30th Sunday in Ordinary Time, Year A - Oct. 25, 2026

 

30^th Sunday in Ordinary Time, Year A - Oct. 25, 2026

Exodus 22:20-26; 1 Thessalonians 1:5c-10; Matthew 22:34-40

 

Theme: Love Your God, Love Your Neighbor, And Love Yourself

 

A.    A Brief Exegetical Analysis of Matthew 22:34-40

 

1. Historical and Literary Contexts

The Jewish religious leaders questioned Jesus’ authority (21:23-27). In response, Jesus told them three consecutive parables (21:28-32; 21:33-46; 22:1-14), warning that by rejecting him, the kingdom of heaven was being taken from them and given to the “outcasts” who repent and believe in him. These parables and their lessons angered them, leading them to view Jesus as a threat to their power. Through a series of three entrapping questions, they plotted to either embarrass him publicly before the Jewish community or gather legal evidence to accuse him, which would lead to his arrest and condemnation by the Roman authorities. Our Gospel passage is the third trap. The other two are the questions about paying taxes to Caesar (22:15-22) and the resurrection of the dead (22:23-33). Jesus triumphed over all their tests. Immediately after our text, Matthew discusses the Messiah's sonship (22:41-46).    

 

2. Form, Structure, and Movement

This Gospel narrative unfolds in two parts: the question posed by a scholar of the law to Jesus (vv. 34-36) and Jesus’s response (vv. 37-40).

 

3. Detailed Analysis

Vv. 34-36. The scribe’s question is a test meant to entrap Jesus. The Pharisees know that Jesus has twice escaped their traps. The first question came from the unholy alliance of the Pharisees and Herodians (Mt 22:15-22), and the second from the Sadducees (22:23-33). With these failures in mind, they approached him again, this time determined to succeed. That is why they appointed an expert in Mosaic law to represent them. The trap in his question lies in pushing Jesus to single out one commandment as the greatest, aiming to ridicule him, since for devout Jews, “all commandments were to be kept with equal care.”^[1]

Vv. 37-40. Instead of singling out one greatest commandment, Jesus summarizes all the laws of Moses into two commandments. The first, quoting the famous Jewish passage known as the Shema (Dt 6:4-5), is love for God, involving the whole person (heart, soul, and mind). The emphasis is on the words “all,” “heart,” “soul,” and “mind.” The Greek word for heart is kardia; it can be understood as the seat of emotions or affections. Thus, loving God with all of one’s heart means nurturing one’s affection and emotional attachment to him. The “soul” refers to one’s spiritual nature. Therefore, loving God with all one’s soul means pursuing a personal spiritual relationship with God. The “mind” (in Greek, dianoia) represents an intellectual endeavor. Thus, loving God with all one’s mind challenges believers to know God not only by faith but also through intelligence, meaning by studying Sacred Scripture.^[2]

Referring to Lv 19:18, Jesus's second greatest commandment is to love one's neighbor as oneself. The love for oneself serves as a model for loving one's neighbor. Everything written in the Law and the Prophets (the Jewish Bible) derives from these two commandments.

  

4. Synthesis

An expert in Mosaic law tests Jesus with a question about which of Moses' laws is greatest. He tries to push Jesus into singling out one law as the greatest so he can ridicule him publicly, because, for devout Jews, all laws must be regarded equally. In response, Jesus summarizes all the commandments into two rather than singling out one. The first is the love for God, which engages the whole person (heart, soul, and mind). This means believers should love God with all their affection and emotional attachment (heart), seek a personal and spiritual relationship with him (soul), and use not only their faith but also their intelligence (mind). The second commandment is that believers should use their love for themselves as a model for loving their neighbors. Jesus concludes by affirming that everything written in the Jewish Bible derives from these two commandments.

B.     Pastoral Implications

 

1. Liturgical Context

In the Gospel, Jesus summarizes the Mosaic laws into two commandments: love for God with all our hearts, souls, and minds, and love for our neighbors as we love ourselves. Then, the sacred author of the first reading explains in detail how we should live out our love for God and our neighbors. The second reading encourages us to imitate Jesus and Saint Paul and to become models for our brothers and sisters.    

 

2. What the Church Teaches Us Today

In the first commandment, Jesus emphasizes the words “all,” “heart,” “soul,” and “mind.” The Greek word for heart is kardia; it can be understood as the seat of our emotions or affections. The “soul” represents our spiritual nature. The “mind” (in Greek, dianoia) refers to intellectual endeavor. So, when Jesus commands us to love God with all our heart, soul, and mind, he calls us to love God with all our affection and emotional attachment to him (heart), to seek a personal and spiritual relationship with him (soul), and to use not only our faith but also our intelligence (mind).

