When Christ Becomes Enough
Daily Reflection, When Christ Becomes Enough, August 18, 2026, Tuesday of the Twentieth Week in Ordinary Time, Gyaviira Luwaga, Bugiri, Bukasa, US Catholic magazine, Catholic Extension, CatholicTV, Catholic Herald
Published by Philipps Galle in 1563 Engraving on paper, © Christian Art
Matthew 19:23–30
Jesus said to his disciples: “Amen, I say to you, it will be hard for one who is rich to enter the Kingdom of heaven. Again I say to you, it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for one who is rich to enter the Kingdom of God.” When the disciples heard this, they were greatly astonished and said, “Who then can be saved?”
Jesus looked at them and said, “For men this is impossible, but for God all things are possible.” Then Peter said to him in reply, “We have given up everything and followed you. What will there be for us?” Jesus said to them, “Amen, I say to you that you who have followed me, in the new age, when the Son of Man is seated on his throne of glory, will yourselves sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.
And everyone who has given up houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or children or lands for the sake of my name will receive a hundred times more, and will inherit eternal life.But many who are first will be last, and the last will be first.”
Encountering Christ in the Word: A Reflection on Matthew 19:23–30
There are Gospel passages that console us immediately, and there are others that first disturb the carefully arranged furniture of the heart. Matthew 19:23–30 belongs to the latter. Jesus has just watched a wealthy young man walk away sorrowful after being invited to relinquish his possessions, give to the poor, and follow him. The sadness of that departure lingers over the words that follow. Turning to his disciples, Jesus says, “Amen, I say to you, it will be hard for one who is rich to enter the Kingdom of heaven.” He then presses the point with an image that is almost absurd in its impossibility: “It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for one who is rich to enter the Kingdom of God.”
We should resist the temptation to make Jesus’ image more comfortable than he intended. Major commentators understand the camel and the needle as deliberate hyperbole, not as a reference to a conveniently narrow gate through which a camel might pass with sufficient effort (France, 2007; Nolland, 2005). The contrast is intentionally impossible: one of the largest creatures familiar to Jesus’ hearers is imagined passing through one of the smallest openings used in ordinary life. Jesus does not present a difficult task that might be accomplished with discipline; he presents an impossibility. That distinction matters, because it prepares us for the sentence around which the entire passage turns: “For men this is impossible, but for God all things are possible.”
At first, however, the image concerns wealth, and Jesus allows its seriousness to remain. Scripture does not teach that material possessions are evil in themselves. Abraham possessed flocks and herds; Job was prosperous; the land flowing with milk and honey was itself a sign of God’s generosity. Creation is good, and material goods can be received with gratitude. Yet the biblical tradition is equally aware that gifts can slowly become rivals to the Giver. Deuteronomy warns Israel that prosperity can produce a deadly forgetfulness: “Do not say in your heart, ‘My power and the might of my own hand have gained me this wealth’” (Deut. 8:17). The danger appears when what was received as gift becomes a foundation for self sufficiency.
This is why wealth has such unusual spiritual power. It can imitate some of the promises we properly seek in God. Money can promise security, freedom, influence, comfort, protection from uncertainty, and some measure of control over the future. It cannot finally provide any of these absolutely, yet it can persuade the heart that it can. The spiritual danger is therefore deeper than owning things. We may reach the point at which our possessions quietly begin to possess us.
Clement of Alexandria, reflecting on the rich young man, recognized this interior dimension of renunciation. He cautioned against interpreting Christ’s command as though holiness consisted merely in disposing of external property while allowing greed, pride, or disordered desire to remain enthroned within (Clement of Alexandria, 1885). Yet this patristic insight should never become an excuse for a comfortable Christianity that spiritualizes away Jesus’ challenge. The inner freedom Clement describes must eventually become visible in generosity. As studies of early Christian attitudes toward wealth show, the Fathers repeatedly linked detachment from possessions with concrete care for the poor (Holman, 2008; Rhee, 2017). John Chrysostom was especially relentless on this point: wealth held in abundance cannot be treated as though it were unrelated to the suffering of one’s neighbour.
