The parable of the marriage feast. Christ orders tribute to be paid to Caesar. He confutes the Sadducees, shews which is the first commandment in the law and puzzles the Pharisees.
Yet by one other parable he fore sheweth the most deserued reprobation of the earthly and persecuting Iewes, and the gratious vocation of the Gentils in their place. 15 Then he defeateth the snare of the Pharisees and Herodians about paying tribute to Caesar. 23 He answereth also the inuention of the Sadducees against the Resurrection: 34 and a question that the Pharisees aske to pose him: turning and posing them againe, because they imagined that Christ should be no more then a man: 〈◊〉 and so he putteth al the busy Sectes to silence.
1And Jesus answering, spoke again in parables to them, saying:E Gesù ricominciò a parlare con essi per via di parabole, dicendo:AND IESVS ansvvering, spake againe in parables to them, saying:Et respondens Jesus, dixit iterum in parabolis eis, dicens: 2The kingdom of heaven is likened to a king who made a marriage for his son.Il regno de' cieli è simile a un re, il quale fece lo sposalizio del suo figliuolo:The kingdom of heauen is likened to a man being a king, vvhich made a • mariage to his sonne.Simile factum est regnum cælorum homini regi, qui fecit nuptias filio suo. 3And he sent his servants to call them that were invited to the marriage: and they would not come.E mandò i suoi servi a chiamare gli invitati alle nozze, e non volevano andare.And he sent his • seruants to call them that vvere inuited to the mariage: and they vvould not come.Et misit servos suos vocare invitatos ad nuptias, et nolebant venire. 4Again he sent other servants, saying: Tell them that were invited, Behold, I have prepared my dinner: my beeves and fatlings are killed, and all things are ready. Come ye to the marriage.Mandò di nuovo altri servi, dicendo: Dite agli invitati: il mio desinare è già in ordine, si sono ammazzati i buoi, e gli animali di serbatoio, e tutto è pronto: venite alle nozze.Againe he sent other seruants, saying, Tel them that vvere inuited, Behold I haue prepared my dinner: my beeues and fatlings are killed, and al things are ready: come ye to the mariage.Iterum misit alios servos, dicens: Dicite invitatis: Ecce prandium meum paravi, tauri mei et altilia occisa sunt, et omnia parata: venite ad nuptias. 5But they neglected and went their ways, one to his farm and another to his merchandise.Ma quelli miser ciò in non cale: e se ne andarono chi alla sua villa, chi al suo negozio.But they neglected: and vvent their vvaies, • one to his farme, and an other to his merchandise:Illi autem neglexerunt: et abierunt, alius in villam suam, alius vero ad negotiationem suam: 6And the rest laid hands on his servants and, having treated them contumeliously, put them to death.Altri poi presero i servi di lui, e trattarongli ignominiosamente, e gli uccisero.and the rest laid hands vpon his seruants, and spitefully intreating them, murdered them.reliqui vero tenuerunt servos ejus, et contumeliis affectos occiderunt. 7But when the king had heard of it, he was angry: and sending his armies, he destroyed those murderers and burnt their city.Udito ciò, il re si sdegnò; e mandate le sue milizie, sterminò quegli omicidi, e dette alle fiamme la loro città.But vvhen the king had heard of it, he vvas vvroth, and sending his hostes, destroied those murderers, and burnt their citie.Rex autem cum audisset, iratus est: et missis exercitibus suis, perdidit homicidas illos, et civitatem illorum succendit.
8Then he saith to his servants: The marriage indeed is ready; but they that were invited were not worthy.Allora disse a' suoi servi: Le nozze erano all'ordine, ma quelli, che erano stati invitati, non furono degni.Then he saith to his seruants, The mariage in deede is ready: but they that vvere inuited, vvere not vvorthie.Tunc ait servis suis: Nuptiæ quidem paratæ sunt, sed qui invitati erant, non fuerunt digni: 9Go ye therefore into the highways; and as many as you shall find, call to the marriage.Andate dunque a' capi delle strade, e quanti riscontrerete, chiamate tutti allo nozze.Goe ye therfore into the high vvayes: and vvhosoeuer you shal finde, call to the mariage.ite ergo ad exitus viarum, et quoscumque inveneritis, vocate ad nuptias. 10And his servants going forth into the ways, gathered together all that they found, both bad and good: and the marriage was filled with guests.E andati i servitori di lui per le strade radunarono quanti trovarono e buoni, e cattivi, e il banchetto fu pieno di convitati.And his seruants going forth into the vvayes, gathered together al that they found, bad and good: and the mariage vvas filled vvith ghestes.Et egressi servi ejus in vias, congregaverunt omnes quos invenerunt, malos et bonos: et impletæ sunt nuptiæ discumbentium. 11And the king went in to see the guests: and he saw there a man who had not on a wedding garment.Ma entrato il re per vedere i convitati, vi osservò un uomo, che non era in abito da nozze.And the king vvent in to see the ghestes: and he savv there a man not attired in a vvedding garment.Intravit autem rex ut viderent discumbentes, et vidit ibi hominem non vestitum veste nuptiali. 12And he saith to him: Friend, how camest thou in hither not having on a wedding garment? But he was silent.E disselli: Amico, come se' tu entrato qua, non avendo la veste nuziale? Ma quegli ammutolì.And he saith to him, Frende, hovv camest thou in hither not hauing a vvedding garment? But he vvas dumme.Et ait illi: Amice, quomodo huc intrasti non habens vestem nuptialem ? At ille obmutavit. 13Then the king said to the waiters: Bind his hands and feet, and cast him into the exterior darkness. There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.Allora il re disse a' suoi ministri: legatelo per le mani, e pe' piedi, e gittatelo nelle tenebre esteriori: ivi sarà pianto, e stridore di denti.Then the king said to the vvaiters, Binde his hands and feete, and cast him into the vtter darkenes: there shal be vveeping & gnashing of teeth.Tunc dicit rex ministris: Ligatis manibus et pedibus ejus, mittite eum in tenebras exteriores: ibi erit fletus et stridor dentium.
14For many are called, but few are chosen.Imperocché molti sono i chiamati, e pochi gli eletti.For many be called, but fevv elect. •Multi enim sunt vocati, pauci vero electi. 15Then the Pharisees going, consulted among themselves how to insnare him in his speech.Allora i Farisei ritiratisi tenner consiglio per coglierlo in parole.Then the Pharisees departing, consulted among them selues for to entrappe him in his talke.Tunc abeuntes pharisæi, consilium inierunt ut caperent eum in sermone. 16And they sent to him their disciples with the Herodians, saying: Master, we know that thou art a true speaker and teachest the way of God in truth. Neither carest thou for any man: for thou dost not regard the person of men.E mandano da lui i loro discepoli con degli Erodiani, i quali dissero: Maestro, noi sappiamo, che tu se' verace, e insegni la via di Dio secondo la verità, senza badare a chicchessia; imperocché non guardi in faccia gli uomini.And they send to him their disciples vvith the Herodians, saying, Maister, vve knovv that thou art a true speaker, and teachest the vvay of God in truth, neither carest thou for any man. for thou doest not respect the person of men:Et mittunt ei discipulos suos cum Herodianis, dicentes: Magister, scimus quia verax es, et viam Dei in veritate doces, et non est tibi cura de aliquo: non enim respicis personam hominum: 17Tell us therefore what dost thou think? Is it lawful to give tribute to Caesar, or not?Spiegaci adunque il tuo parere: È egli lecito, o no di pagare il tributo a Cesare?tel vs therfore vvhat is thy opinion, is it lavvful to giue tribute to Caesar, or not?dic ergo nobis quid tibi videtur, licet censum dare Cæsari, an non ? 18But Jesus knowing their wickedness, said: Why do you tempt me, ye hypocrites?Ma Gesù conoscendo la loro malizia, disse: Ipocriti, perché mi tentate?But IESVS knovving their naughtines, said, what do you tempt me Hypocrites?Cognita autem Jesus nequitia eorum, ait: Quid me tentatis hypocritæ ? 19Shew me the coin of the tribute. And they offered him a penny.Mostratemi la moneta del tributo. Ed essi gli presentarono un danaro.Shevv me the tribute coine. And they offred him a penie.Ostendite mihi numisma census. At illi obtulerunt ei denarium. 20And Jesus saith to them: Whose image and inscription is this?E Gesù disse loro: Di chi è questa immagine, e questa iscrizione?And IESVS saith to them, whose is this image and superscription?Et ait illis Jesus: Cujus est imago hæc, et superscriptio ? 21They say to him: Caesar’s. Then he saith to them: Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s; and to God, the things that are God’s.Gli risposero: Di Cesare. Allora egli disse loro: Rendete dunque a Cesare quel, che è di Cesare; e a Dio quel, che è di Dio.They say to him, Caesars. Then he saith to them, Render therfore the things that are Caesars, • to Caesar: and the things that are Gods, to God.Dicunt ei: Cæsaris. Tunc ait illis: Reddite ergo quæ sunt Cæsaris, Cæsari: et quæ sunt Dei, Deo.
