The text of the third Sunday of Lent puts before us two different but related facts: Jesus comments on the events of the day and He narrates a parable. Luke 13: 1-5: At the people’s request, Jesus comments on the events of the day: the massacre of pilgrims by Pilate and the massacre at the tower of Siloam where eighteen people were killed. Luke 13: 9: Jesus tells a parable about the fig tree that bore no fruit.
As you read, it is good to note two things: • See how Jesus contradicts the popular interpretation of what is happening • See whether there is a connection between the parable and the comment on the events of the day.
A Division of the Text to Help with the Reading: • Luke 13: 1: The people tell Jesus about the massacre of the Galileans Like today, people pass on comments on the events that happen and want to hear comments from those who can form public opinion. That is why some people went to Jesus to tell Him of the massacre of some Galileans whose blood Pilate had mingled with that of their sacrifices. It was probably the assassination that took place on Mount Gerazim, which was still a place of pilgrimage and where people went to offersacrifices. This event underlines the ferocity and stupidity of some Roman rulers in Palestine who provoked the religious sensibility of the Jews through irrational actions such as this.
• Luke 13: 2-3: Jesus comments on the massacre and draws a lesson from there for the people Asked to give an opinion, Jesus asks: “Do you suppose that these Galileans were worsesinners than any others that this should happen to them?” Jesus’ question reflects thepopular interpretation common then: suffering and violent death are punishment fromGod for some sin committed by that person. Jesus’ reaction is categorical: “They were not I tell you. No!” He denies the popular interpretation and transforms the event intoan examination of conscience: “unless you repent you will all perish as they did”. Inother words, unless there is a real and proper change, the same massacre will overtakeall. Later history confirmed Jesus’ foresight. The change did not take place. They were not converted and forty years later, in 70, Jerusalem was destroyed by the Romans. Many people were massacred. Jesus saw the gravity of the political situation of Hiscountry. On the one hand, there was the ever heavier and unbearable Romandomination. On the other, there was the official religion, which was growing more andmore alienated without understanding the importance of the faith in Yahweh in the livesof the people.
• Luke 13: 4-5: To support His thinking, Jesus comments on another event In support of His thinking, Jesus comments on more than one event. Jesus takes the initiative of commenting on another event. A blizzard causes the tower of Siloam to crumble and eighteen people are crushed by the stones. People thought thatit was “a punishment from God!” Jesus’ comment is: “No, I tell you, but unless you repent you will all perish as they did”. His concern is to interpret events in such a waythat God’s call to change and conversion becomes transparent. Jesus is a mystic, acontemplative. He reads events in a different way. He can read and interpret the signsof the times. For Him, the world is transparent, revealing the presence and call of God.
• Luke 13: 6-9: The parable of the fig tree that did not bear fruit Jesus then tells the parable of the fig tree that bears no fruit. A man had planted a fig tree in his vineyard. For three years the tree bore no fruit. So he says to his vinedresser: “Cut it down”. But the vinedresser replies: “Leave it one more year….it may bear fruitnext year; if not, then you can cut it down.” We do not know whether Jesus told this parable immediately after His comments on the massacre and the crumbling of the towerof Siloam. It was probably Luke who placed this parable here, because Luke sees a connection between the comments on the events and the parable of the fig tree. Luke does not say what this connection is. He leaves us to discover this. What meaning doesLuke see? I shall dare to give an opinion. You may discover another meaning. The owner of the vineyard and of the fig tree is God. The figtree represents the people. Jesus is the vinedresser. The owner of the vineyard has grown tired of looking for fruit fromthe fig tree and finding none. He decides to uproot the tree. Thus, there will be more room for another plant that may bear fruit. The chosen people were not producing the fruit that God expected. He wants to pass on the Good News to the pagans. Jesus is thevinedresser who asks that the fig tree be spared a little longer. He will redouble His efforts to obtain a change and a conversion. Later in the Gospel, Jesus recognizes that His redoubled efforts have borne no result. They will not be converted. Jesus mourns the lack of conversion and weeps over the city of Jerusalem. (Lk 19: 41-44).
Some people told Jesus about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mingled with the blood of their sacrifices. Jesus said to them in reply, "Do you thinkthat because these Galileans suffered in this way they were greater sinners than all other Galileans? By no means! But I tell you, if you do not repent, you will all perish as they did! Or those eighteen people who were killed when the tower at Siloam fell on them—do you think they were more guilty than everyone else who lived in Jerusalem? By no means! But I tell you, if you do not repent, you will all perish as they did!" And he told them this parable: "There once was a person who had a fig tree planted in his orchard, and when he came in search of fruit on it but found none, he said to the gardener, 'For three years now I have come in search of fruit on this fig tree but have found none. So cut it down. Why should it exhaust the soil?' He said to him in reply, 'Sir, leave it for this year also, and Ishall cultivate the ground around it and fertilize it; it may bear fruit in the future. If not, you can cut it down.'"
Some Questions to help us in our personal reflection. • What struck or pleased you most in this text? Why? • What was the popular interpretation of these two events? • How does Jesus disagree with the popular interpretation of the events? • What is the meaning of the parable? Is there a connection between the parable and the comments on the events? • What is this text’s message for us who have to interpret the signs of the times today?