money.  If you really wished to give back to God what belongs to God, you would sell all your possessions and give them to the poor, you would give up your desire for power, prestige and possessions. 

    The real issue was oppression itself and not the fact that a pagan Roman dared to oppress God's chosen people.  The root cause of oppression was man's lack of compassion.  Considered in terms of compassion the hardship of having to pay taxes to a Roman govern­ment instead of a Jewish government  were minimal in comparison with the hardships suffered by the poor and the sinners at the hands of their rich and virtuous fellow‑contrymen.  Both hardships need to be removed but Jesus was much more sensitive to the hardships of the poor and the sinners, as  so many Gospel stories clearly show. 

    Jesus did not reproach the Pharisees for being too political; he reproached them in a sense for being "too religious", that is, for oppressing their fellow brothers and sisters in the name of a loveless under­standing of religion. 

    And, who knows, maybe we also are too "religious" at times...

Armand Veilleux

13 octobre 2026 – mardi de la 28ème semaine du Temps Ordinaire

Ml 1,14b - 2,1.2b.8-10; 1 Th 2,7b-9.13; Mt 23,1-12

Homélie

           Les deux lectures que nous venons d’entendre sont si limpides qu’elles n’ont guère besoin de commentaire !

           L’attitude de Jésus à l’égard du Pharisien qui l’avait invité à manger chez-lui, et à l’égard des Pharisiens en général, dans le récit évangélique que nous avons lu, est d’une sévérité qu’on trouve rarement dans sa bouche.  C’est dire l’importance du message que ses paroles transmettent.

           Jésus est plein de compréhension de de miséricorde pour toute faiblesse humaine. Mais il est d’une très grande sévérité pour toute forme d’hypocrisie. Et c’est d’hypocrisie qu’il s’agit dans ce récit.

           La pratique de la loi – de toute loi, et donc aussi de nos règlements monastiques – n’a de sens que si elle correspond vraiment à une disposition du cœur. 

           Le même message nous est livré dans les paroles de Paul aux Galates au sujet de la circoncision.  Nous ne sommes sauvés par aucun rite ou aucune observance que ce soit.  Le salut est un pur don de Dieu, un geste d’amour qui ne demande qu’à être reçu avec amour. Toute observance de la Loi prend son sens lorsqu’elle est l’expression d’un tel amour.

Armand Veilleux

23 octobre 2026 – vendredi de la 29^ème semaine (années paires)

Eph 4,1-6 ; Luc 12, 54-59 

H O M É L I E

Nous terminons aujourd’hui la lecture de ce long chapitre 12 de l’Évangile de Luc, où celui-ci regroupe un grand nombre d’enseignements de Jésus prononcés en des circonstances différentes.  Le fait que nous ignorons, dans la plupart des cas ces circonstances nous rend plus difficile l’interprétation de ces récits.  Les deux petits « logia » d’aujourd’hui sont des paroles de sagesse qui peuvent évidemment être appliquées à toutes les situations. 

12 octobre 2026 : lundi de la 28^ère semaine du Temps Ordinaire

Luc 11, 29-32

Homélie 

           Le prophète Jonas fut envoyé par Dieu aux païens de la cité de Ninive.  Mais il ne voulait pas avoir cette mission, et il s’enfuit vers la cité de Tarsis.  Cela, comme nous le savons, le conduisit – lui et tous ses compagnons – dans une terrible tempête.  Au coeur de cette tempête, il reconnut son péché et il accepta – il demanda même – d’être jeté à la mer pour calmer la colère de Dieu. C’est alors qu’il commença une expérience de solitude, symbolisée par le temps qu’il passa dans le ventre d’un gros poisson, avant de commencer, finalement, sa mission qui était de prêcher un message de repentance.  Cependant, il lui était impossible de comprendre qu’une cité païenne pourrait se convertir à Dieu ;  et lorsqu’elle se convertit, il en fut contrarié.  Comme nous le savons par le reste de l’histoire, Dieu va lui faire comprendre, à travers l’image de la plante qui croît en un jour et qui meurt le lendemain, que Lui, Dieu, a le même amour miséricordieux pour la ville païenne de Ninive que pour le peuple d’Israël.