Christ feeds four thousand. He gives sight to a blind man. He foretells his passion.
Of compassion he feedeth the people, 4000 vvith seuen loaues. 10 After al vvhich miracles as though they vvere yet vnsufficient to proue him to be Christ, the obstinate Pharisees do require some miracle from heauen. 13 Wherevpon forsaking them, he vvarneth his Disciples to bevvare of the leauen of their doctrine, neither to feare vvant of necessaries. 22 He healeth a blind man by degrees and vvith ceremonies. 27 Peter confesseth him (though men al this vvhile had not learned so farre) to be Christ. 31 and by and by he reuealeth to them his passion, 32 rebuking also Peter for dissuading it, 34 and shewing that it is a thing vvherein al that vvil be saued (namely in time of persecution) must folovv him.
1In those days again, when there was a great multitude and they had nothing to eat; calling his disciples together, he saith to them:Di que' giorni essendo di nuovo grande la folla, né avendo quelli da mangiare, chiamati a se i discepoli, disse loro:IN those daies againe vvhen there vvas a great multitude, and had not what to eate: calling his Disciples together, he saith to them,In diebus illis iterum cum turba multa esset, nec haberent quod manducarent, convocatis discipulis, ait illis: 2I have compassion on the multitude, for behold they have now been with me three days and have nothing to eat.Mi fa compassione questo popolo: perché sono già tre giorni, che si trattiene con me, e non ha da mangiare.I haue compassion vpon the multitude: because loe three daies they now endure vvith me, neither haue vvhat to eate.Misereor super turbam: quia ecce jam triduo sustinent me, nec habent quod manducent: 3And if I shall send them away fasting to their home, they will faint in the way: for some of them came from afar off.E se li rimanderò alle case loro digiuni, verran meno per istrada: perocché taluni di essi son venuti da lontano.and if I dimisse them fasting into their home, they vvil faint in the vvay: for some of them came farre of.et si dimisero eos jejunos in domum suam, deficient in via: quidam enim ex eis de longe venerunt. 4And his disciples answered him: From whence can any one fill them here with bread in the wilderness?E i discepoli gli risposero: E come potrà alcuno qui in una solitudine satollarli di pane?And his Disciples ansvvered him, Whence may a man fil them here vvith bread in the vvildernes?Et responderunt ei discipuli sui: Unde illos quis poterit saturare panibus in solitudine ? 5And he asked them: How many loaves have ye? Who said: Seven.Ed egli domandò loro: Quanti pani avete? Risposero: Sette.And he asked them, Hovv many loaues haue ye? Who said, Seuen.Et interrogavit eos: Quot panes habetis ? Qui dixerunt: Septem. 6And he commanded the people to sit down on the ground. And taking the seven loaves, giving thanks, he broke and gave to his disciples for to set before them. And they set them before the people.E ordinò alle turbe, che sedessero per terra. E presi i sette pani, rese le grazie, gli spezzò, e gli diede a' suoi discepoli, perché gli ponesser davanti alle turbe, come li posero.And he commaunded the multitude to sit dovvne vpon the ground. And taking the seuen loaues, giuing thankes he brake, and gaue to his Disciples for to set before them, and they did set them before the multitude.Et præcepit turbæ discumbere super terram. Et accipiens septem panes, gratias agens fregit, et dabat discipulis suis ut apponerent, et apposuerunt turbæ.
7And they had a few little fishes: and he blessed them and commanded them to be set before them.E avevano ancora alcuni pochi pesciolini: e questi pur benedisse, e ordinò, che fossero distribuiti.And they had a fevv litle fishes: and he blessed them, and commaunded them to be set before them.Et habebant pisciculos paucos: et ipsos benedixit, et jussit apponi. 8And they did eat and were filled: and they took up that which was left of the fragments, seven baskets.E mangiarono, e si satollarono: e raccolsero degli avanzi, che rimasero, sette sporte.And they did eate and vvere filled. and they tooke vp that vvhich vvas left of the fragments, seuen maundes.Et manducaverunt, et saturati sunt, et sustulerunt quod superaverat de fragmentis, septem sportas. 9And they that had eaten were about four thousand. And he sent them away.Or quelli, che avevano mangiato, erano circa quattro mila, e li licenziò.And they that had eaten vvere about foure thousand: and he dimissed them.Erant autem qui manducaverunt, quasi quatuor millia: et dimisit eos. 10And immediately going up into a ship with his disciples, he came into the parts of Dalmanutha.Ed entrato immediatamente in barca co' suoi discepoli andò dalle parti di Dalmanuta.And immediatly going vp into the boate vvith his Disciples, he came into the quarters of Dalmanûtha.Et statim ascendens navim cum discipulis suis, venit in partes Dalmanutha. 11And the Pharisees came forth and began to question with him, asking him a sign from heaven, tempting him.E andaron da lui i Farisei, e cominciarono a disputare con esso, chiedendogli, per tentarlo, un segno nel cielo.And the Pharisees vvent forth, and began to question vvith him, asking of him a signe from heauen, tempting him.Et exierunt pharisæi, et cœperunt conquirere cum eo, quærentes ab illo signum de cælo, tentantes eum. 12And sighing deeply in spirit, he saith: Why doth this generation seek a sign? Amen, I say to you, a sign shall not be given to this generation.Ed egli, gettato dal cuore un sospiro, disse: Perché mai questa generazione chiede ella un segno? In verità dicovi, che non sarà dato a questa generazione tal segno.And groning in spirit, he saith; Why doth this generation aske a signe? Amen I say to you, If a signe shal be giuen to this generation.Et ingemiscens spiritu, ait: Quid generatio ista signum quærit ? Amen dico vobis, si dabitur generationi isti signum. 13And leaving them, he went up again into the ship and passed to the other side of the water.E rimandatigli, entrò di nuovo in barca, e passò il lago.And leauing them, he vvent vp againe into the boate, and passed beyond the straite.Et dimittens eos, ascendit iterum navim et abiit trans fretum.
14And they forgot to take bread: and they had but one loaf with them in the ship.E si scordarono di pigliare del pane: e non avevan seco in barca, se non un pane.And they forgot to take bread: and they had but one loafe vvith them in the boate.Et obliti sunt panes sumere: et nisi unum panem non habebant secum in navi. 15And he charged them saying: Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the leaven of Herod.Ed egli istruivagli, e diceva loro: Guardatevi, e state lontani dal fermento de' Farisei, e dal fermento d'Erode.And he commaunded them, saying, Looke vvel and bevvare of the leauen of the Pharisees, and the leauen of Herod.Et præcipiebat eis, dicens: Videte, et cavete a fermento pharisæorum, et fermento Herodis. 16And they reasoned among themselves, saying: Because we have no bread.Ed essi si bisticciavano tra di loro, dicendo: Non abbiam pane.And they reasoned among them selues saying, Because vve haue not bread.Et cogitabant ad alterutrum, dicentes: quia panes non habemus. 17Which Jesus knowing, saith to them: Why do you reason, because you have no bread? Do you not yet know nor understand? Have you still your heart blinded?La qual cosa conosciuta avendo Gesù, disse loro: Perché v'inquietate del non aver pane? Non avete voi ancora conoscimento, né intelletto? Ed è accecato tutt'ora il cuor vostro?Which IESVS knovving, saith to them, Why doe you reason, because you haue not bread? do you not yet knovv nor vnderstand? yet haue ye your hart blinded?Quo cognito, ait illis Jesus: Quid cogitatis, quia panes non habetis ? nondum cognoscetis nec intelligitis ? adhuc cæcatum habetis cor vestrum ? 18Having eyes, see you not? And having ears, hear you not? Neither do you remember?Avete occhi, e non vedete? orecchie, e non udite? né avete memoria.hauing eies see you not? and hauing eares heare you not? Neither do you remember?oculos habentes non videtis ? et aures habentes non auditis ? nec recordamini, 19When I broke the five loaves among five thousand, how many baskets full of fragments took you up? They say to him: Twelve.Allorché cinque pani io divisi tra cinquemila uomini: quanti canestri furono gli avanzi, che raccoglieste? Gli risposero: Dodici.When I brake fiue loaues among fiue thousand: and hovv many baskets ful of fragmēts tooke you vp? They say to him, Tvvelue.quando quinque panes fregi in quinque millia: quot cophinos fragmentorum plenos sustulistis ? Dicunt ei: Duodecim. 20When also the seven loaves among four thousand, how many baskets of fragments took you up? And they say to him: Seven.E quando poi sette pani io divisi tra quattro mila persone: quante sporte furono gli avanzi, che raccoglieste? Risposero: Sette.When also seuen loaues among foure thousand, hovv many maundes of fragments tooke you vp? And they say to him, Seuen.Quando et septem panes in quatuor millia: quot sportas fragmentorum tulistis ? Et dicunt ei: Septem.
21And he said to them: How do you not yet understand?E diceva loro: Come non ancora intendete?And he said to them, Hovv do you not yet vnderstand?Et dicebat eis: Quomodo nondum intelligitis ? 22And they came to Bethsaida: and they bring to him a blind man. And they besought him that he would touch him.E giunsero a Betsaida, e gli fu presentato un cieco, e lo supplicavano, che lo toccasse.And they come to Bethsaida: and they bring to him one blinde, and desired him that he vvould touche him.Et veniunt Bethsaidam, et adducunt ei cæcum, et rogabant eum ut illum tangeret. 23And taking the blind man by the hand, he led him out of the town. And spitting upon his eyes, laying his hands on him, he asked him if he saw any thing.E preso il cieco per mano, lo menò fuora del borgo: e avendogli sputato negli occhi, e impostegli le mani, gli dimandò, se vedeva nulla.And taking the hand of the blinde, he led him forth out of the tovvne: and spitting into his eies, imposing his hands, he asked him if he savv any thing.Et apprehensa manu cæci, eduxit eum extra vicum: et exspuens in oculos ejus impositis manibus suis, interrogavit eum si quid videret. 24And looking up, he said: I see men, as it were trees, walking.Ed egli, alzati gli occhi, disse: Veggo uomini camminare simili ad alberi.And looking vp, he said, I see men as it vvere trees, vvalking.Et aspiciens, ait: Video homines velut arbores ambulantes. 25After that again he laid his hands upon his eyes: and he began to see and was restored, so that he saw all things clearly.Indi Gesù impose di nuovo le mani sopra gli occhi di lui, e principiò a vedere: e fu sanato in guisa, che vedeva tutte le cose distintamente.After that againe he imposed his hands vpon his eies, and be began to see, and vvas restored, so that he savv al things clerely.Deinde iterum imposuit manus super oculos ejus: et cœpit videre: et restitutus est ita ut clare videret omnia. 26And he sent him into his house, saying: Go into thy house, and if thou enter into the town, tell nobody.E rimandollo a casa sua, e disse: Vattene a casa tua: e se entri nel borgo, non dir nulla a nissuno.And he sent him into his house, saying, Goe into thy house: and if thou enter in to the tovvne, tel no body.Et misit illum in domum suam, dicens: Vade in domum tuam: et si in vicum introieris, nemini dixeris. 27And Jesus went out, and his disciples into the towns of Cæsarea Philippi. And in the way, he asked his disciples, saying to them: Whom do men say that I am?E Gesù sen andò co' suoi discepoli per le castella di Cesarea di Filippo: e per istrada interrogava i suoi discepoli, dicendo loro: Chi dicono gli uomini, che io mi sia?And IESVS vvent forth and his Disciples into the tovvnes of Caesarêa-Philippi: and in the vvay he asked his Disciples, saying to them, Whom do men say that I am?Et egressus est Jesus, et discipuli ejus in castella Cæsareæ Philippi: et in via interrogabat discipulos suos, dicens eis: Quem me dicunt esse homines ?
28Who answered him, saying: John the Baptist; but some Elias, and others as one of the prophets.Essi risposero: Chi dice Giovanni Batista, chi Elia, chi come uno de' profeti.Who ansvvered him, saying, Iohn the Baptist, some Elias, & other some as it vvere one of the Prophets.Qui responderunt illi, dicentes: Joannem Baptistam, alii Eliam, alii vero quasi unum de prophetis. 29Then he saith to them: But whom do you say that I am? Peter answering said to him: Thou art the Christ.Allora disse loro: E voi chi dite, che io sia? Pietro risposegli: Tu se' il Cristo.Then he saith to them, But vvhom do you say that I am? Peter ansvvering said to him, Thou art Christ.Tunc dicit illis: Vos vero quem me esse dicitis ? Respondens Petrus, ait ei: Tu es Christus. 30And he strictly charged them that they should not tell any man of him.E proibì loro strettamente il dir ciò di se con alcuno.And he threatened them that they should not tel any man of him.Et comminatus est eis, ne cui dicerent de illo. 31And he began to teach them that the Son of man must suffer many things and be rejected by the ancients and by the high priests and the scribes: and be killed and after three days rise again.E cominciò a spiegar loro, come doveva il Figliuolo dell'uomo patir molto, ed esser riprovato dai seniori, e dai principi de' sacerdoti, e dagli Scribi, ed essere ucciso: e risuscitare tre giorni dopo.And he began to teache them, that the Sonne of man must suffer many things, and be reiected of the Auncients and of the high Priestes and the Scribes, and be killed: and after three daies rise againe.Et cœpit docere eos quoniam oportet Filium hominis pati multa, et reprobari a senioribus, et a summis sacerdotibus et scribis, et occidi: et post tres dies resurgere. 32And he spoke the word openly. And Peter taking him began to rebuke him.E parlava di questo fatto apertamente. E Pietro, presolo in disparte, cominciò a rampognarlo.And he spake the vvord openly. And Peter taking him, began to rebuke him.Et palam verbum loquebatur. Et apprehendens eum Petrus, cœpit increpare eum. 33Who turning about and seeing his disciples, threatened Peter, saying: Go behind me, Satan, because thou savourest not the things that are of God but that are of men.Ma egli rivoltosi, e mirando i suoi discepoli, sgridò Pietro, dicendo: Va lungi da me, satana; perché non hai la saggezza di Dio, ma degli uomini.Who turning, and seeing his Disciples, threatened Peter, saying, Goe behind me Satan, because thou sauourest not the things that are of God, but that are of men.Qui conversus, et videns discipulos suos, comminatus est Petro, dicens: Vade retro me Satana, quoniam non sapis quæ Dei sunt, sed quæ sunt hominum.
34And calling the multitude together with his disciples, he said to them: If any man will follow me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me.E chiamate a se le turbe con i suoi discepoli, disse loro: Se alcuno vuoi tenere dietro a me, rinneghi se stesso, e prenda la sua croce, e mi siegua.And calling the multitude together vvith his Disciples, he said to them, If any man vvil folovv me, let him deny him self, and take vp his crosse, and folovv me.Et convocata turba cum discipulis suis, dixit eis: Si quis vult me sequi, deneget semetipsum: et tollat crucem suam, et sequatur me. 35For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever shall lose his life for my sake and the gospel shall save it.Imperocché chi vorrà salvare l'anima sua, la perderà: e chi perderà l'anima sua per me, e pel Vangelo, la salverà.For he that vvil saue his life, shal lose it: and he that shal lose his life for me and the Gospel, shal saue it.Qui enim voluerit animam suam salvam facere, perdet eam: qui autem perdiderit animam suam propter me, et Evangelium, salvam faciet eam. 36For what shall it profit a man, if he gain the whole world and suffer the loss of his soul?Imperocché che gioverà all'uomo l'acquisto di tutto il mondo, ove perda l'anima sua?For vvhat shal it profit a man, if he gaine the vvhole vvorld, and suffer damage of his soule?Quid enim proderit homini, si lucretur mundum totum et detrimentum animæ suæ faciat ? 37Or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?Oppure che darà l'uomo in cambio dell'anima sua?Or vvhat permutation shal a man giue for his soule?Aut quid dabit homo commutationis pro anima sua ? 38For he that shall be ashamed of me and of my words, in this adulterous and sinful generation: the Son of man also will be ashamed of him, when he shall come in the glory of his Father with the holy angels.Conciossiachè chi si vergognerà di me, e delle mie parole in questa generazione adultera, e peccatrice; si vergognerà di lui il Figliuolo dell'uomo, quando verrà nella gloria del Padre suo con gli Angeli santi.For he that shal be ashamed of me, and of my vvordes in this aduouterous and sinful generation, the Sonne of man also vvil be ashamed of him, vvhen he shal come in the glorie of his father vvith the holy Angels.Qui enim me confusus fuerit, et verba mea in generatione ista adultera et peccatrice, et Filius hominis confundetur eum, cum venerit in gloria Patris sui cum angelis sanctis. 39And he said to them: Amen I say to you that there are some of them that stand here who shall not taste death till they see the kingdom of God coming in power.E diceva loro: Vi dico in verità, che degli astanti vi sono alcuni, i quali non gusteranno la morte, sino a tanto che veggano venire il regno di Dio con maestà.Et dicebat illis: Amen dico vobis, quia sunt quidam de hic stantibus, qui non gustabunt mortem donec videant regnum Dei veniens in virtute.
8:1
about the year A.D. 32.
8:8
Theophylactus
After the multitude had eaten and were filled, they did not take the remains; but these the disciples collected, as in the former miracle of the multiplication of the loaves. By this circumstance we are taught to be content with what is sufficient, and to seek no unnecessary supplies. We may likewise learn from this stupendous miracle the providence of God and his goodness, who sends us not away fasting, but wishes all to be nourished and enriched with his grace. (Theophylactus)
Haydock
Thus does our Lord verify in his works what he has promised in his instructions; that if we will seek in the first instance the kingdom of God and his justice, that all necessary things shall be added unto us. By the gathering up of the fragments that remained, he not only made the miracle more striking to the multitude and to the apostles, but has also left us a practical lesson, how, in the midst of plenty, which proceeds from the munificence of heaven, we must suffer no waste. (Haydock)
8:9
St. Matthew (xv. 38.) adds, without counting either the women or the children.
8:10
Tirinus
Dalmanutha. St. Matthew (xv. 39.) has, to the borders of Magedan; in Greek, Magdala, or Magedan. These were two towns beyond the sea of Galilee, situated near to each other; it is of little consequence which of these names the Evangelists mention; perhaps our Saviour visited both. (Tirinus)
Bible de Vence
The major part of commentators, if we can believe the Bible of Vence, take Magedan, or Magdala, to be the the town of that name situated to the east of the lake of Tiberias, in the vicinity of Gerasa, and Dalmanutha to be the name of that part of the country in which these two towns were situated. (Bible de Vence)
Polus
Polus in his Synopsis Criticorum, (vol. 4:p. 410.) gives three explanations for the discrepance of the names in Sts. Matthew and Mark: 1. Idem locus erat binominis, the same place might have two names. 2. Propiqua erant loca, the places were near. 3. Alterum erat regio, alterum vicus, the one was the name of the territory, the other of the town or village; and concludes with asserting from Jewish authorities, that it was the same territory in which the two villages Magedan and Dalmanutha were situated; so that it might be known by either name, as we find the territory of Gadara and of Gergesae is one and the same. (Polus)
8:11
Theophylactus
Jesus Christ did not consent to the petition they made him, because there will be another time for signs and wonders, viz. his second coming, when the powers of heaven shall be moved, and the moon refuse her light. This his first coming is not to terrify man, but to instruct and store his mind with lessons of humility, and every other virtue. (Theophylactus)
8:12
Bible de Vence
Jesus Christ fetches a deep sigh on account of their obduracy, and says; why do these ask for a miracle to confirm their belief, when they resist the authority of so many miracles, which are daily performed under their eyes? (Bible de Vence)
Witham
A sign shall not be given. But by a Hebrew form of speech, if divers times is put for a negative. (Witham)
8:15
8:23
It may be asked, why our Lord led the man from the multitude before he cured him?
Theophylactus
It may be answered, that he did it not to seem to perform his prodigies through vain glory; and thence to teach us to shun the empty praises of men: 2dly, to facilitate recollection, and to give himself to prayer, before he cured the blind man; and lastly, he went out of the city because the inhabitants of Bethsaida had already rendered themselves unworthy of the miracles of Christ. For among them our Saviour had wrought many miracles, yet they would not believe. (St. Matthew 11:21.) (Tirinus) (Theophylactus)
Dionysius
Dionysius says, that Jesus led him from the multitude to shew that if a sinner, figured by the blind man, wishes to be converted from his evil ways, he must first leave all immediate occasions and inducements to sin. (Dionysius)
8:24
Witham
Men[Ver. 24. Video homines velut arbores ambulantes, blepo taus anthropous os dendra peripatountas.] as trees walking. In the Latin text, walking may agree either with men, or with trees, but the Greek shews that walking must be referred to men. Perhaps Christ restored sight in this manner to the man by degrees, to make him more sensible of the benefit; or to teach us how difficult is a sinner's conversion; of which this was a figure. (Witham)
8:25
Our Saviour made use of exterior signs in the performance of his miracles to command attention, and to signify the inward effects of the favours grants: these the Catholic Church, after the example of her Founder and Model, also uses in the celebration of her sacraments, and for the same purposes. Nor ought any supercilious and superficial reasoner to undervalue and contemn the corporal and external application of holy things, under the hollow plea, that we are exclusively to attend to the spirit and faith.
8:28
As one of the prophets. In the Greek it is, one of the prophets.
8:31
After our Redeemer had heard the confession of his first apostle, who spoke in the name of all, as the head, he opens out to them the grand mystery of his passion.
8:1
Concordance Mt. 15, 32.
In the liturgy The Gospel vpō the 6 Sunday after Pentecost.
8:2
Great feruour and deuotion in the good people, and exceding force in our Maisters preaching, that made thē abide fasting so long to heare his diuine sermons.
8:6
6. Gaue to his disciples.] He serueth the people not immediatly him self, but by the Apostles ministerie: to teach vs that we must receiue Christes Sacraments and doctrine, not at our owne hand, but of his Priests and our Pastours.
8:7
7. Blessed them.] 〈Greek〉. So is it in some ancient Greeke copies, agreable to our Latin, and in S. Luke expresly in the common Greeke text, Luc. 9, 16. that he blessed the fiue loaues and the two fishes: which must be alwaies marked against the Heretikes, Blessing of creatures vvorketh an effect in thē. which denie this blessing to pertaine to the creatures, but •eine it alwaies to be referred to God for thanks giuing. For if it were so, he would haue said grace but once for that whole refection: but he did seuerally blesse both the bread first, and afterward the fishes also, Gen. 1, 22. 28. multiplying them by his said blessing (as he did mankind and other creatures in the beginning by blessing them) and so working effectually some change or alteration in the very creatures them selues.
8:10
Concordance Mt. 15, 39. 16, 1.
8:18
Concordance Mar. 6, 38.
8:19
Concordance Mr. 8, 5.
8:22
Our Sauiour vsed to worke much by touching: that we may learne not to cōtemne the corporal and external application of holy things, nor to chalēge by the spirit and faith only, as Heretikes doe.
8:27
Concordance Mt. 16, 13.
Concordance Lu. 9, 18
8:35
35. For me and the Gospel.] What is to suffer for the Gospel. By the Gospel is signified, not only the foure Euangelistes, but al Scriptures, and whatsoeuer Christ said that is not in Scripture: for he saith in this very place, He that shal be ashamed of my wordes, the Sonne of man wil be ashamed of him &c. Neither his owne wordes only, Luc. 9. but whatsoeuer the Apostles taught in word or writing: for our Sauiour saith, He that despiseth you, despiseth me. For defence of any of al these and of euery Article of the Catholike faith, we ought to die, and this is to lose our life for Christ and his Gospel.
8:36
36. Gaine the whole world.] Doing against our owne conscience. Let such note this, that for feare or flattery of the world cōdescend to obey the vniust lawes of men touching religion, against their owne consciences: and be content for the rest of a few daies of this life, and for sauing their temporal goods, to lose their soule and the ioyes of heauen.
8:1
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Harmony of the Gospels 4.5
… and we forbade him. But Jesus said, Forbid him not; for there is no man which shall do a miracle in my name, that can lightly speak evil of me; for he that is not against you is on your side.”
8:3
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 23
[5] And Jesus called his disciples, and said unto them, I have compassion on this multitude, because of their continuing with me three days, having nothing to eat; and to send them away fasting I am not willing, lest they faint in the way,
8:5
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 45.0
On the words of the Gospel, Mark viii. 5 , etc., where the miracle of the seven loaves is related.
8:6
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 45.2
… In that I explain this to you, I minister to Christ; and when ye hear peaceably, ye “sit down.” I in my body sit, but in my heart I am standing, and ministering to you in anxiety; lest peradventure, not the food, but the vessel offend any of you. Ye know the feast of God, ye have often heard it, that it is for the heart, not for the belly.
8:10
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Harmony of the Gospels 2.51
… In this case, indeed, Mark also keeps the same order; and after his account of the miracle of the seven loaves, subjoins the same intimation as is given us in Matthew, only with this difference, that Matthew’s expression for the locality is not Dalmanutha, as is read in certain codices, but Magedan.
8:12
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 23
[13] And the Pharisees and Sadducees came to him, and began to seek a discussion with him. And they asked him to shew them a sign from heaven, tempting him. [14]
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 52
But Mark saith, that when they were come unto Him, and were questioning with Him, “He sighed deeply in His spirit, and saith, Why doth this generation seek after a sign?”
8:13
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 23
… And they asked him to shew them a sign from heaven, tempting him. [14] And Jesus sighed within himself, and said, What sign seeketh this evil and adulterous generation? It seeketh a sign, and it shall not be given a sign, except the sign [15] of Jonah the prophet. Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not be given a [16] sign.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Harmony of the Gospels 2.52
… Then Jesus said unto them, Take heed, and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees;” and so forth, down to where we read, “Then understood they that He bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.” These words are recorded also by Mark, and that likewise in the same order.
8:14
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 23
… He said unto them, How have ye not understood that I spake not to you because of the bread, but that ye should beware of the leaven of the Pharisees [25] and Sadducees? Then they understood that he spake, not that they should beware of the leaven of the bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and Sadducees, which he called leaven.
8:15
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 23
[17] And his disciples forgot to take with them bread, and there was not with them [18] in the boat, not even one loaf.
Archelaus † fl. AD 278 The Acts of the Disputation with the Heresiarch Manes 44
… here, our Lord Jesus Christ, after His birth by Mary His mother, was sent off in flight into Egypt through the instrumentality of an angel. There, Moses led forth his people from the midst of the Egyptians, and saved them; and here, Jesus, leading forth His people from the midst of the Pharisees, transferred them to an eternal salvation.
8:17
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 23
… And they reflected within themselves that they had taken with them [20] no bread. And Jesus knew, and said unto them, Why think ye within yourselves, O ye of little faith, and are anxious, because ye have no bread?
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 52
But not even so did they understand the motive of His question; wherefore afterwards He saith to them, as Mark relates, “Are your hearts so hardened? Having eyes, see ye not? and having ears, hear ye not?”
8:18
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 23
… And they reflected within themselves that they had taken with them [20] no bread. And Jesus knew, and said unto them, Why think ye within yourselves, O ye of little faith, and are anxious, because ye have no bread? until now do ye not perceive, [21] neither understand? is your heart yet hard?
8:19
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 23
… And Jesus knew, and said unto them, Why think ye within yourselves, O ye of little faith, and are anxious, because ye have no bread? until now do ye not perceive, [21] neither understand? is your heart yet hard? And have ye eyes, and yet see not? [22] [Arabic, p. 90] and have ye ears, and yet hear not?
8:20
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 23
… until now do ye not perceive, [21] neither understand? is your heart yet hard? And have ye eyes, and yet see not? [22] [Arabic, p. 90] and have ye ears, and yet hear not? and do ye not remember when I brake those five loaves for five thousand? and how many baskets full of broken [23] pieces took ye up? They said, Twelve.
8:21
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 23
… [22] [Arabic, p. 90] and have ye ears, and yet hear not? and do ye not remember when I brake those five loaves for five thousand? and how many baskets full of broken [23] pieces took ye up? They said, Twelve. He said unto them, And the seven also for four thousand: how many baskets full of broken pieces took ye up? They [24] said, Seven.
8:22
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 23
… And that blind man looked intently, [29] and said unto him, I see men as trees walking. And he placed his hand [30] again on his eyes; and they were restored, and he saw everything clearly. And he sent him to his house, and said, Do not enter even into the village, nor tell any man in the village.
St Athanasius of Alexandria † AD 373 Synodal Letter to the People of Antioch. (Tomus ad Antiochenos.) 1
… nor was there one that raised up Lazarus, another that asked concerning him; but the same it was that said as man, ‘Where does Lazarus lie ;’ and as God raised him up: the same that as man and in the body spat, but divinely as Son of God opened the eyes of the man blind from his birth
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Harmony of the Gospels 2.53
… But he has brought in before it a narrative which is given by him alone,—namely, that regarding the giving of sight to that blind man who said to the Lord, “I see men as trees walking.”
8:23
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 23
[26] And after that, he came to Bethsaida. And they brought to him a certain blind [27] man , and besought him that he would touch him.
8:24
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 23
[26] And after that, he came to Bethsaida. And they brought to him a certain blind [27] man , and besought him that he would touch him. And he took the hand of that blind man, and led him out without the village, and spat in his eyes, and laid his [28] hand on him, and asked him, What seest thou?
8:25
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 23
… And they brought to him a certain blind [27] man , and besought him that he would touch him. And he took the hand of that blind man, and led him out without the village, and spat in his eyes, and laid his [28] hand on him, and asked him, What seest thou? And that blind man looked intently, [29] and said unto him, I see men as trees walking.
St Gregory of Nyssa † AD 395 On Virginity 11
… I venture to affirm that, to one who has cleansed all the powers of his being from every form of vice, the Beauty which is essential, the source of every beauty and every good, will become visible. The visual eye, purged from its blinding humour, can clearly discern objects even on the distant sky
8:26
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 23
… And he took the hand of that blind man, and led him out without the village, and spat in his eyes, and laid his [28] hand on him, and asked him, What seest thou? And that blind man looked intently, [29] and said unto him, I see men as trees walking. And he placed his hand [30] again on his eyes; and they were restored, and he saw everything clearly.
8:27
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 23
… And he was speaking plainly. And Simon Cephas, as one grieved [43] for him, said, Far be thou, my Lord, from that. And he turned, and looked upon [44] his disciples, and rebuked Simon, and said, Get thee behind me, Satan: for thou art a stumblingblock unto me: for thou thinkest not of what pertains to God, but of what pertains to men.
8:30
Origen † AD 254 Origen's Commentary on Matthew 12.15
… For the expression here plainly indicates that now for the first time Peter confessed that Christ was the Son of the living God. Matthew then, according to some of the manuscripts, has written, “Then He commanded His disciples that they should tell no man that He was the Christ,” but Mark says, “He charged them that they should tell no man of Him;”
8:31
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 23
… and [39] whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. And he sternly charged his disciples, and warned them that they should not tell any man concerning him, [40] that he was the Messiah. And henceforth began Jesus to shew to his disciples [41] that he was determined to go to Jerusalem,
St Irenaeus of Lyons † AD 202 Against Heresies 3.16.5
… for He says: “The Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected, and crucified, and on the third day rise again.”
8:32
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 23
… And henceforth began Jesus to shew to his disciples [41] that he was determined to go to Jerusalem, and suffer much, and be rejected of the elders, and of the chief priests, and of the scribes, and be killed, and on the [42] third day rise.
8:33
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 23
… And henceforth began Jesus to shew to his disciples [41] that he was determined to go to Jerusalem, and suffer much, and be rejected of the elders, and of the chief priests, and of the scribes, and be killed, and on the [42] third day rise. And he was speaking plainly. And Simon Cephas, as one grieved [43] for him, said, Far be thou, my Lord, from that.
8:34
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 23
… Whosoever shall deny me and my sayings in this sinful and adulterous generation, the Son of man also will [50] deny him, when he cometh in the glory of his Father with his holy angels. For the Son of man is about to come in the glory of his Father with his holy angels; and then shall he reward each man according to his works.
