Today's reading lets us see what religiosity can turn into when living spiritual experience is completely ignored. Of course, in itself it does not exclude the possibility of full communion with God, but on one condition...
Today's reading lets us see what religiosity can turn into when living spiritual experience is completely ignored. Of course, in itself it does not exclude the possibility of full communion with God, but on one condition: if religion occupies a subordinate, auxiliary position, remaining only a means for expressing and embodying revelation. Meanwhile any religious tradition becomes self-sufficient if special efforts are not undertaken for its spiritual renewal. And if politics is mixed into religion, as happened in Judea in the Gospel period, this happens even faster.
And, as we can see, the majority of the Jewish religious leaders of the Gospel era did not even try to look at the situation that had arisen in Jerusalem because of Jesus' preaching (vv. 40-43) from a spiritual point of view. For them He was merely a violator of the established order. From their point of view He could in no way be the Messiah, since His appearance did not correspond to the messianic ideas accepted in the Judaism of that time. And besides, a prophet "does not come from Galilee" (v. 52).
Before us is absolute confidence in the truth of one's own religious tradition, which no revelation can shake. If miracles happen contrary to what religion says about them, then they are "wrong" miracles. And even if they are so obvious that many of the people believed the One who performed them directly before their eyes, no one is interested in the opinion of the people: after all, they do not know the Torah and are therefore "accursed" (v. 49). Yet among those gathered for the feast there was almost certainly not one who had not read and studied both the Torah and the other sacred books! But, as we can see, their knowledge of the Torah was different; it did not prevent them from believing in Jesus, and therefore they are, of course, "ignorant" - otherwise how would they have differed in opinion from the religious authorities?
However, authorities who depart from the "general line" also get their share: when, for example, Nicodemus dares to say that before passing judgment, and all the more before condemning, it is necessary at least to hear the accused (vv. 50-51), he is silenced. The arguments are simple and have nothing to do with the Torah, truth, or justice: you yourself must be from Galilee, so you defend your fellow countrymen (v. 52). It is no surprise that in such an atmosphere Jesus could not count not only on a just trial, but even on a more or less objective assessment of everything He said and did.
7
7:52 They answered - By personal reflection; the argument they could not answer, and therefore did not attempt it. Art thou also a Galilean? - One of his party? Out of Galilee ariseth no prophet - They could not but know the contrary. They knew Jonah arose outof Gethhepher; and Nahum from another village in Galilee.Yea, and Thisbe, the town of Elijah, the Tishbite, was in Galilee also. They might likewise have known that Jesus was not born in Galilee, but at Bethlehem, even from the public register there, and from the genealogies of the family of David. They were conscious this poor answer would not bear examination, and so took care to prevent a reply.