22And hearing this, they wondered and, leaving him, went their ways.Ciò udito restarono stupefatti, e lasciatolo se ne andarono.And hearing it they marueled, and leauing him vvent their vvaies.Et audientes mirati sunt, et relicto eo abierunt. 23That day there came to him the Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection; and asked him,In quel giorno andarono a ritrovarlo i Sadducei, i quali negano la risurrezione, e lo interrogarono,That day there came to him the Sadducees, that say there is no resurrection: and asked him,In illo die accesserunt ad eum sadducæi, qui dicunt non esse resurrectionem: et interrogaverunt eum, 24Saying: Master, Moses said: If a man die having no son, his brother shall marry his wife and raise up issue to his brother.Dicendo: Maestro, Mosè ha detto: Se uno muore non avendo figliuolo, il suo fratello sposi la moglie di lui, e dia discendenza al fratello.saying, Maister, Moyses said, If a man die not hauing a childe, that his brother marie his wife, and raise vp seede to his brother.dicentes: Magister, Moyses dixit: Si quis mortuus fuerit non habens filium, ut ducat frater ejus uxorem illius, et suscitet semen fratri suo. 25Now there were with us seven brethren: and the first having married a wife, died; and not having issue, left his wife to his brother.Or eranvi tra di noi sette fratelli: e il primo ammogliatosi venne a morte; e non avendo prole, lanciò la sua moglie al fratello.And there vvere vvith vs seuen brethren: and the first hauing maried a vvife, died: and not hauing issue, left his vvife to his brother.Erant autem apud nos septem fratres: et primus, uxore ducta, defunctus est: et non habens semen, reliquit uxorem suam fratri suo. 26In like manner the second and the third and so on, to the seventh.Lo stesso fu del secondo, e del terzo fino al settimo.In like maner the second and the third euen to the seuenth.Similiter secundus, et tertius usque ad septimum. 27And last of all the woman died also.Finalmente ultima di tutti morì anche la donna.And last of al the vvoman died also.Novissime autem omnium et mulier defuncta est. 28At the resurrection therefore, whose wife of the seven shall she be? For they all had her.Alla risurrezione adunque di chi sarà moglie dei sette? imperocché la hanno avuta tutti.In the resurrection therfore vvhose vvife of the seuen shal she be? for they al had her.In resurrectione ergo cujus erit de septem uxor ? omnes enim habuerunt eam. 29And Jesus answering, said to them: You err, not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God.Ma Gesù rispose loro: Voi siete in errore, non intendendo le scritture, nè il potere di Dio.And IESVS answering, said to them, You do erre, not knowing the Scriptures, nor the povver of God.Respondens autem Jesus, ait illis: Erratis nescientes Scripturas, neque virtutem Dei.
30For in the resurrection they shall neither marry nor be married, but shall be as the angels of God in heaven.Imperocché alla risurrezione né gli uomini prendono moglie, nè le donne marito; ma sono come gli Angeli di Dio nel cielo.For in the resurrection neither shal they marie not be maried: but are • as the Angels of God in heauen.In resurrectione enim neque nubent, neque nubentur: sed erunt sicut angeli Dei in cælo. 31And concerning the resurrection of the dead, have you not read that which was spoken by God, saying to you:Riguardo poi alla risurrezione de' morti, non avete voi letto quello, che Dio espresse, dicendo a voi:And concerning the resurrectiō of the dead, haue you not read that vvich vvas spoken of God saying to you,De resurrectione autem mortuorum non legistis quod dictum est a Deo dicente vobis: 32I am the God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob? He is not the God of the dead but of the living.Io sono il Dio d'Abramo, il Dio di Isacco, il Dio di Giacobbe? Egli non è il Dio de' morti, ma de' vivi.I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Iacob? He is not God • of the dead, but of the liuing.Ego sum Deus Abraham, et Deus Isaac, et Deus Jacob ? Non est Deus mortuorum, sed viventium. 33And the multitudes hearing it were in admiration at his doctrine.Udito ciò le turbe, ammiravano la sua dottrina.And the multitudes hearing it, marueled at his doctrine.Et audientes turbæ, mirabantur in doctrina ejus. 34But the Pharisees, hearing that he had silenced the Sadducees, came together.Ma i Farisei avendo saputo, com'egli aveva chiuso la bocca a' Sadducei, si unirono insieme.But the Pharisees hearing that he had put the Sadducees to silence, came together:Pharisæi autem audientes quod silentium imposuisset sadducæis, convenerunt in unum: 35And one of them, a doctor of the law, asked him, tempting him:E uno di essi dottore della legge lo interrogò per tentarlo.and one of them a doctor of lavv asked of him, tempting him,et interrogavit eum unus ex eis legis doctor, tentans eum: 36Master, which is the great commandment in the law?Maestro, qual è il gran comandamento della legge?Maister, vvhich is the great commaundement in the lavv?Magister, quod est mandatum magnum in lege ? 37Jesus said to him: Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with thy whole heart and with thy whole soul and with thy whole mind.Gesù dissegli: Amerai il Signore Dio tuo con tutto il tuo cuore, e con tutta l'anima tua, e con tutto il tuo spirito.IESVS said to him, Thou shalt loue the lord thy God from thy whole hart, and with thy whole soul, and with thy whole minde.Ait illi Jesus: Diliges Dominum Deum tuum ex toto corde tuo, et in tota anima tua, et in tota mente tua.
38This is the greatest and the first commandment.Questo è il massimo, e primo comandamento.This is the greatest and the first commaundement.Hoc est maximum, et primum mandatum. 39And the second is like to this: Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.Il secondo poi è simile a questo: Amerai il prossimo tuo come te stesso.And the second is like to this, Thou shalt loue thy neighbour as thyself.Secundum autem simile est huic: Diliges proximum tuum, sicut teipsum. 40On these two commandments dependeth the whole law and the prophets.Da questi due comandamenti pende tutta quanta la legge, e i profeti.• On these tvvo commaundements dependeth the vvhole Lavv and the Prophets.In his duobus mandatis universa lex pendet, et prophetæ. 41And the Pharisees being gathered together, Jesus asked them,Ed essendo radunati insieme i Farisei, Gesù domandò loro,And the Pharisees being assembled, IESVS asked themCongregatis autem pharisæis, interrogavit eos Jesus, 42Saying: What think you of Christ? Whose son is he? They say to him: David’s.Dicendo: Che vi pare del Cristo: di chi è egli figliuolo? Gli risposero: Di Davidde.saying, What is your opinion of Christ? Whose sonne is he? They say to him, Dauids.dicens: Quid vobis videtur de Christo ? cujus filius est ? Dicunt ei: David. 43He saith to them: How then doth David in spirit call him Lord, saying:Egli disse loro: Come adunque Davidde in ispirito lo chiama Signore, dicendo:He saith to them, Hovv then doth Dauid in spirit cal him Lord, saying,Ait illis: Quomodo ergo David in spiritu vocat eum Dominum, dicens: 44The Lord said to my Lord: Sit on my right hand, until I make thy enemies thy footstool?Il Signore ha detto al mio Signore: Siedi alla mia destra, sin a tanto che io metta i tuoi nemici per isgabello ai tuoi piedi?The Lord said to my Lord, sitte on my right hand, vntil I put thine enemies the foote stole of thy feete?Dixit Dominus Domino meo: Sede a dextris meis, donec ponam inimicos tuos scabellum pedum tuorum ? 45If David then call him Lord, how is he his son?Se dunque Davidde lo chiama Signore, come è egli suo figliuolo?If Dauid therfore call him Lord, hovv is he his sonne?Si ergo David vocat eum Dominum, quomodo filius ejus est ? 46And no man was able to answer him a word: neither durst any man from that day forth ask him any more questions.E nessuno potea replicargli parola: né vi fu, chi ardisse da quel di in poi di interrogarlo.And no man could ansvver him a vvord: neither durst any man from that day aske him any more.Et nemo poterat ei respondere verbum: neque ausus fuit quisquam ex illa die eum amplius interrogare.