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 22.21
… Then James and John forsook father and net and ship and followed the Saviour: neither kinship nor the world’s ties, nor the care of their home could hold them back. Then were the words heard: “Whosoever will come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Harmony of the Gospels 2.55
… Nevertheless, he mentions at the same time that the Lord spoke to this effect: “Whosoever shall be ashamed of me and my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, of him also shall the Son of man be ashamed when He comes in the glory of His Father with the holy angels.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 46.0
On the words of the Gospel, Mark viii. 34 , “If any man would come after me, let him deny himself,” etc. And on the words 1 John ii. 15 , “if any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 46.1
1. Hard and grievous does that appear which the Lord hath enjoined, that “whosoever will come after Him, must deny himself.”
8:35
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 23
[45] And Jesus called the multitudes with his disciples, and said unto them, Whosoever would come after me, let him deny himself, and take his cross every day, and [46] come after me.
8:36
St Cyprian of Carthage † AD 258 On the Lapsed 8
… Why bring with you, O wretched man, a sacrifice? why immolate a victim? You yourself have come to the altar an offering; you yourself have come a victim: there you have immolated your salvation, your hope; there you have burnt up your faith in those deadly fires.
Pope St Gregory I the Great † AD 604 Register of the Epistles of St. Gregory the Great 2.23
… In no ordination let any consideration, in any way whatever, surreptitiously reach your Fraternity, lest you should be entangled (which God forbid) in the snares of simoniacal heresy. For what shall it profit a man , as the Truth says, if he shall gain the whole word, and lose his own soul (
8:37
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 23
… And whosoever would save his life shall lose it; and whosoever [47] loseth his life for my sake, and for the sake of my gospel, shall save it. What shall [48] a man profit, if he gain all the world, and destroy his own life, or lose it?
8:38
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 23
… And whosoever would save his life shall lose it; and whosoever [47] loseth his life for my sake, and for the sake of my gospel, shall save it. What shall [48] a man profit, if he gain all the world, and destroy his own life, or lose it? or what [49] [Arabic, p. 92] will a man give in ransom for his life?
Tertullian † AD 220 De Fuga in Persecutione 7
… If to suffer, how to flee? In fact, what utter inconsistency in the decrees of One who commands to flee, and yet urges to suffer, which is the very opposite! “Him who will confess Me, I also will confess before My Father.” How will he confess, fleeing? How flee, confessing? “Of him who shall be ashamed of Me, will I also be ashamed before My Father.”
St Cyprian of Carthage † AD 258 The Epistles of Cyprian 62.15
… Therefore thus the brotherhood is beginning even to be kept back from the passion of Christ in persecutions, by learning in the offerings to be disturbed concerning His blood and His blood-shedding. Moreover, however, the Lord says in the Gospel, “Whosoever shall be ashamed of me, of him shall the Son of man be ashamed.”
St Basil the Great † AD 379 De Spiritu Sancto 6
… We ask them to listen to the Lord Himself, distinctly setting forth the equal dignity of His glory with the Father, in His words, “He that hath seen me hath seen the Father;” and again, “When the Son cometh in the glory of his Father;”
St Gregory of Nyssa † AD 395 Against Eunomius 2.6
… for the Son does not divide the glory with the Father, but has the glory of the Father in its entirety, even as the Father has all the glory of the Son. For thus He spake to the Father “All Mine are Thine and Thine are Mine .” Wherefore also He says that He will appear on the Judgment Day “in the glory of the Father
St Gregory of Nyssa † AD 395 Against Eunomius 2.10
… How then are we to dispose of the utterances of the Truth,—one which tells us that He shall be seen in the glory of the Father
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 Exposition of the Christian Faith 3.13
… “But when the Son of Man shall come in His majesty, and all the angels with Him.” Again, to show that His Father’s majesty and glory and His own majesty and glory are one and the same, our Lord Himself saith in another book: “And the Son of Man shall confound him, when He shall come in the glory of His Father, with the holy angels.”
8:39
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 Exposition of the Christian Faith 3.12
97. Now learn that the kingdom of the Son is the very same as the kingdom of the Father: “Verily, I say unto you that there be some of those which stand around us, who shall not taste death until they see the kingdom of God coming in power.”
8:1
Theophylact † 1107
After the Lord had performed the former miracle concerning the multiplication of the loaves, now again, a fitting occasion presents itself, and He takes the opportunity of working a similar miracle; wherefore it is said, In those days, the multitude being very great, and having nothing to eat, Jesus called his disciples unto him, and, saith unto them, I have compassion on the multitude, because they have now been with me three days, and have nothing to eat. For He did not always work miracles concerning the feeding of the multitude, lest they should follow Him for the sake of food; now therefore He would not have performed this miracle, if He had not seen that the multitude was in danger. Wherefore it goes on: And if I send them away fasting to their own houses, they will faint by the way: for divers of them came from far.
St Bede † AD 735 in Marc. 2, 32
Why they who came from afar hold out for three days, Matthew says more fully: And he went up into a mountain, and sat down there, and great multitudes came unto him, having with them many sick persons, and cast them down at Jesus feet, and he healed them. (v. Matt. 15:29)
Theophylact † 1107
The disciples did not yet understand, nor did they believe in His virtue, notwithstanding former miracles; wherefore it continues, And his disciples said unto him, From whence can a man satisfy these men with bread here in the wilderness? But the Lord Himself does not blame them, teaching us that we should not be grievously angry with ignorant men and those who do not understand, but bear with their ignorance. After this it continues, And he asked them, How many loaves have ye? and they answered, Seven.
Remigius † AD 908
Ignorance was not His reason for asking them, but that from their answering seven, the miracle might be noised abroad, and become more known in proportion to the smallness of the number. It goes on: And he commanded the people to sit down on the ground. In the former feeding they lay down on grass, in this one on the ground. It continues, And he took the seven loaves, and gave thanks, and brake. In giving thanks, He has left us an example, that for all gifts conferred on us from heaven we should return thanks to Him. And it is to be remarked, that our Lord did not give the bread to the people, but to His disciples, and the disciples to the people; for it goes on, and gave to his disciples to set before them; and they did set them before the people. And not only the bread, but the fish also He blessed, and ordered to be set before them. For there comes after, And they had a few small fishes: and he blessed, and commanded to set them also before them.
St Bede † AD 735 ubi sup.
In this passage then we should notice, in one and the same, our Redeemer, a distinct operation of Divinity and of Manhood; thus the error of Eutyches1, who presumes to lay down the doctrine of one only operation in Christ, is to be cast out far from the Christian pale. For who does not here see that the pity of our Lord for the multitude is the feeling and sympathy of humanity; and that at the same time His satisfying four thousand men with seven loaves and a few fishes, is a work of Divine virtue? It goes on, And they took up of the broken meat that was left seven baskets.
Theophylact † 1107
The multitudes who ate and were filled did not take with them the remains of the loaves, but the disciples took them up, as they did before the baskets. In which we learn according to the narration, that we should be content with what is sufficient, and not look for any thing beyond. The number of those who ate is put down, when it is said, And they that had eaten were about four thousand: and he sent them away; where we may see that Christ sends no one away fasting, for He wishes all to be nourished by His grace.
St Bede † AD 735 ubi sup.
The typical difference between this feeding and the other of the five loaves and two fishes, is, that there the letter of the Old Testament, full of spiritual grace, is signified, but here the truth and grace of the New Testament, which is to be ministered to all the faithful, is pointed out. Now the multitude remains three days, waiting for the Lord to heal their sick, as Matthew relates, when the elect, in the faith of the Holy Trinity, supplicate for sins, with persevering earnestness; or because they turn themselves to the Lord in deed, in word, and in thought.
Theophylact † 1107
Or by those who wait for three days, He means the baptized; for baptism is called illumination, and is performed by trine immersion.
St Gregory the Great † AD 604 Mor. 1, 19
He does not however wish to dismiss them fasting, lest they should faint by the way; for it is necessary that men should find in what is preached the word of consolation, lest hungering through want of the food of truth, they sink under the toil of this life.
St Ambrose † AD 397 in Luc. 6:73
The good Lord indeed whilst He requires diligence, gives strength; nor will He dismiss them fasting, lest they faint by the way, that is, either in the course of this life, or before they have reached the fountainhead head of life, that is, the Father, and have learnt that Christ is of the Father, lest haply, after receiving that He is born of a virgin, they begin to esteem His virtue not that of God, but of a man. Therefore the Lord Jesus divides the food, and His will indeed is to give to all, to deny none; He is the Dispenser of all things, but if thou refusest to stretch forth thy hand to receive the food, thou wilt faint by the way, nor canst thou find fault with Him, who pities and divides.
St Bede † AD 735 ubi sup.
But they who return to repentance after the crimes of the flesh, after thefts, violence, and murders, come to the Lord from afar; for in proportion as a man has wandered farther in evil working, so he has wandered farther from Almighty God. The believers amongst the Gentiles came from afar to Christ, but the Jews from near, for they had been taught concerning Him by the letter of the law and the prophets. In the former case, however, of the feeding with five loaves, the multitude lay upon the green grass; here, however, upon the ground, because by the writing of the law, we are ordered to keep under the desires of the flesh, but in the New Testament we are ordered to leave even the earth itself and our temporal goods.
Theophylact † 1107
Further, the seven loaves are spiritual discourses, for seven is the number, which points out the Holy Ghost, who perfects all things; for our life is perfected in the number of seven days’d.
Pseudo-Jerome
Or else, the seven loaves are the gifts of the Holy Spirit, the fragments of the loaves are the mystical understanding of the1 first week.
St Bede † AD 735 ubi sup.
For our Lord’s breaking the bread means the opening of mysteries; His giving of thanks shews how great a joy He feels in the salvation of the human race; His giving the loaves to His disciples that they might set them before the people, signifies that He assigns the spiritual gifts of knowledge to the Apostles, and that it was His will that by their ministry the food of life should be distributed to the Church.
Pseudo-Jerome
The small fishes blessed are the books of the New Testament, for our Lord when risen asks for a piece of broiled fish;1 or else in these little fishes, we receive the saints, seeing that in the Scriptures of the New Testament are contained the faith, life, and sufferings of them who, snatched away from the troubled waves of this world, have given us by their example spiritual refreshment.
St Bede † AD 735 ubi sup.
Again, what was over and above, after the multitude was refreshed, the Apostles take up, because the higher precepts of perfection, to which the multitude cannot attain, belong to those whose life transcends that of the generality of the people of God; nevertheless, the multitude is said to have been satisfied, because though they cannot leave all that they possess, nor come up to that which is spoken of virgins, yet by listening to the commands of the law of God, they attain to everlasting life.
Pseudo-Jerome
Again, the seven baskets are the seven Churches. By the four thousand is meant the year of the new dispensation, with its four seasons. Fitly also are there four thousand, that in the number itself it might be taught us that they were filled with the food of the Gospel.
Theophylact † 1107
Or there are four thousand, that is, men perfect in the four virtues; and for this reason, as being more advanced, they ate more, and left fewer fragments. For in this miracle, seven baskets full remain, but in the miracle of the five loaves, twelve, for there were five thousand men, which means men enslaved to the five senses, and for this reason they could not eat, but were satisfied with little, and many remains of the fragments were over and above.
The Latin text
Theophylactus
Postquam dominus superius miraculum de multiplicatione panum perpetrasset, nunc iterum occasione habita congruenti, adducit simile miraculum operari; unde dicitur in diebus illis iterum cum turba esset cum Iesu, nec haberent quod manducarent, convocatis discipulis ait illis: misereor super turbam, quia ecce iam triduo sustinent me, nec habent quod manducent. Non enim semper circa alimenta miracula faciebat, ne propter cibum ipsum sequerentur. Et nunc igitur hoc miraculum non fecisset, nisi quia videbat turbis periculum imminere: unde sequitur et si dimisero eos ieiunos in domum suam, deficient in via: quidam enim ex eis de longe venerunt
Beda
Quare triduo sustinent de longe venientes? Matthaeus plenius dicit sic: et ascendens in montem sedebat; et accesserunt ad eum turbae multae, habentes multos infirmos, et proiecerunt eos ad pedes eius, et curavit eos
Theophylactus
Discipuli adhuc non intelligebant, nec virtuti eius propter priora miracula credebant; unde sequitur et responderunt ei discipuli sui: unde istos quis poterit hic saturare panibus in solitudine? Ipse autem dominus non eos vituperat, ex hoc instruens nos quod non debemus ignorantibus et non intelligentibus graviter irasci, sed eorum ignorantiae compati; unde sequitur et interrogavit eos: quot panes habetis? Qui dixerunt: septem
Remigius super Matth
Non ideo interrogavit, quia ignoraret quot haberent; sed ut dum illi respondent septem, quo pauciores essent, eo magis miraculum diffamaretur, et notius fieret. Sequitur et praecepit turbae discumbere super terram. In superiori refectione supra foenum discubuisse dicuntur, hic vero super terram. Sequitur et accipiens septem panes, gratias agens fregit. In eo quod gratias egit, nobis reliquit exemplum ut de omnibus donis nobis caelitus collatis illi gratias referamus. Et notandum, quia dominus panes non dedit turbae, sed discipulis, discipuli autem dederunt turbis; sequitur enim et dedit discipulis suis ut apponerent; et apposuerunt turbae. Non solum panes, sed et pisciculos benedicens iussit apponi; sequitur enim et habebant pisciculos paucos, et ipsos benedixit, et iussit apponi. Et manducaverunt, et saturati sunt
Beda
In hac ergo lectione consideranda est in uno eodemque redemptore nostro distincta operatio divinitatis et humanitatis, atque Eutychetis error, qui unam tantum in Christo operationem dogmatizare praesumit, procul a Christianis finibus expellendus. Quis enim non videat hoc, quod super turbam miseretur dominus, affectum esse, et compassionem humanae fragilitatis? Quod autem septem panibus et pisciculis paucis quatuor millia hominum satiavit, divinae opus est virtutis. Sequitur et sustulerunt quod superaverat de fragmentis septem sportas
Theophylactus
Turbae comedentes et saturatae non secum tollunt panum reliquias, sed ipsas discipuli sustulerunt, sicut et superius cophinos: in quo secundum historiam discimus quoniam oportet nos his quae sufficiunt esse contentos, et non quaerere ultra. Deinde numerus manducantium describitur cum dicitur erant autem qui manducaverant quasi quatuor millia: et dimisit eos. Ubi considerandum est, quod Christus neminem ieiunum dimittit: omnes enim vult sua gratia enutriri
Beda
Hoc vero typice inter hanc refectionem et illam quinque panum, ac duorum piscium distat, quod ibi littera veteris testamenti spirituali gratia plena significata est; hic autem veritas, et gratia novi testamenti fidelibus ministranda monstrata est. Turba autem triduo dominum sustinet propter sanationem infirmorum, ut Matthaeus narrat, cum electi in fide sanctae Trinitatis pro peccatis perseveranti instantia supplicant. Vel quia ad dominum se opere, locutione, atque cogitatione convertunt
Theophylactus
Vel per eos qui per triduum expectant, significat baptizatos. Baptismus enim illuminatio dicitur, et trina submersione perficitur
Gregorius Moralium
Non vult autem eos ieiunos dimittere, ne deficiant in via: oportet enim quod in praedicatione verbum consolationis accipiant, ne a veritatis pabulo ieiuni remanentes in huius vitae labore succumbant
Ambrosius super Lucam
Bonus quidem dominus studia exigit, vires ministrat, non vult ieiunos dimittere, ne deficiant in via; hoc est vel in istius cursu vitae, vel antequam ad caput vitae perveniant, scilicet ad patrem, et intelligant quod ex patre Christus est: ne forte cum acceperint, quod natus ex virgine est, incipiant non Dei virtutem, sed hominis aestimare. Dividit ergo escas dominus Iesus, et ille quidem vult dare omnibus, negat nemini, dispensator est omnium; sed cum ille panes frangat, ut det discipulis, si tu manus tuas non extendas ut accipias tibi escas, deficies in via, nec poteris in eum culpam referre qui miseretur, et dividit
Beda
Qui vero post carnis flagitia, post furta, violentias et homicidia ad poenitentiam redeunt, ad dominum de longinquo veniunt. Quanto enim quisque plus in pravo opere erravit, tanto ab omnipotente Deo longius recessit; et credentes de gentibus de longe venerunt ad Christum; Iudaei vero de prope, qui legis et prophetarum erant litteris edocti ex illo. Supra autem in refectione quinque panum turbae super faenum viride discumbebant, hic autem super terram: quia per Scripturam legis desideria carnis comprimere iubemur; in novo autem testamento ipsam quoque terram, ac facultates temporales relinquere praecipimur
Theophylactus
Septem autem panes sunt spirituales sermones: nam septenarius numerus spiritus sancti significativus est, qui perficit omnia: in septenario enim numero dierum nostra vita perficitur
Hieronymus
Vel septem panes dona sunt spiritus sancti, fragmenta panum mystici intellectus sunt huius septimanae
Beda
Quod enim dominus panes fregit, apertionem significat sacramentorum; quod gratias egit, ostendit quantum de salute humani generis congaudeat; quod panes discipulis dedit ut turbae apponerent, significat quia spiritualis dona scientiae tribuit apostolis, et per eorum ministerium voluit Ecclesiae suae vitae, cibaria distribui
Hieronymus
Pisciculi benedicti, libri sunt novi testamenti: quoniam piscis assi partem dominus resurgens postulat: vel in pisciculis sanctos accipimus, quorum Scriptura novi testamenti fidem, vitam et passiones continet: qui e turbulentis huius saeculi fluctibus erepti, refectionem nobis internam exemplo suo praebuerunt
Beda
Quod autem turbis saturatis supererat, apostoli tollunt: quia altiora perfectionis praecepta, quae turba nequit attingere, ad illos pertinent qui generalem populi Dei conversationem transcendunt; et tamen turba saturata esse memoratur: quia etsi sua relinquere nequeant, neque explere, quod de virginibus dicitur; tamen audiendo mandata legis Dei ad vitam perveniunt aeternam
Hieronymus
Septem autem sportae, septem Ecclesiae. Quatuor millia, annus est novi testamenti, cum quatuor temporibus. Bene etiam quatuor millia sunt, ut in ipso numero docerent evangelicis se pastos esse cibariis
Theophylactus
Vel quatuor millia sunt, idest quatuor virtutibus perfecti; et propter hoc veluti fortiores plura comedentes, pauciora reliquerunt. In isto enim miraculo septem sportae remanent; in miraculo autem quinque panum duodecim cophini: quia quinque millia erant, idest quinque sensibus servientes, et propter hoc non potuerunt comedere, sed paucis contenti fuerunt; unde multae superabundant reliquiae fragmentorum
8:10
Theophylact † 1107
After that our Lord had worked the miracle of the loaves, He immediately retires into another spot, lest on account of the miracle, the multitudes should take Him to make Him a king; wherefore it is said, And straightway he entered into a ship with his disciples, and came into the parts of Dalmanutha.
St Augustine † AD 430 de Con. Evan. 2. 51
Now in Matthew we read that He entered into the parts of Magdala1. But we cannot doubt that it is the same place under another name; for several manuscripts even of St. Mark have only Magdala. It goes on, And the Pharisees came forth, and began to question with him, seeking of him a sign from heaven, tempting him.
St Bede † AD 735 in Marc. 2, 33
The Pharisees, then, seek a sign from heaven, that He, Who had for the second time fed many thousands of men with a few loaves of bread, should now, after the example of Moses, refresh the whole nation in the last time with manna sent down from heaven, and dispersed amongst them all.
Theophylact † 1107
Or they seek for a sign from heaven, that is, they wish Him to make the sun and moon stand still, to bring down hail, and change the atmosphere; for they thought that He could not perform miracles from heaven, but could only in Beelzebub perform a sign on earth.
St Bede † AD 735 ubi sup.
When, as related above, He was about to refresh the believing multitude, He gave thanks, so now, on account of the foolish petition of the Pharisees, He groans; because, bearing about with Him the feelings of human nature, as He rejoices over the salvation of men, so He grieves over their errors. Wherefore it goes on, And he groaned in spirit, and saith, Why doth this generation seek after a sign? Verily I say unto you, If a sign shall be given to this generation. That is, no sign shall be given; as it is written in the Psalms, (Ps. 89:36) I have sworn once by my holiness, if I shall fail David, that is, I will not fail David.
St Augustine † AD 430 ubi sup.
Let no one, however, be perplexed that the answer which Mark says was given to them, when they sought a sign from heaven, is not the same as that which Matthew relates, namely, that concerning Jonah. He says that the Lord’s answer was, that no sign should be given to it; by which we must understand such an one as they asked for, that is, one from heaven; but he has omitted to say, what Matthew has related.
Theophylact † 1107
Now the reason why the Lord did not listen to them was, that the time of signs from heaven had not arrived, that is, the time of the second Advent, when the powers of the heaven shall be shaken, and the moon shall not give her light. But in the time of the first Advent, all things are full of mercy, and such things do not take place.
St Bede † AD 735 ubi sup.
For a sign from heaven was not to be given to a generation of men, who tempted the Lord; but to a generation of men seeking the Lord, He shews a sign from heaven, when in the sight of the Apostles He ascended into heaven. It goes on, And he left them, and entering into a ship again, he departed to the other side.
Theophylact † 1107
The Lord indeed quits the Pharisees, as men uncorrected; for where there is a hope of correction, there it is right to remain; but where the evil is incorrigible, we should go away. There follows: Now they had forgotten to take bread, neither had they in the ship with them more than one loaf.
St Bede † AD 735 ubi sup.
Some may ask, how they had no bread, when they had filled seven baskets just before they embarked in the ship. But Scripture relates that they had forgotten to take them with them, which is a proof how little care they had for the flesh in other things, since in their eagerness to follow the Lord, even the necessity of refreshing their bodies had escaped from their mind.
Theophylact † 1107
By a special providence1 also the disciples forgot to take bread, that they might be blamed by Christ, and thus become better, and arrive at a knowledge of Christ’s power. For it goes on, And he charged them, saying, Take heed, and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the leaven of Herod.
Pseudo-Chrysostom Vict. Ant. e Cat. in Marc.
Matthew says, of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees; Luke, however, of the Pharisees only. All three, therefore, name the Pharisees, as being the most important of them, but Matthew and Mark have each mentioned one of the secondary sects; and fitly has Mark added of Herod, as a supplement to Matthew’s narrative, in which they were left out. But in saying this, He by degrees brings the disciples to understanding and faith.
Theophylact † 1107
He means by leaven their hurtful and corrupt doctrine, full of the old malice, for the Herodians were the teachers, who said that Herod was the Christ.
St Bede † AD 735 ubi sup.
Or, the leaven of the Pharisees is making the decrees of the divine law inferior to the traditions of men, preaching the law in word, attacking it in deed, tempting the Lord, and disbelieving His doctrine and His works; but the leaven of Herod is adultery, murder, rash swearing, a pretence of religion, hatred to Christ and His forerunner.
Theophylact † 1107
But the disciples themselves thought that the Lord spoke of the leaven of bread. Wherefore it goes on, And they reasoned amongst themselves, saying, it is because we have no bread; and this they said, as not understanding the power of Christ, who could make bread out of nothing; wherefore the Lord reproves them; for there follows, And when Jesus knew it, he said unto them, Why reason ye because ye have no bread?
St Bede † AD 735 ubi sup.
Taking occasion then from the precept, which He had commanded, saying, Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the leaven of Herod, our Saviour teaches them what was the meaning of the five and the seven loaves, concerning which He adds, And do ye not remember, when I brake the five loaves amongst five thousand, and how many baskets full of fragments ye took up? For if the leaven mentioned above means perverse traditions, of course the food, with which the people of God was nourished, means the true doctrine.
The Latin text
Theophylactus
Postquam dominus operatus est miraculum panum, statim in alium secedit locum, ne propter miraculum, ipsum turbae caperent, ut facerent regem; unde dicitur et statim ascendens navim cum discipulis suis, venit in partes Dalmanutha
Augustinus de Cons. Evang
In Matthaeo autem legitur, quod venit in fines Magedam. Non autem dubitandum est eumdem locum esse sub utroque nomine: nam plerique codices non habent, etiam secundum Marcum, nisi Magedam. Sequitur et exierunt Pharisaei, et coeperunt conquirere cum eo, quaerentes ab illo signum de caelo, tentantes eum
Beda
Pharisaei siquidem signum quaerunt de caelo, ut qui multa hominum millia secundo de paucis panibus saturavit, nunc in exemplo Moysi, manna caelitus misso, et per omnia passim disperso, populum omnem in ultimo tempore reficiat: quod in Evangelio Ioannis quaerunt dicentes: quod signum facis, ut videamus et credamus tibi? Patres nostri manducaverunt manna in deserto, sicut scriptum est: panem de caelis dedit manducare
Theophylactus
Vel quaerunt signum de caelo, scilicet ut solem et lunam sisteret, grandinem peteret et aerem immutaret. Credebant enim quod de caelo signa facere non poterat, sed quod in Beelzebub solum poterat facere signum in terra
Beda
Sicut autem turbam supra credentem refecturus gratias agebat, ita nunc ob stultam Pharisaeorum petitionem gemit: quia humanae naturae circumferens affectus, sicut de hominum salute laetatur, ita super eorum dolet erroribus: unde sequitur et ingemiscens spiritu ait: quid generatio ista signum quaerit? Amen dico vobis, si dabitur generationi isti signum; idest, non dabitur, iuxta illud: semel iuravi in sancto meo, si David mentiar; idest, non mentiar David
Augustinus de Cons. Evang
Non autem moveat quod Marcus non dicit responsum esse quaerentibus signum de caelo idem quod Matthaeus de Iona; sed ait dominum respondisse: signum non dabitur ei; intelligendum est enim quale petebant, hoc est de caelo. Praetermisit autem dicere de Iona, quod Matthaeus commemoravit
Theophylactus
Ideo autem eos dominus non exaudit, quia aliud est tempus signorum caelestium, scilicet tempus adventus secundi, cum virtutes caelorum commovebuntur, et luna non dabit lumen suum. Tempore autem primi adventus non fiunt talia, sed omnia mansuetudine plena
Beda
Non etiam dandum erat caeleste signum generationi tentantium dominum. Ceterum generationi quaerentium dominum signum de caelo ostendit, quando cernentibus apostolis ascendit in caelum. Sequitur et dimittens eos, ascendit iterum navim, et abiit trans fretum
Theophylactus
Dimittit quidem dominus Pharisaeos quasi incorrectos: nam ubi spes est correctionis, ibi morandum est; ubi vero malum incorrigibile est, inde recedendum. Sequitur et obliti sunt panes sumere, et nisi unum panem non habebant secum in navi
Beda
Quaerit autem aliquis: quomodo panes non habebant qui statim impletis septem sportis ascenderunt in naviculam? Sed Scriptura testatur, quod obliti sunt eos secum tollere; quod indicium est quam modicam carnis curam haberent in reliquis, quibus ipsa reficiendi corporis necessitas intentione dominici comitatus mente excesserat
Theophylactus
Dispensative etiam panes sumere discipuli sunt obliti, ut reprehensi a Christo fierent meliores et ad virtutis Christi notitiam pervenirent; sequitur enim et praecipiebat eis, dicens: videte, et cavete a fermento Pharisaeorum, et fermento Herodis
Chrysostomus
Matthaeus dicit: a fermento Pharisaeorum et Sadducaeorum; Lucas vero Pharisaeorum solum. Tres ergo Pharisaeos nominant, quasi principales; Matthaeus vero et Marcus sibi secundarios diviserunt. Congrue autem Marcus posuit Herodis, quasi relictis a Matthaeo Herodianis in supplementum narrationis ipsius. Hoc autem dicens, paulatim inducit discipulos ad sensum et fidem
Theophylactus
Fermentum Pharisaeorum et Herodianorum vocat doctrinam eorum, quasi damnosam et corruptivam et malitia veteri plenam. Herodiani enim doctores erant, qui Herodem Christum esse dicebant
Beda
Vel fermentum Pharisaeorum est decreta legis divinae traditionibus hominum postponere; legem verbis praedicare, et factis impugnare; dominum tentare, doctrinae eius, aut operibus non credere. Fermentum autem Herodis est adulterium, homicidium, temeritas iurandi, simulatio religionis, et odium in Christum et praecursorem eius
Theophylactus
Ipsi autem discipuli de fermento panum dixisse dominum putaverunt; unde sequitur et cogitabant ad alterutrum, dicentes: quia panes non habemus. Hoc autem dicebant, quasi non intelligentes Christi virtutem, quod poterat panes facere ex non ente; unde dominus eos reprehendit: sequitur enim quo cognito Iesus ait illis: quid cogitatis, quia panes non habetis?
Beda
Per occasionem autem praecepti quod salvator iusserat, dicens cavete a fermento Pharisaeorum et fermento Herodis, docet eos quid significent quinque panes, et septem, de quibus subdit nec recordamini quando quinque panes fregi? et cetera. Si enim fermentum praedictum traditiones perversas significaret, quare cibi quibus nutritus est populus Dei, non veram doctrinam significent?
8:22
The Gloss non occ.
After the feeding of the multitude, the Evangelist proceeds to the giving sight to the blind, saying, And they come to Bethsaida, and they bring a blind man to him, and besought him to touch him.
St Bede † AD 735 in Marc. 2, 34
Knowing that the touch of the Lord could give sight to a blind man as well as cleanse a leper. It goes on, And he took the blind man by the hand, and led him out of the town.
Theophylact † 1107
For Bethsaida appears to have been infected with much infidelity, wherefore the Lord reproaches it, (Matt. 11:21) Woe to thee, Bethsaida, for if the mighty works which were done in you had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. He then takes out of the town the blind man, who had been brought to Him, for the faith of those who brought him was not true faith. It goes on; And when he had spit in his eyes, and put his hands upon him, he asked him if he saw ought.
Pseudo-Chrysostom Vict. Ant. e Cat. in Marc.
He spat indeed, and put His hand upon the blind man, because He wished to shew that wonderful are the effects of the Divine word added to action; for the hand is the symbol of working, but the spittle, of the word proceeding out of the mouth. Again He asked him whether he could see any thing, which He had not done in the case of any whom He had healed, thus shewing that by the weak faith of those who brought him, and of the blind man himself, his eyes could not altogether be opened. Wherefore there follows: And he looked up, and said, I see men as trees walking; because he was still under the influence of unfaithfulness, he said that he saw men obscurely.
St Bede † AD 735 ubi sup.
Seeing indeed the shapes of bodies amongst the shadows, but unable to distinguish the outlines of the limbs, from the continued darkness of his sight; just as trees standing thick together are wont to appear to men who see them from afar, or by the dim light of the night, so that it cannot easily be known whether they be trees or men.
Theophylact † 1107
But the reason why he did not see at once perfectly, but in part, was, that he had not perfect faith; for healing is bestowed in proportion to faith.
Pseudo-Chrysostom Vict. Ant. e Cat, in Marc.
From the commencement, however, of the return of his senses, He leads him to apprehend things by faith, and thus makes him see perfectly; wherefore it goes on, After that, he put his hands again upon his eyes, and he began to see, and afterwards he adds, And he was restored, and saw all things clearly; that is, being perfectly healed in his senses and his intellect. It goes on: And he sent him away to his house, saying, Go into thy home, and if thou enter into the town, tell it not to any one.
Theophylact † 1107
These precepts He gave him, because they were unfaithful, as has been said, lest perchance he should receive hurt in his soul from them, and they by their unbelief should ran into a more grievous crime.
St Bede † AD 735 ubi sup.
Or else, He leaves an example to His disciples that they should not seek for popular favour by the miracles which they did. 1Mystically, however, Bethsaida is interpreted ‘the house of the valley,’ that is, the world, which is the vale of tears. Again, they bring to the Lord a blind man, that is, one who neither sees what he has been, what he is, nor what he is to be. They ask Him to touch him, for what is being touched, but feeling compunction.?