The Gospel therefore invites us to ask a more searching question than, “Am I rich?” It asks, “What has become indispensable to me?” Money may be the answer, but not always. A person can possess relatively little and still be fiercely attached to reputation, professional success, emotional security, physical appearance, influence, comfort, plans, relationships, or the approval of others. We can even become possessive about religious things; our ministry, our reputation for holiness, our preferred way of praying, our place within a community. The camel carries many kinds of baggage. Christ’s concern is whatever makes the heart too burdened to follow freely.
The reaction of the disciples makes this clear. They do not simply say, “Then wealthy people face a serious problem.” Instead they are “greatly astonished” and ask, “Who then can be saved?” Their question enlarges the horizon of the passage. The problem is no longer one man’s bank account; it is the human condition. Something in every human heart resists surrender. Something in us wants salvation while retaining ultimate control over the terms. We want God, but often we would prefer God added to the life we have already arranged rather than God as the One around whom everything else must be rearranged.
Then Matthew gives us a small literary detail of immense spiritual tenderness: “Jesus looked at them.”
Before Christ speaks of impossibility and grace, he looks at his disciples.
One could pass too quickly over those words, but the Gospels often make the gaze of Jesus the place where truth and mercy meet. Christ sees more deeply than his disciples see themselves. He sees their ambition, their confusion, their future failures, Peter’s coming denial, their eventual courage, and the work grace will accomplish in them. He does not look at human weakness with surprise. He looks directly into it and says, “For men this is impossible, but for God all things are possible.”
The saying reverberates with the Old Testament. When Sarah laughs at the promise that she will bear a son in old age, God asks Abraham, “Is anything too marvelous for the LORD to do?” (Gen. 18:14). The promise of Israel begins precisely where human possibility has reached its limit. An elderly, barren couple cannot generate the future God promises them; the covenant depends upon divine fidelity. Matthew places the disciple in a similar position. We cannot save ourselves. We cannot, by willpower alone, purify every desire, conquer every attachment, or manufacture holiness. Grace is not God congratulating successful human striving. Grace is God accomplishing within us what we cannot bring to completion by ourselves.
This does not weaken Jesus’ demand; it makes the demand possible. Christianity avoids both complacency and despair. Complacency says, “Surely Christ does not expect such radical freedom from me.” Despair says, “I could never become that free.” Jesus permits neither conclusion. His command is real, but so is his grace. The saint is not someone born without attachments. The saint is someone who allowed divine love to become stronger than those attachments.
Peter then enters the conversation in a way that is both admirable and revealing: “We have given up everything and followed you. What will there be for us?” Unlike the rich young man, Peter has indeed left his nets and followed Christ. Yet even within genuine sacrifice there remains a trace of calculation. The young man’s attachment took the form of possessions; Peter’s temptation is subtler. He has surrendered much, but now he wants to know the return on his investment.
There is something of Peter in most believers. We can keep hidden accounts with God. I have prayed faithfully; why has this happened to me? I served the Church; why was I overlooked? I tried to obey; why has my life become more difficult rather than easier? I gave this up for God; when will he compensate me? Even sacrifice can become another form of possession when we begin to treat it as a claim upon divine generosity.
Jesus does not rebuke Peter for asking. Instead, he enlarges Peter’s imagination. Those who have followed him will participate in the “new age,” when the Son of Man sits upon his throne of glory and the Twelve sit upon thrones associated with the twelve tribes of Israel. The Greek term Matthew employs, palingenesia, carries the sense of regeneration or renewal. The promise is larger than private compensation; it concerns God’s renewal of creation and the restoration of his people (Davies & Allison, 1997; Luz, 2005). The imagery of the Son of Man enthroned in glory recalls Daniel 7:13–14, where one “like a son of man” receives an everlasting kingdom. The twelve disciples and twelve tribes evoke the restoration of Israel. Peter is thinking about what he has lost; Jesus asks him to contemplate what God is making new.