Jesus’ second greatest commandment challenges us to love our neighbors as we love ourselves. Our first reading offers concrete examples of how to do so. Moses shares two of God’s Covenant laws with his people and us. Both commandments fall under the category of “Social Justice Teaching,” or, in Jesus’s language, “Love for our neighbor.” The first command instructs us to “not oppress or afflict a resident alien (…) You shall not wrong any widow or orphan” (Exodus 22:20-21). The Hebrew word for resident aliens is ger, which means stranger, temporary dweller, or sojourner. In Old Testament society, resident aliens are regularly grouped with widows and orphans as the poorest and most vulnerable. God gives us one reason we should not abuse strangers or the most vulnerable people: “For you were once aliens residing in the land of Egypt” (Exodus 22:20), meaning we were all aliens through sin before Jesus redeemed us.

The second command addresses money lending. In the Old Testament, only the poor engaged in money lending because they lacked access to other financial resources. Lenders often took advantage of them by overcharging and demanding significant collateral. In our first reading, the collateral is the cloak, which represents the ultimate possession the poor could have, as it served as their bedding at night to protect against the cold. Therefore, God commanded them not to demand interest when lending money to the poor; and when they took a cloak as a pledge, they should return it before sunset so the poor could use it at bedtime (see Exodus 22:24-26).

Notice how God identifies the poor: “My people” (v. 24) and “your neighbor” (v. 25). This teaches us that the poor are God’s people and our neighbors. In biblical language, especially in the context of our Gospel passage, a neighbor is anyone, near or far, who needs our material, spiritual, and emotional assistance, including forgiveness and reconciliation. We are called to love our “neighbors” because we, too, are “resident aliens” and “neighbors” before God and need his love, forgiveness, and reconciliation (see Exodus 22:20).

For Jesus, the love we should extend to our neighbors must be inspired by the way we love ourselves. “You shall love your neighbor as yourself” (Mt 22:39, NABRE). We cannot love, forgive, and reconcile with others if we are not capable of loving, forgiving, and reconciling with ourselves.

In our second reading, our Holy Mother Church presents Saint Paul and Jesus as models of those who loved God and their neighbors, urging us to imitate them with joy, even amid great affliction (1 Thes 1:6). When we do so, we, too, will become models for our brothers and sisters to follow (1 Thes 1:7).

May the liturgy of this Mass enable us to love God with all our hearts, souls, and minds, and to love our neighbors as we love ourselves. Amen.

Rev. Leon Ngandu, SVD

Pastor of Holy Family Catholic Church in Jackson, MS &

SVD-USS Biblical Apostolate Coordinator

---

[1] NABRE, Note to Mt 22:36.

[2] Barbara E. Reid, The Gospel According to Matthew, 113.

29th Sunday in Ordinary Time, Year A - October 18, 2026

 

29^th Sunday in Ordinary Time, Year A - October 18, 2026

Isaiah 45:1, 4-6; 1 Thessalonians 1:1-5b; Matthew 22:15-21

 

Theme: Political and Spiritual Needs Should Not Be in Contradiction with Each Other

A.    A Brief Exegetical Analysis of Matthew 22:15-21

 

1. Historical and Literary Contexts

The three parables in a row (21:28-32; 21:33-46; 22:1-14) that Jesus told the Jewish religious leaders in response to their lack of faith in him infuriated them. They now saw Jesus as a threat to their power. Moving forward, Matthew presents a series of three entrapping questions directed at Jesus, through which they conspired to either publicly humiliate him before the Jewish community or gather legal evidence to accuse him, ultimately seeking to have him arrested and condemned by the Roman authorities. Our Gospel passage discusses the first of these three entrapping questions, which is immediately preceded by the parable of the Wedding Feast (22:1-14) and followed by the second tricking question about the Resurrection (22:23-33).   

 

2. Form, Structure, and Movement

V. 15 introduces this Gospel narrative, while v. 22, omitted from our passage by the lectionary, concludes it. The text is structured in two movements: the first presents the question posed to Jesus by the Pharisees’ disciples and the Herodians (vv. 16-17), and the second examines Jesus’ response (vv. 18-21).

