The Gospel of Luke

Abstract

Baker’s Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture series is an attempt to meet the need for “accessible yet substantive” commentaries on the books of the NT. In addition to exegetical insights, one of the series’s strengths is its intentional engagement with the history of interpretation (especially the Apostolic Fathers and Medieval theologians). Significant in this regard is the aim of the series to “draw on the interpretation of Protestant and Orthodox scholars” and not strictly Roman Catholic scholarship (p. 11).Fr. Pablo Gadenz’s commentary on Luke is an excellent fulfillment of the aims of the series. Gadenz begins with a short introduction in which he sets out some working assumptions about Luke, including: Luke was a historian who wrote in the biographical genre (p. 19), also wrote Acts (p. 16), accompanied Paul (p. 16), and wrote before AD 80. After the introduction, each section of the commentary follows a pattern of biblical text, exegetical comments, and “reflection and application.” Interspersed throughout are sidebars on various biblical backgrounds topics (e.g. the impact of Herod the Great and his sons) and reflections from various ancient commentators on the same biblical text (e.g., Origen on Jesus as a priest-figure in Luke 5).A selection of passages will provide a good overview of this commentary. In his section on the scholar of the law and the parable of the Good Samaritan (Luke 10), Gadenz demonstrates his keen ability to identify OT allusions. In addition to providing familiar explanations about the intent of the law in Jesus’s conversation with the scholar of the law in 10:26–27, Gadenz also picks up on the sequence of travelers who pass by the injured man in the parable. He identifies an apparent Hebraic formula for introducing a group of people following the sequence of priest, Levites, and common Israelites as found in Ezra 2:70 and 6:16. However, when Jesus tells the parable, the final category is replaced by the Samaritan. Additionally, Gadenz suggests 2 Chr 28:15 as the basis for Jews having the category of Samaritans helping the “captives of Judah” (p. 211). The significant number of parallels makes this allusion striking (nakedness, anointing with oil, placing on an animal, and Jericho).In his interpretation of the parable of the Dishonest Steward (Luke 16), Gadenz exhibits a careful attention to detail by explaining that the focus on whether or not the dishonest manager’s actions can be justified misses the point (e.g., if he ultimately acted rightly by removing his over-charged interest from the amount owed by his clients). Instead, the focus should be on the contrast with children of the light, who ironically are instructed to behave like the dishonest manager. Gadenz argues that because the motivations of the children of light are inherently different than the dishonest manager, the actual instruction is focused on preparation for a “heavenly future” (p. 282).Another passage highlights a place where Gadenz’s commentary could have provided more with regard to the specific emphasis of Luke’s narrative. The “cleansing of the temple” in Luke 19:45–48 parallels Matthew and Mark almost identically but differs significantly from John’s Gospel even though this passage represents one of the rare instances where all four Gospels share content. Gadenz’s focus on the internal elements of Luke’s narrative and related background issues results in no discussion of the arrangement of the material. Luke’s placement of this material late in the narrative (leading up to Jesus’s trial) is consistent with the movement of Jesus’s ministry culminating in an arrival in Jerusalem. However, there are other significant moments in the temple earlier in Luke’s narrative (Jesus’s presentation in Luke 2:22–40 and presence with the teachers in Luke 2:41–52) that Fr. Gadenz does not connect to the meaning of Jesus’s return to, cleansing, and teaching in the temple. Comparison with John’s quotation of Ps 69:9 (“zeal for my father’s house will consume me”) seems to indicate a possible connection with Luke’s unique temple material from Jesus’s youth and could indicate more nuance in the placement and content of Luke’s material and Jesus’s relationship to the temple.Gadenz provides us with a great commentary that will give its readers insight not only into to the content of Luke’s Gospel, but also to the way in which Luke’s Gospel has been interpreted through the history of the church.