St Bede † AD 735 ubi sup.
For the Lord touches us, when He enlightens our minds with the breath of His Spirit, and He stirs us up that we may recognise our own infirmity, and be diligent in good actions. He takes the hand of the blind man, that He may strengthen him to the practice of good works.
Pseudo-Jerome
And He brings him out of the town, that is, out of the neighbourhood of the wicked; and He puts spittle into his eyes, that he may see the will of God, by the breath of the Holy Ghost; and putting His hands upon him, He asked him if he could see, because by the works of the Lord His majesty is seen.
St Bede † AD 735 ubi sup.
Or else, putting spittle into the eyes of the blind man, he lays His hands upon him that he may see, because He has wiped away the blindness of the human race both by invisible gifts, and by the Sacrament of His assumed humanity; for the spittle, proceeding from the Head, points out the grace of the Holy Ghost. But though by one word He could cure the man wholly and all at once, still He cures him by degrees, that He may shew the greatness of the blindness of man, which can hardly, and only as it were step by step, be restored to light; and He exhibits to us His grace, by which He furthers each step towards perfection. Again, whoever is weighed down by a blindness of such long continuance, that he is unable to distinguish between good and evil, sees as it were men like trees walking, because he sees the deeds of the multitude without the light of discretion.
Pseudo-Jerome
Or else, he sees men as trees, because he thinks all men higher than himself. But He put His hands again upon his eyes, that he might see all things clearly, that is, understand invisible things by visible, and with the eye of a pure mind contemplate, what the eye hath not seen, the glorious state of his own soul after the rust of sin. He sent him to his home, that is, to his heart; that he might see in himself things which he had not seen before; for a man despairing of salvation does not think that he can do at all what, when enlightened, he can easily accomplish.
Theophylact † 1107
Or else, after He has healed him He sends him to his home; for the home of every one of us is heaven, and the mansions which are there.
Pseudo-Jerome
And He says to him, If thou enter into the town, tell it not to any one, that is, relate continually to thy neighbours thy blindness, but never tell them of thy virtue.
The Latin text
Glossa
Post refectionem turbarum Evangelista de illuminatione caeci subiungit, dicens et veniunt Bethsaidam, et adducunt ei caecum, et rogabant eum ut illum tangeret
Beda
Scientes quia tactus domini sicut leprosum mundare, ita caecum illuminare valeret. Sequitur et apprehensa manu caeci eduxit eum extra vicum
Theophylactus
Videtur namque Bethsaida multa infidelitate fuisse infecta: unde dominus exprobrat ei: vae tibi, Bethsaida: quia si in Tyro et Sidone factae essent virtutes quae factae sunt in vobis, olim in Cilicio et cinere poenitentiam egissent. In hac ergo adductum caecum extra vicum educit: non enim erat vera adducentium fides. Sequitur et expuens in oculos eius, impositis manibus suis, interrogavit eum si aliquid videret
Chrysostomus
Spuit quidem, et manus imponit caeco, volens ostendere quod verbum divinum operationi adiunctum mirabiliter proficit. Manus enim operationis est ostensiva, sputum vero sermonis ex ore prolati. Interrogat autem si aliquid videret; quod in aliis sanatis non fecit, significans propter imperfectam adducentium fidem, ac ipsius caeci, oculos eius non esse omnino apertos; unde sequitur et aspiciens ait: video homines velut arbores ambulantes. Quia enim in infidelitate adhuc detinebatur, obscure se videre homines declarabat
Beda
Formam quidem corporum inter umbras aspiciens, sed nulla membrorum lineamenta, visu adhuc caligante, discernere valens, quales condensae arbores a longe spectantibus, vel in luce nocturna solent apparere; ita ut non facile arbor, an homo sit, possit dinosci
Theophylactus
Ideo autem non statim eum perfecte facit videre, sed in parte, quia non perfectam fidem habebat: nam secundum fidem datur medela
Chrysostomus
Deducit autem eum ab initio sensus redditi in fidei apprehensionem; et sic fecit eum perfecte videre; unde sequitur deinde iterum imposuit manus super oculos eius et coepit videre. Et postea subiungit et restitutus est, ita ut clare videret omnia; sensu scilicet, et intellectu perfecte curatus. Sequitur misit eum in domum suam, dicens: vade in domum tuam; et si in vicum introieris, nemini dixeris
Theophylactus
Hoc quidem praecepit ei, quia infideles erant, ut dictum est, ne forte ab eis in anima laederetur, et ipsi non credentes gravius crimen incurrant
Beda super Lucam
Vel exemplum suis tribuit ne de his quae faciunt mirandis, favorem vulgi requirant. Mystice autem Bethsaida domus vallis interpretatur, idest mundus, qui est vallis lacrymarum. Adducunt autem ad dominum caecum; idest, qui non videt quid fuit, quid est, et quid erit. Rogant illum, ut eum tangeret. Quis enim est qui tangitur nisi qui compungitur?
Beda
Tangit enim nos dominus cum mentem afflatu sui spiritus illustrat, atque ad agnitionem nos propriae infirmitatis, studiumque bonae actionis accendit. Apprehendit manum caeci, ut eum ad executionem bonae operationis confortaret
Hieronymus
Et eduxit eum extra vicum, idest vicinitatem malorum. Expuit autem in oculos eius, ut videat voluntatem domini per flatum spiritus sancti. Impositis autem manibus interrogat eum si videret: quia per opera domini videtur maiestas eius
Beda
Vel expuens in oculos caeci imponit manus suas ut videat: quia caecitatem humani generis et per invisibilia dona, et per sacramenta assumptae humanitatis extersit. Sputum etiam, quod de capite hominis procedit, gratiam spiritus sancti designat. Sed quem uno verbo totum simul curare poterat, paulatim curat, ut magnitudinem humanae caecitatis ostendat, quae vix et quasi per gradus ad lucem redeat: et gratiam suam nobis indicat, per quam singula perfectionis incrementa adiuvat. Quisquis autem ita longi temporis obscuritate depressus est, ut inter bonum et malum discernere nesciat, quasi ambulantes homines instar arborum cernit, quia facta multitudinis absque luce discretionis videt
Hieronymus
Vel videt homines velut arbores, quia omnes homines existimat se superiores. Iterum autem manus posuit super oculos eius, ut videret clare omnia; idest, per opera visibilia intelligeret et quae oculus non vidit, et clarum animae suae statum post rubiginem peccati, mundi cordis oculo contueretur. Misit eum in domum suam, idest in cor suum, ut videret in se quod ante non vidit. Non enim putat homo desperans de salute omnino posse quod illuminatus facile potest perficere
Theophylactus
Vel postquam sanavit, mittit in domum: nam domus uniuscuiusque nostrum, caelum est, et mansiones quae sunt in eo
Hieronymus
Dicit autem ei et si in vicum introieris, nemini dixeris; idest, vicinis caecitatem tuam semper enarra, non virtutem
8:27
Theophylact † 1107
After taking His disciples afar from the Jews, He then asks them concerning Himself, that they might speak the truth without fear of the Jews; wherefore it is said, And Jesus entered, and his disciples, into the towns of Cæsarea Philippi.
St Bede † AD 735 in Marc. 2, 35
Philip was that brother of Herod, of whom we spoke above, who in honour of Tiberius Cæsar called that town, which is now called Paneas, Cæsarea Philippi. It goes on, And by the way he asked his disciples, saying unto them, Whom do men say that I am?
Pseudo-Chrysostom Vict. Ant. e Cat. in Marc.
He asks the question with a purpose, for it was right that His disciples should praise Him better than the crowd.
St Bede † AD 735 ubi sup.
Wherefore He first asks what is the opinion of men, in order to try the faith of the disciples, lest their confession should appear to be founded on the common opinion. It goes on, And they answered, saying, Some say John the Baptist, some Elias, and others, One of the prophets.
Theophylact † 1107
For many thought that John had risen from the dead, as even Herod believed, and that he had performed miracles after his resurrection. After however having enquired into the opinion of others, He asks them what was the belief of their own minds on this point; wherefore it continues, And he saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Hom. in Mat. 54
From the manner, however, itself of the question, He leads them to a higher feeling, and to higher thoughts, concerning Him, that they might not agree with the multitude. But the next words shew what the head of the disciples, the mouth of the Apostles, answered; when all were asked, Peter answereth and saith unto him, Thou art the Christ.
Theophylact † 1107
He confesses indeed that He is the Christ announced by the Prophets; but the Evangelist Mark passes over what the Lord answered to his confession, and how He blessed him, lest by this way of relating it, he should seem to be favouring his master Peter; Matthew plainly goes through the whole of it.
Origen † AD 253 in Matt. Tom. xii. 15
Or else, Mark and Luke, as they wrote that Peter answered, Thou art the Christ, without adding what is put down in Matthew, the Son of the living God, so they omitted to relate the blessing which was conferred on this confession. It goes on, And he charged them that they should tell no man of him.
Theophylact † 1107
For He wished in the mean time to hide His glory, lest many should be offended because of Him, and so earn a worse punishment.
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 ubi sup.
Or else, that He might wait to fix the pure faith in their minds, till the Crucifixion, which was an offence to them, was over, for after it was once perfected, about the time of His ascension, He said unto the Apostles, Go ye and teach all nations.
Theophylact † 1107
But after the Lord had accepted the confession of the disciples, who called Him the true God, He then reveals to them the mystery of the Cross. Wherefore it goes on, And he began to teach them that the Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected of the elders and of the chief priests, and the scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again; and he spake that saying openly, that is, concerning His future passion. But His disciples did not understand the order of the truth, neither could they comprehend His resurrection, but thought it better that He should not suffer.
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Vict. Ant. e Cat. in Marc. v. Chrys. ubi sup.
The reason, however, why the Lord told them this, was to shew, that after His cross and resurrection, Christ must be preached by His witnesses. Again, Peter alone, from the fervour of his disposition, had the boldness to dispute about these things. Wherefore it goes on, And Peter took him up, and began to rebuke hime.
St Bede † AD 735 ubi sup. Chrys. ubi sup.
This, however, he speaks with the feelings of a man who loves and desires; as if he said, This cannot be, neither can mine ears receive that the Son of God is to be slain.
St John Chrysostom † AD 407
But how is this, that Peter, gifted with a revelation from the Father, has so soon fallen, and become unstable? Surely, however, it was not wonderful that one who had received no revelation concerning the Passion should be ignorant of this. For that He was the Christ, the Son of the living God, he had learnt by revelation; but the mystery of His cross and resurrection had not yet been revealed to him. He Himself, however, shewing that He must come to His Passion, rebuked Peter; wherefore there follows, And when he had turned about and looked on his disciples, he rebuked Peter, &c.
Theophylact † 1107
For the Lord, wishing to shew that His Passion was to take place on account of the salvation of men, and that Satan alone was unwilling that Christ should suffer, and the race of man be saved, called Peter Satan, because he savoured the things that were of Satan, and, from unwillingness that Christ should suffer, became His adversary; for Satan is interpreted ‘the adversary.’
Pseudo-Chrysostom Vict. Ant. e Cat. in Marc.
But He saith not to the devil, when tempting Him, Get thee behind me, but to Peter He saith, Get thee behind me, that is, follow Me, and resist not the design of My voluntary Passion. There follows, For thou savourest not the things which be of God, but which be of men.
Theophylact † 1107
He says that Peter savours the things which be of men, in that he in some way savoured carnal affections, for Peter wished that Christ should spare Himself and not be crucified.
The Latin text
Theophylactus
Postquam eduxit longe a Iudaeis discipulos suos, tunc de seipso interrogat, ut non timentes Iudaeos respondeant veritatem; unde dicitur et ingressus est Iesus, et discipuli eius in castellum Caesareae Philippi
Hieronymus super Matth
Philippus iste fuit frater Herodis, de quo supra diximus, qui in honorem Tiberii Caesaris Caesaream Philippi, quae nunc Paneas dicitur, appellavit. Sequitur et in via interrogabat discipulos suos, dicens eis: quem me dicunt esse homines?
Chrysostomus
Sciens quidem interrogat, quia decebat ut discipuli quandoque eum melius laudarent quam turbae
Beda
Unde primum hominum sententiam interrogat, discipulorum fidem exploraturus, ne illorum confessio vulgi videretur opinione firmata. Sequitur qui responderunt illi, dicentes: alii Ioannem Baptistam, alii Eliam, alii vero quasi unum de prophetis
Theophylactus
Multi namque putabant quod Ioannes a mortuis resurrexisset, sicut et Herodes credebat, et post resurrectionem suam miracula perpetrasset. Postquam vero ab eis sciscitatus est aliorum suspicionem, ipsos interrogat quid de hoc in eorum mente consistat; unde sequitur tunc dicit illis: vos vero quem me esse dicitis?
Chrysostomus in Matth
Ex ipso autem interrogationis modo, in maiorem eos reducit sensum ad maius aliquid aestimandum de eo, ne cum turbis conveniant. Quid vero vertex discipulorum, os apostolorum, interrogatis omnibus, responderit, manifestatur cum subditur respondens Petrus ait ei: tu es Christus
Theophylactus
Confitetur quidem illum esse Christum a prophetis denuntiatum. Sed quid ad confessionem Petri responderit dominus, et qualiter ipsum beatificavit, Marcus Evangelista pertransit, ne huiusmodi narrando, Petro suo magistro gratiam praestare videretur; Matthaeus autem hoc plane pertractat
Origenes super Matth
Vel quia Marcus et Lucas scripserunt Petrum respondentem tu es Christus, non adicientes quod positum est in Matthaeo: filius Dei vivi; propterea non scripserunt ad confessionem relatam beatitudinem. Sequitur et comminatus est eis, ne cui dicerent de illo
Theophylactus
Volebat enim interim suam gloriam occultare, ne multi scandalizarentur de eo, et poenam mererentur maiorem
Chrysostomus
Vel ut scandalo crucis completo puram infigat fidem in mente eorum: prius enim passione perfecta, circa ascensionem dixit eis: euntes docete omnes gentes
Theophylactus
Postquam autem dominus confessionem discipulorum acceptavit dicentium verum Deum, tunc ipsis revelat crucis mysterium; unde sequitur et coepit docere eos quoniam oportet filium hominis multa pati, et reprobari a senioribus, et a summis sacerdotibus, et Scribis, et occidi, et post tres dies resurgere; et palam verbum loquebatur, scilicet de futura passione. Non autem intelligebant discipuli ordinem veritatis, neque resurrectionem comprehendere poterant; sed putabant esse melius quod non pateretur
Chrysostomus
Praedixerat tamen hoc eis dominus hac occasione, ut ostenderet quod oportet post crucem et resurrectionem Christum a testibus praedicari. Rursus Petrus existens fervidus, solus de his sumit audaciam disputandi; unde sequitur et apprehendens eum Petrus, coepit increpare eum: domine, propitius esto tibi: nam hoc non erit
Beda
Hoc autem amantis affectu et optantis dixit; quasi diceret: hoc non potest fieri, nec recipiunt aures meae ut Dei filius occidendus sit
Chrysostomus in Matth
Quid est autem hoc quod Petrus qui revelatione patris potitus erat, sic velociter cecidit et instabilis est effectus? Sed dicimus non esse mirum si hoc ignoravit qui de passione revelationem non accepit. Quod enim Christus filius Dei vivi esset, revelatione didicerat; mysterium vero crucis et resurrectionis nondum ei fuerat revelatum. Ipse vero ostendens quod oporteret eum ad passionem venire, Petrum increpavit; unde sequitur qui conversus, et videns discipulos suos, comminatus est Petro, dicens: vade retro me, Satana
Theophylactus
Dominus namque volens ostendere quod propter salutem hominum debebat eius passio fieri, et quod solus Satanas Christum pati nolebat, ut genus non salvaretur humanum, Petrum Satanam nominavit, eo quod saperet quae sunt Satanae, nolens Christum pati, sed adversans eidem; Satanas enim adversarius interpretatur
Chrysostomus
Daemoni autem ipsum tentanti non ait: vade post me; sed Petro dicit: vade retro me; idest sequere me, et voluntario meae passionis consilio non resistas. Sequitur quoniam non sapis ea quae Dei sunt, sed quae hominum
Theophylactus
Quae hominum sunt dicit Petrum sapere, secundum quod affectiones carnales quodammodo sapiebat: volebat enim Petrus quod sibi Christus praestaret requiem, et non crucifigeretur
8:34
St Bede † AD 735
After shewing to His disciples the mystery of His passion and resurrection, He exhorts them, as well as the multitude, to follow the example of His passion. Wherefore it goes on; And when he had called the people unto him with his disciples also, he said unto them, Whosoever wishes to come after me, let him deny himself.
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Hom. in Matt. 55
As if He would say to Peter, Thou indeed dost rebuke Me, who am willing to undergo My passion, but I tell thee, that not only is it wrong to prevent Me from suffering, but neither canst thou be saved unless thou thyself diest. Again He says, Whosoever wishes to come after me; as if He said, I call you to those good things which a man should wish for, I do not force you to evil and burdensome things; for he who does violence to his hearer, often stands in his way; but he who leaves him free, rather draws him to himself. And a man denies himself when he cares not for his body, so that whether it be scourged, or whatever of like nature it may suffer, he bears it patiently.
Theophylact † 1107
For a man who denies another, be it brother or father, does not sympathize with him, nor grieve at his fate, though he be wounded and die; thus we ought to despise our body, so that if it should be wounded or hurt in any way, we should not mind its suffering.
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 ubi sup.
But He says not, a man should not spare himself, but what is more, that he should deny himself, as if he had nothing in common with himself, but face danger, and look upon such things as if another were suffering; and this is really to spare himself; for parents then most truly act kindly to their children, when they give them up to their masters, with an injunction not to spare them. Again, He shews the degree to which a man should deny himself, when He says, And take up his cross, by which He means, even to the most shameful death.
Theophylact † 1107
For at that time the cross appeared shameful, because malefactors were fixed to it.
Pseudo-Jerome
Or else, as a skilful pilot, foreseeing a storm in a calm, wishes his sailors to be prepared; so also the Lord says, If any one will follow me, &c.
St Bede † AD 735 ubi sup.
For we deny ourselves, when we avoid what we were of old, and strive to reach that point, whither we are newly called. And the cross is taken up by us, when either our body is pained by abstinence, or our soul afflicted by fellow-feeling for our neighbour.
Theophylact † 1107
But because after the cross we must have a new strength, He adds, and follow me.
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 ubi sup.
And this He says, because it may happen that a man may suffer and yet not follow Christ, that is, when he does not suffer for Christ’s sake; for he follows Christ, who walks after Him, and conforms himself to His death, despising those principalities and powers under whose power, before the coming of Christ, he committed sin. Then there follows, For whosoever will save his life shall lose it; but whosoever shall lose his life for my sake and the Gospel’s, the same shall save it. I give you these commands, as it were to spare you; for whosoever spares his son, brings him to destruction, but whosoever does not spare him, saves him. It is therefore right to be always prepared for death; for if in the battles of this world, he who is prepared for death fights better than others, though none can restore him to life after death, much more is this the case in spiritual battle, when so great a hope of resurrection is set before him, since he who gives up his soul unto death saves it.
Remigius † AD 908
And life is to be taken in this place for the present life, and not for the substance itself of the soul.
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 ubi sup.
As therefore He had said, For who so ever will save his life shall lose it, lest any one should suppose this loss to be equivalent to that salvation, He adds, For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul, &c. As if He said, Think not that he has saved his soul, who has shunned the perils of the cross; for when a man, at the cost of his soul, that is, his life, gains the whole world, what has he besides, now that his soul is perishing? Has he another soul to give for his soul? For a man can give the price of his house in exchange for the house, but in losing his soul, he has not another soul to give. And it is with a purpose that He says, Or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul? for God, in exchange for our salvation, has given the precious blood of Jesus Christ.
St Bede † AD 735 in Marc. 2, 36
Or else He says this, because in time of persecution, our life is to be laid aside, but in time of peace, our earthly desires are to be broken, which He implies when He says, For what shall it profit a man, &c. But we are often hindered by a habit of shamefacedness, from expressing with our voice the rectitude which we preserve in our hearts; and therefore it is added, For whosoever shall confess me and my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, him also shall the Son of man confess, when he cometh in the glory of his Father with the holy angels.
Theophylact † 1107
For that faith which only remains in the mind is not sufficient, but the Lord requires also the confession of the mouth; for when the soul is sanctified by faith, the body ought also to be sanctified by confession.
Pseudo-Chrysostom Vict. Ant. e Cat. in Marc.
He then who has learned this, is bound zealously to confess Christ without shame. And this generation is called adulterous, because it has left God the true Bridegroom of the soul, and has refused to follow the doctrine of Christ, but has prostrated itself to the devil and taken up the seeds of impiety, for which reason also it is called sinful. Whosoever therefore amongst them has denied the kingdom of Christ, and the words of God revealed in the Gospel, shall receive a reward befitting His impiety, when He hears in the second advent, I know you not. (Matt. 7:23)
Theophylact † 1107
Him then who shall have confessed that his God was crucified, Christ Himself also shall confess, not here, where He is esteemed poor and wretched, but in His glory and with a multitude of Angels.
St Gregory the Great † AD 604 Hom. 32. in Evang.
There are however some, who confess Christ, because they see that all men are Christians; for if the name of Christ were not at this day in such great glory, the Holy Church would not have so many professors. The voice of profession therefore is not sufficient for a trial of faith whilst the profession of the generality defends it from shame. In the time of peace therefore there is another way, by which we may be known to ourselves. We are ever fearful of being despised by our neighbours, we think it shame to bear injurious words; if perchance we have quarrelled with our neighbour, we blush to be the first to give satisfaction; for our carnal heart, in seeking the glory of this life, disdains humility.
Theophylact † 1107
But because He had spoken of His glory, in order to shew that His promises were not vain, He subjoins, Verily I say unto you, That there be some of them that stand here who shall not taste of death, till they have seen the kingdom of God come with power. As if He said, Some, that is, Peter, James, and John, shall not taste of death, until I shew them, in my transfiguration, with what glory I am to come in my second advent; for the transfiguration was nothing else, but an announcement of the second coming of Christ, in which also Christ Himself and the Saints will shine.
St Bede † AD 735 in Marc. 3. 36
Truly it was done with a loving foresight, in order that they, having tasted for a brief moment the contemplation of everlasting joy, might with the greater strength bear up under adversity.
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Hom. in Matt. 56
And He did not declare the names of those who were about to go up, lest the other disciples should feel some touch of human frailty, and He tells it to them beforehand, that they might come with minds better prepared to be taught all that concerned that vision.
St Bede † AD 735 ubi sup.
Or else the present Church is called the kingdom of God; and some of the disciples were to live in the body until they should see the Church built up, and raised against the glory of the world; for it was right to make some promises concerning this life to the disciples who were uninstructed, that they might be built up with greater strength for the time to come.
Pseudo-Chrysostom Orig. in Matt. tom. xii. 33, 35
But in a mystical sense, Christ is life, and the devil is death, and he tastes of death, who dwells in sin; even now every one, according as he has good or evil doctrines, tastes the bread either of life or of death. And indeed, it is a less evil to see death, a greater to taste of it, still worse to follow it, worst of all to be subject to it.
The Latin text
Beda
Postquam discipulis mysterium suae passionis et resurrectionis ostendit, hortatur eos una cum turba ad sequendum suae passionis exemplum; unde sequitur et convocata turba cum discipulis suis, dixit eis: si quis vult me sequi, deneget semetipsum
Chrysostomus in Matth
Quasi diceret ad Petrum: tu quidem increpas me passionem sustinere volentem; ego autem dico tibi, quod non solum prohibere me pati nocivum est; sed neque salvari poteris, nisi ipse moriaris. Dicit autem si quis vult me sequi, quasi dicat: ad bona voco, quae quis velle debet; non ad mala et gravia, ut cogaris. Qui enim infert violentiam frequenter impedit; qui vero auditorem in libertatem dimittit, magis attrahit ipsum. Aliquis autem abnegat semetipsum, cum nullam sui corporis curam habet, ut sive flagelletur, sive aliquid simile patiatur, sustineat patienter
Theophylactus
Nam sicut qui abnegat alterum, videlicet fratrem, aut patrem, quamvis ille vulneretur, et moriatur, non compatitur, neque condolet ei: sic et nos debemus spernere corpus nostrum, ut si vulnerari contingat, vel aliquid simile pati, non curemus
Chrysostomus
Non autem ait, quod parcat sibi ipsi, sed, quod amplius est, quod abneget semetipsum, quasi nihil commune ad se habeat, sed periculis exponat, et circa ea sic disponatur, ac si alius pateretur; et hoc est sibi ipsi parcere: quia patres tunc liberis suis ignoscunt, cum tradentes eos doctoribus, illis iubent non parci. Usquequo autem oporteat seipsum abnegare, ostendit cum subdit et tollat crucem suam; quasi dicat: usque ad mortem exprobrabilissimam
Theophylactus
Nam tunc crux exprobrabilis videbatur, quia in ea malefici figebantur
Hieronymus
Vel aliter. Sicut gubernator peritus tempestatem in tranquillitate praecavens, nautas suos vult esse paratos, ita et dominus dicit si quis vult me sequi, deneget semetipsum; id est, alter ex altero fiat
Beda
Tunc enim nos ipsos abnegamus cum vitamus quod per vetustatem fuimus, et ad hoc nitimur quod per novitatem vocamur. Crux autem tollitur cum aut per abstinentiam afficitur corpus, aut per compassionem proximi affligitur animus
Theophylactus
Quia vero post crucem virtutem aliam nos habere oportet, adiecit et sequatur me
Chrysostomus in Matth
Hoc autem dicit, quia contingit aliquem patientem non sequi Christum, cum scilicet aliquis non patitur propter Christum: sequitur enim Christum qui post eum ambulat, qui morti eius se conformat, principes etiam et potestates contemnens, sub quibus ante Christi adventum peccabat. Sequitur qui enim voluerit animam suam salvam facere, perdet eam; qui autem perdiderit animam suam propter me et Evangelium, salvam faciet eam, quasi dicat: haec vobis mando quasi vobis parcens: etenim qui filio suo parcit, perdit eum; qui vero non parcit, salvat. Oportet ergo nos esse ad mortem continue praeparatos. Si enim in materialibus praeliis qui paratus est ad mortem melior est aliis, nullo post mortem eum resuscitare valente, multo magis in spiritualibus praeliis, cum spes tanta resurrectionis existat, quod qui ponit animam suam in mortem, salvam facit eam
Remigius
Anima autem hoc loco intelligenda est vita praesens, non autem ipsa substantia animae
Chrysostomus in Matth
Quia ergo dixerat qui voluerit animam suam salvam facere, perdet eam, ne quis perditionem hanc, et salutem illam aestimet aequalem, subiungit quid enim proderit homini, si lucretur totum mundum, et detrimentum faciat animae suae? Aut quam commutationem dabit homo pro anima sua? Quasi dicat: ne dicas quoniam animam suam salvavit qui crucis effugit pericula: quando enim cum anima sua, idest vita ista, lucratur aliquis orbem terrae, quid amplius erit ei, anima pereunte? Numquid aliam habet animam pro anima dare? Pretium enim pro domo potest aliquis commutare; animam vero perdens, aliam animam dare non potest. Caute autem dicit aut quam commutationem dabit homo? Deus enim propter nostram salutem dedit commutationem pretiosum sanguinem Iesu Christi
Beda
Vel hoc dicit, quia persecutionis tempore ponenda est anima; pacis autem tempore frangenda sunt desideria terrena: quod significat cum dicit quid enim proderit homini? et cetera. Plerumque autem verecundiae usu praepedimur, ut rectitudinem quam servamus in mente, non exprimere valeamus in voce; et ideo subditur qui enim me confessus fuerit, et verba mea in generatione ista adultera et peccatrice, et filius hominis confitebitur eum, cum venerit in gloria patris sui cum Angelis sanctis
Theophylactus
Non enim est sufficiens fides quae solum in mente consistit, sed oris confessionem dominus requirit: sanctificata enim per fidem anima debet et corpus per confessionem sanctificari
Chrysostomus
Qui autem hoc didicit subiecit se cum desiderio ad hoc quod sine confusione Christum confiteatur. Dicitur autem adultera generatio, quae Deum verum animae sponsum dereliquit, et non est secuta Christi doctrinam; sed Daemonibus prostrata, semina impietatis suscepit, propter quod et peccatrix dicitur. Qui ergo inter hos Christi dominationem negaverit, et verba Dei in Evangelio revelata, dignam impietatis poenam suscipiet, audiens in secundo adventu: non novi vos
Theophylactus
Qui ergo confessus fuerit crucifixum esse suum Deum, et ipse confitebitur illum, non hic ubi Christus reputatur pauper, et miser, sed in gloria et cum multitudine Angelorum
Gregorius in Evang
Sunt autem nonnulli qui Christum ideo confitentur, quia cunctos Christianos esse conspiciunt. Non ergo ad probationem fidei vox sufficit, quam defendit a verecundia professio generalitatis. Pacis ergo tempore est aliud, ubi ostendamur vobis. Veremur saepe a proximis despici, dedignamur iniurias verbi tolerare. Si contigerit iurgium fortasse cum proximo, erubescimus priores satisfacere: cor quippe carnale dum huius vitae gloriam quaerit, humilitatem respuit
Theophylactus
Quia vero de sua gloria dixerat, volens ostendere quod non inania promittebat, subditur et dicebat illis: amen dico vobis, quia sunt de hic stantibus qui non gustabunt mortem, donec videant regnum Dei veniens in virtute; ac si diceret: quidam, idest Petrus et Iacobus et Ioannes, non gustabunt mortem, donec eis ostendam in transfiguratione cum qua gloria venturus sim in secundo adventu: non enim erat aliud transfiguratio, nisi secundi adventus praenuntiatio, in quo et ipse Christus, et sancti lucebunt
Beda
Pia vero provisione factum est ut, contemplatione semper manentis gaudii ad breve momentum delibata, fortius adversa tolerarent
Chrysostomus in Matth
Non autem eorum qui ascensuri erant nomina declaravit, ne reliqui discipuli aliquid paterentur humanum; praedicit autem, ut dociliores circa huiusmodi contemplationem fiant
Beda
Vel regnum Dei praesens Ecclesia vocatur. Aliqui autem ex discipulis usque adeo in corpore victuri erant ut Ecclesiam constructam conspicerent, et contra mundi gloriam erectam. Discipulis enim rudibus de praesenti vita aliquid promittendum fuit, ut possent robustius in futuro solidari
Chrysostomus
Mystice autem vita Christus est, mors vero Diabolus. Gustavit autem mortem, qui peccatis immoratur: adhuc omnis homo habens dogmata bona aut prava, mortis aut vitae panem degustat. Et quidem minus malum est videre mortem; malum autem est eam gustare; sed adhuc peius eam sequi; pessimum autem ei supponi
8:1
1 Christ feedeth the people miraculously: 10 refuses to give a sign to the Pharisees: 14 admonisheth his disciples to beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, and of the leaven of Herod: 22 giveth a blind man his sight: 27 acknowledgeth that he is the Christ, who should suffer and rise again: 34 and exhorteth to patience in persecution for the profession of the gospel.