 

3. Detailed Analysis

V. 15. This verse is connected to three consecutive parables (21:28-32; 21:33-46; 22:1-14) that Jesus told the Jewish religious leaders in response to their lack of faith in him. The lessons from these parables angered them. In response, they now plot against Jesus, seeing him as a threat to their power.

Vv. 16-17. At the time of Jesus, Israel was under Roman occupation. The Herodians were Israelites who supported Herod, the Roman puppet king, and worked for the Romans. The Pharisees were professional religious scholars who sought to impose their interpretation of the Mosaic laws on everyone.^[1] The Herodians, a political group, and the Pharisees, a religious group, did not get along for several reasons, including their differing views on paying the census tax to Caesar; the Herodians favored it, while the Pharisees opposed it. In this passage, they form an unholy alliance solely because Jesus is their common enemy.

Their question to Jesus, whether it is lawful to pay the census tax to Caesar, presents both a political and a religious dilemma. The “lawful” here refers to the divine law. Since this is a yes-or-no question, if Jesus says, “Yes, it is lawful," the Pharisees can accuse him to the Jewish community of supporting the Roman regime. On the other hand, if Jesus says, “No, it is not lawful," the Herodians will use it as legal evidence to report him to the Roman authority and have him arrested and condemned.

Vv. 18-21. To understand Jesus’ response, it is essential to recognize that under the Pax Romana (Roman Peace), the Roman government allowed Jewish religious groups in Jerusalem to levy a tax on all expatriate Jews throughout the Roman Empire to support the Temple. However, the Jewish religious leaders were illegally enriching themselves from this tax.^[2] Thus, in the first part of his response, “Repay to Caesar what belongs to Caesar,” Jesus highlights the hypocrisy of these dishonest Jewish religious leaders, challenging them to abandon the tax they imposed on expatriate Jews before they concern themselves with the tax the Roman government imposes on them.

In the second part of his response, “Repay to God what belongs to God,” Jesus elevates the debate to a higher level. Since the coin bears Caesar’s image, they should give him the currency that belongs to him. Likewise, God’s image and likeness are stamped on each person, as stated in Genesis 1:26a, 27a: “Then God said: Let us make human beings in our image, after our likeness… God created mankind in his own image; in the image of God he created them” (NABRE). This means that human beings belong to God. Therefore, as much as they are concerned with paying taxes to Caesar, the Pharisees and Herodians should also be concerned with giving themselves to God by embracing the kingdom of heaven that Jesus established on earth.

V. 22. The narrator’s comments in this verse, omitted by the lectionary from our Gospel passage, suggest that the Pharisees and Herodians failed in their attempt to entrap Jesus.

  

4. Synthesis

The Pharisees and Herodians, who typically do not get along, form an unholy alliance to entrap Jesus, their common enemy. They pose a yes-or-no question to Jesus about whether paying the census tax to Caesar is lawful under God’s law. If Jesus says, “Yes, it is lawful,” the Pharisees will discredit him among the Jewish community, accusing him of supporting the Romans who occupied Israel at that time. If he says, “No, it is not lawful,” the Herodians will report him to the Roman authorities, who will arrest and condemn him for inciting people to disobey Roman laws.

In his response, Jesus first challenges all the Jewish religious leaders to abandon the practice of illegally enriching themselves from the taxes they impose on their fellow Israelites before they can be concerned about paying taxes to Caesar. Second, since Caesar’s image is printed on the coin, indicating that the currency belongs to him, Jesus tells them to give to Caesar what belongs to him. Likewise, since God created human beings in his image and likeness, meaning that God’s image and likeness are stamped in human beings, the Pharisees and Herodians should be concerned about giving themselves to God because they belong to God. This means that instead of seeking to condemn Jesus, they should believe in him and embrace the kingdom of heaven he established on earth.

 

B.     Pastoral Implications

 

1. Liturgical Context

In our Gospel, the Pharisees and Herodians try to entrap Jesus with a political and religious question. In his response, Jesus shows that political and spiritual needs should not contradict each other. For instance, our first reading tells us that God used King Cyrus, a political leader, to bless his chosen people. In all that we do (in politics and religion), the Church calls us to imitate the Thessalonian believers by keeping our work of faith, labor of love, and endurance in hope of our Lord Jesus, as we heard in our second reading.