22:1
about the year A.D. 33.
Hom. lxx
Jesus answered, and spoke to them again in parables, and concludes his discourse with again describing, 1st. the reprobation of the Jews; 2d. the calling of the Gentiles to the true faith; and 3d. the final judgment of both the one and the other. In this parable of the marriage feast, says St. Chrysostom, our Saviour again declares to the Jews their reprobation, and the vocation of the Gentiles, their great ingratitude, and his tender solicitude for them. For he did not send them a single invitation only; he repeatedly invited them. Say, says he, to the invited; and afterwards, call the invited; thus evincing the greatness of their obstinacy, in resisting all the calls and pressing invitations of the Almighty. (Hom. lxx.)
Menochius
This parable is certainly not the same as that mentioned in St. Luke 14:16, as every one that will be at the pains to examine and compare all the circumstances of each, will easily discover, though they are very much alike. (Menochius)
22:2
Is like to a man being a king, etc. This parable seems different from that of Luke 14:16. See St. Augustine, lib. 2:de Cons. Evang. ch. LXX. The main design in this parable, is to shew the Jews that they were all invited to believe in Christ; though so few of them believed. The king is God; his son is Jesus Christ; the spouse is the Church; the marriage is Christ's incarnation; the feast, the grace of God in this life, and his glory in the next. His servants were the prophets; and lastly his precursor, St. John the Baptist.
Witham
My fatlings, which I have prepared, and made fat for the feast: but this is but an ornament of the parable. (Witham)
Menochius
The same takes place in the kingdom of heaven, as when a king makes a marriage feast for his son. Jesus Christ seems to have had two things in view in this parable: 1st. that many are called to the kingdom of heaven, that is his Church, and that few come, as he concludes, ver. 14, many are called, etc; 2d. that not all that come when called will be saved, that is will be reputed worthy of the celestial feast; because some have not on the wedding-garment, as he shews, ver. 11. (Menochius)
Bible de Vence
Thus the conduct of God in the formation of his Church, and in the vocation of men to glory which himself has prepared for them in the kingdom of heaven, is like to that of a king, wishing to celebrate the marriage of his son. (Bible de Vence)
Jansenius
Marriage is here mentioned, says St. Chrysostom to shew there is nothing sorrowful in the kingdom of God, but all full of the greatest spiritual joy. St. John the Baptist likewise calls our Saviour the spouse; and St. Paul says, I have espoused thee to one man, 2 Corinthians xi. (St. Chrysostom, hom. lxx.) See also Ephesians 5:25.; Apocalypse 21:2.; Apocalypse 21:9. The nuptials in this place do not signify the union of marriage, or the incarnation of Jesus Christ, by which the Church is made his spouse; but the marriage feast, to which men are said to be invited. This is no other than the doctrines, the sacraments and graces, with which God feeds and nourishes our souls, united to him by faith in this life, and by eternal joy and glory in the next. (Jansenius)
This union is begun here on earth by faith, is cemented by charity in all such as are united to Christ in the profession of the one true faith he came down to establish, and will be consummated and made perpetual hereafter by the eternal enjoyment of Christ in his heavenly kingdom.
22:3
Jansenius
His servants. John the Baptist and Christ himself, who took the form of a servant, to call such as had been formerly invited to the nuptials that were to be celebrated in his time. The Jews were invited by Moses and the prophets, and were instructed to believe that the Messias would celebrate this happy feast. On the predetermined day, they were again called by his servants, saying: Do penance; for the kingdom of heaven is at hand: come to the feast, that is become members of his Church, by believing in Christ. (Jansenius)
In the same manner, St. Chrysostom says that the Jews had been invited by the voice of the prophets, and afterwards by the Baptist, who declared to all, that Christ should increase, but that he himself should decrease. At length, they were invited by the Son in person, crying aloud to them: come to me all you that labour, and are heavily laden, and I will refresh you. (Matthew 11:28.) And again: if any man thirst, let him come to me and drink. (St. John 7:37.)
and not by his words only, but by his actions also did he call them; and after his resurrection, by the ministry of Peter and the rest of the apostles (hom. lxx,) he informed the invited Jews that the banquet was ready; because the Christian religion being now established, the way to eternal happiness was laid open to mankind.
22:5
St. John Chrysostom
One to his farm. After they had put to death the Son of God, still did the Almighty invite them to the marriage-feast; but they with futile excuses declined and slighted the proffered favour, wholly taken up with their temporal concerns and sensual enjoyments, their oxen, lands and wives. From the punishment inflicted on these, we learn, that no consideration, how specious soever it may appear, can prove a legitimate excuse for neglecting our spiritual duties. (St. John Chrysostom, hom. lxx.)
Such as refuse to be reconciled to the holy Catholic Church, allege vain pretexts and impediments; but all these originating in pride, indolence, or human respects, will not serve at the day of general retribution and strict scrutiny.
22:6
Witham
Put them to death. Thus the Jews had many times treated the prophets. (Witham)
Menochius
These were by far the most impious and the most ungrateful; tenuerunt Servos ejus, as is related in the Acts, with regard to the death of James, and Stephen, and Paul. (Menochius)
22:7
St. Chrysostom
Sending his armies. Here our Redeemer predicts the destruction of Jerusalem, by the armies of Vespasian and Titus, sent against them by the Almighty, in punishment of their incredulity and impiety. (St. Chrysostom, hom. lxx.)
Menochius and Maldonatus
Thus the king destroyed those murderers, and burnt their city; for sooner or later God is observed to exert his vengeance on all such as despise his word, or persecute his ministers. See the miseries to which the Jews were reduced in Josephus, book the 6th, ch. IX, Hist. of the Jewish war; who declares, that in the last siege of Jerusalem 1,100,000 persons perished, and that the city was completely destroyed. Other interpreters suppose that the evil spirits are here meant, by whom God punishes man, according to Psalm lxxvii, ver. 49. (Menochius and Maldonatus).
22:8
St. Chrysostom
Were not worthy. The Almighty knew full well that they were not worthy; he still sent them these frequently repeated invitations, that they might be left without any excuse. (St. Chrysostom, hom. lxx.)
Jansenius
More is signified here than the bare letter conveys; they were not only less worthy of the nuptials, but by their very great obstinacy, ingratitude and impiety, quite unworthy. Not so the Gentiles. (Jansenius)
Hence Christ says:
22:9
St. Chrysostom
Go ye therefore into the highways. The apostles first kept themselves within the precincts of Judea, but the Jews continually sought their destruction. Therefore St. Paul said to them, (Acts 13:46.) to you it behoved us first to speak the word of God, but seeing you reject it, and judge yourselves unworthy of eternal life, behold we turn to the Gentiles. (St. Chrysostom, hom lxx.)
22:10
St. Chrysostom
Both bad and good. Christ had before told the Jews that harlots and publicans should, in preference to them, inherit the kingdom of heaven, and that the first should be last, and the last first, which preference of the Gentiles, tormented the Jews more than even the destruction of their city. (St. Chrysostom, hom. lxx.)