8:15
Ver. 15. Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the leaven of Herod. The leaven is the doctrine of the Pharisees, by which they taught children to say to their parents corban, as well as other things contrary to the law of God. The leaven of Herod is the doctrine of the Sadducees, for with them Christ had had His most recent controversy, as appears from Matt. xvi. 1-12. For Herod, as well as many of the principal people at that time, were Sadducees (see Jos. xviii. c. 2). They denied the immortality of the soul, and lived as Atheists. So Herod lived in adultery, killed John, and committed many other crimes, having no fear of God. For although he thought that John had risen again in Christ, yet that opinion did not arise, out of faith, but was wrung out of him by fear. Others, with Origen and S. Jerome, understand by leaven the sect of the Herodians, who flattered Herod, saying that he was the Messiah. But that referred to Herod of Ascalon, not Herod Antipas, as I have shown on Matt. xxii. 16. Ver. 23. And taking the blind man by the hand, He led him out of the town, i.e., outside of Bethsaida, as is plain from ver. 22. He led him forth for the same reason that when He was about to heal the deaf and dumb man He took him aside from the multitude. This was, 1st For the sake of prayer, that, being alone, He might collect His thoughts, and unite Himself wholly to God, and pray the more intently and collectedly. 2nd To fly from the applause of men, and teach us to do the same. 3rd Because the citizens of Bethsaida were unworthy of the miracle of Christ; for although they had seen Him work so many miracles, they would not believe in Him.
8:23
And spitting upon his eyes. Fasting spittle does good to the purblind, but does not illuminate those who have actually lost their sight. The saliva, therefore, of Christ was not a natural but a supernatural remedy for blindness, being the instrument by which Christ's Godhead wrought. S. Hilarion imitated this miracle by which Christ gave sight to a blind man, as S. Jerome relates in his Life. "A blind woman was brought to S. Hilarion, who said that she had expended all her substance upon physicians. Hilarion said to her, If thou hadst given to the poor what thou hast thrown away upon physicians, Christ the true Physician would have healed thee."
8:25
Laid His hands, i.e., when He had placed His hands upon the eyes of the blind man, and again removed them. For that is improbable which the Scholiast in S. Chrysostom says, that this blind man saw people (ver. 24) when Christ's hands were over his eyes. For this would have been a new and uncalled-for miracle. Ver. 24. And looking up, he said, I see men as it were trees, walking. As much as to say, I see something obscurely and confusedly; for I see men walking, but in such a way that I cannot distinguish whether they are men or trees. Just as it happens to ourselves, says Bede; when we see people at a great distance, we can only distinguish men from trees by their motion, because men walk, but trees do not. The word walking must be referred to men, not to trees, as is plain by the Greek. The word walking in the Latin text, however, might refer to trees in this sense: I see men as it were trees split, and therefore two-footed, and so walking. This blind man, therefore, as yet in darkness, saw men as it were through a mist and cloud, in which they appeared greater than they really were, it might be as thick and tall as trees, as by means of magnifying glasses letters appear larger than they are in reality. It is related of S. Gregory Thaumaturgus, that in the Decian persecution he fled with his deacon to a certain hill. A certain traitor made known where they were to the persecutors, who carefully searched the whole hill to discover Gregory. With strong faith in God, he stood in prayer, with eyes immovable and hands stretched out. But God smote the persecutors with inability to see. They returned and reported that they had seen nothing on the hill except two trees a little distant from one another. When they had gone away, the traitor himself went up the hill and saw two men, Gregory and his deacon, instead of the trees. He acknowledged that it was the work of Divine power that they had appeared to the persecutors to be trees, and he fell down at their feet, and from a traitor became a confessor of the faith. (S. Greg. Nyss. in Vita.) Mystically: The Scholiast in S. Jerome says, "The blind man is a penitent sinner. He sees men as trees walking, because he esteems every one superior to himself. With David he counts himself unworthy to be called a man, deeming himself to be a dead dog and a flea" (2 Sam. xvi.). Ver. 25. After that again He laid His hands upon his eyes, and he began to see, and was restored, so that he saw all things clearly. Christ wished not suddenly, but by degrees, perfectly to illuminate this blind man: 1st That He might exhibit miracles of every description. 2nd That this miracle might be more esteemed. 3rd And principally, That He might accommodate Himself to the imperfect faith of the blind man and those who brought him, their faith increasing as the miracle proceeded; and that He might the more kindle in them faith, hope, and desire that it might be brought to a perfect work. "In the first place, He cured this blind man imperfectly," says Euthymius, "inasmuch as he believed imperfectly, that he who as yet had but a little vision might by means of the little light believe more perfectly, and be healed more completely; for He was the wise Physician." And by and by he says, "Increase of faith deserved increase of healing." Tropologically: Christ wished to teach us that the unbeliever and the sinner are gradually illuminated by God, and that they ought correspondingly to make gradual increase in the knowledge and worship of God. "He did it," says Bede, "that He might show the greatness of human blindness, which is wont to arrive step by step, and by certain grades, as it were, of progression, at the light of the Divine knowledge." For as the Scholiast says, "There are degrees of knowledge; neither can any one arrive in a single hour, or, indeed, without considerable time, at perfect knowledge." We have experience of this in children and scholars, who must be taught and instructed step by step. For if the teacher, being impatient of delay and trouble, should wish to teach them everything at once, he would crush their memory and intellect, so that they would take in nothing. It is like wine when it is poured into a vessel with a narrow neck; if you try to pour it all in at once, you pour in scarcely anything, but nearly the whole is spilled. Worthy of note is the Italian proverb, "Gently, gently, if you would go far;" or the saying of the philosopher, "Progression is by degrees." Symbolically: The Scholiast in S. Jerome says, "Christ laid His hands upon his eyes, that he might see all things clearly, that is, that by visible works he might understand things invisible, and which eye hath not seen; and that after the film of sin he might clearly behold the state of his soul with the eye of a clean heart. For blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God." Ver. 34. In this adulterous generation, of depraved Jews, who are sons of God, though not genuine ones, but like spurious children, the offspring of adultery. For they are degenerate from the faith of their fathers, the Patriarchs, since they will not receive Me, who am the Messiah promised to them. Therefore they are not so much children of God as of the devil. Such are called in Hebrew bene nechar, i.e., children born of a strange, alien, or adulterous father. See what has been said on S. Mat 10:33. Ver. 39. The kingdom of God, i.e., the glory of the kingdom of God, which is about to be in My transfiguration. Coming, i.e., appearing, and showing itself to Peter, James, and John. In power, i.e., with great power, glory, splendour, and majesty.
8:1
v. 1 in diebus illis, qua locutione semel usus est 1,9, ubi pariter indicatur Iesum venisse ad loannem baptistam postquam is iam per longius tempus munere suo functus est; iterum cum turba multa esset, πάλιν refer ad 6,3&; fama scil. de miraculo patrato (7,36. 37) et de aliis sanationibus (Matth. 15,30. 31) per regiones sparsa turbas attrahebat, nec haberent quod manducarent, convocatis discipulis ait, « non ut ignorans quid acturus esset consuleret, sed ut nobis formam daret etiam ἃ minoribus aliquando consilium habendi » (A/5.), potius, ut discipulos redderet attentos ad miraculum , ut iis daret occasionem intercedendi pro populo, ut suum in turbas affectum manifestaret apostolisque exemplum miserationis, curae ac sollicitudinis praeberet
Bene notandum est quot modis haec de altera panum multiplicatione narratio a priore distinguatur 6,35 seq. [n priore discipuli monent Dominum , ut turbas dimittat in proximas villas et vicos ad cibos emendos ; in hac ipse Christus convocat discipulos et indigentiam turbarum exponit; discipuli autem id quod in priore fieri posse dixerunt, scil. ut ( panes coemerentur, in hac minime fieri posse clare enuntiant v. ἐς. Unde simul alia regio a locis inhabitatis longius remota indicatur. In priore turbae pascuntur vespera eiusdem diei quo Dominum secuti erant; in hac iam triduo apud Dominum versantur. In illa afferuntur Domino quinque panes et duo pisces, in hac panes septem et pisciculi pauci. In illa turbae recumbunt super gramen viride, in hac super terram; proinde aliud quoque anni tempus innuitur quo solis aestu gramen iam exaruit, vel indicatur alia regio. In priore saturantur quinque millia, in altera quattuor millia; in illa fragmenta panum implent duodecim cophinos, in hac septem sportas, quod discrimen et numeri et vocabuli etiam postea denuo effertur 8,19. 20; cf. 16,9. 10. Demum priore multiplicatione Christus praeparabat sermonem de pane vitae, de Eucharit Eigiitet sc cd nice eoim URHEPSITS RE Uim μὰ: stia, uti elucet ex loan. 6,26 seq.; et turbae eum volebant regem f facere; nihil tale in altera. Quae cum ita se habeant plane arbitrarium est quod recentiores quidam affirmant (Schleiermacher, Credner, Hase, de Wette, Ewald, Meyer, Weiss etc. quos enumerat Schanz), unum eundemque eventum narratione duplici exhiberi. At cum omnes conditiones temporis, loci, numerorum etc. aliae sint, etiam auctoritate evangelistae omissa nequit explicari, quomodo narratio de uno eventu tam.variam induerit formam, cum tamen ipsi rationalistae narrationem referant ad fontem antiquiorem, ad traditionem petrinam. Bene iam advertit Salm. : « quemadmodum Dominus bis eiecit ementes et vendentes e templo, bis edidit signum in sedanda tempestate maris, duos paralyticos , unum submissum funibus de tecto, alterum ad probaticam piscinam, sanavit, semel mundavit leprosum et iterum decem leprosos, tres mortuos suscitavit , ita hoc signum multiplicandi panes bis edidit in deserto ». Qua iteratione ostendit Christus, prout Jans. notat , indeficientem suam bonitatem et sequentibus se declarat nihil unquam etiam temporalium defuturum, se etiam temporalium rationem habere et fame laborantibus misereri. Iesum diutius in regione orientali ad mare Galilaeae esse commora- . tum ex eo quoque concluseris , quod Marcus dicit
8:2
v. 2 misereor super turbam σπλαγ- χνίζομαι, magnum dicit commiserationis affectum , quo viscera commoventur, quia ecce (ita ut videtur omnes codd. vulg., solum lich habet etiam pro ecce iam) iam triduo. sustinent me προσμένουσίν μοι manent, commorantur apud me, nec Aiabent quod manducent , cum iam diutius Ibi morarentur, viatica quae secum attulerant erant absumpta (TAeopA. Euth.)
8:3
v. 3 et si dimisero eos ieiunos in domum suam, deficient in via; quidam enim ez eis de longe venerunt; aptius xai τινες; nam quod a/iqui a longe adsunt, non potest esse ratio, cur omnes in via essent defecturi si impransi dimitterentur; proinde xai τινες, qua sententiae parte conditio additur alia ad praesentem rei difficultatem describendam. Merito iis in verbis admirationi habetur Christi miseratio et benignitas. Notatu quoque dignum est quod in regione illa orientali, quae maximam partetn gentilis est, turbae adeo constanter etiam cibis iam multum deficientibus apud Iesum versantur neque ab eo avelli posse videntur. Nihil tale de populo in Iudaea vel Galilaea legitur. lam cernitur prolusio quaedam quo gaudio et qua promptitudine gentes fidem sint amplexurae (cf. Act. 13,48). Sermone Dominisimul fides apostolorum exploratur et satis deprehenditur imperfecta. Neque enim iis in mentem venisse videtur eum ipsum qui ita loquatur etiam pollere potestate amplissima remedium penuriae afferendi. Quod tamen ne nimium mireris, recogita quid dixerit evangelista supra 6,52 : non enim intellexerunt de panibus, erat enim cor eorum obcaecatum ;
8:4
v. & e(responderunt ei discipuli sui : unde illos quis poterit hic. saturare panibus in solitudine? nota quantopere differat haec responsio ab altera 6,36; versantur itaque in regione a villis et vicis valde remota. Satis dure in discipulos aliqui invehuntur; « vide discipulos quam insipienter (ἀνοήτως) se habeant nondum credentes virtuti illius ex prioribus signis » (TAeopA.); « in discipulis observandum quanta adhuc stupiditate tenerentur et diffidentia , qui cum prioris miraculi fuissent spectatores et ministri, iam tamen dicunt : unde nobis..., vel quia obliti erant prius miraculum vel potius quia prae nimia tarditate nondum intelligebant Dominum quandocumque vellet semper posse quod semel potuit » (Jans.). Atque saltem assentiendum erit iis quae Eu/A. dicit, apostolos non intellexisse causam interrogationis, cum Dominus ideo ex iis quaesivisset, ut recordati prioris miraculi offerrent ei panes dicentes : multiplica etiam hos. Christus autem ponit eandem quaestionem quam prius posuerat
8:5
v. 5 et fnterrogavit eos : quot panes habetis? cf. 6,88; tum fortasse discipuli iam coeperunt intelligere quid Christus esset facturus. Christus vero interrogat , ut miraculi certitudo et magnitudo ex confessione discipulorum notior fiat (Jans.); qui dixerunt : septem;
8:6
v. 6 et praecepit turbae discumbere super terram et accipiens septem panes gratias agens fregit et dabat discipulis suts ut apponerent , et apposuerunt turbae ; vide 6,41; distincte quoque mentio fit orationis et benedictionis super pisciculos factae ; in priore una oratione et panes et pisces multiplicavit ; v. Ἴ et habebant pisciculos paucos et ipsos benedixit , εὐλογήσας, quae vox usu apud sacros auctores vix differt ab εὐχαριστήσας (cf. Ioan. 6,11 et Matth. 14,19; 15,36; Marc. 6,41. Luc. 9,16. 1 Cor. 11,24; 18,16) et iussit apponi ; apostoli administri sunt beneficii modo adeo miraculoso turbis a Domino praestiti et dum in eorum manibus panes et pisces ipsa distributione multiplicantur, quasi manibus palpant miraculum et iterum insigni ratione de Domini potentia edocentur. Uti Domino largiente panem corporalem nunc distribuunt , ita postmodum ad Domini verbum cibum spiritualem populis administrabunt. lam tangitur perfectio miraculi (4/ó.), cum scil. tot saüarentur et panum fragmenta superessent haud pauca
8:8
v. 8 e( manducaverunt et saturati sunt et. sustulerunt quod superaverat de fragmentis septem sportas; reliquiis frustorum (panis fracti v. 6) septem impleverunt σπυ- ρίδας, « dicit Chrysostomus sportas cophinis fuisse fortasse maiores » (Euth.) et vocem posse maiorem significare corbem etiam eo patet quia apud Graecos quandoque σαργάνη 2 Cor. 11,33 (sporta in qua Paulus Damasci per fenestram demissus fuit) explicatur tamquam εἶδος σπυρίδος et Act. 9,95 revera legitur de re eadem iv σπυρίδι. Septem autem sportas putat Schegg apostolos secum tulissc, unam pro Domino et singulas pro binis apostolis; sed forte nonnemo id subtilius excogitatum esse censebit; nam in priore multiplicatione duodecim cophini implentur.
8:10
v. 10 e/ stattm ascendens navim cum discipulis suis venit in partes Dalmanutha, cum neque Magadan neque Dalmanutha alibi commemoretur, satis incertum est ubi regio haec quaerenda sit. Ne in hoc quidem consentiunt sitne in littore lacus orientali an occidentali. Illud affirmat Patr. ea ductus ratione quod evangelistae cum narrare habeant Christum ex alterutro lacus littore ad alterum transmisisse dicere soleant eum transfretasse vel ivisse trans fretum ; cum itaque in hoc loco Marcus aeque ac Matthaeus neutrum dicant, sed Christum navi venisse, esse concludendum narrari non traiectum ad regionem trans lacum positam , sed navigationem ad aliam partem eiusdem littoris. Idem censet Weiss et addit Dalmanutha posse reperiri in vico hodierno Delhemija a parte meridionali lacus prope ostium fluvii, cui nomen Hieromax. Sed nominum discrimen maius est quam ut ex nomine ratio probabilis colligi possit. Verum pro situ orientali adduci potest quod habet Eusebius : ἔστι νῦν ἡ Μαγεδανὴ περὶ τὴν l'epacxv , itemque S. Hier. : nunc autem regio dicitur Magedena circa Gerasam (de Lagarde , Onomaslica s. 989,83 et 141,22). Pro quo situ alii etiam provocant ad v. 22, ubi lacu traiecto Iesus Bethsaidam venisse dicitur ( Patr.) ; dubito num hac ratione multum efficiatur ; nam etiam ex parte lacus orientali veniri poterat Bethsaidam. Ceterum vide quae ad Matth. 15,39 notavi. Alii Dalmanutha quaerunt in ruinis Ain el-Darideh a partc meridionali haud ita procul a Magdala (ita I. L. Porter; cf. Riehm, Handwoerterbuch des bibl. Alterth. I p. 251), alii in Minje; cf. Zeitschrift d. d. Palaestina- Vercins II p. 59; in ruinis Maun ctc. Explicat vocem Lightfoot referens ad locum Zalmon quem a talmudicis prope Tiberiadem collocari opinatur (tzado scil. in daleth immutato, quod Syris ct Arabibus non sit alienum; decas chorogr. cap. 5). Bi tua interest, varias repcrics coniecturas apud Sepp, Leben Iesu V p. 76-79, quas ipso p. 647 iterum nova hypothesi prolata refutat ; vide quoque Schegg p. 352 qui vocem explicat : possessio viduac. « Quemadmodum post multiplicationem quinque panum quidam apud loannem miraculum illud collatum cum manna mosaico quod e coelo venit extenuabant petentes satis aperte etiam signum aliquod e coelo quale fuit signum mosaicum, ita verisimile est et nunc pharisaeos audita fama miraculorum Christi et singulariter eius quod iam mox ediderat, coeleste aliquod signum ab eo petiisse, quo declararet suam auctoritatem et se esse vere Messiam , ut si tale edere non posset reliqua omnia miracula eius calumniarentur tamquam non divina, atque occasionem haberent. extenuandi singulariter miraculum recens factum et apud homines celebratum » (Jans.);
Turba dimissa Iesus conscensa navicula venit in fines Magadan, uti Matth. 15,39 dicitur. Eadem itaque regio designari censenda est apud Marcum
8:11
v. 11 et exierunt pharisaei, ex sedibus suis in terra sancta, ita ut ad insidias Iesu struendas lam non vererentur regiones quoque gentilium ingredi; ita aliqui, qui regionem Dalmanutha in littoreorientali collocant (cf. Wezss). Cum dicatur Christum venisse in partes D. ipsum vicum vel oppidum non videtur intrasse; quare simul atque audierunt eum advenisse, exierunt ex oppidis eius regionis (Schegg , Schanz, Keil); ceterum pharisaeos etiam ex lerusalem descendisse in Galilaeam ad observandum Iesum, legimus 7,1, et cum omnem cum alienigenis consuetudinem abhorrerent, fortasse vix multi habitabant in Galilaea, quae regio ab iis iam non terrae sanctae accensebatur, e£ coeperunt conquirere cum co, disceptare, disputare, quaerentes ab eo signum de coelo tentantes eum, neque enim eo animo petebant ut crederent, sed ut si non ederet calumniandi occasionem haberent. Dicuntur quoque tentare eum, quia modo indebito eius potentiam experiri volunt. Plurimis enim signis se iam a Deo missum et approbatum probaverat; quasi haec non sufficerent signum de coelo postulant; verum uti eiectionem daemonum ope Beelzebub fieri calumniabantur, ita signum quoque de coelo per satanam fieri poterant mentiri, ut plebem a fide Christi arcerent. Iesus autem de tanta eorum perversilate intime dolet
8:12
v. 12 οἱ :ngemiscens spiritu ἀπὸ βάθους, ἀπὸ καρδίας (Euth.) ab intimo corde, ab imo pectore trahens suspirium , secum scil. reputans quid iam fecisset. ut eos ad fidem adduceret et quid deinceps facturus et passurus esset pro eorum quoque salute et quid ipsi contra se supplicii essent contracturi in malitia perseverantes (cf. Vict.). Hunc Messiae dolorem unus nobis refert Marcus ; ait : quid generatio ista signum quaerit? cur quaerit? quaestio est indignabundi, cum sciat malo animo quaerere neque fore ut crederent, etsi daretur; amen dico vobis, si dabitur generationi isti signum, si i. e. hebr. QN, qua particula iurandi formula inducitur: vere, profecto non dabitur (cf. Hebr. &,3 : iuravi in ira mea; si introibunt in requiem meam, Ps. 94,11; videPs. 88,36; 131,3. Am. 8,7. Is. 5,9. ler. 49,90), tale scil. signum quale isti perperam atque insidiose quaerunt non dabitur (Beda); alia enim signa quae ad fidem faciendam plane sufficiebant etiam deinceps [6508 edidit. Quod Matth. 16,& habet de signo Ionae, Marcus non refert, fortasse quia Petrus coram iis docens quibus libri veteris testamenti non erant noti eius signi mentionem non fecit. Opinatur Grimm eo tempore Iesum nondum quidquam de sua passione innuere voluisse, quare tum nihil esse dictum de signo Ionae. Apud Lucam eius signi mentio ad tempus quoque posterius refertur (11,99). Attamen videri potest omnino convenire, ut Iesus antequam adeo explicite de sua passione loquatur prout loquitur 8,31 et Luc. 9,22, suam mortem aliqua ratione innuat atque ita quoque animos ad praedictionem illam explicitam praeparet. Pharisaeos autem ut incorrigibiles dimittit (TheopA.)
8:13
v. 13 et dimittens eos , ab iis scil. qui a Deo recedunt etiam Deus recedit ( Vici.) , vel uti Matth. 16,4 relictis illis, quia infidelitatis error insolentium animos obtinebat, eos reliquisse dicitur, ascendit iterum navim et abit trans fretum, in littus orientale illi dicunt qui Magedan et Dalmanutlia occidentali attribuunt, in littus occidentale (Patr.);
8:14
v. 1& et obliti sunt panes sumere el nisi unum panem non habebant secum in navi, Marcus solus accurate refert eos habuisse secum unum panem. Ex hac oblivionc Beda indicium colligit quam modicam carnis curam habuerint in. veliquis, quibus ipsa reficiendi corporis necessitas quae naturaliter cunctis mortalibus inesset, intentione dominici comitatus menle excessisset. Tempore quo navigabant utitur Iesus ad eos docendos v. 13 δέ praecipiebal eis dicens : videte (et) cavete, diligenter considerate et sedulo cavele, a fermento pharisaeorum et fermento Herodis, i. e. caveant ab exemplo et perversitate eorum qui in re religiosa et civili principatum gerunt. Cum Matth. 16,6 de fermento sadducaeorum sermo fiat, quaerunt cur hic Herodis nomen ponatur. Respondent aliqui eum ut fautorem sadducaeorum nominari (Jans. Lap.), alii, quia probabile sit Herodem sadducaeorum potius quam pharisaeorum placita esse secutum (Patr. Fil.). Idque haud immerito dicitur. Sadducaei enim traditiones et praecepla pharisaeorum spernebant, moribus Graecorum favebant eosque imitabantur, neglecta religione rebus saecularibus inhiabant (cf. ScAürer l.c.Il p. 341 seq.). lam Herodem Antipam hisce cum sadducaeis consensisse nemo negabit. Porro Herodes imperium Romanorum in Iudaea subruere tentabat et qui ab eius partibus stabant et Palaesünam Romanis eripere et Herodi tradere cupiebant Herodiani vocabantur (cf. 3,6); quare Schanz haud improbabiliter existimat hoc loco simul moneri discipulos (et cum eis Christianos) ne machinationibus partium ac factionum sese adiungant. Explicant Vict. Theoph. de fermento Herodianorum. Fermentum explicatur Matth. 16,12 de doctrina, Luc. 12,14 de hypocrisi. Quae duo non inter se pugnant. Nam fermentum pharisaeorum generatim id est quo alios inficere et suo exemplo formare ac penetrare student. Proin primo loco eorum doctrina intelligitur et quae ex illa consequuntur; vide 2,93; 7,1-14; quantopere autem mores eorum ad hypocrisin efformati sint, lege Matth. 6,1 seq. 23,13 seq. Quare fermentum pharisaeorum non solum intelligitur de eorum traditionibus et explicatione legis a vera pietate aliena, verum de tota eorum perversitate qua infecti sunt et alios doctrina et exemplo inficere possunt. Pariter non est cur fermentum Herodis ad unum aliquod restringatur. Varia recenset eda : fermentum eius est adulterium, homicidium, temeritas iurandi , simulatio religionis et quod omnium caput est et origo scelerum, odium ac persecutio in Christum et praecursorem eius. Discipulis audita fermenti voce in mentem venit de panibus neglectis
8:16
v. 16 et cogitabant ad alterutrum διελογίζοντο πρὸς ἀλλήλους inter se colloquebantur; nam (ut lans. versionem latinam perstringit) quid est cogitare ad alterutrum? quia panes non habemus, id quod concipi potest : ita loquitur, quia panes non habemus, vel melius, ut ὅτι solum eorum verba introducat (ὅτι recitativum) : panes non habemus, quae dicunt inter se solliciti de tali oblivione et anxii. In qua trepidatione, ut ait ans. , bis erant reprehendendi, et quod carnaliter intelligerent quod dicebatur de fermento et quod inciderentin sollicitudinem victus, cum eum secum haberent cuius potenliam iam bis experti crant in suppeditatione necessariorum. Quare ἃ Christo reprehenduntur v. 16, quia panes non habetis? nondum cognoscttts nec intelligitis? adhuc caecatum habetis cor vestrum? i. c. o vos pusillae fidei homines, quid est cur solliciti sitis de panibus vel me de panibus locutum existimetis? tot praeceptis instituti nondum habetis eam quam deberetis intelligentiam? Nota quam ingenue ac fideliter referatur tarditas et defectus apostolorum ; nullo modo evangelistae occultare student quam fuerint rudes, sed sincere ac candide rem narrant, uti acciderat. Id profecto aliis quoque eorum narrationibus summam conciliare debet auctoritatem. Apposite notat Cai. : « provida dispensatione divina effectum est, ut discipuli Iesu visis tot miraculis adhuc caecatum cor haberent; ad tollendum ἃ mundo suspicionem omnis humanae artis in Iesu οἱ discipulis cius per quos postea mundus conversus est ad fidem Iesu ». Videmus autem in discipulis quam tardum in rebus divinis sit ingenium hominum, nisi peculiari Spiritus sancti ope illustretur. In Iesu vero spectare licct bonitatem et patientiam, qua eorum perfert et docet tarditatem. Ipsa increpatione eos excitat ad considerationem documentorum quibus iam erant instituti sed quae satis neglexerant vel oblivioni dederant. Quare pluribus explicat quae modo iis exprobraverat
8:17
v. 17 quo cognito ait illis Iesus : quid cogitatis διχλογίζεσθε, uti in
8:18
v. 18 oculos habentes non videtis? et aures habentes non auditis? nec recordamini?
8:19
v. 19 quando quinque panes fregi in quinque millia, quot cophinos fragmentorum sustulistis? dicunt ei : duodecim; sententiae per interrogationem legendae sunt; ita enim et ad antecedentia conformantur el maiorem prae se ferunt vim ac concitationem, quae hic saue subest, prout ex tot membris brevibus et citato cursu inter se sequentibus apparet. Etiam non recordamtni legere oportebit per interrogationem, neque poterit trahi ad subsequentia, ut sensus sit : nonne recordamini, quot cophinos sustuleritis? Nam, ut iam απο. bene advertit, tunc nou recte subiungeretur : dicunt ei : duodecim ; verum respondendum essel : utique recordamur. ldem elucet cx quaestione sequenti;
8:20
v. 20 quando et septem panes in quattuor millia, quot sportas fragmentorum (ulistis? οἱ dicun ei : septem; iste dialogus Marco proprius est remque ad vivum exprimit. Discipuli non sine quodam de sua trepidatione pudore respoudent. Cum itaque memoriam miraculorum habeant, merito non sine admiratione aliqua interrogantur, quomodo fieri possit, ut ex tali memoria non colligant omnem curam ac sollicitudinem inutilem esse abiiciendam. Unde
8:21
v. 31 et dicebat eis : quomodo nondum rnelligitis ? vide lect. var. Cum Iesus moneat apostolos cavendum esse a perversorum hominum doctrina et consuetudine, idem monet quod postmodum apostoli docent praecipientes : haereticum hominem devita; si quis venit ad vos et hanc doctrinam non afífert, nolite recipere eum nec ave ei dixeritis; qui enim dicit illi ave, communicat operibus eius malignis (Tit. 3,10. 2 [oan. 10. 41; cf. 2 Petr. 2,4 seq.). « Fermentum hanc vim habet, ut si farinae mistum fuerit, quod parvum videbatur crescat in maius et ad saporem suum univcrsam conspersionem trahat ; ita et doctrina haeretica, si vel modicam scintilminis possessionem ad se trahet » (Zeda). g) Caecus sanatur 8,22-286. 8,22. Et veniunt Bethsaidam, et addu- 8,22. Καὶ ἔρχονται εἰς Brüsatoiv: xai cunt ei caecum, et rogabant eum ut illum tangeret. 23. Et apprehensa manu caeci, eduxit eum extra vicum; et exspuens Uti supra 7,32-37, ita hic quoque evangelista propriam habet narrationem. [n utraque accurate refertur quibus signis adhibitis Christus curaverit. Proinde indicatur vario modo Iesum sanasse , modo solo verbo et nutu voluntatis, modo manuum impositione, modo subito, modo aliquibus quasi ritibus accersitis et per gradus quosdam. In qua varietate quoque significatur non omnibus eadem semper remedia neque eodem modo esse applicanda, verum alia aliis acconimodanda esse , alios citius, tardius alios curari ;
8:22
v. 22 et veniunt Bethsardam : wicevtum est intellizaturne Bethsaida Iulias (Lamy, Calm. Schegy, Schanz, Fil. Keil, Ed. M p. &7) an Bethsaida prope Capharnaum (Vict. Theoph.! Patr.). Cum vocetur κώμη, fortasse vicus prope Capharnaum nominatur; at haec ratio certa non est, cum prior alterius Bethsaidae appellatio κώμη (cf. Iosephus, Antiq. 18,9. 1) potuerit apud plebem retineri; insuper quandoque idem oppidum apud scriptores novi testamenti χώμη et πόλις appellatur. Ita Bethlehem Luc. 2,& πόλις, Ioan. 7,49 χώμη designatur. Qui Dalmanutba in littore occidentali collocant, propter v. 13 (abiit trans fretum) generatim de Bethsaida in Gaulanitide inferiore quae Iulias appellatur explicant. Eum vicum Philippus tetrarcha restauravit, incolis auxit, ad urbis dignitatem evexit et ex Augusti imperatoris filia Iulia in eius honorem appellavit. Id autem factum est ante an. 752 u. c.; nam eo anno Iulia ab Augusto iam exsilio mulctata est et in insulam Pandateriam eiecta (cf. Schürerl. c. 11 p. 119). — Ceterum dubito num ex navigatione quidquam pro alterutra explicatione erui possit. Nihil enim dicitur quando venerint Bethsaidam neque per quam viam. Sed cum in subsequentibus Iesus et discipuli versentur in castellis Caesareae Philippi, licebit hic quoque potius de Bethsaida in Gaulanitide cogitare. Ipse quoque curandi modus quo scil. hominem seorsum ducit a turba , uti supra 7,32, regionem illam orientalem indicare videtur. Iesus qui discipulos de cordis caecitate reprehenderat iam hominem caecum sanat, in qua sanatione etiam recentiores quidam exprimi censent et doceri eum posse et velle spiritualem quoque caecitatem a discipulis auferre; et adducunt ei caecum et rogabant eum, ut illum tangeret; non refertur ipsum caecum etiam rogasse; id notari potest ad fulciendam sententiam eorum qui putant eum non statim, sed per gradus quosdam sanatum esse propter defectum fidei;
8:23
v. 23 et apprehensa manu caeci eduxit eum extra vicum; cf. 1,33; vult enim, uti ex v. 26 quoque elucet, miraculum occultari, e ezspuens in oculos etus, sumpta saliva oculos tangens ac liniens, « ita solemus lippientes et caligantes oculos saliva mundare » (Ma/d.), quare Christus simile quid adhibet sed effectu longe maiore, uti sacram eius decet humanam naturam, impositis manibus suts super oculos scil., uli in v. 25 exprimitur; dein manibus remotis, interrogavit eum si quid videret; v. 9& et aspiciens ἀναδλέψας, oculis sublatis, azt : video homines velut arbores ambulantes, graece : video homines, quia sicut arbores cerno ambulantes; scil. propter visus obscuritatem (EwtA.) non vidit nisi confuse; videbat itaque, ut Beda dicit, formam quidem corporum inter umbras, sed nulla membrorum lineamenta visu adhuc caligante discernere valuit, quales condensae arboresa longe spectantibus vel certe in luce nocturna solent 1. Explicant scil. de Bethsaida infideli cuim allusione ad Matth. 11,21. apparere, ita ut non facile arbor an homo sit possit dignosci. Ex motu tamen et ambulatione cognovit esse homines. Ex quo eius loquendi modo colligunt eum non fuisse caecum a nativitate (Cai. [ans. et recentiores);
8:25
v. 25 deinde iterum imposuit manus super oculos eius el coepit videre διέδλεψεν firmiter intuitus est, firmiter aspexit, quasi nunc acie oculorum nebulam illam et obscuritatem penetrans qua antea res viderat et restitutus est plene a defectu illo et caecitate sanatus est zta ut clare videret omnia , καὶ ἐνέθλεπεν et intuebatur (nota imperfectum hoc loco, dum supra διέδλεψεν) constanter, firmiter, diutius dilucide omnia. Cur Iesus eum paulatim sanaverit quaerunt. Plerumque rationem assignant ex defectu fidei in caeco. Prius enim, ut Ewuth. ait, imperfecte curavit ut imperfecte credentem; ideo etiam interrogavit eum si quid videret, ut qui parum adhuc respiciebat, per modicum aspectum crederet perfectius ac sanaretur perfectius , et similiter Vict. Theoph. Cai. Calm. Fil.; voluit enim, prout Mald. censet , Christus suam potentiam ad illius fidem moderari, quod et in Petro super mare ambulante fecisse legimus, qui cum perfecte credebat firmis super mare vestigiis incedebat, cum dubitabat mergebatur; fortasse etiam voluit, ut caecus beneficium quod accipiebat dum paulatim sibi conferebatur pluris faceret. Docemur itaque Dominum rogatum non illico dare omnia, sed paulatim nonnunquam sua dona rogantibus impertire quo magis desiderium nostrum et fidem accendat (fans.). Non ob defectum fidei, sed ad fidem caeci probandam ita egisse Christum ScAegg arbitratur; cum enim caecus prius solum confuse et obscure videret, magnam exstitisse pro eo tentationem putandi sanationem non succedere et Christum ea vice prospero successu non uti ; attamen caecum firmum in fide mansisse. Sed puto caecum iam gaudio affici, etsi oculorum acies solum imperfecte ei restitueretur; unde dubito fueritne pro eo tale periculum tentationis οἱ desperationis de Christi potentia. Aliter Schanz , ita paulatim sanalionem esse effectum , ut discipulis quasi exemplo proponeretur caecitatem quoque spiritualem paulatim ab iis esse auferendam. Similem rationem etiam Beda, Salm. afferunt , ut scil. magnitudo humanae caecitatis ostenderetur quae quasi pedetentim et per quosdam profectuum gradus ad lucem divinae visionis soleret pervenire. Addit Sa/m. apostolis quoque formam exhiberi quantopere laborandum sit eis, ut ad veri cognitionem adducere possint eos qui in errore aliquo inveteraverint. Iesus autem sanatum ab hominum turba et admiratione arcere vult
8:26
v. 96 et misit illum in domum suam dicens : vade in domum tuam et si in vicum in(roieris nemini dixeris; vide lect. var. ; in melioribus codicibus et editionibus criticis solum legitur : μηδὲ εἰς τὴν χώμην εἰσέλθῃς
8:27
v. 27 e/ egressus est Iesus et discipuli eius in. castella Caesareae Philippi, scil. septemtrionem versus in ditionem se contulit urbis Caesareae, vel in vicos qui ad eius urbis ditionem pertinebant. Philippus tetrarcha, filius Herodis, vicum nomine Paneadem apud Iordanis fontem situm magnifice ampliavit urbemque construxit quam in honorem Augusti Caesaream vocabat (cf. Iosephus, Antiq. 18,2.1). Ut autem ab aliis eiusdem nominis urbibus distingueretur, Caesarea Philippi appellari solebat, neque nomen Paneas vel Panias (qua appellatione tota quoque regio olim designabatur) abiit in desuetudinem; per aliquod tempus vocabatur Neronias, cum Agrippa Il eam aedificiis auctam in Neronis honorem eo nomine dici voluisset. Cum itaque per illam regionem incederent, procul a Iudaea, in terra quae a gentilibus magnam partem incolebatur, Iesus fidem discipulorum clave et distincte edoceri et enuntiari voluit , e£ in via (id Marco proprium est) znterrogabat discipulos suos dicens eis : quem me dicunt esse homines?