 

2. What the Church Teaches Us Today

(1) While the Jewish religious leaders ironically appeared to oppose the census tax to Caesar, they were illegally enriching themselves from the tax the Roman government allowed them to impose on their fellow expatriate Jews living in the Roman Empire to support the Temple. In the first part of his response, “Repay to Caesar what belongs to Caesar,” Jesus challenges them and all of us to be honest with ourselves and to prioritize our relationship with God before worrying about the wrongdoings of others. Many Christians today involve themselves in fighting for political causes, even good ones, but neglect their spiritual lives. Any good cause we fight for loses its significance if we neglect our relationship with God, which is the primary need of our lives. As we continue to fight for justice and peace and promote the well-being of people in our societies, let us remember that we must also fight to bring people and ourselves closer to God for the well-being of our souls in the heavenly kingdom.

 (2) Using the example of Caesar’s image on Roman currency, Jesus reminds the Jewish religious leaders and all of us that God’s image and likeness are stamped on our souls. We are created in God’s image and likeness (Gn 1:26-27). Therefore, in the second part of his response, “Repay to God what belongs to God,” Jesus means that the Jews and all of us should render to the political authorities what pertains to politics, while at the same time rendering to God “ourselves” because we belong to him. This is what the Jewish religious leaders and many of us fail to do. Like these Pharisees and Herodians, many Christians today focus more on maintaining their social and political power than on embracing the kingdom of heaven that Jesus came to establish.

In this Gospel, Jesus teaches us that political and spiritual needs should not contradict each other. This is what we heard in our first reading. God used King Cyrus, a political leader, to bless his people, the Israelites. In all that we do, our Holy Mother Church calls us to imitate the Thessalonian believers by keeping our work of faith, labor of love, and endurance in hope of our Lord Jesus, as we heard in our second reading. Amen. 

Rev. Leon Ngandu, SVD

Pastor of Holy Family Catholic Church in Jackson, MS &

SVD-USS Biblical Apostolate Coordinator

 

---

[1] John Bergsma, “The Word of the Lord: Reflections on the Sunday Mass Readings for Year A,” 443.

[2] John Bergsma, “The Word of the Lord: Reflections on the Sunday Mass Readings for Year A,” 444.

28th Sunday in Ordinary Time, Year A. Oct. 11, 2026

 

28^th Sunday in Ordinary Time, Year A. Oct. 11, 2026

Isiah 25:6-10a; Philippians 4:12-14, 19-20; Matthew 22:1-14

 

Theme: We Should Not Disregard God’s Invitation to Participate in the Eucharistic Celebrations

A. A Brief Exegetical Analysis of Matthew 22:1-14

 

1. Historical and Literary Contexts

This is the third in a series of three parables that Jesus tells the Jewish religious leaders in response to their lack of faith in him (see 21:23-27). The other two parables are the parable of the Two Sons (21:28-32) and that of the Tenants (21:33-46). In all three parables, Jesus highlights how the Jews may miss the kingdom of heaven if they continue to reject him. He praises Gentiles, tax collectors, prostitutes, and all sinners for repenting and believing in him. Our text immediately follows the parable of the Tenants (21:33-46) and precedes a series of three trapping questions (22:15-22; 23-33; and 34-40) posed by the Jewish religious leaders to Jesus, as they now consider him a threat.   

 

2. Form, Structure, and Movement

This Gospel narrative presents a parable. Vv. 1-2 serve as an introduction, and v. 14 as a conclusion. The parable unfolds in three movements. The first movement (vv. 3-6) recounts the initial guests’ refusal to attend the feast. The second movement (vv. 7-10) describes the king’s reaction to those who rejected his invitation and his decision to invite anyone the servants might find on the main road. The third movement (vv. 11-14) details the punishment of a man who attended the feast without a wedding garment.

 

3. Detailed Analysis

Vv. 1-2. In the Old Testament, the concept of final salvation is often depicted through banquet imagery. Thus, the wedding feast here symbolizes the manifestation of the kingdom of heaven on earth. God is the giver of this banquet for his Son Jesus, the groom, who is united with the Church, the bride.^[1]

Vv. 3-6. This parable teaches that the Jews were the first guests God invited to the kingdom of heaven, which is manifested in the Church of Jesus. However, they not only ignored God’s invitation by prioritizing their businesses but also killed the prophets (servants) God sent to remind them of it. They refuse God’s invitation because they are unwilling to repent and believe in Jesus, as repentance and faith in Jesus (the wedding garment) are required to enter the kingdom of heaven (see vv. 11-12).

Vv. 7-10. The burning of the city and the destruction of the murderers refer to the eschatological punishment that will occur at the end of time. Because the Jewish religious leaders disregard God’s invitation, God decides to call non-Jews (Gentiles), both good and bad alike, including tax collectors, prostitutes, and all sinners.