Bristow
Good and bad, persons of every tribe, tongue, people, nation, sex and profession, without any exception of persons or conditions. Hence it is evident that the Church of God doth not consist of the elect only; and, that faith alone, without the habit of charity and good works, will not suffice to save us. (Bristow)
22:11
St. John Chrysostom
Wedding garment, which Calvin erroneously understands of faith, for he came by faith to the nuptials. St. Augustine says it is the honour and glory of the spouse, which each one should seek, and not his own; and he shews this, in a sermon on the marriage feast, to be charity. This is the sentiment of the ancients, of St. Gregory, St. Ambrose, and others. What St. Chrysostom expounds it, viz. an immaculate life, or a life shining with virtues, and free from the filth of sin, is nearly the same; for charity cannot exist without a good life, nor the purity of a good life, without charity. In his 70th homily on St. Matthew, he says that the garment of life is our works; and this is here mentioned, that none might presume, (like Calvin and his followers) that faith alone was sufficient for salvation. When, therefore we are called by the grace of God, we are clothed with a white garment, to preserve which from every stain, from every grievous sin, depends upon the diligence (the watching and praying) of every individual. (St. John Chrysostom)
Bible de Vence
It was the custom then, as it still is in every civilized nation, not to appear at a marriage feast, or at a dinner of ceremony, except in the very best attire. (Bible de Vence)
22:12
Witham
Not having a wedding garment. By this one person, are represented all sinner void of the grace of God. (Witham)
St. Chrysostom
To enter with unclean garments, is to depart out of this life in the guilt of sin. For those are no less guilty of manifesting a contempt for the Deity, who presume to sit down in the filth of an unclean conscience, than those who neglected to answer the invitations of the Almighty. He is said to be silent, because having nothing to advance in his own defence, he remains self-condemned, and is hurried away to torments; the horrors of which words can never express. (St. Chrysostom, hom. lxx)
22:15
This is the third conference which Jesus Christ had with the Jews. It relates to the civil conduct of mankind, as directed and influenced by religion.
22:16
Challoner
The Herodians. That is, some that belonged to Herod, and that joined with him in standing up for the necessity of paying tribute to Caesar; that is, to the Roman emperor. Some are of opinion that there was a sect among the Jews called Herodians, from their maintaining that Herod was the Messias. (Challoner)
Nicholas of Lyra. and St. Chrysostom
These soldiers had come to Jerusalem for the feast of the Passover, which was to take place in a very few days. The Pharisees sent their disciples with these soldiers, that immediately as the former ensnared him in his discourse, the latter might apprehend him. It is worthy of remark, that these blood-thirsty miscreants sought to ensnare him in his words, not able to discover a fault in any action of his whole life. (Nicholas of Lyra. and St. Chrysostom)
Master, we know. The Pharisees had instructed their disciples and the Herodians to speak in this seemingly friendly manner to our Saviour, that they might put him off his guard, and thereby ensnare him; thinking that Jesus, like other men, could be led away by flattery. Thus do all hypocrites act. They first praise those they want to destroy; and thus by their deceitful words, lead them aside from the true path, into all kinds of evils and miseries. Thus St. Chrysostom, Tostatus, etc.
22:17
Witham
Is it lawful, reasonable and just, to give tribute to Caesar? It was at that time a question much agitated among the Jews, whether they, being the peculiar people of God, ought to be subject and pay taxes to Caesar, or to any prince whatsoever, or be exempt from them. (Witham)
Tirinus and Denis the Carthusian
Judas Galilaeus, about the time of Christ's birth, stirred up the people to a revolt, which though suppressed by violent measures, and himself slain by the Romans, yet the doctrine he broached did not expire with him. Some even among the Pharisees were of opinion, that it was unlawful for the people of God to serve strangers and idolaters, as we learn from Josephus. The question, therefore, proposed to our Saviour was insidious in the extreme, and not easy to be answered, without incurring the displeasure of one or other of the parties. For, if he answered that it was lawful, he would expose himself to the hatred of the Jews, who were aggrieved with what generally thought an unjust extortion, and a mark of servitude injurious to God; if he denied the legality of this hated capitation-tax, he would incur the displeasure of the Herodians, and be denounced to Caesar. This latter appears to have been their wish; as, in that case, it would have been very easy to persuade Pilate, that Christ and his disciples coming from Galilee, were favourers of that sect, who, from the name of their founder, Judas Galilaeus, were called Galilaeans; and some of whom, as we read in St. Luke (chap. 13:1,) Pilate put to death, whose blood he mingled with their sacrifices. Indeed so determined were the enemies of Christ to injure him with Pilate on this subject, that notwithstanding his answer was plainly in favour of the tribute, yet they blushed not a few days after to accuse him to Pilate of teaching it to be unlawful to pay tribute; we have found him, say they, forbidding tribute to be paid to Caesar. (Tirinus and Denis the Carthusian)
22:18
Tostatus
Ye hypocrites? Our divine Saviour knowing their malice, and that it was their wish in proposing this question, to render him odious to the people, or a suspicious character to the prince, answers them in these severe words. ... Another motive was, to let them see that the secrets of their inmost heart were open to him, and thus induce them to be converted from their wickedness; for, certainly, if they perceived that he could read their hearts, they must thence concluded that he was something more than human. This severe reprehension, according to St. Chrysostom, shews, that it is better for man that God should chastise him here in this life, than spare him here to chastise him hereafter. (Tostatus)
22:21
Witham
Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar's. He neither directly decided the question, nor offended the Herodians. They admired his wisdom, were quite disappointed, and retired with confusion. (Witham)
Tirinus
The reasoning of Christ appears to be this: As you are the subjects of Caesar, which you plainly acknowledge by admitting his coin, upon which he inscribes himself lord of Asia, Syria, and Judaea, etc. it is but just you pay him the tribute due from subjects to their sovereign; nor have you any reason to object on the plea of religion, since he demands of you for the exigencies of the public service only temporal things, and such as are in some respects already his own, by being stamped with his own image and superscription. But spiritual things, which belong to God alone, as your souls, stamped with his image, divine worship, religious homage, etc. God, not Caesar, demands of you. "Give therefore to Caesar what belongeth to Caesar, and to God what belongeth to God." (Tirinus)
Origen † AD 253
What our Saviour here commands us to give to God, is nothing else but our heart and affections. Here our divine Lord likewise shews us, how we are to steer the middle course between the two extremes, into which some persons fall. Some say that all must be given to God, and nothing to Caesar, that is all our time must be given to the care of our soul, and none to the care of the body; but Christ teaches that some must be given to the one, and part to the other. (Origen)
Although Christ clearly establishes here the strict obligation of paying to Caesar what belongs to Caesar, yet he is afterwards accused, as we have mentioned above, (see note on ver. 17) as if he forbade tribute to be paid to Caesar. In like manner, in spite of the most explicit declarations of the Catholic Church, respecting her loyalty and subjection to temporal powers, her enemies fail not to calumniate her doctrine as inimical to the state, and subversive of due subordination. But let our opponents attend to the following authority and public declaration of Pope Clement XIV. addressed to all Catholic bishops in the Christian world. "Be careful," says he, "that those whose instruction in the law of the gospel is committed to your charge, be made sensible from their very infancy of their sacred obligation of loyalty to their kings, of respect to their authority, and of submission to their laws, not only for wrath, but for conscience sake."
St. Athansius
But princes should not exact, and subjects should not affect to give them ecclesiastical jurisdiction. St. Athanasius quotes the following strong words from an epistle of the famous confessor Hosius, to Constantius, the Arian emperor: "Cease, I beseech thee, and remember that thou art mortal. Fear the day of judgment, and meddle not with ecclesiastical matters; neither do thou command us in this kind, but rather learn them of us. To thee God hath committed the empire; to us he hath committed what belongs to the Church. And as he who, with a malicious eye, hath designs upon thine empire, opposeth the ordinance of God; so do thou also beware lest, by an improper interference in ecclesiastical matters, thou be made guilty of a great crime. For it is written, Give to Caesar, etc. Therefore, neither is it lawful for us on earth to hold the empire, neither hast thou, O emperor, power over incense and sacred things." (St. Athansius, ep. ad solit. vitam agentes.)
St. Ambrose
And St. Ambrose to Valentinian, the emperor, (who by the ill counsel of his mother Justina, an Arian, required of St. Ambrose to have one church in Milan made over to the Arian heretics) saith: "We pay that which is Caesar's to Caesar, and that which is God's to God. Tribute is Caesar's; it is not denied. The Church is God's; it cannot verily be yielded to Caesar; because the temple of God cannot be Caesar's right. Be it said, as all must allow to the honour of the emperor, for what is more honourable than that the emperor be said to be the son of the Church? A good emperor is within the Church, but not above the Church." (St. Ambrose, lib. V. epist. Orat. de Basil, trad.)