8:28
v. 98 qui responderunt illi dicentes : loannem bap- Lstam , quem itaque ad vitam rediisse et donum miraculorum a Deo accepisse putabant; vide 6,15; ali E/tam, quae opinio simul documento est exspectatum esse tum temporis adventum Messiae; nam credebatur fore ut Elias apparerel ante Messiam (cf. 9,10. Matth. 17,10) quae sententia ex Mal. &,5 orta est; aiit vero (quasi) unum de prophetis, superfluit quasi, uti iam Cai. adnotat. Ex his vulgi opinionibus iterum apparet quam tenaciter et veluti mordicus adhaeserint opinioni de regno messiano cum pompa et splendore orituro. Quamvis enim haberent et testimonia [Ioannis baptistae et tot Iesu miracula, tamen eum Messiam non agnoscunt, quia illi exspectationi non respondet. Et quid discipuli?
8:29
v. 29 (unc dicit illis : vos vero quem me esse dicitis? respondens Petrus ait ei : tu es Christus ὁ Χριστός, ille Messias, ille unus Unctus quem prophetae annuntiarunt et quem omnes exspectant. Unus quidem respondet Petrus, sed qui iam tamquam caput et princepsapostolorum vario modo erat declaratus etagnitus (cf. 1,36 ; 3,16; 5,37. Matth. 8,145; 10,9; 15,98. Luc. 5,3. 10). Quare eius responsione etiam significatur quae sit et quae esse debeat aliorum fides, et cum confessio Petri ἃ Iesu laudetur et ad Patris revelationem referatur (Matth. 16,17), clarissime docentur reliqui quoque quid de Iesu sentiendum sit. Veteres iam quaerunt, cur apud Marcum non legatur promissio illa magnifica quae teste Matthaeo facta sit Petro. Verum responsum mihi videtur iam dedisse Eusebius, qui in libro 3 demonst. evang. (p. 191; M. 22,216. 217) rationem repelit ex eo, quod Petrus, ut verisimile est, talia in suis narrationibus non enuntiaverit neque aequum putaverit quae ad se et ad suam laudem a Christo dicta sint proprio testimonio proferre. Marcus itaque qui ea quae Petrus taceret, ne ipse quidem quod scriberet habebat. In eandem sententiam etiam Patr. concessit; cf. lib. 1 de evang. cap. 2 n. 63. Alii, uti Vict. Theoph., putant Marcum ea praetermisisse, ne videretur ad gratiam Petri praeceptoris sui haec dixisse; quae ratio abesse videtur a simplicitate evaugelici narratoris. Existimat Schegg eum omisisse quia revera nescisset illam promissionem ; sed etsi Petrus de illa non loquebatur, tamen incredibile videtur Marcum qui Ierusalem in urbe domicilium habebat et cum reliquis quoque apostolis familiariter versatus est nihil de ea re comperisse. Consulto praeteriisse censet Schanz ne in libro suo proderet alienigenis Romanis institutum esse ordinem proprium hierarchicum inter Christianos; in imperio enim romano ut Christiani quoque collegiis licitis accenserentur necesse fuisse ut non tamquam a synagogis ludaeorum separati ac seiuncti considerarentur. Alii alias in medium proferunt rationes; ita Weiss, quia promissio illa non cohaereat cum iis de quibus discipuli in subsequentibus usque ad 10, 45 edoceantur; Acil, quia promissio illa nihil conferat ad id quod Marcus illustrare ac probare intendat et sibi proposuerit, scil. alienigenis demonstrare in Iesu manifestari coelestem quandam ac divinam virtutem et potestatem. Quae ratio solum tum quidquam veri haberet, si illa promissione nihil aliud contineretur nisi aliquis honor soli Petro prae aliis collatus, ut esset primus inter pares. Quod olim Beza scripsit : « quis crediderit vel ipsum Petrum vel Marcum praeteriturum fuisse illud tu es Petrus, si Ecclesiae christianae fundamentum in his verbis situm esse existimassent », etiam a recentioribus quibusdam acatholicis repetitur (cf. Weiss, Cook, Ed. II p. 81). Utique, si Marcus scripsisset tempore Lutheri, verba illa probabilissime non omisisset. Quod isti volunt, idem est ac si quis ortis disceptationibus de vera Christi in Eucharistia praesentia argueret : quis crediderit evangelistas et Paulum non dicturos fuisse verba illa esse litteraliter nulla metaphora admissa intelligenda, si essent litteraliter accipienda, eosque de magnitudine miraculi monere fuisse omissuros? Praeterea in primordiis rei christianae, dum ubique apostoli ipsi coetus Christianorum ngscentes regerent, non opus fuit ut Petrus ubique praedicaret se esse primatem. Neque sane Marco fuit propositum totam et integram doctrinam et institutionem Christi suo libello comprehendere neque omnibus haeresibus quae exsistere possent occurrere. Pari ratione dici posset baptismum in nomine Patris et Filii et Spiritus sancti administrandum minime esse tantae necessitatis, quia alias neque Marcus neque Lucas neque Ioannes illam potuissent tacere necessitatem. Et sic porro. Iesus autem
8:30
30. Et comminatus est eis, ne cui dicerent de illo. Quae hic narrantur quam maxime ad discipulorum eruditionem et profectum facta sunt. Postquam tamdiu cum Iesu versati sunt et tot eius viderunt miracula, profecto opportunum erat, ut clare ac distincte noscerent non solum Iesum esse revera Messiam, quem prophetae annuntiarant et quem omnes tanto desiderio exspectabant, verum etiam ut edocerentur de eo Messiae munere quod hominibus incredibile videri poterat, eum scil. debere pati. Exinde autem indoles quoque regni eius hisce in terris illustratur et quid sit praestandum iis qui ipsum velint sequi facili negotio deducitur. Unde haec pars in institutione discipulorum principem locum occupat; v. 30 comm:natus est eis, ἐπετίμησεν, severe admonuit, additis minis interdixit, ne cui dicerent de illo , de se, se esse Messiam. Cum enim vulgus a falsa illa exspectatione non sineret sese avellere, quid fieret si palam ubique proclamaretur Messiam esse praesentem? Tempus adesse crederent turbae iugi Romanorum excutiendi, omnes alienigenas expellendi ab urbe sancta etc.; maxima igitur et valde perniciosa oriretur turbarum concitatio. Praeterea cum etiam pii minime assueti essent (uti in ipsis apostolis discimus) Messiam patientem et morientem sibi animo fingere et credere, parcendum erat ne si nunc eum Messiam esse discerent, postea videntes eum adeo ignominiose contumeliis affectum et indignissima patientem et acerbe interemptum, scandalizarentur et ad priorem redirent incredulitatem (Ewth. Bed. Alb.). Prius enim gloria resurrectionis factae erat scandalum crucis removendum ; tum demum Messias patiens et pro peccatis sese in morte offerens tuto praedicari potuit atque in eum a mortuis gloriose vivum fides poterat exigi, ita ut ipsa eius in coelum ascensione et conditione ac praedicatione apostolorum omnis notio regni temporalis funditus amoveretur. Cum itaque discipuli clare ac distincte Messiam agnoscerent, statim etiam docendi erant Messiam oportere pati et ita intrare in gloriam suam , ne quid illis de falsa notione adhaereret;
8:31
v. 31 εἰ coepit docere eos quoniam oportet Filium hominis pati multa ; ita generatim; dein singula quaedam enumerantur; antequam igitur Filius hominis ad eam gloriam et dominationem perveniat quae de ipso apud Danielem 7,13 describitur, eum oportet multa pati, e! reprobari, repudiari, reiici, a senioribus et a summis sacerdotibus el scribis, ergo a summo Iudaeorum magistratu, ab iis qui in re civili et religiosa principatum apud ludaeos gerunt et qui cognitionem et explicationem legis tamnquam doctores profitentur; en illi ipsi qui oracula messiana optime scire debent et qui summam illam promissionem populo Dei de Messia factam quam maximi aestimare debebant, Messiam dicuntur repudiare! et occidi et post tres dies resurgere , vel, ut Matth. habet, tertia die resurgere. Quid /er/ta die significare possit, collige ex Tob. 3,10 12 et Esth. 4,6 et 5,1 et ex eo quodein Seder olam fertur : nudiustertius sunt tres dies. Ceterum vide quae ad Matth. 12,50 notavi. In odio quidem et persecutionibus et calumniis pharisaeorum, qui Iesum societatis cum Beelzebub initae accusarunt, et qui iam consilium ceperant eum interimendi; dein in habitu humili ac paupere quem Iesus constanter prae se ferebat, in occisione praecursoris, et praesertim in signo Ionae, uti illud Iesus explicat (Matth. 12,40) iam poterant aliqua indicia cognosci fore ut Iesus patiatur multa. Verum nunc plane et aperte suam passionem annuntiat prima vice;
8:32
v. 32 et palam verbum loquebatur παρρησίᾳ i. e. sine ambagibus, sine orationis involucris, libere et aperte, φανερῶς xai ἀπαραχαλύπτως (Euth.), manifeste sine ullo tegumento hunc sermonem dicebat. « Dum alii turbarentur et attoniti haererent, iterum Petrus utpote ingenio fervens solus audet de ea re sermonem miscere; at minime palam et aperte, sed assumit Iesum seorsum: » (Vict.) et apprehendens eum Petrus coepit increpare eum; « quomodo increpaverit eum Matthaeus exponit apertius : absita te, Domine, non erit tibi hoc; saepe diximus nimii ardoris atque amoris quam maximi fuisse Petrum in Dominum... neque putat fieri posse ut Filius Dei occidatur, et separatim ducit ne praesentibus ceteris condiscipulis magistrum videatur arguere; coepit increpare illum amantis affectu et optantis dicere : non potest fieri nec recipiunt aures meae, ut Dei Filius occidendus sit » (Beda). Videtur Petrus cogitasse Iesum ex odio pharisaeorum et persecutionibus concludere fore ut sibi mors intentetur; quare Iesum vult certiorem reddere de valida defensione quam a suis habebit; unde multa cum fiducia dicit : hoc non erit. Uti Petrus, ila reliqui quoque discipuli pati et occidi Messiam alienum reputabant ab eius dignitate minimeque decere; quare Cliristus severe reprehendit Petrum eo modo ut reprehensio eius evadat simul cruditio ceterorum. Id nobis Marcus significat qui etium nobis indicavit Iesum παρρησίᾳ coram discipulis de sua passione esse locutum ;
8:33
v. 33 qui conversus el videns discipulos suos comminatus est Petro ἐπετίμησεν increpavit, severe admonuit, dicens : vade retro me, satana, cum indignatione eum ἃ sc repellit ac recedere iubet; vocat eum adversarium vov ; cf. 1 Reg. 5,18 hebr. 11,14. 23. 25; eum a se abscedere iis verbis iubet quibus diabolum tentatorem repulit. Nam eius vestigia Petrus, utique haud sibi conscius, premit. Quemadmodum enim ille Iesum retrahere conabatur a via quam ei Pater assignaverat, ila Petrus quoque ne passione et morte voluntatem et beneplacitum exsequatur Patris, sua suadet admonitione. Vide quae notavi in Comment. Matth. I p. 147. 150; et ad 16,23. Quid enim sit recusare humilitatem passionis (A/5.) declarat quoniam. non sapis quae Dei sunt sed quae sunt hominum; consilium quippe divinum erat per humilitatem crucis relevare casum superbiae primi hominis (4/5.), per obedientiam Christi usque ad mortem crucis expiare inobedientiam peccatorum ; nam quia in Dei sapientia non cognovit mundus per sapientiam Deum, placuit Deo per stultitiam praedicationis salvos facere credentes; et ita Christus crucifixus Iudaeis quidem est scandalum et gentibus stultitia, at iis qui salvi fiunt Dei virtus ct sapientia (1 Cor. 1,21-24) et cur decuerit Deum auctorem salutis Iesum per passionem consummare , exponit apostolus ad Hebr. 2,10-18. Iam haec divina consilia Petrus nondum intellexit, « adhuc nondum gustaverat quod postea gustavit, cum ivit gaudens a conspectu concilii flagellatus , quia fuit dignus pro nomine Iesu contumeliam pati » (Cai.) ; verum adhuc ea sentiebat vigente humano affectu quae sunt hominum, scil. fugere passiones, vitare mortem; voluit enim, ut TAeoph. dicit, Dominum esse in pace et prosperitate, voluit eum esse exemptum a passione et morte. Neque id est mirum Petrum et amore in Iesum et humano affectu ita iudicasse. Nondum enim intellexit Scripturam (Is. 53,1-19. Zach. 13,7 etc.) et quae stulta sunt mundi elegit Deus ut confundat sapientes (1 Cor. 1,27). Nam hicquoque valet illud : non enim cogitationes meae cogitationes vestrae, neque viae vestrae viae meae, dicit Dominus; quia sicut exaltantur coeli a terra, sic exaltatae sunt viae meae a viis vestris et cogitationes meae a cogitationibus vestris (Is. 55,8. 9). De qua rc ita meditatur S. Aug. : « idem Petrus a petra cognominatus beatus, Ecclesiae figuram portans, apostolatus principatum tenens, continuo post paululum iam audito quod beatus esset, iam audito quod Petrus esset, posteaquam audivit futaram Domini passionem, quia praedixerat eam cito futuram discipulis suis, displicuit ei. Timuit nc perderent morientem quem confessus fuerat vitae fontem... Christus continuo reprehendit quem paulo ante laudaverat, et quem beatum dixerat satanam appellat. Idem ipse Petrus paulo ante beatus, postea satanas, in momento uno, infra pauca verba. Miraris differentiam nominum, , differentias attende causarum. Quid miraris quia paulo ante beatus, postea satanas? attende causam quare beatus, quia non tibi revelavit caro et sanguis, sed Pater meus qui in coelis est. Ecce audisti causam quare beatus. Quare autem illud quod horrescimus et repetere nolumus? quare, nisi de tuo? non enim sapis quae Dei sunt, sed quae sunt hominum » (serm. 76,3; M. 38,480). — Ceterum monent Cai. lans. non esse satanam nomen proprium daemoni sed generaliter idem significare quod latinis adversarius (cf. Num. 22,22 hebr. 32. 1 Sam. 29,4. 9 Sam. 19,93. Ps. 109,6); « omnis enim qui adversatur satanas est, et quia Petrus adversabatur divinae praedestinationi quam audierat ex ore Iesu, ideo merito appellatur satanas i. e. adversarius » (Cai.). Sed cum tamen idem nomen etiam daeimoni imponeretur atque eo haud raro designaretur daemon quoque et in vetere testamento et in novo (cf. 1 Chron. 29,1. Iob 1,6 seq. 2,2 seq. Zach. 3,1. 2. Matth. 4,10; 12,26. Marc. 1,13; 3,23. 26; 4,15. Luc. 10,18; 11,18; 13,16; 232,3. 31. loan. 13,27), reprehensio ex ipso nomine evadit satis acerba et Petrum quasi imitatorem daemonis qui eodem cum illo nomine vocari mereatur perstringit. Ex qua appellatione conclude quantopere Iesus aversetur et repudiet quaecumque Dei ordinationi et beneplacito sunt contraria. Expendit Zasilius seleuc. (orat. 31,5; M. 85,348) cur Iudae proditori Iesus dixerit amice etc., dum Petrum tanta asperitate increpet, et inter alia id quoque affert, ubi vulnus sit incurabile, ibi pharmacum esse inutile; ubi autem sit spes curationis, ibi sectionem esse inducendam, ibi flagellum admovendum. Petrus enim ex amore in Iesum ita locutus est. Nihil consulit, ut Calm. ait, praeter animi sui sinceritatem et ardorem. [am si Messias solum per passionem intraturus est in gloriam suam, quae erit sors eorum qui illi adhaerere volunt? Christo igitur passo in carne el vos eadem cogitatione armamini (1 Petr. 4,1)! Non sistit Iesus in sola increpatione Petri, qua illud se debere pati iterum asseruit; verum quid cum hac divina dispositione (v. 31 δεῖ, oportet) necessario coniunctum sit infert
8:34
v. 3& et convocata turba , curavit igitur ut quam plurimi audirent quae dicturus erat utpote ad omnes pertinentia (Partr.), cum discipulis suis dizit eis : si quis vult me sequi, ὀπίσω μου ἐλθεῖν post me venire , deneget semetipsum , translatio sumpta est ab iis qui partes alicuius deserunt idque palam profitentur; ita abnegare seipsum est esse sui quasi desertorem et paratum etiam vitam perdere, cum id postulabit obsequium Dei (Lamy); similiter iam TAeopA. : quid sit abnegare se ipsum discemus, si didicerimus quid sit abnegare alium; qui enim abnegat alium, fratrem fortassis vel familiarem, etiamsi flagellari illum viderit vel occidi, non advertit, non dolet; sic quoque el nos vult corpus nostrum despicere. Unde sequitur abnegare seipsum esse, ut Jans. dicit, valedicere propriis affectibus ac desideriis et apud ea quae divinae sunt voluntatis , quantumcumque sunt carni et nostrae suos appetitus , sua desideria , suam voluntatem et omne quod in homine carnali vivit et vegetat submittere et conformare divinae voluntati (Sylv.). Tunc autem, ut S. Gregorius (hom. 32 in evang.) et Beda dicunt, nos abnegamus, cum vitamus quod per vetustatem fuimus et ad hoc nitimur quo per novitatem vocamur ; idque illustrat Pauli exemplo dicentis : vivo iam non ego; exstinctus quippe fuerat saevus ille persecutor et vivere coeperat praedicator pius. Ut brevi omnia comprehendantur, abnegatio sui ipsius postulat, ut in omnibus Deum spectemus, quid ei gratum sit et ad eius honoris emolumentum ut consideremus, non quid nobis iucundum. Siquis Christi discipulus esse vu/t (monent Iesum consulere libero arbitrio, invitando, praemia proponendo, ostendendo damnum recusantium), necesse est secundo : et tollat crucem suam ; « translata haec esse nemo non videt; at nova sane huiusmodi translatio est a nemine prius unquam usurpata, sed neque aliunde deducta quam ex ipsius Christi cruce; suam, quemadmodum scil. ego meam tollam » (Patr.). Verum cum crucis supplicium Christo nondum inflictum esset dum haec loqueretur, oportebit addere, Romanis iam diuin Palaestina imperantibus supplicium crucis et ipsum cruciarium debere suam portare crucem satis notum fuisse discipulis. Quare facile intelligebant postulari a Christo ut quis paratus esse debeat ad ignominiae et mortis genus dirissimum subeundum pro ipso et ipsius causa. Quia itaque cruce supplicium designatur atrocissimum et ignominia plenum, crucem tollere dicit quaevis mala etincommoda, persecutiones, infestationes, tribulationes perferre, quae occurrere possint in obsequio Deo praestando; e/ sequatur me; quaerunt sitne haec tertia quaedam conditio, an id quod ex duabus praemissis sua sponte consequatur. Et hoc quidem modo aliqui concipiunt, scil. ut significetur eum qui velit venire post Christum, sequi posse, et debere per illa duo (Jans.) et in eum sensum scribit Par. : « cave id ita intelligas ac si Christus dixisset : si quis vult me sequi... sequatur me; sed : et ita agendo, denegando semetipsum videlicet et tollendo crucem suam , praestet quod statuit , hoc est, sequatur me ». Fieri enim non potest (ut pro ea acceptione arguit Jans.) ut qui seipsum vere abnegavit et tollit crucem suam , non sequatur Christum ; et alioquin absurdum esset dicere tria haec requiri ab eo qui vult venire post Iesum, nempe abnegare se, tollere crucem et sequi Christum , cum venire post Christum sit sequi Christum; itaque perinde esset ac si diceretur : qui vult me sequi sequatur me. Sic ille. Nihilominus alii tres assignari conditiones docent, ita ut Iesus dicendo sequatur me addat aliquid novi (cf. Vict. Theoph. Sylv. Schegg). Atque haec explicatio erit amplectenda. Commendatur ea ex verbis apud Matth. 10,38 : qui non accipit crucem suam et sequitur me, non est me dignus. Atque illa absurditas, de qua /ans., facillime vitatur. Nam sensus est : qui vult meus esse discipulus (venire post me, mihi adhaerere, meus esse socius et sectator), me imitetur; proinde sequ? in fine sententiae in notione ?m:tand? se ceperis, nulla apparet absurditas. Ea autem notione verbum ἀχολουθεῖν legitur v. g. loan. 8,12 : qui sequitur me, non ambulat in tenebris, ubi sensus certe est : qui me ducem et magistrum agnoscens praeceptis meis et exemplis obsequitur, vel 10,97 : oves meae vocem meam audiunt et sequuntur me. Atque ea significatione vocem nostro loco esse revera capiendam, merito monent iam Vict. Theoph. ; fit enim , ait Vzct., ut qui patitur eum non sequatur, si scil. non pPopter ipsum patitur; addit proin me sequatur, ne existimes sufficere ipsa per se pericula et tribulationes, sed ut intelligas opus esse dum ea sustineas ipsum sequi. Atque clare quoque Sylv. rem exponit : tertio praecipit, ut se sequatur; valde enim miserrimum est, ut quis se ipsum abneget, proprios affectus et voluntates conculcando, tollatque crucem suam, mortificationes, labores, molestias sustinendo et non Christum , sed mundum mundanasque glorias sequatur. Et, proh dolor, quot sunt qui in obsequio aliorum et suis desideriis renuntiare debeant et graves subire labores, atque haec omnia sustineant non sequentes Christum , sed umbram quandam famae et gloriae vel emolumentum temporale! Dixerat Iesus : si quis vult; sed iam subdit rationem gravissimam quam sit necessarium Christi causa se abnegare et immo mortem libenter subire ; ostendit scil. fructum si quis id praestiterit, damnum si recusaverit
8:35
v. 35 qui entm voluerit animam suam salvam facere, perdet eam i. e. qui se! vult salvum facere, se perdet, vel quod fere idem est : qui hanc vitam quam nunc vivimus servare volens recusabit mori pro Christo ubi opus fuerit, in aeternam perniciem incurret (Patr.) ; qui autem perdiderit animam suam propter me et evangelium , in ministerio praedicationis, vel ad evangelii veritatem tutandam, defendendam, profitendam , salvam faciet eam ; vide ad Matth. 10,39. Ab amore sui et vitae qui maximus est apud homines argumentum ducit : vel ob id quia te et vitam tuam diligis et eam salvam vis, ne cuncteris cam pro 1. Ex hebraismo; notum est enim 22 cum suffixis haud raro poni pro pronorninc. me et mea causa et pro mea doctrina profundere. Cum autem ipsa vita presens contemnatur oporteat, ut causa Christi eiusque doctrina sarta tecta maneat , etiam voluptates vitae et concupiscentiae animae carnales contemnantur necesse est, ne qua in re recedatur ab evangelio. Quare hoc Iesu effatum etiam ita enuntiari potest : qui in hoc mundo assecutus est contra me animae suae desideria eamque per horum assecutionem salvam ac beatam facere voluerit, ac sic eam amaverit, ut illius malis concupiscentiis acquiesceret, perdet eam in futuro saeculo. Contra vero qui propter mea praecepta et amorem mei concupiscentias animae frenaverit animamque suam afflixerit salutari poenitentia , inveniet eam et salvam faciet in futuro saeculo (cf. Jans. cap. 55). Qui vitae commoda perdit pro Christo, ea abundantissime ac cumulatissime inveniet; nam quod in praesenti est momentaneum et leve tribulationis supra modum in sublimitate aeternum gloriae pondus operatur (2 Cor. 5,17). Subiungitur altera ratio qua ostenditur quam inutile sit lucrum vitae temporalis, immo totius mundi cum perditione animae et quam irreparabile sit damnum perditionis animae (Jans.) vel, ut Alb. ponit, secunda ratio est sumpta ἃ nocumento quod affert animae perditio in comparatione ad lucrum quod affert concupiscentia,
8:36
v. 36 quid enim proderit , ὠφελεῖ, prodest homini, si lucretur mundum totum et detrimentum animae suae faciat? ζημιωθῆναι, si animae iacturam faoiat, eam perdiderit;
8:37
v. 37 aut quid dabit homo commutationis pro anima sua? i. e. sicut nemo adeo stultus est, ut velit, si fieri posset, iactura vitae huius corporalis lucrari universum mundum, tum quia vita perdita nullus ei futurus esset usus rerum huius mundi, tum quia vitam perditam nulla re posset recuperare ; sic multo magis stultum est lucro temporalis vitae vel etiam totius mundi facere iacturam animae post hanc vitam , quando ei nihil prodesse potest acquisitio rerum in hoc saeculo obtentarum nec anima perdita poterit ulla re redimi (cf. Jans.). Quo sensu anima ψυχή capienda sit facile ex antecedenti v. 35 colligitur. Unam habes animam , monet Vict., hanc si perdideris, non habes alteram. Confirmatur itaque illud quod antea statuebatur, quod qui propter Deum vitam amittit, seipsum servet (Lamy). Atque uti prior sententia in v. 95 potissimum spectat tempus persecutionis, quo anima ponenda sit, ita haec magis spectat tempus pacis quo frangenda sint desideria terrena , quemadmodum Beda adnotat. Apposite quoque Theoph. advertit, supplicium designari et interitum aeternum, quia nullo pretio animam perditam redimi posse affirmetur. Additur tertia ratio quam necessarium sit Christum sequi et qua simul unus explicatur nodus quo quis prae ignavia iacturam animae facere facile possit
8:38
v. 38 qué enim me confusus fuerit et verba mea ἐπαισγ wi, si quem puduerit mei et verborum meorum; si quis erubuerit profiteri rie et doctrinam meam ; « noster interpres dum graeca verba imitando conatur exprimere, minuslatine loquitur, sicut et Marcus magis hebraice quam graece locutus fuerat » (Ma/d.), in generatione 1sta adultera et peccatrice , additur hoc, quia apud impios praedicatio Christi eiusque doctrinae derisui habetur ; sed talium hominum irrisionem et contemptum timere eo.magis culpae verteretur discipulis Christi quo ab iis sperni non ignominiae est sed honori. Dicitur aduitera generatio , quia populus Dei foedere sinaitico quasi sponsa Domini consideratur (cf. Is. 50,1. Ier. 2,9. Ez. 16,8 seq. Os. 2,2 etc.); unde si peccando a Deo recedit, fidem nuptialem violare et adulterare dicitur et qui Deo infideles sunt tamquam filii adulterini et spurii existimantur (cf. Matth. 12,39). « Adultera est quae cum alio viro fuerit, et anima quae Deum verum sponsum deseruit nec eius doctrinam custodivit et semina impietatis suscipit, adultera vocatur » (Vict.); et Filius hominis confundetur eum, eum non agnoscet, sed cum ignominia abiiciet, cum venerit in gloria Patris sui cum angelis sanctis; merito hic se dicit Filium. hominis cum se venturum ea gloria dicat qua Daniel 7,13 Filium hominis in visione intuitus est. In ultimo iudicio quando apparebit in maiestate et gloria divina cum splendido angelorum comitatu palam fiet, quam immensa stultitia et ignavia illi fuerint qui talem ac tantum regem: eiusque doctrinam profiteri erubuerint coram hominibus omni contemptu dignis. Ut illi palam Christum venerari veriti sunt, ita tum iudex divinus coram omnibus eos cum indignatione tamquam se plane indignos reiiciet, veluti pudore afficiendus coram Patre et angelis et beatis, si eos inter suos connumeraret. Commemorat gloriam Patris , qua scil. Pater eum clarificaturus est (Ioan. 17,1. 5) quia omne iudicium Filio dedit; apparet in ea gloria ad iudicium quae in s. litteris Deo attribuitur, scil. in nubibus coeli et cum angelis; hanc gloriam opponit humilitati primi sui adventus ob quam quosdam pudet Christum eiusque doctrinam suscipere et profiteri (cf. Jans.). Ex tota hac sententia etiam colligitur, non sufficere fidem mentalem, sed etiam exigi confessionem oris (TAeopA.) et professionem publicam et gloriandum esse in cruce Christi palam, uti apostolus dicit : non erubesco evangelium (Rom. 1,16. Gal. 6,14). Uti supra in resurgere v. 31 exhibuit gloriam ad quam per passionem et mortem sit perventurus, ita nunc in salute animae v. 35 et in gloria sua ostendit denuo ad quem terminum omnibus votis desiderandum et appetendum adducendi sint qui abnegatione et portatione crucis se sequantur. Hisce aliam addit confirmationem. Ut scil. omni pudore et timore posito Christum eiusque doctrinam publice profiteantur neve vereantur in se suscipere eam quae necessaria futura sit abnegationem et crucem, edocentur fore ut intra temporis spatium haud adeo remotum regnum Dei iam appareat constitutum in virtute. Animi enim fortitudo et alacritas ad opus difficile aggrediendum maxime augetur spe successus propinqui proposita;
8:39
v. 39 e4 dicebat illis : amen dico vobis, quia sunt quidam de hic stantibus qui non. gustabunt mortem, gustare mortem ΠῚ nyo phrasis est rabbinica frequens; cf. videre mortem Ps. 88,49; etiam graece dicitur γεύεσθαι πόνων, μόχθων, πένθους (Pind. N. 6,41. Soph. Tr. 1101. Eur. Alc. 1069) ; cum mors consideretur tamquam res amara (1 Sam. 15,32), quo sensu dicatur gustare non est dubium (cf. Matth. 16,28. Luc. 9,27. Ioan. 8,52. Hebr. 2,9), donec videant regnum Dei veniens in virtute ἔληλυθυῖαν regnum venisse; regnum Dei vel regnum messianum constituitur Ecclesia Christi ; quare explicandum erit cum S. Gregorio (hom. 32,6 in evang. M. 76,1236) de eadem Ecclesia constructa, firmiter iam constituta et potenti virtute dilatata et contra mundi huius gloriam erecta, eodemque modo Beda, lans. Lamy, Reischl explicant. Bene dicit S. Greg. : « sed cum tanta Dominus subeundae mortis praecepta ederet, quid necessarium fuit ut ad hanc subito promissionem veniret? Quod si subtiliter attendamus, quanta dispensatione pietatis agatur agnoscimus; discipulis enim rudibus etiam de praesenti vita aliquid promittendum fuit, ut possent robustius in futura solidari... videndum regnum Dei promittit in terra, ut hoc ab eis fidelius in coelo praesumatur. Ex ipso itaque regno quod iam videmus in mundo esse sublimatum speremus regnum quod in coelo credimus percipiendum » (l. c. 1237).