Vv. 10-13. The Gentiles, tax collectors, prostitutes, and all sinners respond to God’s invitation. The “wedding garment,” which is sincere repentance and faith in Jesus, is still required for everyone to be part of the Church of Jesus. The man in the wedding hall without a wedding garment represents all believers in the Church of Jesus who lack the intention to repent and believe in Jesus. Their fate, along with that of the Jews who disregard God’s invitation, is eternal condemnation at the last judgment at the end of the age.

V. 14. Jesus’s concluding statement illustrates that God generously invites all people to join the heavenly kingdom, yet they intentionally reject God’s invitation.  

  

4. Synthesis

The parable of the Wedding Feast suggests that the Jews were the first guests God invited to be part of the Church of Jesus, which is the manifestation of the kingdom of heaven on earth. The “wedding garment,” signifying a sincere desire to repent and believe in Jesus, is required for accessing Jesus’s Church. The Jewish religious leaders chose to disregard God’s invitation by prioritizing their businesses because they refused to repent and believe in Jesus. Consequently, God extends his invitation to the Gentiles, tax collectors, prostitutes, and all sinners who are willing to repent and believe in his Son, Jesus. Those who do not intend to repent and believe in Jesus (both Jews and non-Jews) will face eternal condemnation at the last judgment at the end of the age.

 

B.     Pastoral Implications

 

1. Liturgical Context

The first reading and the Gospel today speak of the most sumptuous feast God offers to his people. The Gospel presents this feast as a wedding banquet, while the first reading describes it as a feast of rich food and choice wines to be held on Mount Zion. This heavenly banquet begins here on earth and is celebrated at every Eucharistic celebration (Mass) we attend. We, who are spiritually hungry, as Saint Paul states in our second reading, are solemnly invited to this “wedding banquet,” the Mass. A “wedding garment,” which signifies a sincere desire to repent and believe in Jesus, is required to enjoy the Eucharistic celebration now and the glory of the kingdom of heaven at the end of the age. 

 

2. What the Church Teaches Us Today

(1) Our Holy Mother Church exhorts us not to act as the Jews did in our Gospel. They ignored God’s invitation, mistreated, and killed the prophets sent to remind them of it. They prioritized their businesses and refused to express a sincere desire to repent and believe in Jesus, a condition for participating in the Eucharistic Celebration. Unfortunately, there are still people today who behave like those Jews. They deliberately refuse to attend Masses, especially on Sundays, because they prioritize their businesses and leisure activities. Some mistreat God’s servants, including ordained and lay ministers, through criticism and harmful actions. They do not participate in Eucharistic celebrations because they are unwilling to express a sincere desire to repent and believe in Jesus, as required. If we act like them, Jesus exhorts us to repent.

(2) The Church also calls us not to behave like the man in our Gospel who was found at the wedding banquet without the required wedding garment, even though he knew it was necessary to enter the banquet hall. This man symbolizes all believers who partake in the Eucharistic celebrations without a genuine desire to repent and allow Jesus to change their lives. Instead, each time we attend Mass, we should sincerely express our willingness to repent and let the Word of God, heard in the Scripture readings, homilies, and the Eucharist we receive during Holy Communion, transform our lives. When we do this, we will avoid eternal condemnation and enjoy the glory of eternal salvation in the heavenly Eucharistic celebration at the end of the age.

May the liturgy of this Mass, along with all the Masses we attend, enable us to express our sincere willingness to repent and believe in Jesus whenever we respond to God’s invitation to Mass. Amen. 

Rev. Leon Ngandu, SVD

Pastor of Holy Family Church in Jackson, MS &

SVD USS Biblical Apostolate Coordinator

---

[1] Ian Boxall, “Matthew” in The Jerome Biblical Commentary for the Twenty-First Century, 1217.

27th Sunday in Ordinary Time, Year A. October 4, 2026

 

27^th Sunday in Ordinary Time, Year A. October 4, 2026

Isaiah 5:1-7; Philippians 4:6-9; Matthew 21:33-43

 

Theme: God Expects Us to Bear Fruit That Will Last

 

A.    A Brief Exegetical Analysis of Matthew 21:33-43

 

1. Historical and Literary Contexts

Our Gospel passage is the second of three parables that Matthew presents consecutively in the context of controversies between Jesus and the Jewish religious leaders (Mt 21:23–22:46). In all three parables, Jesus warns that the Jews may miss the kingdom of heaven if they continue to reject him. He praises Gentiles, tax collectors, prostitutes, and all sinners for repenting and believing in him. Our text immediately follows the parable of the Two Sons (21:28-32) and precedes the parable of the Wedding Feast (22:1-14).