22:24
Haydock
Raise up issue to his brother, to be heirs of his name and of his effects, as we read in Ruth 4:10.: suscitare nomen defuncti, etc. to raise up the name of the deceased in his inheritance, lest his name be cut off from among his family, and his brethren, and his people. (Haydock)
22:29
Jansenius
You err. The Sadducees erred in supposing that there would be no resurrection, or if there was, that the future state would be like the present. Unable to conceive any thing else, they thought themselves justified in concluding that the soul would not survive the body. Had they known the Scriptures, they would not have fallen into this error; since therein are found abundant testimonies of a resurrection, as Job xiv and xix, Isaias xxvi, Ezechiel xxxvii, Daniel xii. The power of God also, had they paid sufficient attention to that consideration, would have taught them the same truth. It cannot be difficult for that power, which created and formed all things from nothing, to raise the body again after it has been reduced to ashes: nor impossible to prepare in a future state, rewards and enjoyments superior to and widely different from any thing that is seen in our present stage of existence. (Jansenius)
22:30
Jansenius
As the angels. Not in every respect, for the body shall be likewise raised with the soul, whilst the angels are pure spirits: but in this we shall be like unto angels, we shall be endowed with immortality, and impassibility; and our joys, like those of the angels, shall be wholly spiritual. (Jansenius)
Bristow
If not to marry, nor to be married, be like unto angels, the state of religious persons, and of priests, is justly styled by the Fathers an angelic life. (St. Cyprian, lib. 2:de discip. et hab. Virg. sub finem.) (Bristow)
22:32
He is not the God of the dead. Jesus Christ here proves the resurrection of the body by the immortality of the soul; because in effect these two tenets are inseparable. The soul being immortal, ought necessarily to be one day reunited to the body, to receive therein the recompense or punishment which it has merited in this same body, when it was clothed with it.
By this text St. Jerome refutes the heretic Vigilantius, and in him many of modern date, who to diminish the honour Catholics pay to the saints, call them designedly dead men. But the Almighty is not the God of the dead; of consequence these patriarchs, dead as they are in our eyes as to their bodies, are still alive in the eyes of God as to their souls, which he has created immortal, and which he will undoubtedly have the power of reuniting to their bodies.
Witham
The Sadducees were a profane sect, who denied the resurrection of the body, and the existence of angels and spirits, and any future state in another world: (see Acts 23:8.) nor did they receive any books but the five books of Moses. Christ therefore, from a passage Exodus 3:15, shewed them that Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, had still a being; because God, 200 years after the death of the last, said thus to Moses, I am the God of Abraham, etc. He did not say, (as St. Chrysostom takes notice) I was the God of Abraham, etc. Therefore these souls had a being: for the Lord would not call himself the God of those who were not at all: no one calling himself lord or king of those who are no more. (Witham)
22:34
Witham
The Pharisees heard that he had silenced their adversaries, the Sadducees, etc. Some of them, says St. Luke, (xx. 39.) applauded him, saying, Master, thou hast said well. (Witham)
Bible de Vence
The Pharisees assembled themselves together, that they might confound him by their numbers, whom they could not by their arguments. Wherefore they said one to another: let one speak for all, and all speak by one, that if one be reduced to silence, he alone may appear to be refuted; and, if he is victorious, we may all appear conquerors. Hence it is said, And one of them, a doctor of the law, (St. Chrysostom) asked him, tempting him, if he were really possessed of that wisdom and that knowledge which people so much admired in him. (Bible de Vence)
22:40
Bristow
On these two, etc. Whereby it is evident that all dependeth not upon faith only, though faith be the first, but much more upon charity, which is the love of God and of our neighbour, and which is the sum of all the law and the prophets; because he that hath this double charity, expressed here by these two principal commandments, fulfilleth all that is commanded in the law and the prophets. (Bristow)
22:45
Witham
If David then call him Lord, how is he his son? It was allowed of as a certain truth, that the Messias was to be the son of David. Christ shews them by David's own words, that he was the Lord as well as the son of David: and this is what they could not answer to. (Witham)
Tirinus
Jesus Christ here inculcates to the Pharisees, that two natures must be admitted in the Messias; in one of which, viz. in his human nature, he is the son of David, and as such inferior to him; and in the other, viz. in his divine nature, he is the son of God, and consequently superior to David; whence this latter, by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, justly calls him Lord. (Tirinus)
St. John Chrysostom
Jesus Christ does not wish them to think that the Messias is not the son of David, but only wished to rectify their opinion concerning him. When therefore he asks how he is the son, he teaches them that he is not after the manner they understand it, the mere Son, but what is much more, the Lord also, of David. (St. John Chrysostom, hom. lxxii.)
22:16
22:1
In the liturgy The Gospel vpō the 19 Sunday after Pentecost.
22:2
2. Mariage.) Then did God the Father make this mariage, when by the mysterie of the Incarnation he ioyned to his sonne our Lord, the holy Church for his spouse. Greg. hom. •8.
22:3
3. Seruants.) The first seruants here sent to inuite, were the Prophets: the second, were the Apostles: and al that afterward conuerted countries, or that haue and doe reconcile men to the Church. Wordly excuses against reconciliation.
22:5
5. One to his farme) Such as refuse to be reconciled to Christes Church, alleage often vaine impediments and worldly excuses, which at the day of iudgement wil not serue them.
22:10
Not only good men be within the church, but also euil mē. against the Heretikes of these daies.
22:11
11. A man not attyred.] If profiteth not much to be within the Church and to be a Catholike, except a man be of good life, for such an one shal be damned, because with faith he hath not good workes: The Church cō sisteth of good and bad. as is euident by the example of this man, who was within, and at the feast as the rest, but lacked the garment of charitie and good workes. And by this man are represented al the bad that are called. and therfore they also are in the Church, as this man was at the feast: but because he was called, and yet none of the elect, it is euident that the Church doth not consist of the elect only contrarie to our Aduersaries.
2•. To Caesar.) Temporal duties and payments exacted by worldly Princes must be payed, Neither must temporal Princes exact, nor their Subiects giue vnto them, Ecclesiastical iurisdiction. so that God be not defrauded of his more soueraine dutie. And therfore Princes haue to take heede, how they exact: and others, how they geue to Caesar, that is, to their Prince, the things that are dewe to God, that is, to his Ecclesiastical ministers. Wherevpon S. Athanasius reciteth these goodly wordes out of an epistle of the ancient and famous Cōfessor Hosius Cordubensis to Cōstantius the Arian Emperour: Cease I beseche thee, and remember that thou art mortal, feare the day of iudgement, intermedle not with Ecclesiastical matters, neither doe thou commaund vs in this kinde, but rather learne them of vs, to thee God hath committed the Empire, to vs he hath cōmitted the things that belong to the Church: and as he that with malicious eies carpeth thine Empire, gainesayeth the ordinance of God: so doe thou also beware, lest in drawing vnto thee Ecclesiastical matters, thou be made guilty of a great crime. It is written, Geue ye the things that are Caesars, to Caesar: and the things that are Gods, to God. Therfore neither is it lawful for vs in earth to hold the Empire, neither hast thou (O Emperour) power ouer incense and sacred things. Athan. Ep. ad Solit. vitā agentes. And S. Ambrose to Valentinian the Emperour (who by the il counsel of his mother Iustina an Arian, required of S. Ambrose to haue one Church in Millan deputed to the Arian Heretikes) saith: we pay that which is Caesars, to Caesar: and that which is Gods, to God. Tribute is Caesars, it is not denied: the Church is Gods, it may not verely be yelded to Caesar: because the Temple of God can not be Caesars right. Which no man can deny but it is spoken with the honour of the Emperour. for what is more honorable then that the Emperour be said to be the sonne of the Church? For a good Emperour is within the Church, not aboue the Church, Ambr. lib. 5. Epist. Orat. de Basil. trad.
22:15
Concordance Mr. 12, 13.
22:16
Concordance Lu. 20, 20.
22:21
Concordance Mr. 12, 19.
22:22
Concordance Lu. 20, 27.
22:23
Concordance Act. 23, 6.
22:24
Concordance Deu. 25, 5.