8:1
L'événement n’est pas situé d’une façon précise, mais la mention du temps, si vague soit-elle (οἵ, τ, 9), le rattache au séjour dans la Décapole. Il faut done supposer, ce que Mc. ne nous avait pas dit, que Jésus y prêchait, car il n'aurait pas en quelque façon approuvé l'endurance de la foule, si son empressement n'avait eu en vue que les miracles. — πάλιν fait peut-être allusion aux autres rassemblements pendant que Jésus prêchait en Galilée (nr, 20; 1v, 1; v, 21) ou à celui qui a précédé la première multiplication (νι, 84). Cette fois c'est Jésus qui prend l'initiative et appelle ses disciples comme pour avoir leur avis.
8:2
La compassion du Sauveur ne se porte pas cette fois sur la détresse morale de la foule (νι, 34}, mais sur l'embarras où elle se trouve. Ils avaient sans doute apporté des provisions, mais elles sont épuisées. — fuépa τρεῖς est un nominatif entre parenthèses (Moulton, 70; Meisterhans, 203); construction qui n'était pas inconnue aux attiques. La même tournure anormale dans Mt. xv, 32 prouve que l'un des deux a servi de source écrite ou qu'ils ont eu une source commune. Swete préfère suppléer εἰσίν et traiter προσμένονσιν et ἔχουσιν comme des datifs, ce qui est beaucoup moins simple.
8:3
Prévenant les apôtres qui vont proposer de les renvoyer comme ils l'ont déjà suggéré dans le premier cas (νι, 36), Jésus leur remontre que, s’en allant à jeun, ils risquent de succomber en route. Νῆστις ne paraît dans la Bible qu'ici dans Mc. et Mt., nouvelle preuve de dépendance littéraire. ᾿Εκλύεσθαι, de la faiblesse causée par la faim, Jud. vi, 15; 1 Regn. χιν, 28; Is. xLvi, 1; Thren. ἢ, 19: 1 Macc. nr, 47. L’argument ne s'applique dans toute la rigueur qu'à ceux qui étaient venus de loïn (καί « d'autant que », Wg. enim), maïs il semble bien qu’on était à une certaine distance des lieux habités. ἥκασιν (DL. xxx, 17), forme du parfait (Mayser, 372). On préfère cette leçon (avec RAD etc. latt. syrr. arm. go. aeth. sah., cf. W.-Schmiedel [104, n. 2], Moulton [53]) probablement corrigée en ἡχουσιν par une recension antiochienne (EFG etc.) et en εἰσιν par une recension alexandrine (BLA me.)
ἥχασι, — Nestle : εἰσίν.
8:4
On s'étonne que les apôtres ne paraissent pas soupçonner que Jésus puisse faire une seconde multiplication, quand ils ont été témoins de la première. Mais il y a une différence très sensible dans leurs propos. Dans le premier cas, ils ne soupçonnent absolument rien et relèvent l'impossibilité de nourrir ces gens avec une nuance d'ironie peu respectueuse. Dans le cas présent, il serait exagéré de dire qu'ils demandent le miracle, quoique timidement, mais il est certain que leur réponse, en forme de question, insiste moins sur l'impossibilité que sur l'embarras où ils se trouvent; ils semblent renvoyer la réponse au maître. — πόθεν ici ne signifie pas proprement : « où faudrait-il aller pour trouver », mais « comment pourrait-on faire », ou plus précisément « comment quelqu'un pourrait-il s'y prendre? » laissant ainsi au Maître le soin de résoudre la question, comme Phèdre demande à Socrate τὴν... τέχνην πῶς καὶ πόθεν ἄν τις δύναιτο πορίσασθαι (PLar. Phèdre, 269 d; cf. XÉN. Cons. τι, ἀ). La phrase n’est pas sans analogie avec la plainte de Philoctète πόθεν γὰρ ἔσται βιοτά ; τίς ὧδ᾽ ἐν αὔραις τρέφεται μηχέτι μηδενὸς χρατύνων ὅσα πέμπει βιόδωρος αἷα; (Sopu. PA. 1159). Au surplus la « stupidité » des disciples est jugée trop sévèrement par ceux qui lisent à quelques lignes de distance les deux multiplications, et jugent d’après cela, sans se placer par la pensée dans les circonstances. Le premier miracle avait eu lieu depuis longtemps déjà; bien d'autres cas avaient dù se présenter où l'on s'était trouvé dans l'embarras sans que Jésus ait eu recours à un moyen aussi extraordinaire. On ignorait ses desseins. Mc. prête sans doute à Jésus l'intention d’éprouver la foi des disciples et il se propose aussi de constater leur lenteur à se mouvoir dans le surnaturel, et la pénurie réelle où l'on se trouvait : Fidetur etiam mihi voluisse Christus eorum explorare fidem, et futuri miraculi occasionem captare, ut discipulorum confessione constaret, non esse panem, unde tanta turba pasci posset. Semper enim observamus Christum numquam sine magna comperiaque necessitaie miracula fecisse (Mald. sur Mt. xv, 32). De plus il s’agit de trouver du pain dans un désert. Comme il n'y a pas de désert proprement dit dans les environs orientaux du lae, l'expression marque une certaine emphase; tout le monde savait que Dieu avait donné du pain à son peuple dans le désert : τὸν ἄρτον ὃν ἐφάγετε ὑμεῖς ἐν τῇ ἐρήμῳ (Ex. xvr, 32). Il fallait donc un miracle pour sauver la situation.
8:5
Mt. mentionne dès ce moment les petits poissons. N'est-ce pas pour donner plus d'unité à la narration ?
8:6
C’est ici que la ressemblance avec vr, 41 est le plus complète; l'acte principal ne pouvait être accompli de deux manières différentes.
8:7
La présence des poissons n'indique pas la proximité du lac, on pouvait garder longtemps des poissons cuits et salés. Mc. a-t-il pensé à une distribution distincte? ou a-t-il mis les petits poissons après pour ne pas dire qu'ils avaient été partagés? Une double distribution successive eût compliqué les choses.
8:8
Il n’est pas certain qu'il faille lire σπυρίδας plutôt que σφυρίδας (NAD); ce sont des corbeilles tressées, plus larges que les couflins. Il y en a sept, autant que de diacres, note Loisy; on pourrait dire : autant que de pains, ou alléguer le nombre sacré des Sémites. Mieux vaut s’en tenir au fait.
8:9
Mc. est moins affirmatif sur le nombre (ὡς) que dans le premier cas; peutêtre parce que cette fois il n’a pas dit qu'on ait réparti la foule par cinquante et par cent. Loisy paraît supposer que Mec. n’a cru qu'à une multiplication, ou plutôt, dans son système de symbolisme : « s’il n’a pas pris, comme Luc, le parti d'omettre l'une des deux multiplications, c'est peut-être parce qu'il avait su attribuer un sens à chacune, la première figurant la proposition de l'Évangile aux Juifs, et la seconde présentant la communication du salut aux Gentils. » « Aucun récit n'a été inventé pour enchérir sur l'autre; mais la même tradition ayant donné lieu à deux rédactions, les deux ont été recueillies dans Marc, et ont passé de là dans Matthieu » (1, 990). C'est bien, en effet, l'opinion dominante des critiques modernes. On allègue que la mise en scène est la même dans les deux cas, et environ au même lieu, à l’orient du lac. Les disciples se comportent la seconde fois comme s'ils n’avaient rien vu de semblable. La conclusion est à peu près la même. ΠῚ est vrai qu'il y a des divergences de détail, déjà notées par saint Jérôme : Jbi quinque panes erant et duo pisces; hic septem panes et pauci pisciculi. 1bi super fenum discumbunt : hic super terram. Ibi qui comedunt quinque millia sunt, juxta panum numerum quos comedunt : hic quatuor millia. 1δὲ duodecim cophini replentur de reliquiis fragmentorum : hic septem sportae (Com. in Matth., P. L. XXVI, 112). Il faut cependant convenir, au point de vue critique, qu'un même événement a parfois été narré avec des différences aussi considérables, et si le premier récit se trouvait dans un auteur, le second dans un autre, tous deux assez éloignés des faits, on pourrait très bien conclure que le fait est unique. Mais il s’agit d’un même auteur, de Mc., qui puise aux meilleures sources et à des souvenirs immédiats, et qui n'aurait certainement pas conservé deux récits s’il n'avait cru les faits distincts. Les règles de la critique obligent à conclure à deux événements distincts, car Loisy n’a pas prouvé que Mc. suit dans toute cette partie deux chaînes parallèles de souvenirs. Le seul argument sérieux qu’on puisse alléguer contre la dualité, c’est l'attitude des apôtres; nous avons indiqué dans le commentaire que, dans le second cas, elle est notablement différente. L'omission de Le. prouve seulement qu'il a cru suffisant l'effet produit sur son lecteur par la première multiplication. On sait d’ailleurs que ceux qui nient la seconde multiplication ne sont pas disposés à reconnaître la première.
8:10
Il semble bien que nous sommes ramenés sur la rive occidentale. C'est là qu'ont eu lieu jusqu'à présent les discussions avec les Pharisiens (οἷ, v. suivant); de plus, εἰς τὸ πέραν au v. 13 indique plutôt la rive orientale. Maïs à quel endroit? La question est encore indécise. 1) Si l’on maintient la lecture Dalmanoutha, attestée par tous les onciaux (sauf D), quelques mss. ἀπο. latt. σα. me. δα]. arm., etc., il faut renoncer à toute identification. Delhemiyeh, au sud du lac, près de l'embouchure du Yarmouk dans le Jourdain, n'offre qu'une consonance assez lointaine et ne convient guère comme site. Herz (Expos. Times, sept. 1897) a proposé comme original nn qui serait la forme emphatique de 95 « port » (λιμήν) et désignerait le havre, par exemple de Magdala; mais cette forme n'est ni connue, ni vraisemblable, et le nom propre ferait défaut. Encore moins satisfaisant est le rapprochement proposé par J. Lightfoot avec moy (Jud. 1x, 48). 2) On a été tenté de regarder [Djalmanoutha comme la transcription de l'araméen ΝΕ), traduction de εἰς τὰ μέρη. Cette conjecture proposée par Rendel Harris (Codex Bezae, p. 178, en 1891) et par Nestlo (Philol. Sacr., p.17) a été rejetée par Dalman {Worte, 52 s.), parce que NM signifie « parts », « portions » et que jamais les versions syriaques ne se sont servies de ce mot pour signifier une région. L'objection prouve d'une façon décisive que NM ne peut être original dans ce sens; ce n’est donc pas Me. qui aurait aussi mal transcrit sa source. Mais μέρος en grec n’a pas non plus pour l'ordinaire le sens de région (cependant I Regn. xxx, 14et dans le N. T. Mt. τι, 22; xv, 21; xvi, 18; Act. 11, 10 ΧΙΧ, 1; xx, 2; Eph. 1v, 9); il se pourrait qu'un lecteur syrien très ancien ait mis en marge de son exemplaire : Δαλμανουθα, pour se traduire à lui-même ele τὰ μέρη. Ce mot aurait passé pour un nom propre représentant une leçon meilleure que le nom qui suivait μέρη dans le Codex, et l'aurait ensuite remplacé dans le texte. L'hypothèse est précaire, mais vaudrait mieux que celle de R. Harris, qui suppose une dittographie nn nn. Il resterait à déterminer le nom primitif mis par Me. On peut opter entre Mayed ay et Mayὄχλα. Magedan est soutenu par d latin (Magidan, transcrivant Μελεγαδα de D), par a, ff, b, à, r,c, K, et syrsin. avec Busèbe : Μαγεδάν' εἰς τὰ ὅρια Μαγεδὰν 6 Χριστὸς ἐπεδήμησεν, ὡς ὁ Ματθαῖος. χαὶ ὁ Μάρκος δὲ τῆς Μαγεδὰν μνημονεύει χαὶ ἔστι νῦν ἡ Mayeδανὴ περὶ τὴν Γερασάν (Onom. 184, 18). Comme texte, ce Magedan a l'avantage de coïncider avec la leçon la plus soutenue de Mt., mais n'est-ce pas pour cela même qu'il a passé de Mt. à Mc. par harmonisation? Quant au lieu indiqué par Eusèbe, près de Gérasa, il est invraisemblable, à moins qu'Eusèbe n'ait eu dans la pensée les bords du lac, en prenant Gérasa du point de vue de l’histoire du possédé (v, 1). On serait tenté de préférer la leçon Ναγδαλα soutenue par de très bons cursifs 1. 13. 69,209. 274. 347 et le syr.-pal. édité par Land (Otia syriaca, textes, p. 140), magdal, L'endroit serait à el-Mejdel d'aujourd'hui, Magdala, la patrie de Marie-Magdeleine. Cette leçon serait peut-être encore plus en harmonie avec Mt., si l’on tient compte de la leçon Μαγδαλα, de nombreux on:iaux, arm. aeth. Chrys. à laquelle Μαγαδαν peut se ramener, comme Μαγαδά (Jos. xv, 37, B) pour 5. Cependant cette leçon n'est-elle pas, dans Mt. comme dans Mc., une correction savante des écoles où l'on connaissait la topographie? Le ms. 1 suit ordinairement Origène qui ne reculait pas devant ces corrections (cf. sur v, 1). En somme, le plus sûr est de conserver Dalmanoutha, en attendant une 50- lution plus satisfaisante du problème.
8:11
Ἐξῆλθον, les Pharisiens sont sortis de la ville proche du lieu de débarquement où Jésus a pu demeurer quelque peu. On ne voit pas qu'ils aïent eu un long chemin à faire, ce qui indique la rive occidentale, car ce sont toujours les mêmes adversaires. Cette fois ils se sont enhardis et s'adressent à Jésus, non pour le questionner sur la conduite de ses disciples, mais pour lui demander un signe du ciel. Si συνζητεῖν est pris dans le sens ordinaire de Mc. (τ, 27; 1x, 10. 14. 46; χιι, 28), il y eut d'abord une discussion dont l’objet n'est indiqué que par la demande qui la termina. Tout le monde est d'accord qu'il s'agit d'un signe messianique. Cette opinion est bien la plus probable; cependant le texte n'est pas explicite. Jésus, jusqu'à présent, ne s’est pas manifesté comme Messie et les Pharisiens pouvaient se demander s’il ambitionnait d'en jouer le rôle. Ils sont en présence de miracles qui les irritent parce qu'on les fait sans être de leur parti et sans avoir leur agrément, parce que Jésus ἃ ouvertement combattu leurs doctrines. Leur but principal, d'après Mc., n'est pas de s’éclairer, mais de tenter Jésus. Le mot peut avoir plusieurs sens. Ceux d'entre eux qui attribuent les miracles de Jésus à Beclzéboul s'imaginent peut-être que ce prince de l'air (Eph. 11, 2) ne pourra pas faire un prodige dont l'origine soit dans le ciel. Théoph. : ἐνόμιζον γὰρ ὅτι οὗ δυνήσεται ἐξ οὐρανοῦ ποιῆσαι σημεῖον οἷα δὴ ἐν τῷ Βεελζεθοὺλ δυνάμενος ποιεῖν τὰ ἐν τῇ γῇ μόνα σημεῖα, Ou peut-être leur intention est-elle, en exigeant un prodige éclatant, manifeste, qui fasse la lumière pour tout le monde, de tenter Jésus au sens propre, de l’induire à sortir de sa voie et à déplaire à Dieu en provoquant une manifestation extraordinaire pour sa propre glorification (cf. Hoz., Loisy). Si Jésus refuse d'aborder l'épreuve, on dira qu'il est impuissant et qu'il n’est pas au niveau d'un Élie qui avait fait descendre le feu du ciel (1 Reg. xvin, 38; II Reg. τ, 10 ss.). En somme, on demande à Jésus une ratification publique et éclatante, — dont on puisse constater pour ainsi dire physiquement qu'elle est venue d'en haut, — de l'attitude qu'il a prise et qui suppose une mission divine, sans que cette mission soit encore neltement caractérisée. Si tout le monde admettait que le Messie devait faire la preuve de sa mission, on n'était pas d'accord sur le signe. Theudas s’engageait à fendre les eaux du Jourdain (Le Messianisme, 21); les rabbins demandèrent à Bar-Kokébas de juger par un instinct infaillible intérieur (Ze Messianisme, 228 s.); en somme, le signe messianique par excellence eût été la victoire. La prétention des Pharisiens était déplacée, non point qu'un signe fût superflu, mais parce que, ne tenont pas compte des miracles de Jésus, ils en exigeaient un à leur fantaisie.
8:12
Ce qu'il y avait de plus clair dans les plans probablement mal définis des Pharisiens, c'est qu'ils procédaient d'une intention mauvaise; ceux qui n’ont pas reconnu la puissance et la bonté de Dieu dans les miracles déjà opérés se rendront-ils à un prodige fait sur commande? Aussi Jésus gémit-il profondément (ἀναστενάζειν Eccli. xxv, 18; Lam. 1, 4; II Mace. vi, 30; Suz. 22 [Théod.] est plus fort que le verbe simple) sur cette mauvaise volonté qui se révèle à son esprit (cf. 11, 8). Le mot γενεά est général et semble comprendre avec les Pharisiens tous les Juifs, du moins ceux qui suivent leur impulsion (cf. v. 88; 1x, 19; χπι, 30). C'est le premier indice de l’échec de Jésus auprès de la masse. Cette génération se comporte vis-à-vis de lui comme la généralion contemporaine de l’Exode vis-à-vis de Moïse (γενεὰ σχολιὰ χαὶ διεστραμμένη, Di. xxx, 5; Ps. xcv [xciv], 10; ef. Act. n1, 40; Phil. τι, 15 [Sarete]}. — εἰ δοθήσεται équivaut à une négation (ἀντὶ τοῦ, où δοθήσεται, Ἰδίωμα γὰρ τοῦτο τῆς Ebcatèos διαλέχτου, Euth.); c'est une tournure nettement hébraïque, supposant à la fin de la phrase une sorte d'imprécation : si je fais telle chose, que je meure! C'est le seul cas du N. T., sauf les allusions au Ps. χον, 11 (Heb. πὶ, 11; 1v, 8, 5). Comme ce psaume parle au v. 10 de « cette génération », il est vraisembiable que Jésus le citait implicitement. La tournure vient donc directement de la Bible, non de l'usage parlé. ἢ] n'est pas douteux que d’après Mc. les miracles opérés par le Sauveur sont les signes de sa mission messianique, ou plutôt de sa qualité de Fils de Dieu. Si donc Jésus refuse un signe, c’est celui que demandent les Pharisiens. Comme le dit Loisy : « Les signes du ciel, ou les signes se produisant du ciel en terre, sont réservés pour l'avènement glorieux du Messie; ils ne sont pas nécessaires maintenant aux âmes de bonne volonté pour reconnaître que le royaume des cieux arrive » (1, 993). On ne saurait mieux dire, ni affirmer plus clairement que l'avènement glorieux n'était point destiné à cette génération! Ce qui est d'une extrême conséquence, tant pour le système de Loisy, que pour l'intelligence des textes qui suivront (ur, 24-26). Mt. xn, 39 et xvi, 4 et 1,0. x1, 29 font une exception au refus du signe : «il ne sera donné d'autre signe que le signe de Jonas ». Il est impossible de douter de l’authenticité de cette parole. Pourquoi Me. l’a-t-il omise ? S'il avait suivi Mt., ce serait assez difficile à expliquer. Le plus simple est d'admettre que l'exception relative à Jonas ne figurait pas dans la tradition qu'il suivait, et qui, par conséquent, ne serait pas en tout la même que celle où ont puisé Mt. et Le. On comprend d’ailleurs que Pierre ou tout autre préchant l'Évangile en dehors des cercles juifs érudits comme devaient l'être Les Pharisiens, ait omis de parler du signe de Jonas, qu'il eût fallu expliquer. Et Je signe de Jonas n'étant pas un signe tel que le demandaient les Pharisiens, \ on pouvait s’en tenir à l’omission pure et simple.
8:13
Jésus quitte les Pharisiens, n’attendant rien de bon d’une controverse avec eux. Quand il multiplie les miracles, on lui en demande un que personne ne puisse contester, un miracle devant les cinq Académies. Il le refuse et passe. εἷς τὸ πέραν semble bien la rive orientale, puisqu'on va aboutir à Bethsaïda au v.22. .
8:14
Wellh. se demande si el μὴ ἕνα ἄρτον οὐχ est grec; cela n’est pas éloigné de : οὐδὲν ἄλλο σιτέονται εἰ μὴ ἰχθῦς μοῦνον (Hér., 1, 200). Les disciples étaient chargés des choses matérielles: Avant de monter en barque, surtout pour aller sur la rive orientale où l’on était moins chez soi, on faisait provision de. pain Cette fois, soit que le départ ait été plus prompt, soit parce que la controverse avec les Pharisiens avait absorbé les esprits, on omit de se munir de pains; il en restait un seul, peut-être oublié auparavant sur le bateau.
8:15
L'impf. διεστέλλετο indique peut-être que la recommandation était faite pendant la traversée. Ὁρᾶτε semble bien faire double emploi; mais n'est-ce pas pour cela qu'il ἃ disparu dans D Zatt. syrsin.? — βλέπετε ἀπό ἃ été regardé comme une tournure hébraïque (Schanz d’après Winer), mais on n'a fourni aucun exemple topique. En hébreu Y5 ΠΝῚ signifie plutôt prendre exemple sur quelqu'un : ‘Ar’ ἐμοῦ ὄψεσθε (Jud. vir, 17). La construction de Me. (encore xn1, 38) est plutôt forgée d'après le type φυλάσσεσθαι ἀπό qui est grec (Χήν. Cyr. LE, τα, 9); il suflisait pour cela que βλέπειν ait le sens de prendre garde (Gal. v, 15; Heb. x, 25; IT Jo. 8 etc.). D'ailleurs Deïssmann (ZLicht vom Osten, p. 82) a cité une lettre sur papyrus du 4 août 41 après J.-C. dont l'auteur n’était certes pas juif, où il est dit : χαὶ où βλέπε σατὸν (sic) ἀπὸ τῶν Ἴουδαίων. --- Le levain, sous un petit volume, ἃ le pouvoir de communiquer sa propre fermentation à toute la masse à laquelle on le mêle; principe de fermentation, le levain est donc un principe de corruption. Aussi les pains fermentés ne pouvaient-ils être offerts au temple. Si la parabole du levain n'insiste pas sur ce sens fâcheux (Mt. xmr, 33; Le. χα, 21), c'est que c'est une simple comparaison. Quand le levain est pris lui-même dans un sens métaphorique, ce sens est défavorable (1 Cor. v, 6 ss.; Gal. v, 9}, pour marquer un principe de corruption morale qui contamine tout ce qu'il touche. Dans le cas présent, il est double, c'est l'esprit des Pharisiens et celui d'Hérode. Bède a très bien résumé ce que Me. lui-même donne à conclure : Vel fermentum Pharisaeorum est decreta legis divinae traditionibus hominum posiponcre, legem verbis praedicare, ei factis impugnare, Dominum teniare, doctrinae ejus, aut operibus non credere. Fermentum autem Herodis est adulierium, homicidium, temeritas jurandi, simulatio religionis et odium in Chrisium et praecursorem En excluant ce levain, Jésus veut que ses disciples se tiennent complètement en dehors de ces deux partis, l'un dont la religion est plus extérieure que profonde, l’autre qui est tout entier occupé des choses du monde et de la politique; les disciples doivent chercher Dieu très purement; la moindre pensée empruntée aux préoccupations des Pharisiens ou d'Hérode contaminerait leur piété.
8:16
La leçon ἐχουσιν de B 1. 28. 209. 604. c, 4, est soutenue par εἰχαν de D (a, ὃ, α, ff, 4) qui est une correction de puriste (le présent peut être maintenu, cf. νι, 45), et préférable à eyouev qui a dû être mis comme plus facile et semblable à Mt. Si on lit ἔχομεν le sens est : « il dit cela parce que nous n'avons pas (pris) de pain ». C'est peut-être le sens de Mt. Celui de Me. est un peu différent. Les disciples commencent à diseuter entre eux {πρὸς ἀλλήλους et non plus ἐν ἑαυτοῖς) parce qu'ils n'ont pas de pain; d’où est venue lomission? qui est en faute? comment la réparer? (Swete). La parole de Jésus est un véritable méchäl, cachant un enseignement moral relevé sous une recommandation pratique. Les disciples s'en tiennent au sens litiéral, ou plutôt ils n'ont pas le temps de s’y arrêter, de sentir qu'ils ne comprennent pas, de demander une explication, parce que le levain les fait aussitôt penser aux pains, et en même temps ils se souviennent de leur oubli. Ne s'occupant pas davantage de la leçon qu'a voulu leur donner le Maître, ils s’absorbent dans leurs préoccupations temporelles et dans une querelle.
8:17
γνούς ne s'entend point d'une connaissance surnaturelle, puisque la dispute avait lieu aux oreilles de Jésus. — ὅτι est récitatif d'après Swete, mais plutôt = 5° ὅ τι, répondant au ‘2 hébreu, comme dans 1v, 41 (Blass, 300), et souvent dans les LXX. Pour νοεῖν, cf. vi, 18; x, 14; pour συνίεναι, IV, 12; vi, 52; vu, 14. Étant constamment témoins de faits surnaturels, les disciples ne réfléchissent pas assez pour en comprendre la portée. Leur cœur est calleux; sur le sens de πεπωρωμένην, cf. 11, 5; le sens d’aveuglé dans syrsin. et Vg., introduit dans D (πεπηρωμενην), est peu vraisemblable ici; c’est l'idée du v. suivant. D'ailleurs il ne faudrait pas confondre ce cœur calleux avec le cor malignum de IV Esd. 1v, 20. 21. 26.
8:18
Le début du v. peut être une allusion soit à Jer. v, 21 : ὀφθαλμοὶ αὐτοῖς xai οὗ βλέπουσιν, ὦτα αὐτοῖς xai οὐχ ἀχούουσιν, soit à ΕΖ. x11, 2 : ἔχουσιν ὀφθαλμοὺς τοῦ βλέπειν καὶ οὐ βλέπουσιν χαὶ ὦτα ἔχουσιν τοῦ ἀχούειν καὶ οὐχ ἀχούουσιν, ou même à Isaïe, que Mc. ἃ déjà cité librement 1v, 12. Les disciples sont-ils donc au même point que la foule qui profite des miracles, et qui recherche l’enseignement sans entrer dans l'esprit de la révélation nouvelle, parce qu'elle ne s’y applique pas assez? — À propos du Zogion III d'Oxyrhynchos : πονεῖ ἢ ψυχή pou ἐπὶ τοῖς υἱοῖς τῶν ἀνθρώπων ὅτι τυφλοί εἰσιν τῇ καρδίᾳ adr@[v] καὶ où βλέ[πουσιν], Reiïtzenstein (p. 241) ἃ comparé un passage du Poimandrès (νι [νππ|, ὃ 8) ἵνα μήτε ἀκούῃς περὶ ὧν ἀχούειν σε δεῖ, μήτε βλέπῃς, περὶ ὧν βλέπειν σε dei. Le rapport entre le Poimandrès et le logion est assez vague; quant au logion, il ἃ conservé le souvenir de la tristesse éprouvée par Jésus en présence de l’aveuglement des hommes (cf. Actes de Judas Thomas, 252, en syriaque, éd. Wright). — οὐ μνημονεύετε pourrait être séparé de ce qui suit par une interrogation, mais la question porterait dans le vague.
8:19
πλήρεις est peut-être moins authentique que πλήρης (AFGM al.) indéclinable (Moulton, 50). Sur εἰς au lieu du datif commodi dans la koiné, cf. Deiss- MANN, Bibelstudien, 113 8.
8:20
πληρώματα σφυρίδων « le contenu des corbeilles », comme Eur. Zon. 1051 χρατήρων πληρώματα, « le contenu des cratères »; χλασμάτων est un second génitif indiquant la nature du contenu.