 

2. Form, Structure, and Movement

This Gospel narrative includes a parable. It is structured in two movements. The first movement emphasizes the mistreatment of the landowner’s servants by the tenants (33-39), and the second movement reveals the lesson the parable teaches the Jewish religious leaders (vv. 40-43).

 

3. Detailed Analysis

Vv. 33-39. God, the landowner, created (planted) Israel, the vineyard, and cared for it (v. 33). He then entrusted its care to the Jewish religious leaders, the tenants. Afterward, God sent his various prophets (servants) to assess how the Jewish religious leaders were guiding the people of Israel in the way of God. The Jewish religious leaders beat some prophets, stoned others, and killed some. Again, God sent other prophets, more numerous than the first, but the Jewish religious leaders treated them the same way. Finally, God decided to send Jesus, his only Son, believing they would respect him (v. 37). In Jewish culture during Jesus’ time, if a Jewish proselyte died without an heir, the tenants would have a final claim on the inheritance.^[1] That is why, in this parable, by killing God’s heir (anticipating Jesus' Death), the Jewish religious leaders intended to acquire the inheritance and become like God (vv. 38-39).

Vv. 40-43. In answering Jesus’ question here, the Jewish religious leaders condemn themselves (vv. 40-41), just as they did in the previous parable (see 21:31). Then Jesus reminds them of Psalm 118, which he applies to himself. He is the stone the builders rejected, now the cornerstone of the Church. Jesus concludes this passage with a warning. If the Jewish religious leaders continue to reject Jesus (see 21:23-27), God’s kingdom will be taken away from them and given to those who produce the fruits of their faith in Jesus (v. 43).

  

4. Synthesis

The parable recounts how God created Israel and entrusted its care to the Jewish religious leaders. However, these leaders mistreated and killed the prophets, including God’s Son, foreshadowing Jesus’ Death. Quoting Psalm 118 and applying it to himself, Jesus affirms that he is the stone the builders (the Jewish religious leaders) rejected, which has become the cornerstone. Here, Jesus foretells his Resurrection and how he will sustain his Church. Jesus ends the parable with a warning, telling the Jewish religious leaders that because they questioned his authority, the kingdom of God is being taken away from them and given to the people (such as the tax collectors, prostitutes, and all sinners) who repent and believe in him. 

 

B.     Pastoral Implications

 

1. Liturgical Context

We begin the month of October, dedicated to devotion to the Blessed Virgin Mary. The Church encourages us to ask our Blessed Mother to intercede with her Son, Jesus, at all times. Both the first reading and the Gospel use the “vineyard” as a metaphor for the people of Israel and, by extension, for all believers, including us today. In the first reading, God blames the people in general, and in the Gospel, Jesus criticizes the leaders for failing to produce good fruit, which represents faith in God and Jesus. God expects all of us, both ordinary people and leaders, to bear the fruits of faith in him that endure. To achieve this, in our second reading, Saint Paul exhorts us to think about and do what is true, honorable, just, pure, lovely, gracious, and anything excellent and worthy of praise, and to imitate him.

 

2. What the Church Teaches Us Today

From the Gospel and the first reading, our Holy Mother Church invites us to reflect on our distinct missions as “tenants” (leaders), “servants” (prophets), and “vineyard” (God’s people). The key to determining whether we are successful in our missions is whether we produce good fruit, which represents the results of ministries and faith in God.

First, God has entrusted us, as leaders, with people to care for: children to their parents, parents to their children, students to their teachers, the sick to hospital caregivers, citizens to their government, and the faithful to Church leaders, among others. We are “tenants” to one another. Unlike the tenants in our parable, we are called to treat everyone with dignity. God expects us to produce “good fruit” of love, happiness, joy, and faith among us.

Second, as God’s servants (prophets), we may be rejected, criticized, discouraged, and even persecuted, as we heard in our parable. This is how the devil operates to hinder God’s mission. The devil’s goal is to keep people from being evangelized so they may not be saved on the last day. We are called to be courageous prophets, willing to sacrifice ourselves for the salvation of our brothers and sisters in our Church communities, families, and wherever we live.