The distinction is beautiful. Christian renunciation is not fundamentally an exercise in loss. It is the response of someone who has encountered a greater good. Jesus had already expressed this logic in the parables of the hidden treasure and the pearl of great price. The man who discovers treasure in a field sells everything, but Matthew includes the crucial words: he does so “out of joy” (Matt. 13:44). Without encounter, renunciation becomes grim deprivation. After encounter, it can become freedom.
The saints understood this. Saint Francis of Assisi is remembered for radical poverty, but his poverty cannot be understood merely as contempt for material things. The man who called the sun his brother and the moon his sister did not despise creation; he had ceased trying to possess it as the source of his identity. Once Christ became his treasure, the world could become gift again. That is one of the paradoxes of Christian detachment: when we stop demanding that created things satisfy the infinite hunger of the heart, we become capable of loving them more rightly. We can enjoy without worshipping, possess without clutching, and surrender without being annihilated.
Jesus’ promise of receiving “a hundred times more” must be heard within this same logic. It is not a prosperity formula in which giving to God becomes a technique for acquiring greater wealth. That would leave the heart’s fundamental orientation unchanged. The hundredfold belongs to the abundance of communion. The Acts of the Apostles offers an early glimpse of such abundance when believers discover a new form of family in Christ and hold their possessions in radical solidarity with one another (Acts 2:44–45; 4:32–35). A missionary may leave one home and discover a hundred homes opened in hospitality. A religious sister may relinquish biological motherhood and become a spiritual mother to generations. A priest may forego establishing a household of his own and discover that an entire community calls him father. A lay Christian who abandons the relentless pursuit of accumulation may discover friendships, generosity, peace, and freedom that money could never have purchased. The hundredfold is not simply more things. It is a richer participation in the life of God and his people, culminating in the promise Jesus names explicitly: eternal life.
This helps us understand his final reversal: “Many who are first will be last, and the last will be first.” The kingdom unsettles the measurements by which human societies establish importance. Wealth, achievement, recognition, status, influence, and even visible religious success cannot reveal the final condition of a soul. The one regarded as first may stand before God spiritually impoverished; the person the world barely notices may possess a heart rich in faith. The next chapter of Matthew will develop this reversal in the parable of the labourers in the vineyard, where grace refuses to behave according to ordinary calculations of merit.
It is here that the Gospel begins to draw us, perhaps unexpectedly but profoundly, toward the Eucharist. Matthew 19:23–30 is not, in its immediate literary context, a Eucharistic discourse. Its direct concerns are wealth, discipleship, salvation, grace, renunciation, and eschatological reward. Yet within the unity of Christian revelation, these themes find remarkable depth when contemplated before the Eucharistic Christ. The One who asks the disciple to relinquish everything is the One who first gives everything. The Gospel does not culminate in a God who impoverishes humanity for his own enrichment; it culminates in the Son who “emptied himself” (Phil. 2:7), gives his life upon the Cross, and offers himself sacramentally to the Church.
The movement from possession to trust already appears in Israel’s journey through the desert. In Exodus 16, God gives manna, but the Israelites are taught not to hoard it. They must receive their bread as gift, day after day. Deuteronomy later interprets this experience as a lesson in radical dependence: God “let you be afflicted with hunger, and then fed you with manna” so that Israel might understand that “one does not live by bread alone” (Deut. 8:3). The wilderness strips away the illusion of self sufficiency. Israel must discover that life is sustained not ultimately by what can be accumulated but by the fidelity of the One who gives.