8:21
La question demeure en suspens, comme une invitation pressante à réfléchir. Il semble que cette fois la sévère admonestation a porté ses fruits, du moins pour Pierre. des choses temporelles; il importe peu qu'ils n'aient pas de pains. Estce donc parce que lui, Jésus, pourra toujours les multiplier en cas de besoin? Schanz rejette cette conséquence. il est difficile de supposer que le Maître ait entendu promettre à ses disciples de subvenir toujours à leurs nécessités par des miracles. Ce serait contraire à son esprit et à sa conduite (cf. Mt. τν, 4). 11 semble que les reproches de Jésus ne s'expliquent bien que s'ils résument toute une situation, et ils sont en effet très généraux. Il ne reproche pas à ses disciples d'avoir oublié les pains, ni de s'attacher trop aux biens temporels. Il constate combien ils sont obtus et peu clairvoyants dans les choses surnaturelles. S'il cite les deux multiplications, c'est comme les deux miracles les plus extraordinaires qu'il ait faits. De même que le levain suggère aux disciples l’idée des pains, la querelle sur les pains appelle le souvenir des deux grands miracles de multiplications. Les disciples se souviennent parfaitement des faits. 115 répondent sans hésiter et savent distinguer très bien ce qui s'est passé dans les deux circonstances. Ce ne sont point des sots, mais ils ne comprennent pas le grand drame qui se passe sous leurs yeux. À propos d'un petit incident, le mécontentement du Maitre éclate; il déborde sur toute l'attitude des disciples jusqu’à ce jour. Malgré leur situation privilégiée, ils en sont au même point que la foule. Comme il arrive souvent en pareil cas, le Maître profite d'une inattention un peu trop forte pour leur dire leur fait sur toute leur conduite. Cette inintelligence des disciples, que Me. constate si nettement, est, d’après Knab., le gage le plus certain de sa véracité : Nota quam ingenue ac fideliter referatur tarditas et defectus apostolorum; nullo modo evangelistae occultare student quam fuerint rudes. id profecto alis quoque eorum narrationibus summam conciliare debet auctoritatem (Mc., p. 212). D’après Loisy, au contraire : « L'inintelligence des apôtres est donc une thèse de l'évangéliste, bien plus qu'un fait de l'histoire » (1, 1005). Le « donc » suppose des preuves antécédentes qui font complètement défaut; à supposer que l'ordre des événements vienne d’une combinaison didactique, non d'une tradition historique, ce n'est point une raison pour que l'inintelligence des apôtres soit une thèse. Plus loin Loisy donne une autre raison : « Marc en vient ici à prêter aux apôtres une inintelligence rebelle à tout éclaircissement, parce qu’il va rapporter les déclarations concernant la mort et la résurrection du Christ que les Douze sont supposés n'avoir pas comprises en dépit de leur clarté » (1, 1006). Ce serait, de la part de l’évangéliste, un artifice, coupable, mais grossier. Les apôtres n'ayant pas compris plus tard, il fallait supposer qu'ils n'ont pas compris plus tôt! Autant valait dire qu'on était décidé à ne leur attribuer qu'un esprit « extraordinairement court » (1, 1001), mais pourquoi? Toute la question est de savoir si l’inintelligence des apôtres est historiquement invraisemblable, Elle le serait, s’il s'agissait de l'ordre pratique, mais précisément ils sont très pratiques (1, 1001), sauf un oubli qu’ils se reprochent aussitôt. Qu'ils n'aient pas compris plus tôt ce qu'était Jésus, c'était sans doute leur faute, puisque Jésus leur reproche leur peu d'intelligence. Mais gette sorte de cécité touche à son terme, puisque Pierre va confesser le Messie; et, si elle est suivie d’un autre aveuglement, c'est qu’il fallait maintenant adopter une idée du Messie toute différente de ce qu'on se figurait dans Israël. La lourdeur des apôtres n’est pas plus invraisemblable que le parti pris des docteurs qui appartient sans doute à l’histoire, et la franchise avec laquelle Mc. la constate demeure une garantie de sa fidélité.
8:22
Bethsaïda, cf. vi, 45. On était donc encore sur la rive orientale. D et plusieurs mss. latt. et go. ont βηθανιαν, probablement celle de Jo. 1, 28, leçon dont on ne peut dire qu'elle est impossible, mais qu'on ne peut accepter sur ces seules autorités. B. Weiss, Holtz., Loisy, notent le parallélisme des deux séries νι, ϑῦ- νι, 37 et vur, 1-26. Ce sont deux voyages qui commencent par une multiplication des pains et se terminent par un miracle qui met en scène le pouvoir de guérir qui est dans le contact de Jésus. De même que les multiplications ont plusieurs traits communs, de même ces miracles Jésus prend dans les deux cas l'infirme à part, il le touche avec sa salive, il recommande de ne rien dire. Mais il reste cette différence que dans le premier cas l'infirme est sourd, et dans le second cas aveugle. Peut-être Mc. en racontant la guérison de l’aveugle par degrés a-t-il pensé à l'avancement intellectuel des apôtres. Mais il n'a pas même souligné ce symbolisme. C’est ici dans Mc. le premier cas de cécité; un autre se trouve x, 46 ss. On demande à Jésus, non pas d'imposer les mains, ce qui était un rite, mais seulement de toucher, ce qui marque une plus grande confiance dans le contact personnel de Jésus.
8:23
La rencontre avait eu lieu dans le bourg. Mc. emploie encore l'expression χώμη, quoique Bethsaïda soit devenu une ville (Le. 1x, 10); peut-être la ville s'était-elle déplacée, l'ancien bourg gardant son nom propre. Jésus ne veut pas faire le miracle dans une rue, et comme l'homme est aveugle, il le prend par la main avec bonté ἐπιλαθόμενος τῆς χειρός (D λαδομενος τὴν χείρα, COrrection qu'on ne s'explique guère que par l'influence du latin, puisque l’acc. est contre l'usage classique et que le moyen λαμβδάνεσθαι ne se trouve pas dans le N. T., Blass, 104, note). La raison de cet a parte est que Jésus ne veut pas attirer l'attention, et il est en effet très convenable que Jésus ait montré de temps en temps avec plus de force qu'il ne faisait pas de miracles pour exciter l'enthousiasme. On reconnaissait à la salive une certaine vertu pour guérir les yeux, surtout si elle était rejetée à jeun; ce singulier remède était même interdit le jour du sabbat (7. Sabbat, x1v, 14% ob.). Mais on ne le prenait pas sans doute au sérieux quand il s'agissait d’un aveugle. A la salive, Jésus ajoute l'imposition des mains, rite religieux. Puis il demande à l’aveugle : εἴ τι βλέπεις (BCD *) ou εἰ τι βλεπει (N Α etc. etc.). La leçon de beaucoup la plus commune suppose l'interrogation indirecte, plus naturelle en grec, mais moins vivante. L’interrogation directe avec εἰ est assez fréquente dans le N. T. (Mt. χα, 10; xix, 8; Le. xinr, 28 et Actes 1, 6; χιχ, 2; xxI, 87; Xx11, 25) et vient probablement des LXX où εἰ est un hébraïsme traduisant 7 ( Wüäner, Viteau, Blass). nn
8:24
ἀναδλέπειν signifie regarder en haut (vi, 41; vu, 34; xvi, 4) et recouvrer la vue (x, 51.52 avec Swete contre Holtz.; cf. Hér., II, 111; Pcar. Phaedr. 248. Sylloge 807, 17 [n° 5. ap. J.-C.}, d'un aveugle qui est censé avoir recouvré la vue dans le temple d'Esculape). Ici c'est le second sens, car les aveugles ont plus ordinairement la tête haute et les yeux disposés comme pour voir en haut. L'aveugle voit des hommes, puisque ce qu'il entrevoit assez vaguement comme des arbres se lrouve de fait en mouvement. Il n'Ctait donc pas aveugle de naissance, et avait conservé dans l'imagination certaines images dont il se sert aussitôt. La Ve. Video homines velut arbores ambulantes suppose l'omission de ὅτι et de ὁρῶ (D, Zatt. syrr.\, mais doit se traduire dans le même sens, et non pas : « Je vois les hommes qui marchent, semblables à des arbres » (Crampon).
8:25
Après une nouvelle imposition des mains sur les yeux, l'aveugle voit distinctement (Amsrore, Son. 8}; il revient à son état normal de santé, οἱ même sans myopie, τηλαυγῶς (δηλαυγως N° CLA est une correction malheureuse; ce mot n’existe probablement pas).
8:26
L’intention de Jésus en renvoyant cet homme chez lui est évidemment qu'il ne parle pas; il ne doit même pas (μηδέ au début de la phrase, Blass, 270) entrer dans 10 village. 11 est fort possible en effet qu'il ait eu sa maison en dehors de l’agglomération principale. La Κρ. porte : et si in vicum introieris, nemini dixeris, ce qui adoucit la défense en la restreignant au silence. Cette leçon est d’ailleurs peu appuyée (8, f, ff); la lecon préférée {N° μὴ N° BL 1* 209, syrsin. me. sah.)} se recommande par sa simplicité au milieu des nombreuses divergences de la tradition, Cette guérison par degrés ἃ fait naître plusieurs explications. On a dit que la guérison était proportionnée à la foi de l’aveugle ou que Jésus avait voulu éprouver cette foi. Schanz a pensé avec plus de raison que le Maître se proposait d’instruire ses apôtres. C’est bien aussi ce qui se passe en eux, qui sont appelés peu à peu à la lumière. Il serait étonnant que Jésus qui sait rendre la vue aux aveugles n'ait pas réussi à éclairer ses disciples. Dans la pensée de Me. ce miracle avait probablement une importance décisive pour ouvrir les yeux, du moins à Pierre. La guérison des aveugles était un signe messianique, en même temps que la guérison des sourds : τότε ἀνοιχθήσονται ὀφθαλμοὶ τυφλῶν, χαὶ ὦτα χωφῶν ἀκούσονται (Is. xxxv, δ). Me. s'est bien gardé de chercher un effet de perspective, de grouper les miracles pour forcer la conviction des Juifs; il donne à chacun son cadre historique particulier; mais l’effet devait néanmoins se produire peu à peu dans l'esprit des Douze, surtout après la sévère admonestation à réfléchir et à comprendre enfin (vin,
8:27
Jésus part des environs de Bethsaïda, et se dirige au nord vers les villages dépendant de Césarée de Philippe. On ne saurait dire s’il a suivi la rive du Jourdain, ou s’il est monté sur les plateaux du Djôlan pour redescendre sur Bânias. Une courte histoire de ce lieu (cf. Scnürer, Geschichte… IT, 204 ss.) montrera à quel point on était en terre païenne. La grotte d'où sort une des sources du Jourdain se nommait dès 16 rm siècle avant notre ère τὸ Πάνιον (sous-entendu σπήλαιον ou ἄντρον, Pouys. xvi, 18; xxvin, 1), d’où le nom de Πανεάς ou Πανιάς donné au pays ou au bourg voisin. Quand cette région, appartenant à Zénodore, eut été donnée à Hérode par Auguste, il construisit près de la grotte un temple en l'honneur de l'empereur (Ant. XV, x, 3; Bell. I, x1, 8). Plus tard, et probablement dès l'an 3 av. J.-C., le tétrarque Philippe y construisit une ville qu'il nomma Césarée (Ant. XVIII, n, 4 et Bell. IT, 1x, 1) et qu'on désigna sous le nom de Césarée de Philippe, pour la distinguer de Césarée sur le bord de la mer (la tour de Straton). Le dieu Pan avait remplacé là un Baal sémitique, mais le nom de Bânias est resté, l’un des très rares noms grecs qui aient survécu dans l’onomastique arabe. On était donc presque en terre romaine; tout rappelait le souvenir de César. Tous les voyageurs ont admiré la beauté du site, la verdure, les eaux courantes, les montagnes. À qui vient du nord, la Terre promise semble y commencer avec les sources du Jourdain. Si au contraire on remonte la vallée vers le nord, on pénètre dans les gorges entre l’'Hermon et le Liban, c'est déjà la Syrie. C'est loin du regard envieux des scribes et de l'empressement importun des foules de Galilée, en cheminant, que Jésus va traiter avec ses disciples la question suprême de sa propre destinée. Il demande à ses disciples ce que les hommes pensent qu'il est, soit pour en venir à les questionner eux-mêmes, soit pour qu'il soit bien constaté que leur opinion n’est pas celle de la foule. Ils ont dù se faire une conviction particulière en vivant avec lui,
8:28
Les disciples répètent ce qui a été dit déjà plus haut (vi, 14. 15). Quelques-uns pensaient que Jean-Baptiste avait apparu de nouveau, soit qu'il fût ressuscité, soit qu'il eût échappé à la mort (Nero redivivus, Frédéric Barberousse, Louis XVII); d'autres pensaient à Elie, attendu avant le Messie comme restaurateur (Le Messianisme... 210 ss.); ou bien on tenait simplement Jésus pour un prophète. — ὅτι εἷς... sous-entendu εἶ, Il serait bien extraordinaire que personne n'ait songé au Messie, et saint Jean (Jo. vi, 15) le suggère clairement; mais ce n’était pas une opinion arrêtée et réfléchie, et Me. devait la taire s’il voulait mettre dans tout son jour la ferme réponse de Pierre. Il est possible que Mc. ait trouvé le récit dans une source, mais on ne peut le prouver par l'emploi de τὸν βαπτιστήν au lieu de ὁ βαπτίζων 1, 4; vi, 16. 24, puisqu'il dit aussi τοῦ βαπτιστοῦ (vi, 25). Le passage actuel a d’ailleurs plus d'importance dans la tradition que celui qui précède (γι, 14. 15), et il pourrait avoir fourni le thème des diverses opinions que Mc. a déjà énumérées à propos de la mort de Jean (Zoisy).
8:29
χαὶ αὐτός marque simplement que c'est Jésus qui reprend la parole, comme s’il y avait ὁ δέ. Winer (141 s.) et Blass (166) ont nié que αὐτός soit employé dans le N. T. dans le sens de « il » sans aucune emphase spéciale au contraire Schmiedel (195 5.) soutient l’affirmative, citant Le. xxiv, 28; Me. vi, 27; Mt. χιν, 2; Me. xiv, 15 et Le. 1, 22; τ, 28; xvi, 24; x1x, 2. D'ailleurs la divergence est très légère entre Blass et Schmiedel, d'autant qu'il est très délicat d'apprécier le plus ou moins de relief du pronom. Il n’est pas nécessaire de voir dans cet usage une trace de l'influence des LXX traduisant l'hébreu hou (cf. Introduction). Jésus s'adresse à tous les disciples : λέγετε, « ce que vous dites », entre vous ou quand vous parlez aux autres (Sivete), ou plutôt : « qui dites-vous que je suis maintenant que je vous le demande L'impf. ἐπηρώτα indique que l’action se passait pendant qu'on était en marche, non que la question ἃ été renouvelée souvent; elle est trop solennelle pour cela. La tournure ἀποχριθεὶς εἶπεν est très fréquente chez les Synoptiques et dans les LXX, mais le verbe principal au présent (λέγε) ne se trouve que dans Dan. vu, 16 (LXX). Ce présent ne s'explique bien que par le goût de Mc. pour ce temps (ini, 33; vur, 29; τχ, 5;1x, 19; x, 24; χι, 22. 38; xv, 2; xv, 9, D}. Cette tournure absente de Mt. se trouve trois fois dans Lc. (χι, 453; xI1, ὃ; XVII, 37) mais dans des cas où Mc. manque. L'emploi de ἀποχριθείς de cette façon (dans Jo. ἀπεχρίθη) vient de l'influence sémitique (ΠῺΣ hébr. et aram. avec le sens de répondre et de prendre la parole). Pierre répond au nom de tous : tu es le Messie. La réponse dans Me. est la plus courte. Le. ajoute τοῦ θεοῦ, ce qui ne dit rien de plus, car le Messie par excellence devait être l'élu de Dieu. Mt. ajoute : ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ ζῶντος, qui n'est pas simplement un synonyme, mais insiste sur la nature divine du Christ, après avoir indiqué sa mission. Mc. a aussi passé sous silence la réponse de Jésus à Pierre (Mt. xvr, 17 ss.) et les promesses faites à l'Église en la personne de celui qui sera son chef. Ce silence s'explique assez mal si Mc. s'est ordinairement inspiré de Mt. comme le soutient Schanz; on ne peut dire avec Schanz qu'écrivant à Rome il a craint d'appeler l'attention des autorités romaines sur l’organisation de l'Église et sur son chef. Si l'on admet que Mc. suivait la catéchèse de Pierre, on peut attribuer à l'humilité de l’apôtre l'omission des paroles louangeuses; c'est l'opinion d'Eusèbe : ταῦτα μὲν οὖν 6 Πέτρος εἰχότως παρασιωπᾶσθαι ἠξίου" διὸ καὶ Μάρχος αὐτὰ παρέλιπεν (Dem, eo. τι, 3; P. G. XXII, 217). Ce n'est pas ici le lieu de prouver que ces paroles ont été vraiment prononcées par Jésus. Me., même en les connaissant, a pu préférer les omettre, parce que son but n’est pas d'insister sur l’organisation de l'Église, mais sur la carrière et la mission de Jésus. Spécialement ici, voulant opposer à l'idée fausse qui pouvait être contenue dans le mot de Messie, la vraie destinée du Fils de l’homme, il n’accueille aucun détail qui pourrait distraire la pensée et affaiblir l'effet relativement à Jésus, seul en cause.
8:30
Quoique Mc. ne dise pas que Jésus approuve Pierre, il accepte le titre de Messie. Mais comme ce titre est de nature, à cause des errements de l'opinion, à mettre sur une fausse voie, et que Jésus ne peut faire bénéficier tout le monde des explications qu'il va donner à ses disciples, il leur enjoint de garder le silence sur sa personne. Le moment n'était pas venu de parler haut, mais les disciples pouvaient se souvenir de ce qu'avait dit Jésus sur les choses destinées à être manifestées (τιν, 22). Holtz. juge même que le passage 1v, 22 pourrait être transporté ici, maïs ce n’est qu'une conjecture sans fondement.
8:31
Ἤρξατο a ici toute sa valeur; c'est le début d’un enseignement nouveau. Wellh. a noté que l'évangile qu'ont prêché les apôtres commence à vin, 27. Jusqu'à présent Jésus a prêché la pénitence pour préparer au règne de Dieu, à partir d'ici il instruit les disciples de ce qui regarde sa propre personne. Pierre a cru que Jésus est le Messie; il s'est déterminé d’après ce qu'il a vu, sans parler du don de Dieu que Mi. a mis en relief; il est tout naturel cependant qu'il ait conservé l'idéal messianique de son peuple, et qu'il attende de Jésus, après les preuves qu'il a données de sa mission, l'exercice d'un pouvoir temporel, guerrier et victorieux. Jésus ne pouvait refuser un titre appuyé sur l'Écriture, mais il lui importe de ne point laisser les disciples dans l'erreur sur la destinée qui est la sienne. Aussi, sans rejeter le titre de Messie, ce n’est pas à ce titre qu'il s'arrête, ses disciples ne pouvant facilement en concilier l’idée toute glorieuse avec le rejet par la nation et les souffrances. 1] se désigne comme Fils de l’homme. Ce titre n'étant pas alors un terme technique pour désigner le Messie, et les passages de Daniel ne pouvant être dans toutes les mémoires, ce que les disciples devaient comprendre c'est que le Messie, tel que Jésus l’entendait, tenait à l'humanité de très près, et en partagerait le sort si souvent douloureux. Il y ἃ pour le Fils de l'homme une nécessité, imposée d'en haut, de passer par de nombreuses (πολλά) souffrances, selon un triple stage : 1) rejet officiel par le conseil suprême de la nation, 2) mort violente, 3) résurrection. Jésus sera rejeté comme une pierre dont les maçons ne trouvent pas l'emploi (Ps. exvn [exvin], 22: cf. xn, 10; I Pet. πὶ, 4 ss.). Me. divise le sanhédrin en trois classes : les anciens, qui ne peuvent être que la noblesse laïque, les grands prêtres, c'est-à-dire les représentants des grandes familles sacerdotales, et les scribes, c’est-à-dire les docteurs de la Loi du parti des Pharisiens. C'est le seul cas dans Me. (dans Mt. xvi, 21; Li. 1x, 22 [parallèles] et Le. xx, 19) où les grands prêtres ne sont pas nommés les premiers (οἷ. x1, 27; χιν, 43. 53; XV, 1 ἀρχιερεῖς, γραμματεῖς et πρεσδύτεροι; Me. x, 33; χι, 18; χιν, 1; xV, 81 ἀρχιερεῖς et γραμματεῖς; Me. χιν, 55 οἱ ἀρχιερεῖς χαὶ τὸ συνέδριον); Mc., en effet, a plutôt une tendance à laisser dans l'ombre l'aristocratie du sanhédrin. C’est le contraire dans Josèphe qui ne nomme pas habituellement les docteurs, maïs qui reconnaît cependant qu'en fait l'influence des Pharisiens était prépondérante (Ant. XVIII, 1, 4). D'ailleurs Josèphe ἃ précisément le même ordre que Mc. dans un texte συνελθόντες γοῦν οἱ δυνατοὶ τοῖς ἀρχιερεῦσιν εἰς ταὐτὸ χαὶ τοῖς τῶν Φαρισαίων γνωρίμοις (Bell. 11, xvir, 8; cf. Schürer, Geschichte.. Il, 238-267). Μο., en répétant l’article (omis par Mt. et L.) devant les deux dernières catégories, a relevé la responsabilité de chaque groupe (Sarete). — ἀνίστημι est employé dans le même sens par les Pss. de Salomon (ur, 13. 16 au fut. moy.) de ceux qui ressusciteront, évidemment par la vertu de Dieu. Me. dit μετὰ τρεῖς fuépac (syrsèn. « le troisième jour »), et est demeuré fidèle à cette formule (1x, 81; x, 34) qui paraît être la plus ancienne, et qui est interprétée dans le même sens que « Le troisième jour » dans Mt. xxvn, 64. La formule de Mc. ἃ été abandonnée dans la suite (Mt. xvi, 21; xvu, 23; xx, 19; Le. 1x, 22; xvir, 88; xx1v, 7. 46; Act. x, 40; 1 Cor. xv, 4), comme moins clairement conforme aux faits; elle a donc sa saveur d'authenticité ante eventum. Loisy reconnaît que « pour être moins précise, la formule de Marc ne paraît pas signifier autre chose que l’autre » (II, 18, note).
8:32
Παρρησίᾳ ne peut signifier qu'une chose : « librement », « ouvertement Loisy, qui tient à ce que ce discours aît eu lieu devant la foule, l'entend de la liberté du discours devant un auditoire étranger : « La suite montre que l'évangéliste suppose une foule présente »; « C'est à cause de la foule que Pierre prend Jésus à l'écart, puisque les autres apôtres le suivent et partagent ses sentiments » (II, 19, texte et note 2). C'est un audacieux travestissement du texte. La foule ne paraît qu'au ν, 84. Pierre tire Jésus à l'écart parce qu'il ne veut pas lui adresser son admonestation devant les autres disciples; Bède : ne praesentibus ceteris condiscipulis magistrum videatur argucre. Ce λόγος que Jésus tient ouvertement est l'annonce de sa passion, non plus la doctrine évangélique en général, comme 1, 45. (Le syrsin. et 16 Diatess. ar. ont compris ἐλάλει comme un futur joint à ce qui précède : cf. k. resurgere et cum fiducia sermonerr loqui). Il était très hardi de dire aux disciples que leur Maître serait rejeté et mis à mort par le conseil suprême de la nation. La prophétie était claire, sans être détaillée. Elle choque Pierre qui ne comprenait pas ainsi le rôle du Messie, et qui suppose peut-être que Jésus se laisse aller au découragement (syrsin. : « Simon Képhas, comme ayant pitié de lui, lui dit »). L'intervention de Pierre marque son bon cœur et un peu de témérité; προσλαμθδανέσθαι signifie « aider, assister »; il se dit même de Dieu par rapport à l’homme (Ps. xxvi [xxvur], 10), et surtout du prochain (Rom. x1v, 1. 3; xv, 7); ἐπιτιμᾶν marque le blâme. Loisy a fort raffiné la pensée de Mc., afin de la rendre suspecte : « Pierre tire Jésus à part pour fui reprocher l’inconséquence de son discours, dont le prince des apôtres est censé ne pas comprendre la haute signification providentielle, c’est-à-dire qu'il ne perçoit pas d'avance, comme Paul l’a perçue plus tard, l'importance essentielle de la mort et de la résurrection du Ghrist dans l’économie du salut » ὉΠ, 20). Le texte est beaucoup plus simple et ne reproche pas à Pierre de n'avoir pas compris ce que Paul a compris plus tard. Et c’est grâce à cette interprétation que Loïisy peut conclure : « la remontrance n’est pas mieux garantie historiquement que la prédiction qui l'occasionne, et que le cadre où elle est placée; elle se rattache à la thèse de Marc sur l’inintelligence des apôtres ; tout le développement qui suit la déclaration messianique a le caractère adventice et irréel des passages déjà rencontrés qui font valoir la même idée » (II, 20). Mais comment les apôtres n’auraïent-ils pas été surpris d’une prédiction si contraire à toute l'opinion publique? Leur inintelligence n'a jamais été plus vraisemblable que dans ce cas. L’attitude de Pierre est d'un naturel exquis.
8:33
Comme Jésus comprend très bien que les apôtres partagent l'impression de Pierre, il ne juge pas à propos d'observer la réserve de son disciple, et il lui rend ses reproches à leurs yeux, de façon à ce qu'ils soient témoins de la scène. La Vo. qui avait traduit la première fois ἐπιτιμᾶν increpare met ici comminatus est pour le même mot. — Ὀπίσω avec le gén. est une tournure empruntée aux LXX (hébr. Mn; Blass, 130), Avec le pronom μου, on dirait que Jésus dit à Pierre de le suivre (cf. IV Regn. 1x, 19, ἐπιστρέφου εἰς τὰ ὀπίσω μου), mais, étant comparé à Satan, il est renvoyé loin; il faut donc joindre très étroitement ὅπαγε et ὀπίσω comme ne faisant qu'un : Arrière! (cf. Mt. 1v, 10). On serait cependant tenté de traduire : range-toi derrière moi! non pas dans un sens bienveillant (Origène), mais pour dire : rentre dans le rang! Pierre n’a pas accepté pour son Maître la passion. Elle était cependant voulue de Dieu. fl refusait donc d'entrer dans ses desseins pour lesquels il avait de l’antipathie. Le mot φρονεῖν est incontestablement paulinien (Swete, Loisy etc.), mais il est ici plus simple que dans les passages les plus semblables de Paul : οἱ γὰρ χατὰ σάρκα ὄντες τὰ τῆς σαρκὸς φρονοῦσιν (Rom. vin, 5) ou τὰ ἄνω φρονεῖτε μὴ τὰ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς (Col. πὶ, 2). D'ailleurs, ce mot n’a pas été frappé par Paul. Swete cite Esth. {xv1), 1; I Macc. x, 20 et dans le grec non biblique Déw. in Phil. 3 : of τὰ Φιλίππου φρονοῦντες, Dion d'Halic., πὶ : οἱ φρονοῦντες τὰ τῆς ὀλιγαρχίας; on pourrait ajouter de nombreux exemples de Xén. (Hell. NI, πι, 4; VII, 1v, 40, etc.); ce n’est nullement une expression théologique. La théologie pénètre ici par une opposition entre Dieu et les hommes qui n’est point spécifiquement paulinienne. Loisy note que « Me. vin, 31-33 n'est pas sans analogie avec Gal. τι, 11-21, et pourrait en dépendre en quelque façon » (II, 21, n. 6). Cela s'appelle faire flèche de tout bois pour nier la réalité de la prédiction sur la passion et de la réprimande de Pierre. M. Loisy tient beaucoup à regarder la prédiction de Jésus comme inventée par la tradition et les évangélistes après les faits. La raison, c'est que les apôtres ont été surpris par la mort du Christ, et surpris ensuite par sa résurrection. « Il serait inconcevable que les événements les eussent trouvés ainsi au dépourvu, si Jésus en avait parlé aussi clairement et instamment que le font entendre nos récits » (Il, 18). Il est cependant très naturel que les apôtres aient été surpris par l'arrestation, la condamnation et l'exécution de Jésus au moment où ils touchaient au terme de leurs espérances. Ils n’ont peut-être regardé les paroles du Maître que comme le pressentiment sans fondement d’un fait inconciliable avec l'opinion qu'ils avaient du Messie, et il est encore plus naturel que le crucifiement ait ruiné leurs projets et exposé même leur foi. La prédiction du Christ à Pierre ne l'a pas empêché de succomber et de le renier. Une autre raison de Loisy, c'est qu'à la dernière cène Jésus n'a pas annoncé en termes exprès sa résurrection, et il en a encore moins fixé la date (οἷ. Me. χιν, 25). Mais s’il avait employé alors les mêmes termes, on ne manquerait pas de dire que les prédictions antécédentes ont été calquées sur celle-là, ou réciproquement; il n'y a là qu'une mauvaise chicane. Loisy dit enfin que « le caractère conventionnel de cet arrangement est d'autant plus reconnaissable que les évangélistes n'ont pas à citer les paroles que Jésus aurait dites pour annoncer sa mort et sa résurrection » (Il, 17). Mais les termes des évangélistes équivalent à un discours direct; la tradition a conservé les propres paroles de Jésus à Picrre, paroles qui en supposent d’autres, et Loisy ne les respecte d’ailleurs pas davantage, malgré le discours direct. Et pourquoi Jésus n’aurait-il pas annoncé qu'il serait rejeté par le parti dirigeant d'Israël? Au point où en est Me., c'est presque une prédiction post eventum, tant il est déjà clair que les Pharisiens refusent de reconnaître sa mission. Les Hérodiens, qui représentent l'aristocratie et les fonctionnaires, ne sont pas plus sympathiques. Pouvait-il attendre mieux des grandes familles sacerdotales, l'élément le plus conservateur de la nation? Haï par les Pharisiens, Jésus pouvait bien s'attendre à être mis à mort. Étant le Messie, — et il savait l'être, — Dieu lui devait de le ressusciter, et cela paraissait indiqué par la page d'Isaïe où il est question des souffrances et de la mort du serviteur de lahvé {Is. zur, 11 ss.). Si la prédiction a été nuancée d’après l'événement, pourquoi Jésus ne fait-il aucune allusion à l'intervention des étrangers (comme x, 33)? pourquoi a-t-on conservé la formule « après trois jours » moins clairement conforme aux faits que celle du « troisième jour » On pourrait donc ranger la prédiction de Jésus relative à sa mort parmi les pressentiments naturels; mais l'annonce de sa résurrection, à un terme fixé, relève évidemment d’une connaissance surnaturelle. L'idée que sa mort est dans les desseins de Dieu et par conséquent fait partie de sa destinée et de son action se rattache aussi à Isaïe ([s. ir, 10). C’est une conception, nouvelle pour les apôtres, du rôle du Messie. Loin que la seconde scène décrite par Mc. ait rien de conventionnel, elle fournit l'explication de la première. Pierre est assez éclairé pour reconnaître que Jésus est le Messie; et c'est le même qui pourtant ne sait pas ce que c'est que le Messie. Sa confession n’est qu'un premier pas. On ne voit pas d’abord pourquoi Jésus demande aux apôtres une déclaration dont il n’a que faire ; elle n’a de but que comme le point de départ d’un enseignement très profond, sur lequel il devra revenir. En ce jour cependant Jésus a livré aux disciples son secret sur le messianisme qui est le sien.