22:30
30. As Angels.) As Christ proueth here, The Saints heare our prayers. that in heauen they neither marry nor are married, because there they shal be as Angels: by the very same reason, is proued, that Saints may heare our prayers and helpe vs, be they neere or farre of, because the Angels do so, and in euery moment are present vvher they list, and neede not to be neere vs, when they heare or helpe vs.
30. As Angels.) Not to marry nor be married, Religious single life, Angelical. is to be like to Angels: therfore is the state of Religious men and women and Priests, for not marrying, worthely called of the Fathers, an Angelical life. Cyp. lib. 2. de discipl. & ha•. Virg. sub finem.
22:31
Concordance Exo. 3, 6.
22:32
32. Of the dead.) S. Hierom by this place disproueth the Heretike Vigilantius, and in him these of our time, which to diminish the honour of Saincts, call them of purpose, dead men.
22:34
Concordance Mar. 12, 28.
In the liturgy The Gospel vpō the 17 Sunday after Pentecost.
22:36
Concordance Deut. 6, 5.
22:39
Concordance Leu. 19, 18.
22:40
40. On these two.) Hereby it is euident that al dependeth not vpon faith only, Not onely faith. but much more vpon charitie (though faith be the first) which is the loue of God and of our neighbour, which is the summe of al the law and the Prophetes: because he that hath this double charitie expressed here by these two principal commaundemēts, fulfilleth and accomplisheth al that is commaunded in the Law and the Prophetes.
22:41
Concordance Mr. 12, 35.
22:42
Concordance Lu. 20, 41.
22:44
Concordance Ps. 109. 1.
22:1
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 30
… and he said unto him, My friend, how didst thou come in here not having on festive garments? [29] And he was silent. Then the king said to the servants, Bind his hands and his feet, and put him forth into the outer darkness; there shall be weeping and [30] gnashing of teeth. The called are many; and the chosen, few.
St Irenaeus of Lyons † AD 202 Against Heresies 4.36.5
… and he said unto him, Friend, how camest thou hither, not having on a wedding garment? But he was speechless. Then said the king to his servants, Take him away, hand and foot, and cast him into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth. For many are called, but few are chosen.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on First Corinthians 15
… Wherefore saith Paul, ( Philip. iv. 4 .) “Rejoice in the Lord always; again I say, Rejoice.” Upon the festival days no one puts on filthy garments. Neither then let us do so. For a marriage hath been made, a spiritual marriage. For, “the kingdom of Heaven,” saith He, “is likened unto a certain king which would make (St.
22:2
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 40.0
On the words of the Gospel, Matt. xxii. 2 , etc., about the marriage of the king’s son; against the Donatists, on charity. Delivered at Carthage in the Restituta .
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 72.2
… 1 ). The Lord Himself in the Gospel saith, “The Father judgeth not any one, but all judgment He hath given to the Son:” this is then, “O God, Thy judgment to the King give Thou.” He that is King is also the Son of the King: because God the Father also is certainly King. Thus it hath been written, that the King made a marriage for His Son.
Pseudo-Clement The Recognitions of Clement 4.35
… Meantime He has commanded us to go forth to preach, and to invite you to the supper of the heavenly King, which the Father hath prepared for the marriage of His Son, and that we should give you wedding garments, that is, the grace of baptism;
22:3
St Irenaeus of Lyons † AD 202 Against Heresies 4.39.3
3. If, however, thou wilt not believe in Him, and wilt flee from His hands, the cause of imperfection shall be in thee who didst not obey, but not in Him who called [thee]. For He commissioned [messengers] to call people to the marriage, but they who did not obey Him deprived themselves of the royal supper.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 10.5
… thou sayest, I will betake me to the party of Donatus: behold thou addest a fourth sin. The rope is growing; be thou afraid of the rope. It is good for thee to be corrected here, when thou art scourged with it; that it may not be said of thee at the last, “Bind ye his hands and feet, and cast him forth into outer darkness.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 50.11
… For at first He called them together, “when the God of gods spake and called the world from the rising of the sun unto the going down,” He had not yet severed: those servants had been sent to bid to the marriage,
22:4
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 30
… I pray thee to release me, for I ask to be excused. And another said, I have bought five yoke of oxen, and I am going to examine them: I pray thee [15] to release me, for I ask to be excused. And another said, I have married a wife, [16] and therefore I cannot come.
22:5
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 30
… I pray thee [15] to release me, for I ask to be excused. And another said, I have married a wife, [16] and therefore I cannot come. And the king sent also other servants, and said, Say to those that were invited, that my feast is ready, and my oxen and my fatlings are [17] slain, and everything is ready: come to the feast.
22:6
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 30
… And the king sent also other servants, and said, Say to those that were invited, that my feast is ready, and my oxen and my fatlings are [17] slain, and everything is ready: come to the feast. But they made light of it, and [18] went, one to his field, and another to his merchandise:
22:7
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 30
… come to the feast. But they made light of it, and [18] went, one to his field, and another to his merchandise: and the rest took his [19] servants, and entreated them shamefully, and killed them. And one of the servants [20] came, and informed his lord of what had happened.
St Irenaeus of Lyons † AD 202 Against Heresies 4.36.6
… and He confers His free gifts upon those who should [receive them]; but the most righteous Retributor metes out [punishment] according to their deserts, most deservedly, to the ungrateful and to those that are insensible of His kindness; and therefore does He say, “He sent His armies, and destroyed those murderers, and burned up their city.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 A Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles 5
… But was it the good God? Nay, but it is demonstrated that both the Father and the Son did these things. The Father in many places; for instance, when He says in the parable of the vineyard, [“He will miserably destroy those wicked husbandmen” ( Matt. xxi. 41 ); again in the parable of the marriage feast, the King is said] to send His armies (
22:8
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 30
… and the rest took his [19] servants, and entreated them shamefully, and killed them. And one of the servants [20] came, and informed his lord of what had happened. And when the king heard, he became angry, and sent his armies; and they destroyed those murderers, and [21] burned their cities.
22:9
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans 19
This language is not his own only, but in the Gospels too the parables mean this. For He who made a marriage feast for His Son, when the guests would not come, called those in the highways. (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans 30
… 22 .) From them were the Apostles, from them the Prophets, from them all good things. In all these things then the world was made a partaker. If then, he says, ye have been made partakers in that which is greater, and when it was for them that the banquet was prepared, ye have been brought in to enjoy the feast that was spread (
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Letters of St. Augustin 208.7
… But God, who is rich in mercy, has done in regard to you that which is written in the gospel: when the invited guests excused themselves to the master of the feast, he said to the servants, “Go ye, therefore, into the highways and hedges, and as many as ye shall find compel them to come in.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 59.1.10
… there is no cause for thee to spare, extend further thy cords, and strong stakes set thou again and again on the right and on the left.” Upon the right keep good men, on the left keep evil men, until there come the fan: occupy nevertheless all nations; bidden to the marriage be good men and evil men, filled be the marriage with guests;
22:10
St Papias † AD 150 Fragments of Papias, V 1
… and that on this account the Lord said, “In my Father’s house are many mansions:” for all things belong to God, who supplies all with a suitable dwelling-place, even as His word says, that a share is given to all by the Father, according as each one is or shall be worthy. And this is the couch
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 30
… So the lord said unto his servants, Go out into the roads, and the ways, and the paths, and every one that ye find, invite [25] [Arabic, p. 116] to the feast, and constrain them to enter, till my house is filled. I say unto you, that no one of those people that were invited shall taste of my feast. [26]
St Irenaeus of Lyons † AD 202 Against Heresies 5.36.2
… even as His Word says, that a share is allotted to all by the Father, according as each person is or shall be worthy. And this is the couch on which the guests shall recline, having been invited to the wedding.
St Gregory of Nazianzus † AD 389 Select Orations of Saint Gregory Nazianzen 3
… you were all scattered and dispersed, caring little for the Bridechamber and the Bridegroom.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Letters of St. Augustin 55.20
20. This, moreover, is the reason why the law of the Sabbath is placed third among the three commandments of the Decalogue which declare our duty to God (for the other seven relate to our neighbour, that is, to man; the whole law hanging on these two commandments).