Third, we are also “God’s vineyard” (God’s people). In our first reading, the prophet Isaiah addresses Israel’s infidelity to God through a song. Its allegory suggests that Isaiah’s friend represents God, the vineyard symbolizes ancient Israel and, by extension, all of us today, the Israel of the New Covenant. The fertile hillside refers to our society, families, Church communities, and all the places we inhabit. The choicest vines illustrate the desire God has placed in our hearts to know, love, and follow him. The crop of grapes signifies virtues, while rotten grapes represent wickedness, acts of violence, and various sins. God expects us to produce good fruit, such as attending Mass (especially on Sundays), loving, helping, and serving the people in our communities. 

Both the Gospel and the first readings end with a warning. If we continue not to bear good fruit in our mission, Isaiah prophesies that God will make us ruined, and Jesus says that the kingdom of God will be taken away from us. This punishment points to the eternal condemnation that will occur at the end of time during the last judgment. This is a frightening warning. However, in our second reading, Saint Paul calls us to have no anxiety at all, but to make our requests known to God through prayer, petition, and thanksgiving (Philippians 4:6). To bear the good fruits that God expects from us, Saint Paul urges us to think about what is true, honorable, just, pure, lovely, gracious, and anything excellent and worthy of praise (v. 8), and to imitate his example (v. 9).

In the liturgy of this Mass, let us ask for God’s grace so that we may be the “good tenants,” “obedient servants,” and the “fruitful vineyard” that always do God’s will by loving and serving his people and the Church. As we are in October, the month dedicated to the veneration of the Blessed Virgin Mary, let us ask our Blessed Mother to intercede on our behalf. Amen. 

Rev. Leon Ngandu, SVD

Pastor of Holy Family Church in Jackson, MS &

SVD USS Biblical Apostolate Coordinator

---

[1] NABRE, note to Mt 21:38.

26th Sunday in Ordinary Time Year A – Sept. 27, 2026

 

26^th Sunday in Ordinary Time Year A – Sept. 27, 2026

Ezekiel 18:25-28; Philippians 2:1-11; Matthew 21:28-32

 

Theme: Individual Responsibility to Repent and Maintain One’s Relationship with God

 

A.    A Brief Exegetical Analysis of Matthew 21:28-32

 

1. Historical and Literary Contexts

Our Gospel parable is the first of three that Matthew presents in succession within the context of controversies between Jesus and the Jewish religious leaders (Mt 21:23–22:46). It began when the Jewish religious leaders questioned Jesus' authority (21:23-27). In response, Jesus told them three parables in succession: the parable of the Two Sons (21:28-32), the parable of the Tenants (21:33-46), and the parable of the Wedding Feast (22:1-14). Through these parables, Jesus revealed that because they failed to believe in him, the kingdom of heaven was being taken away from them and given to the Gentiles, tax collectors, prostitutes, and sinners who believed in him and repented. In response, the Jewish religious leaders plotted to eliminate Jesus, whom they now viewed as a threat to their power. Subsequently, Matthew presented a series of three trapping questions (22:15-22; 23-33; and 34-40) that they posed to Jesus, intending either to embarrass him in public among the Jewish community or to gather legal evidence to accuse him and have him arrested and condemned by the Roman authorities. We will meditate on these three parables and two of the three trapping questions in the Gospels over the next five Sundays.

 

2. Form, Structure, and Movement

This Gospel passage is a narrative with a parable. It is structured into two movements. Jesus first tells the parable (vv. 28-30) and then interprets it with an exhortation (vv. 31-32).           

 

3. Detailed Analysis

Vv. 28-30. The man represents God, and the vineyard symbolizes the kingdom of heaven on earth. The first son, who initially refused to work in the vineyard but later accepted, represents the outcasts (Gentiles, tax collectors, prostitutes, and all sinners). They initially rejected God’s call but later, through Jesus' preaching, repented and embraced the opportunity to work in God’s kingdom. They echo Ez 18:27: “But if the wicked turn from the wickedness they did and do what is right and just, they save their lives.” (NABRE). The second son, who initially accepted the work in the vineyard but later refused, represents the Jewish religious leaders. They initially accepted their status as God’s chosen people but later turned away from God by not believing in Jesus. They recall Ez 18:26: “When the just turn away from justice to do evil and die, on account of the evil they did they must die.” (NABRE).

Vv. 31-32. Jesus asked the Jewish religious leaders to tell him which of the two sons did their father’s will. In their correct answer, “the first,” the Jewish religious leaders condemned themselves. Then Jesus interpreted the parable for them, contrasting their lack of faith with the outstanding faith of the sinners who repent and enter the kingdom of heaven, while the Jewish religious leaders remain unrepentant.