The Eucharist carries this biblical pedagogy into astonishing intimacy. God no longer gives only manna; in Christ he gives himself. The Bread of Life is not merely provision from God but communion with God. Thomas Aquinas saw in the Eucharist the remarkable intimacy of divine friendship: Christ does not leave his disciples merely a memory but gives them his abiding sacramental presence (Thomas Aquinas, 1981). What Matthew 19 asks us to relinquish, therefore, must be understood in light of what Christ desires to give. He empties our clenched hands because he wishes those hands to receive him.
Eucharistic adoration becomes, in this sense, one of the great schools of holy poverty. Before the Blessed Sacrament, our culture’s ordinary measures of worth begin quietly to collapse. We are not productive there. We cannot impress Christ with our résumé, purchase his affection, manipulate his judgment, or control his grace. We come as creatures before our Creator and beloved before the Lover. We remain.
The simplicity can be unsettling. We are accustomed to doing, speaking, checking, achieving, scrolling, planning, and managing. The consecrated Host asks us simply to behold and to be beheld. Saint John Paul II described Eucharistic worship outside Mass as “of inestimable value,” urging the faithful to linger in adoration before Christ and to allow that encounter to deepen their communion with him (John Paul II, 2003). Benedict XVI likewise taught that adoration is not something separate from the Eucharistic celebration but flows from the mystery of the Eucharist itself: the Christ whom the Church receives is the Christ whom the Church adores (Benedict XVI, 2007).
And perhaps this explains why adoration can become so intimately connected to today’s Gospel. In the silence before the tabernacle or monstrance, Christ allows us to recognize our camels; the accumulated burdens we have mistaken for necessities. We begin to see the things we cannot imagine surrendering. My future must unfold in this particular way. This person must remain in my life. I must be admired. I must succeed. I cannot forgive this injury. I need this financial security before I can trust God. I need to be understood. I need to remain in control.
Get Gyaviira Luwaga’s stories in your inbox
Join Medium for free to get updates from this writer.
Before the Eucharist, we need not pretend these attachments do not exist. We can place them before Christ one by one. “Lord, this is what I am afraid to lose. This is the future I have been trying to secure without you. This is the wound I refuse to surrender. This is the achievement I have allowed to tell me who I am. This is the relationship from which I have demanded what only you can give.”
And Christ’s answer remains: “For men this is impossible, but for God all things are possible.”
Adoration slowly teaches the heart something that theological argument, indispensable though it is, cannot accomplish by itself: the experiential knowledge that Christ is enough. Not enough in the sentimental sense that created things cease to matter, but enough in the theological sense that every created good finds its proper place only when God is first. We do not love family less when Christ is first; we become capable of loving family without turning another person into our saviour. We do not cease valuing work; we cease requiring success to justify our existence. We need not despise money; we become freer to use it rather than worship it. Grace restores the proper order of love.
Yet Eucharistic intimacy must never become an escape from the world or from the poor. Chrysostom’s preaching is particularly severe on this point. He refuses to separate reverence for Christ at the altar from reverence for Christ in the needy (John Chrysostom, 1888). A person cannot plausibly adore the Eucharistic Lord while remaining deliberately indifferent to those with whom Christ identifies himself in Matthew 25. The Host we adore is the Body given “for you.” Eucharistic love therefore carries within itself the form of self gift.
This provides a searching test of our adoration. If time before the Blessed Sacrament is genuine, over time it should make the heart more available: more generous, more patient, less possessive, more capable of noticing suffering, more willing to forgive, and increasingly free from the need to dominate. We adore Christ not to retreat into a private spiritual refuge but to be transformed into people whose lives begin to take on the pattern of the One they adore. The Eucharist says what divine love always says: This is my body, given for you. The disciple who hears those words repeatedly must eventually ask, “If my Lord gives himself so completely to me, what am I still refusing to give to him?”
The deepest movement of Matthew 19:23–30 is therefore not from wealth to poverty for poverty’s sake. It is from possession to communion, from self sufficiency to grace, from calculation to trust, and from the anxiety of keeping everything to the freedom of belonging to Christ. The rich young man possesses many things yet walks away sorrowful. Peter has left many things, yet he still needs to learn that Christ is not merely the path toward a reward; Christ is himself the treasure hidden within every authentic reward.