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Reply to Faustus the Manichæan 22.64
… In His fleshly origin there is this lesson for those who should believe on Him from all nations, that the sins of their fathers need be no hindrance to them. Besides, the Bridegroom, who was to call good and bad to His marriage,
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 40.3
… because He is the Physician of them who are to be cured. According to a certain sort then they were evil. And yet those guests of the Householder at the King’s marriage, were not I suppose of that number of whom it was said, “they invited good and bad,”
22:11
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 30
… 116] to the feast, and constrain them to enter, till my house is filled. I say unto you, that no one of those people that were invited shall taste of my feast. [26] And those servants went out into the roads, and gathered all that they found, good and [27] bad: and the banquet-house was filled with guests.
Tertullian † AD 220 On the Resurrection of the Flesh 27
… In the gospel even, “the wedding garment” may be regarded as the sanctity of the flesh.
Tertullian † AD 220 On Modesty 9
… Therefore the apostate withal will recover his former “garment,” the robe of the Holy Spirit; and a renewal of the “ring,” the sign and seal of baptism; and Christ will again be “slaughtered;” and he will recline on that couch from which such as are unworthily clad are wont to be lifted by the torturers, and cast away into darkness,
Eusebius of Caesarea † AD 339 The Church History of Eusebius 5.1.48
… For they were examined by themselves, as about to be set free; but confessing, they were added to the order of the witnesses. But some continued without, who had never possessed a trace of faith, nor any apprehension of the wedding garment,
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 Exposition of the Christian Faith 4.2
16. Suppose, however, that one who is unworthy hath crept up, hath stolen past the principalities who keep the gates of heaven, hath sat down at the supper of the Lord; when the Lord of the banquet enters, and sees one not clad in the wedding garment of the Faith, He will cast him into outer darkness, where is weeping and gnashing of teeth,
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 14.8
… Nothing remains for him but the stern question, “Friend, how camest thou in hither?” And when he is speechless the order will be given, “Bind him hand and foot, and take him away, and cast him into outer darkness; there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 City of God 18.48
… interpretation (for it also is a prophetic meaning), “shall come those who are elected of the Lord out of all nations.” For then indeed there shall come only those who are elected, whereof the apostle saith, “According as He hath chosen us in Him before the foundation of the world.” For the Master Builder who said, “Many are called, but few are chosen,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Reply to Faustus the Manichæan 22.14
… For to a Pagan there would appear to be little or no harm in not having a wedding garment at the marriage feast, for which our King in the Gospel commanded a man to be bound hand and foot, and cast into outer darkness;
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Work on the Proceedings of Pelagius 11
… In two other passages He deals with that wicked and slothful servant, who neglected to trade with His money, and with the man who was found at the feast without the wedding garment,—and He orders them to be bound hand and foot, and to be cast into outer darkness.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 40.4
… I wish to have it proved to me that that one represented many.” By the Lord’s present help, I will prove it clearly; nor will I search far, that I may be able to prove it. God will assist me in His own words in this place, and will furnish you by my ministry with a plain proof of it. “The Master of the house came in to see the guests.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 45.4
4. Ye know it, dearly Beloved; call to mind the parable of the Gospel, how that the Lord came in to inspect the guests at a certain feast of His. The Master of the house who had invited them, as it is written, “found there a man which had not on a wedding garment.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 62.9
… “God is our helper.”…“Nevertheless, vain are the sons of men, and liars are the sons of men in the balances, in order that they may deceive, being at one because of vanity” ( ver. 9 ). Certainly many men there are: behold there is that one man, that one man that was cast forth from the multitude of guests.
Pope St Leo I the Great † AD 461 Letters 59
… where will be weeping and gnashing of teeth
22:12
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 30
… I say unto you, that no one of those people that were invited shall taste of my feast. [26] And those servants went out into the roads, and gathered all that they found, good and [27] bad: and the banquet-house was filled with guests. And the king entered to see those [28] who were seated, and he saw there a man not wearing a festive garment:
Origen † AD 254 Origen De Principiis 2.5.2
… there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.”
St Athanasius of Alexandria † AD 373 Festal and Personal Letters of Athanasius 7
… ‘counting the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified a profane thing, and despising the Spirit of grace,’ he hears the words, ‘Friend, how camest thou in hither, not having wedding garments?’ For the banquet of the saints is spotless and pure; ‘for many are called, but few chosen
St Athanasius of Alexandria † AD 373 Festal and Personal Letters of Athanasius 20
… From this sinners, because it wearied them, are rightly cast out, and hear the words, ‘Friend, how camest thou in hither, not having a wedding garment
St Cyril of Jerusalem † AD 386 The Catechetical Lectures of S. Cyril procatechesis-or-prologue-to-t.3
3. A certain man in the Gospels once pried into the marriage feast
St Cyril of Jerusalem † AD 386 The Catechetical Lectures of S. Cyril 3.2
… and the cry of loud-voiced heralds assembles them all: but the same Bridegroom afterwards separates those who have come in to the figurative marriage. O may none of those whose names have now been enrolled hear the words, Friend, how camest thou in hither, not having a wedding garment
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 40.4
… It was not right to pass over this. But I have undertaken to establish another point, how that that one signifies many. “The Master of the house” then “came in to see the guests, and He found there a man which had not on a wedding garment. And He saith unto him, Friend, how camest thou in hither not having a wedding garment? And he was speechless.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 45.5
… And he was speechless.” For he found not what to answer. And the Master of the house Who had invited him said, “Bind him hands and feet, and cast him into outer darkness; there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.”
Pseudo-Irenaeus Pseud-Irenæus 1
… for, contrary to every expectation of the heathen, they confessed. For these were examined separately, under the belief that they were to be set free; but confessing, they were added to the number of the Witnesses. But there were also some who remained without; namely, those who had no trace of faith, and no perception of the marriage garment,
22:13
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 30
… [26] And those servants went out into the roads, and gathered all that they found, good and [27] bad: and the banquet-house was filled with guests. And the king entered to see those [28] who were seated, and he saw there a man not wearing a festive garment: and he said unto him, My friend, how didst thou come in here not having on festive garments? [29]
St Irenaeus of Lyons † AD 202 Against Heresies 4.36.6
… for this is the wedding garment, of which also the apostle speaks, “Not for that we would be unclothed, but clothed upon, that mortality might be swallowed up by immortality.” But those who have indeed been called to God’s supper, yet have not received the Holy Spirit, because of their wicked conduct “shall be,” He declares, “cast into outer darkness.”
Aphrahat † AD 346 Aphrahat: Select Demonstrations 6.1
… Let us hearken to the voice of the bridegroom, that we may go in with Him into the bride-chamber. Let us prepare the marriage-gift for His bridal day, and let us go forth to meet Him with joy. Let us put on holy raiment, that we may recline in the chief place of the elect. Whosoever puts not on wedding raiment,
St Basil the Great † AD 379 The Hexæmeron 2.5
… of all he who looks for celestial light as one of the rewards promised to virtue, the light which, as Solomon says, is always a light to the righteous, the light which made the Apostle say “Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light.” Finally, if the condemned are sent into outer darkness
St Gregory of Nazianzus † AD 389 Select Orations of Saint Gregory Nazianzen 2.77
77. Such and so great is the object of our longing zeal, and such a man should he be, who prepares and conducts souls to their espousals. For myself, I feared to be cast, bound hand and foot,
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Treatise Concerning the Christian Priesthood 6.4
… And dost thou not yet tremble to introduce a soul into so sacred a mystery of this kind, and to advance to the dignity of the Priesthood, one robed in filthy raiment, whom Christ has shut out from the rest of the band of guests?