8:34
Le discours qui suit, dans Mt. s'adresse aux disciples, dans Me. à la foule avec les disciples, ce que Le. nomme « tous » (πρὸς πάντας). On peut objecter à la mise en scène de Mc. et de Le. que dans le pays de Césarée de Philippe, plus qu'à demi païen, aucun autre indice ne marque une foule. De plus, comment la foule peut-elle être appelée à porter sa croix si on ne l'a pas entretenue de la destinée souffrante du Christ? Loïsy prétend que la scène est invraisemblable et en conclut aussitôt qu'elle n’est pas historique; ce lui est une raison de plus pour que l'annonce des souffrances ne soit pas non plus historique; car les deux scènes sont étroitement soudées par ce critique : « Le peuple, dans Marc, est appelé à les entendre, parce qu'il a déjà entendu la prophétie de la passion, et qu'un enseignement fait pendant à l’autre. L'invraisemblance de la mise en scène ne touche pas l'évangéliste, qui explique, d'après Paul, le mystère de la croix par rapport au Christ et par rapport au chrétien » (II, 22). Or nous constatons que d'après Mc. la foule n’était certainement pas présente à l'entretien précédent, puisque c’est maintenant que Jésus l'appelle, en même temps (σύν) que ses disciples. La pensée de Mc. est bien que les deux entretiens se sont suivis, mais, même dans cette région, Jésus pouvait être accompagné d’un groupe de curieux, plus où moins sympathiques. En Orient des étrangers qui passent sont toujours suivis des yeux par des gens qu'ils n'aperçoivent même pas, et qui se rassemblent au premier signal. Ce qui est vrai c'est que le nouvel enseignement fait pendant à l’autre. Il est dans le même rapport avec l'annonce de la passion, que l’enseignement donné en parabole avec son explication. Ce que va dire Jésus est une véritable suite de paraboles dans le sens du mächâl énigmatique. Les disciples, prévenus, comprendront beaucoup mieux que la foule, et pour eux cet enseignement complète le premier, car les disciples doivent suivre le Maître dans la voie des souffrances. Pour la foule, elle peut du moins discerner ce sens que les fidèles doivent être prêts à sacrifier leur vie pour Jésus, à soutenir sa cause en toute circonstance. Et cela s'entendait même sans être éclairé sur la destinée du Messie, encore moins sur « le mystère de la croix », la valeur rédemptrice de sa mort, et autres doctrines plus ou moins propres à saint Paul. La présence de la foule répond donc parfaitement à la manière constante de Mc. et à son principe d’un double enseignement. Elle s'explique en fait, puisque Jésus débute en invitant les plus courageux à le suivre. Trois conditions pour suivre Jésus, ou plutôt deux actes (impér. aoriste) préalables pour le suivre (ἀκολουθείτω, impér. présent). ἀπαρνήσασθαι « refuser de reconnaître, considérer comme étranger », cf. Is. xxxr, 7 et Le. χε, 9; xx, 84 Swete note que la vraie interprétation est fournie par saint Paul Gal. n, 19 s.; cependant le mot pouvait s'entendre sans être creusé si profond. Il s'agit d’un partisan qui ne songe plus ni à ses intérêts, ni à sa vie, et qui est prêt à marcher au supplice avec celui dont il ἃ embrassé la cause, c'est-àdire à porter sa croix pour être crucifié, Au premier abord on serait tenté de voir dans cette expression une nuance chrétienne; on aurait mis dans la bouche de Jésus Les paroles que les premiers chrétiens pouvaient se dire entre eux, connaissant la manière dont le Christ était mort. Cependant Χριστῷ συνεσταύρωμαι (Gal. τι, 19) va beaucoup plus loin dans le sens mystique, et, du temps de Jésus, un prétendant messianique pouvait très bien inviter ses partisans à braver même 18 croix. Il ne faut pas oublier que Varus fit crucifier deux mille Juifs (Ant, XVII, x, 4-10), Quadratus tous les révoltés que Cumanus avait pris vivants (Bell. ΤΊ, χα, 6), Gessius Florus un grand nombre de personnes, même distinguées, en un seul jour (Bel. II, xrv, 9), sans parler des exécutions sur la croix au temps de la guerre, si fréquentes que le bois manquait (Bell. V, χι, 1). « Porter sa croix » est une expression que nous ne connaissons plus que comme une métaphore; c'est dans ce sens que l'a prise LC. en ajoutant : « chaque jour », mais elle pouvait être en ce temps une cruelle réalité. 11 faudra donc être prêt à suivre le Maître même dans son supplice. Il est trop aflirmatif de dire avec Loisy : « Cette exhortation… n'a de sens que relativement à la passion, et pour qui connaît les circonstances de la mort de Jésus » (1, 895); il est vrai cependant que l’allusion ne pouvait être bien comprise qu'après la mort de Jésus qu’elle annonçait d'une manière obscure. [’authenticité de la parole est d'autant mieux garantie qu'elle se trouve non seulement dans les passages parallèles de Le. et de Mt., mais encore dans leur autre source, dite les Logia, puisqu'elle reparaît encore Mt. x, 38 et Lc. χιν, 27. Son cachet paradoxal serait plutôt une marque d’authen-
8:35
Le début du v. est, d'après Loisy, la parole certainement authentique qui ἃ donné naissance par développement au v. précédent. En réalité elle se présente ici comme une explication partielle qui adoucit le heurt violent de la première sentence. L'aspect est cependant encore mystérieux, et la difliculté résulte des trois sens de ψυχή, vie, âme, la personne elle-même. Loisy l'explique ainsi : « Le Sauveur joue sur le double sens du mot « âme » ou « vie », qui représente le principe de la vie naturelle et le sujet de la béatitude éternelle. « Celui qui », en reniant Jésus, « aura trouvé sa vie », l'ayant sauvée de la mort temporelle, « la perdra » en réalité, parce qu'il sera privé de la vie véritable, la vie éternelle. « Celui qui aura perdu sa vie », c'est-àdire qui aura été mis à mort pour la cause de l'Évangile, « la trouvera » véritablement, parce qu'il gagnera ainsi la vie bienheureuse dans le royaume des cieux » (1, 896 s.). Cela est très bien dit, maïs il en résulte que le Sauveur avait du royaume des cieux une idée tout à fait transcendante, puisqu'on y arrive en sacrifiant sa vie (cf. Ze Messianisme… Ὁ. 158 ss.). Les mots ἐμοῦ, qui se trouvent dans Le. et dans Mt. comme dans Mc., mettent dans un haut relief l'importance de la personne de Jésus. Sacrifier sa vie pour lui, c'est gagner la vie véritable. Mc. seul ajoute χαὶ τοῦ εὐαγγελίου, Les Douze ont déjà prêché la pénitence (γι, 12), ce qui n'est pas très éloigné de « l'évangile »; « l'évangile » est une expression que Mc. seul emploie absolument (cf. τ, 1. 15; x, 29; et l’{ntroduction).
8:36
Au v. 34, Jésus avait posé la nécessité d’être prêt à sacrifier sa vie, et, à partir de ce moment, chaque phrase débute par γάρ, comme pour indiquer l’enchaînement des preuves. Le v. 35 avait prouvé la proposition du v. 34 en affirmant que la mort pour Jésus est un gain puisqu'elle procure une vie supérieure, désignée comme la vie naturelle par le mot ψυχή, Mais cette affirmation elle-même doit être prouvée. Elle l’est au v. 36, par un argument négatif, qui regarde la perte de la vie véritable plutôt que positivement le salut. Supposons en effet que l’homme sauve sa vie dans ce monde, et que même il y ajoute les jouissances que peut procurer le monde entier, à quoi cela lui sert-il, s’il doit en définitive perdre la vie véritable, et, comme cette vie est la sienne, se perdre lui-même? Toutes les jouissance de la vie ne servent à rien au moment de la mort: telle est la pensée qui se présente naturellement à tous les esprits. Mais Jésus a dit qu’en perdant cette vie on en gagnait une autre. La conclusion est donc que toutes les jouissances de la vie présente ne valent pas cette autre vie. ζημιοῦν opposé à κερδαίνειν n'évoque pas en soi-même l'idée de punition ou d'amende (οἷ. Phil. πὶ, 7 ss.), mais c'est ici le cas à cause du contexte. En préférant la vie présente, on est déchu de la vie future. Le κόσμος n’est pas ici le monde représentant une situation morale ou religieuse, tel qu’il est pris si souvent dans saint Paul: ce sont plutôt les biens du monde avec les jouissances qu'ils procurent. Si donc le vocabulaire du v. 36 est tout paulinien, on n'en peut dire autant de la pensée qui ne se présente pas dans saint Paul sous cette forme {contre Loisy). Sur κόσμος pour « le monde » cf. le discours de Néron aux Grecs (Syll. 876, 31) τοῦ πάντος κόσμου χύριος. Au sujet de la perte de l'âme, Dalman (Worte, 137) compare Aboth de R. Nathan π, 35 : « Quiconque conserve un mot de la Loi, conserve son âme (news Ni TÙ2:) et quiconque efface un mot de la Loi, perd son âme (TND ΝῚΠ 52)». Mais cette idée est étrangère aux écrits rabbiniques plus anciens. On lit dans l'Apocalypse de Baruch {Lr, 15) : in quo ergo perdiderunt homines vitam suam, et quocum commutaverunt animam suam illi, qui fuerunt in terra? maïs on peut se demander si ce n’est point une interpolation chrétienne.
8:37
dot — δῷ; cf. 1v, 29; v, 43, Le verset précédent suppose que l'homme, par un acte délibéré, a préféré les biens du monde à sa vie véritable. Il a fait un mauvais marché, car l'argent ne sert de rien quand il s'agit d'acquérir cette vie supérieure. Un psalmiste avait dit que Dieu ne reçoit pas d'argent pour prolonger la vie (Ps. xzvin [xuix], 8) : où δώσει τῷ θεῷ ἐξίλασμα αὐτοῦ, καὶ τὴν τιμὴν τῆς λυτρώσεως τῆς ψυχῆς αὐτοῦ ( Wellh., Holts.. Loisy, etc.). Cependant la pensée de Jésus est différente. Elle met dans tout son jour l'absurdité de l’homme qui préfère la vie de ce monde à une vie qui est sa vie véritable, son âme, lui-mème. Car si l’homme riche peut tout se procurer par voie d'échanges, que peut donner celui qui a perdusa vie véritable? Les richesses lui ont échappé avec la mort, et c’est lui, lui perdu, qui doit se racheter? Il y aurait contradiction dans les termes. On ne verra pas là une preuve de la valeur inappréciable que Jésus attribue à la personne humaine comme monade pensante, mais de la valeur inappréciable du salut auquel est destinée l'âme humaine. On lit dans Job (χχνπι, 15) : οὐ σταθήσεται αὐτῇ (la sagesse) ἀργύριον ἀντάλλαγμα αὐτῆς, ct dans Eecli. (xxvi, 14 : οὐκ ἔστιν ἀντάλλαγμα πεπαιδευμένης ψυχῆς (cités par Swete). Ces textes sont plus voisins du nôtre que le Ps. χιῖχ. On peut donc bien dans ce sens parler du prix de l’àme; rien ne peut en compenser la perte, et elle est perdue, si elle n’acquiert pas la vie véritable.
8:38
La décision de chacun ἃ été prise par rapport à Jésus: c'est de lui aussi que vient la détermination suprême. Ce verset est comme le fond du tableau qui fixe les perspectives. Il revient au point de départ de tout cet enseignement, au moment où les partisans du Messie, croyant sa cause pes due, auront rougi de lui et par conséquent l’auront renié, et va jusqu’au moment où le Fils de l'homme, venant dans la gloire de son Père, rougira à son tour de ceux qui n'auront pas voulu le suivre, et les reniera. Le verbe ἐπαισχύνεσθαι ne se rencontre qu'ici dans les évangiles, sauf le passage parallèle de Lc., et se trouve sept fois dans saint Paul : en particulier Rom. 1, 16; FT Tim. 1, 8. 16; Heb. χι, 16 ἐπαισχύνεσθαί τινα. Jésus s’identifie ici avec le Fils de l’homme pris dans un sens messianique: il parle non seulement de sa personne, mais de sa doctrine. La génération actuelle, adultère et péche-- resse, figure au premier plan, puisque c'est elle qui a rejeté Jésus. Quand le Fils de l’homme viendra, il sera dans ia gloire de son Père, ce qui marque bien une ère toute céleste et divine, avec les anges saints. Tout cet enseignement est très remarquable par l'union des idées messianiques avec la pensée de la vie de l'âme. Si l'on s’en tient au début et à la fin, on dirait qu'il ne s'agit que de prendre parti actuellement pour ou contre Jésus, ou plutôt de prendre parti pour lui en bravant même la mort; ceux qui hésiteront seront confondus quand Jésus aura triomphé. Mais cette perspective de la mort à traverser, mort qui ne menace les disciples que parce qu'elle doit atteindre le Maître, suffit pour transporter le messianisme dans une sphère transcendante. Manifestement il ne s'agit pas d'entrer par la faveur toute-puissante de Jésus dans un ordre nouveau créé sur terre par un prodige éclatant. Chacun devra prendre parti pour le Christ et sa doctrine, et s'exposer effectivement même à la mort. La récompense est donc dans l'au-delà. Tine s’agit pas du royaume d'Israël, mais des destinées de chacun, de la vie éternelle qui est le tout de l’homme. Quand Jésus viendra il sera déjà investi de la gloire de son père, d'où il rejettera ceux qui l'auront rejeté. C'est bien à ceux de son temps qu'il s'adresse, — comme le feront toujours tous les prédicateurs —, mais il a ouvert des vues sur les destinées éternelles de tous les hommes, déterminées par leurs rapports avec sa personne. Le v. 35 reconnu comme certainement authentique par Loisy, et tel qu'il l'interprète, suflirait à prouver que Jésus s'est préoccupé du sort individuel de chaque homme dans le monde qui suit Ja mort. ‘1x, 4. LA venue pu RÈGNE DE Dieu (Le. 1x, 27; Mt. xvi, 28).
8:39
Καὶ ἔλεγεν αὐτοῖς, « La reprise de Marc laisse deviner que ce qui la précède ne se rattachait pas originairement à ce qui la suit » (Loisy, 11, 27). Mais on ne peut rien dire de plus précis. Loisy prétend que cette déclaration de Jésus répondait immédiatement à la confession de Pierre; Holtz.se demande si elle 'est pas empruntée aux Logia; Swete la suppose adressée aux Douze après le départ de 19 foule. Autant de conjectures sans preuves, mais il demeure certain que ΙΧ, 1 ne se soude pas à ce qui précède, comme s'il s'agissait du même avènement dont la date serait maintenant déterminée. . ἀμήν marque l’flirmation dans un sens propre à Jésus; cf. n1, 28 (DaLman, ἤγοντο... 185 ss.). La bonne leçon paraît bien être τίνες ὧδε τῶν ἑστηκότων (B D a, ff, n, 4); elle est possible puisque οἱ ἕστήκοτες à lui seul peut signifier « les présents »; οἵ. Mt. xxvi, 73; Jo. mi, 29; Act. xx, 25. La lecon beaucoup plus fréquente : τινες τῶν wôe ἐστ, est plus facile et probablement une correction. γεύεσθαι θανάτου se trouve dans l'hébreu rabb. nn ὩΣ, mais non dans l'A. T. où by s'entend plutôt des choses douces; cf. lrov. xxx, 18; Ps. xxx1v,9, et en grec Job xx, 18, tandis qu'en grec on disait déjà chez les Attiques γεύεσθαι μόχθων (Sopn. Trach. 1101) ou πένθους (Eur. Ale. 1069). ἴδωσιν doit avoir le même sens dans Le. 1x, 27 et dans Mec. (contre Dazmax, Worte.…., p. 88 s.), car si Me. a en plus la circonstance de la venue, cette circonstance est exprimée par un parfait, qui exprime que l’objet de l'action du verbe sera acquis, et cela d’une façon durable. Donc « voir », dans Me. comme dans Le., peut être synonyme de participer, comme dans la locution NAS ingb ΠΝῪ (7. Sank. 399) où ΠΝῚ signifie « avoir part » au monde à venir. — βασιλεία ne pout se traduire ici « royaume », car un royaume ne se déplace pas, mais « règne ». La domination de Dicu sera installée sur la terre ἐν δυνάμει, comme ayant en elle-même la puissance qui doit la faire prévaloir. D'après Loisy, ἐν δυνάμει « pourrait être aussi bien, et plutôt, une expression paulinienne, adoptée par l'évangéliste pour caractériser la manifestation finale du royaume par rapport à son commencement dans l'Évangile ou dans l'Église » (11, 28). Il se peut en effet que cette expression, qui ne se trouve ni dans Mt. ni dans Le.,soit de frappe paulinienne, mais dans Paul elle exprime précisément l'action puissante de Dieu dans la prédication de l'Évangile (cf. Rom. τ, 4; xv, 19; I Cor. 1v, 20). Si Mc. s’est inspiré de Paul, c’est donc à la prédication de l'Évangile qu'il fait allusion et aux miracles qui ont accompagné la fondation de l'Église (cf. Act. 1v, 88; vir, 13). Il ne faut pas oublier que ἐν δυνάμει n'est pas synonyme d'éclat et de gloire, mais indique plutôt une énergie comme celle de l'âme dans le corps; aussi la puissance est-elle rattachée à l'Esprit-Saint dans Rom. 1, 4; xv, 19. La seule difficulté de cette interprétation, c'est que, si la prédication de l'Évangile s'est produite avec une énergie extraordinaire, les effets en ont été gradués, tandis que la parole de Jésus semble indiquer une impulsion décisive, qui se produira assez tard, puisque quelques-unes seulement des personnes présentes en seront témoins. Mais toute prophétie est nécessairement un tableau d'ensemble, tandis que la vie et l'histoire procèdent par des mouvements plus ou moins accentués. Si cependant Jésus faisait allusion à une crise particulière et avantageuse qu'il n'a pas déterminée, on peut regarder la ruine de Jérusalem comme réalisant cette prophétie, parce qu'alors la domination de Dieu, cessant d’être restreinte à un seul peuple, s'est en réalité étendue sur les Gentils. Le. a interprété Mc. dans le sens le moins eschatologique, puisqu'il a supprimé ἐληλυθυΐαν ἐν δυνάμει. Il est encore plus évident que son texte signifie simplement « participer au règne de Dieu », tel qu’il a été inauguré par la résurrection et la prédication des apôtres. Quant à Mt., dont le sens paraît si eschatologique puisqu'il a écrit : τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἐρχόμενον, on ne doit pas l’expliquer en faisant abstraction des derniers mots ἐν τῇ βασιλεία αὐτοῦ. Or le royaume du Fils de l’homme, par opposition au royaume du Père, c'est précisément l'Église, comme le marque bien la parabole de l’ivraie (xrm1, 24). 1] fait donc allusion à une venue du Fils de l’homme dans l'Église sans dire que ce soit la dernière, entendant par là son action, surtout par de grands jugements, comme saint Jean dont l'Évangile est si peu eschatologique suppose la venue du Christ (Jo. xiv, 18 s.; xvr, 16 ss.). Il est difficile de dire quelle est la formule primitive employée par Jésus, celle de Mt. ou celle de Mc. Le processus paraît avoir été celui-ci. En soudant à vinr, 38 un logion qui en était indépendant, Me. a inauguré un rapprochement entre les deux pensées. Le. et Mt. l'ont poursuivi en négligeant la pause : καὶ ἔλεγεν αὐτοῖς et Mt. l'a achevé en introduisant le Fils de l’homme comme au verset précédent. La rédaction la plus ancienne a chance d'avoir conservé mieux l'accent primitif. Pris en lui-même, et un peu plus distinct du contexte qu'il ne l'est même dans Mc., le logion affirmait seulement la certitude de l'établissement prochain du règne de Dieu par la vertu de Dieu. Aucun moderne ne soutient plus l'opinion de Chrys., Euth., Théoph., que la promesse de Jésus avait été tenue par la Transfiguration: il est trop évident que six jours d'intervalle ne répondent pas à la formule « quelques-uns des assistants ne mourront pas ». D'ailleurs cette interprétation vient du gnostique Théodote (dans les Excerpta Theodoti ap. Crru. AL. ὃ 4, Swete).
8:1
DALMANUTHA. - Locality where, according to Mk. 8:10, Jesus landed with his disciples after the second multiplication of the loaves (Mt. 15:32-35; Mk. 8:1-9), of which no trace has remained in tradition. …
8:6
Breaking of Bread (Ἐλᾶσις τοῦ δρῦσου)
This custom was adopted by Jesus, who as head of a new spiritual family broke bread before the crowd he fed in the miracle of the multiplication (Mt. 14, 19; 15, 36; Mk. 6, 41; 8, 6; Lk. 9, 16; Jn. 6, 11). On the eve of his death he repeated the rite in the institution of the Eucharist (Mt. 26, 26; Mk. 14, 22; Lk. 22, 19; I Cor. 11, 24), which St. Paul calls « …
8:8
cod. k, Bobiensis of the 4th-5th century (now in Turin), which contains only Mk. 8, 8: Mt. 15, 36.
8:10
DALMANUTHA. - Locality where, according to Mk. 8:10, Jesus landed with his disciples after the second multiplication of the loaves (Mt. 15:32-35; Mk. 8:1-9), of which no trace has remained in tradition. …
The context of Mk. 8:10-13 seems to argue in favor of Galilee: in fact the Pharisees were present in that locality, to escape from whom Jesus "withdrew to the other side" of the lake (εἰς τὸ πέραν, into Perea?).
8:17
1. In particular the heart (καρδία) is the center of every sensitive, intellectual and moral life: man believes, doubts, speaks, argues with or in the heart (for example Mk. 2, 6-8; 6, 52; 8, 17; Lk. 24, 25; Rom. 10, 8-16).
8:19
… In the parallel passage of Mk. 8:19 the best codices read Dalmanoutha, some secondary ones Magdala (Θ 209) or other variants: Mageda (Tatian, 565), Melegada (D), Dalmounai (W).
8:20
… The evangelical precept proposes "to be perfect as the Father who is in heaven" (Mk. 10:2; Mk. 5:48); and the fullness of perfection is love, charity (cf. Sum. Theol., 2a-2ae, q. 184, a. 1, ad 2). But Jesus Christ himself, by his words (Mk. 19:21; 11:12) and by his example (ibid. 8:20; Lk. 9:58), demonstrated that the Father in heaven can be loved in different ways and by different paths. …
8:22
Bethsaida (Aramaic: "House of the Fisherman")
… At the end of the 16th century it began to be held that the Gospels speak of two B.: an eastern one (Lk. 9:10, and Mk. 8:22) to be identified with the Iulias of Fl. Josephus, and a western one (Mk. 6:45 and in all the other passages) which had to be located in the plain of Gennesaret, perhaps in the inlet …
St. Mark speaks of the healing of the blind man of Bethsaida (Mk. 8:22-25). The scene is depicted on a sarcophagus now in the atrium of the basilica of St. Lawrence in Agro Verano. …
… The study of two cases, externally similar, cured by Jesus, is enough to convince one of this: the blind man of Bethsaida (Mk. 8:22-26) and the blind and mute demoniac (Mt. 12:22); while in the first he obtains the cure by miraculously healing, in the second the effect is obtained by freeing the sick man from diabolical infestation. …
… act of performing miracles by means of different gestures, as is read in the Gospel texts, that is, the Lord is implored to lay his hands (in the Greek text), his hand (in the Latin text [Mk. 5:23; 7:32; Mt. 7:32]) on the sick, or simply to touch them (Mk. 8:22); he puts his fingers into the ears of the deaf-mute and moistens his tongue with his saliva (Mk. 7:33); he lays his hands instead on the eyes of the blind man of Bethsaida (Mk. 8:23) …
8:23
Bethsaida (Aramaic: "House of the Fisherman")
BETHSAIDA (Aramaic: "House of the Fisherman"). - A locality in Galilee, the homeland of Philip, Andrew and Peter (Jn. 1:44; 12:21). In Mk. 8:23, 26, B. is presented as a village; elsewhere in the Gospels it is called a "city." In its vicinity occurred the first multiplication of the loaves (Lk. 9:10). It was often visited by …
… in the Old Testament, where it is encountered as a means of transmitting to others one's own virtue and one's own office; and in the New Testament also as a means of communicating the Holy Spirit (Gen. 48, 14 ff.; Num. 27, 18 and 23; Mk. 5, 25; 8, 23-25; 10, 13 ff.; Lk. 4, 40; 13, 31 etc.; Acts 6, 6; 13, 3; 28, 8; I Tim. 4, 14; II Tim. 1, 6); then with incensation, with the anointing of the sacred oils, especially of chrism, …
… text [Mk. 5:23; 7:32; Mt. 7:32]) on the sick, or simply to touch them (Mk. 8:22); he puts his fingers into the ears of the deaf-mute and moistens his tongue with his saliva (Mk. 7:33); he lays his hands instead on the eyes of the blind man of Bethsaida (Mk. 8:23) and on the woman bent double (Lk. 13:11-15); he touches the leper (Mt. 8:2-3; Mk. 1:40-42; Lk. 5:12-13), the blind men (Mt. 9:2-3; 20:29-34); but he also restores sight by joining …
8:27
From the grammatical point of view this interpretation of the Semitic expression can be justified; all the more so since in some parallel passages of the Synoptics the formula is replaced with "I" (cf. Mt. 5:11 with Lk. 6:22; Mt. 10:32 with Lk. 12:8; Mt. 16:31 with Mk. 8:27 and Lk. 9:18; Mt. 16:21 with Mk. 8:31 and Lk. 9:22; Mt. 19:28 with Lk. 22:29; Mt. 20:28 with Mk. 10:45 and Lk. 22:27).
… daughter of Jairus and the woman with the hemorrhage (Mt. 8:23 - 9:26 = Mk. 4:35 - 5:43 = Lk. 8:22-56); the confession of Peter, the first prediction of the Passion, the transfiguration, the lunatic, the second prediction of the Passion (Mt. 16:13 - 17:22 = Mk. 8:27 - 9:32 = Lk. 9:18-45).
8:29
… From the Nativity (Mt. 2:4) to the confession of Peter (Mt. 16:16, 20; Mc. 8:29; Io. 6:69) and of Nathanael (with the synonym "King of Israel": Io. 1:49), of Martha (Io. 11:27), of the demons (Lc. 4:41), to the revelations of the Risen One (Lc. 24:26, …
Primacy of Saint Peter and of the Roman Pontiff
Peter himself was conscious of his position, since it is generally he who speaks on behalf of all (Mt. 14:28; 15:15; 16:16-22; 17:4; 18:21; 19:27; 26:33; Mk. 8:29; 10:28; 11:21; 14:29; Lk. 8:45; 9:20; 9:33; 12:41; 18:28; 22:31; Jn. 6:68; 13:6-10, 36). Peter's particular position cannot be attributed to his seniority (there is no reason to believe …
8:31
… The forgiveness of sins (H. L. Strack-Billerbeck [v. bibl.], I, p. 493), redemption, were entirely ignored, and the sufferings of the M. were resolutely denied (cf. Mt. 16, 21 ff.; Mk. 8, 31 ff.; 9, 31 ff.; Lk. 18, 34; 24, 21; Jn. 12, 34).
… interpretation of the Semitic expression can be justified; all the more so since in some parallel passages of the Synoptics the formula is replaced with "I" (cf. Mt. 5:11 with Lk. 6:22; Mt. 10:32 with Lk. 12:8; Mt. 16:31 with Mk. 8:27 and Lk. 9:18; Mt. 16:21 with Mk. 8:31 and Lk. 9:22; Mt. 19:28 with Lk. 22:29; Mt. 20:28 with Mk. 10:45 and Lk. 22:27).
Triduum, Octave (Octiduum), Novena
… of the Gospel is that in which Jesus, speaking of the destruction of the Temple which he will rebuild within three days, alludes to his resurrection three days after the burial (Io. 2, 19-20; Mt. 26, 61; 27, 40; Mc. 14, 40; Mt. 27, 63; 17, 22; Mc. 8, 31; 9, 30). Also Saul, the future Paul, after the blinding scene, remained in Damascus for three days fasting and wholly shaken.
8:34
… neighbor (Mt. 6:1-33). It has as its ideal norm the perfection of the Heavenly Father, to whom we conform by following his will (Mt. 5:48; 7:21), as its immediate norm Christ, to be reproduced by remaining united to him as the branches to the trunk (Mk. 8:34; Jn. 15:4-5); it has its reward in the beatitudes (v.).
The other moral condition required (connected with faith) is to follow the C.: this is necessary in order to be his disciples, and in order not to lose oneself (Mt. 10, 38-39; Mk. 8, 34-35). Salvation depends on one's attitude toward him. He knows that he is the only mediator of salvation between God and man (cf. Mt. 11, 27; John 14, 6); no one goes to the Father except …
An exclusively Christian ethical term and concept, a. is founded on the well-known phrase of the Savior (Mt. 16:24; Mk. 8:34; Lk. 9:23): "Si quis vult venire post me, abnegat semetipsum et tollat crucem suam cotidie." Ἀπαρνεῖσθαι ἑαυτὸν is the synthesis, in the form of a paradox, of conversion or μετὰνοια, …
8:35
… cheerful acceptance of purifying suffering, preferring Christ to the dearest persons (Mt. 10:37; Lk. 9:23; 14:26), sacrificing oneself and one's own members and life itself for Him, amid the continuous persecutions that await his followers (Mt. 10:16 ff.; Mk. 8:35). Continuous vigilance is therefore necessary (Lk. 12:35 ff.), both for interior dangers (the flesh) and for exterior ones (the world).
… your desires" (Ecclus. 18:30). In the New Testament the teaching of Jesus and his Apostles is explicit: "If anyone wishes to come after me, let him deny himself, take up his cross daily and follow me" (Luke 9:23; cf. John 12:24; Matt. 22:37; Mark 8:35, etc.). …
8:36
Francis Xavier (Don Francisco de Jasu y Xavier), Saint
bara, Ignatius of Loyola, drew him to himself and to his cause, leading him to reflect on the words of the Gospel: « What does it profit a man to gain the whole world, if he then loses his soul? » (Mk. 8:36). The death of his mother (1529) and of his holy sister Magdalena (1533), the discovery of revolutionary intrigues on the part of the heterodox, who frequented the University, the …
8:38
… beginning of the public ministry (Mt. 4, 11), in the passion (Mt. 26, 53; Lk. 22, 43), in his triumph of the resurrection and ascension (Mk. 16, 5; Lk. 24, 23; Jn. 20, 12; Acts 1, 10), in the future judgment (Mt. 13, 39, 41, 49; 16, 27; 24, 31; 25, 31; Mk. 8, 38), in the definitive triumph of heavenly glory (Rev. 1, 11; 8, 2 ff.). - 2) The a. are subject to the Son. In the Epistles, especially in those of Paul, against the danger of certain …
2. Circumstances of the universal divine judgment. — The judge will be the God-Man (Jn. 5, 22; Acts 10, 42; Rom. 14, 10; II Cor. 5, 10), who will appear from the heights of heaven, preceded by the Cross (Mt. 24, 30), surrounded by hosts of angels and saints (Mt. 24, 31; Mk. 8, 38; Lk. 9, 26; I Thess. 3, 13; II Thess. 1, 7), in a luminous halo of clouds and fire (Mt. 25, 30; 26, 64; Mk. 13, 26; 14, 62; Lk. 21, 27; Acts 7, 30; I Thess. 4, 17; II Thess. 1, 8), …
… Under what influence, if not that of the incomparable Master, in whom they ended by recognizing the beloved Son of the Father (Mt. 3:17; Mk. 1:11; Lk. 3:22; Mt. 17:5; Mk. 9:6; Lk. 9:35), his equal (Mt. 11:27), the Judge of the last day (Mt. 16:27; Mk. 8:38; Lk. 9:26; Mt. 11:21; Mk. 10:37), the teacher who imposed on them the strictest fidelity to his teaching (Mt. 28:19-20; Mk. 15:16, etc.)?
Douay-Rheims (Challoner) · Vulgata Clementina · original Douay-Rheims (Rheims 1582), transcription by EEBO-TCP (CC0) · La Sacra Bibbia, tradotta dalla Volgata da Antonio Martini (1769-1781) (LaParola (laparola.net), Martini OSIS text, Public domain (LaParola's electronic edition marks it 'Dominio pubblico')). Public domain.