Eventually, this Gospel asks each of us a question far more personal than whether we have many possessions: If everything by which I have learned to identify myself were stripped away, would I still know that I am loved because I belong to Christ?
That is a difficult question. It may even feel impossible.
But impossibility is precisely where Jesus places the promise.
“For God all things are possible.”
The Christian life is not the heroic achievement of people who have successfully made themselves detached. It is the gradual miracle by which grace enlarges a human heart until it can receive God more completely. Christ loosens what we clutch. He heals desires that have become disordered. He transforms wealth into stewardship, fear into trust, ambition into service, sacrifice into communion, and hunger into adoration.
And perhaps the most beautiful place to allow him to begin is before the Blessed Sacrament. There, the glorious Son of Man whom Daniel saw receiving an everlasting kingdom comes to us beneath the quiet humility of bread. The One before whom angels worship allows himself to remain in the tabernacle for us. Infinite majesty hides beneath sacramental littleness. The King becomes our food. The Lord who asks everything gives himself entirely.
In that silence, Peter’s question, “What will there be for us?” — can slowly mature into another question: Lord, if I have you, what more do I ultimately need?
When the heart begins to mean those words, the camel starts to shed its burdens.
The impossible begins to become possible.
And what at first sounded like a frightening Gospel of renunciation reveals itself as an invitation to freedom. Christ is not standing before us demanding that we become empty for emptiness’ sake. He is inviting us to release everything that prevents us from being filled with him.
The narrow way leads not into deprivation but into abundance. The last become first, sacrifice becomes communion, and the heart discovers that its deepest hunger was never for possessions, status, certainty, or control.
It was for Christ.
And in the Eucharist, Christ remains; silent, humble, hidden, and wholly given, waiting for us to discover that he is not merely part of the treasure of Christian life.
He is the Treasure.
References
Benedict XVI. (2007). Sacramentum caritatis: Post-synodal apostolic exhortation on the Eucharist as the source and summit of the Church’s life and mission. Libreria Editrice Vaticana.
Catholic Church. (1997). Catechism of the Catholic Church (2nd ed.). Libreria Editrice Vaticana.
Clement of Alexandria. (1885). Who is the rich man that shall be saved? (W. Wilson, Trans.). In A. Roberts & J. Donaldson (Eds.), Ante-Nicene Fathers (Vol. 2). Christian Literature Publishing Company. (Original work composed ca. second–third century)
Davies, W. D., & Allison, D. C., Jr. (1997). A critical and exegetical commentary on the Gospel according to Saint Matthew (Vol. 3). T&T Clark.
France, R. T. (2007). The Gospel of Matthew. William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.
Holman, S. R. (Ed.). (2008). Wealth and poverty in early Church and society. Baker Academic.
John Chrysostom. (1888). Homilies on the Gospel of Saint Matthew (G. Prevost & M. B. Riddle, Trans.). In P. Schaff (Ed.), Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, First Series (Vol. 10). Christian Literature Publishing Company. (Original work delivered ca. fourth century)
John Paul II. (2003). Ecclesia de Eucharistia: Encyclical letter on the Eucharist in its relationship to the Church. Libreria Editrice Vaticana.
Keener, C. S. (1999). A commentary on the Gospel of Matthew. William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.
Luz, U. (2005). Matthew 8–20: A commentary (J. E. Crouch, Trans.). Fortress Press.
Nolland, J. (2005). The Gospel of Matthew: A commentary on the Greek text. William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.
Rhee, H. (2017). Wealth and poverty in early Christianity. Fortress Press.
Thomas Aquinas. (1981). Summa theologica (Fathers of the English Dominican Province, Trans.). Christian Classics. (Original work written ca. 1265–1274)