 

4. Synthesis

Through the parable of the Two Sons, Jesus tells the Jewish religious leaders that they, who initially said yes to God’s call, now turn away from him by failing to believe in Jesus. In contrast, the outcasts who once rejected God’s call now believe in him and repent. Consequently, the outcasts enter the kingdom of heaven ahead of the Jewish religious leaders.  

 

B.     Pastoral Implications

 

1. Liturgical Context

Today, we close September, the month of the Bible. The Church encourages us to regularly read, listen to, study, share, and pray with the Word of God. Today’s Gospel and first readings remind us that everyone is responsible for repenting and maintaining a relationship with God to be saved. To do this, we need to imitate Jesus' humility (second reading).

 

2. What the Church Teaches Us Today

In our Gospel, Jesus addresses the Jews who believe they do not need to repent because they are the “chosen people.” Similarly, many Christians today think they do not need to repent to be saved because they are already baptized. Many others believe they will be saved through the faith of their parents or children. The Prophet Ezekiel addresses this issue in our first reading.

It is necessary to analyze the entire Chapter 18 to understand the background of our first reading passage. In this chapter, Ezekiel addresses individual responsibility. The people used the proverb, “Parents eat sour grapes, but the children’s teeth are on edge” (Ezekiel 18:2), to imply that their current suffering is a divine punishment for sins committed not by themselves but by their parents in past generations. Ezekiel clarified that this saying is false: “… the life of the parent is like the life of the child… Only the one who sins shall die!” (vv. 3-4, NABRE). He explains this through different scenarios. In the first scenario, if a righteous parent begets a wicked son, the parent will live because he does what is right, but the son will die because of his sins (vv. 5-13). In the second scenario, if a wicked parent begets a righteous son, the parent will die for his wickedness, and the son will live for his righteousness (vv. 14-18). In the third scenario, if a wicked person repents, he will be rewarded with life; if a righteous person turns from righteousness to wickedness, he will be punished with death (vv. 21-24). Ezekiel’s listeners do not want to accept that each person is judged for his or her own sins or merits and that wicked people can escape destruction. They rebel against Ezekiel and God when they say, “The Lord’s way is not fair!” (v. 25). Our first reading passage starts here.

Ezekiel emphasizes two categories of people in this reading. The first category comprises the wicked who repent. They correspond to the first son in our Gospel’s parable, representing the outcasts (tax collectors, prostitutes, and all sinners) during Jesus’ time. The second category in our first reading is the righteous who turn away from God. These individuals correspond to the second son in our Gospel’s parable, who represents the Jews of Jesus’ time. They initially said yes to God’s call because they were the “chosen people,” but later failed to maintain their relationship with God because they did not believe in Jesus.

Through our Gospel and first reading, the Church wants us to understand that salvation is not merely an inheritance passed down through generations. Everyone is responsible for their own eternal salvation or condemnation. Furthermore, claiming baptism is not sufficient for salvation. We are called to regularly repent and nurture our relationship with God and with one another in our Church community, in our families, and wherever we live. This is what Saint Paul teaches us in our second reading. He encourages each of us to pursue unity in a spirit of humility.

Paul says that we Christians must pursue unity because we belong to Christ and participate in the Spirit; we consider ourselves sharers in the “same mind” and “the same love” that flow from Christ (vv. 1-2). Our unity will be most clearly displayed when we reject any form of selfishness and regard our brothers and sisters as more important than ourselves (vv. 3-4). Then Paul presents the humility of Jesus in an early Christian hymn (vv. 6-11) as an example to follow. We can note two phases of Christ’s humility: First, he chose not to grasp his divine nature but to become as lowly as a slave in human likeness (vv. 6-7). Second, his humility extends to the cross, where he humbled himself, becoming obedient to death, even death on a cross (v. 8). His humility results in the exaltation and privilege he has received from God (vv. 9-11). This same exaltation awaits all believers who imitate the humility of Christ. So let us imitate Jesus’ humility to inherit the kingdom of heaven.

May the liturgy of this Mass enable us to repent regularly of our sins and to maintain our relationships with God and our brothers and sisters in humility, as Jesus did. Amen.

 

Rev. Leon Ngandu, SVD

Pastor of Holy Family Catholic Church in Jackson, MS &

SVD USS Biblical Apostolate Coordinator