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 54
And again passing an opposite sentence, to some He will answer, “Depart into the everlasting fire, that is prepared for the devil and his angels,” and to others, “O thou wicked and slothful servants.” And some He will “cut asunder,” and “deliver to the tormentors;” but others He will command to “be bound hand and foot, and cast into outer darkness.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 66
For do not now, on hearing of darkness, suppose he is punished by this, by sending into a place where there is no light only, but where “there is” also “weeping and gnashing of teeth.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 A Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles 43
… x. 40 .) ( a ) And again He saith, “Then will I say unto the angels, Gather together them that do iniquity, and cast them into the furnace.” ( Matt. xiii. 30, 41, 42 .) But concerning the just, not so. ( c ) And again, “Bind him hand and foot, and cast him into outer darkness.” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans 3
… xi. 32 .) And now indeed to many such things usually seem to come not of the wrath from above, but of the malice of man. But then the punishment from God shall be manifest, when the Judge, sitting upon the fearful tribunal, shall command some to be dragged to the furnaces, and some to the outer darkness,
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans 25
… “Ah, but God is merciful!” Are these then mere words? and was not that rich man punished for despising Lazarus? Are not the foolish virgins cast out of the Bride-chamber? Do not they who did not feed Him go away into “the fire prepared for the devil?” ( Matt. xxv. 41 .) Will not he that hath soiled garments be “bound hand and foot” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on Second Corinthians 10
… And if thou purposest to utter some harsh sounding [speech], think of the gnashing of teeth, and the fear will be a bridle to thee. And if thou purposest to plunder, hear the Judge commanding, and saying, “Bind him hand and foot, and cast him into the outer darkness,” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on Ephesians 9
We however are not in bonds, nor am I recommending this, since now is not the time for them. But thou, bind not thine hands, but bind thy heart and mind. There are yet other bonds, and they that wear not the one, shall have to wear the other. Hear what Christ saith, “Bind him hand and foot.” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on 1 Timothy 7
Beloved, let us fear, lest we be doomed to hear those terrible words, “Bind him hand and foot.” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on 2 Timothy 3
… xxv. 40 .): that we may not hear, “Between us and you there is a great gulf fixed” ( Luke xvi. 16 .): that we may not hear that voice full of horror, “Take him away, and cast him into outer darkness”: that we may not hear those words full of terror, “Thou wicked and slothful servant.” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 45
… Because He speaketh not simply of resurrection, but of a particular kind of resurrection. For having first said, “I will not cast him out, I shall lose nothing of it,” He then speaketh of the resurrection. Since in the resurrection some are cast out, (“Take him, and cast him into outer darkness,”
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 80.3
… Son, and the Holy Ghost, I adjure and require everyone who shall either read or copy these books of mine, by his belief in a kingdom to come, by the mystery of the resurrection from the dead, by the eternal fire which is “prepared for the devil and his angels;” as he hopes not to inherit eternally that place where “there is weeping and gnashing of teeth,”
St Jerome † AD 420 To Pammachius against John of Jerusalem 33
… He who has not a wedding garment, and has not kept that command, “Let your garments be always white,” is bound hand and foot that he may not recline at the banquet, or sit on a throne, or stand at the right hand of God;
Sulpicius Severus † AD 420 The Doubtful Letters of Sulpitius Severus 1.7
Then will the Evangelist repeat this to the wretched beings, “Go ye
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Holy Trinity 11.6
… and if that is bad, then all are bad. And so the connected series of right wills is a sort of road which consists as it were of certain steps, whereby to ascend to blessedness; but the entanglement of depraved and distorted wills is a bond by which he will be bound who thus acts, so as to be cast into outer darkness.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 40.4
… True it was one man whom the Lord questioned, to one He said, “Friend, how camest thou in hither?” It was one who was speechless, and of that same one was it said, “Bind him hand and foot, and cast him into outer darkness; there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 9.13
… for he who seeks his own glory, not Christ’s, has not the wedding garment: for they refuse to agree with him who was the friend of the Bridegroom, and says, “This is He that baptizeth.” And deservedly was that which he was not made, by way of rebuke, an objection to him who had not the wedding garment, “Friend, how art thou come hither?”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 44.6
… It will be that night of the wicked, that night of those to whom it shall be said in the end, “Depart into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels.” But it is here called night, not flame, nor fire. Hearken, then, why it is also night. Of a certain servant He says, “Bind ye him hand and foot, and cast him into outer darkness.”
22:14
St Barnabas † AD 61 The Epistle of Barnabas 4
… And all the more attend to this, my brethren, when ye reflect and behold, that after so great signs and wonders were wrought in Israel, they were thus [at length] abandoned. Let us beware lest we be found [fulfilling that saying], as it is written, “Many are called, but few are chosen.”
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 30
… and he said unto him, My friend, how didst thou come in here not having on festive garments? [29] And he was silent. Then the king said to the servants, Bind his hands and his feet, and put him forth into the outer darkness; there shall be weeping and [30] gnashing of teeth.
St Irenaeus of Lyons † AD 202 Against Heresies 4.36.6
… For as in the former covenant, “with many of them was He not well pleased;” so also is it the case here, that “many are called, but few chosen.”
Tertullian † AD 220 De Fuga in Persecutione 14
… He who fears to suffer, cannot belong to Him who suffered. But the man who does not fear to suffer, he will be perfect in love—in the love, it is meant, of God; “for perfect love casteth out fear.” “And therefore many are called, but few chosen.”
Origen † AD 254 Origen's Commentary on Matthew 12.12
… But if any one wishes to put us to shame in regard to these things because of the great majority of those of the church who are thought to believe, it must be said to him not only “Many are called, but few chosen;”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 City of God 18.45
… come to all nations.” In this passage the Septuagint translators giving another sense more suitable to the body than the Head, that is, to the Church than to Christ, have said by prophetic authority, “The things shall come that are chosen of the Lord from all nations,” that is, men , of whom Jesus saith in the Gospel, “Many are called, but few are chosen.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Work on the Proceedings of Pelagius 11
… For if it were a solitary case only of the man who was cast into outer darkness for not having on the wedding garment, He would not have gone on at once to give it a plural turn, by saying: “For many are called, but few are chosen;”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 40.4
… True it was one man whom the Lord questioned, to one He said, “Friend, how camest thou in hither?” It was one who was speechless, and of that same one was it said, “Bind him hand and foot, and cast him into outer darkness; there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” Why? “For many are called, but few chosen.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 45.6
… I do not go far for this, I find the explanation there, there I break the bread, and set it before you to be eaten. For He said, when he who had not “the wedding garment was cast out thence into outer darkness,” He said and added immediately, “for many are called, but few chosen.”
John Cassian † AD 435 The Conferences of John Cassian 3.7
… Wherefore we should be careful to take examples of goodness from those who are few and far between, because according to that figure of which we have spoken in the gospel “Many are called but few” are said to be “chosen.”
22:15
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 34
… So they brought unto him a penny. Jesus said unto them, To whom belongeth this image and inscription? They said unto him, To Cæsar. [7, 8] He said unto them, Give what is Cæsar’s to Cæsar, and what is God’s to God. And they could not make him slip in a single word before the people; and they marvelled at his word, and refrained.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Our Lord’s Sermon on the Mount 2.20
… and because they told what they had been asked, i.e. that the money bore the image of Cæsar, they gave a kind of answer to themselves in reference to the question they had asked the Lord: and accordingly from their answer He drew this inference, “Render therefore unto Cæsar the things which are Cæsar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Harmony of the Gospels 2.72
… for thou regardest not the person of men: tell us therefore, What thinkest thou? Is it lawful to give tribute to Cæsar, or not?” and so on, down to the words, “And when the multitude heard this, they were astonished at His doctrine.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 41.2
… Deservedly were you defeated on producing the money, and compelled yourselves to concur in your own capture. For there it was told you, “Render to Cæsar the things that are Cæsar’s, and to God the things that are God’s,” after your own reply, that the money-piece bore the image of Cæsar.
22:16
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 34
[1] Then went the Pharisees and considered how they might ensnare him in a word, [2] and deliver him into the power of the judge, and into the power of the ruler.
Eusebius of Caesarea † AD 339 The Church History of Eusebius 2.23.10
… for they are gone astray in regard to Jesus, as if he were the Christ. We entreat thee to persuade all that have come to the feast of the Passover concerning Jesus; for we all have confidence in thee. For we bear thee witness, as do all the people, that thou art just, and dost not respect persons.
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 67
For “they sent out unto Him their disciples with the Herodians saying, Master, we know that thou art true, and teachest the way of God in truth, neither carest thou for any man; for thou regardest not the person of men. Tell us therefore, What thinkest thou? Is it lawful to give tribute unto Cæsar or not?”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 35.22
… What peace spake they? “Master, we know that Thou acceptest not man’s person, and teachest the way of God in truth. Is it lawful to give tribute unto Cæsar, or not?” They spake indeed peace unto Me. What then? Didst not Thou know them, and deceived they Thee, winking with their eyes? Truly He knew them; therefore said He, “Why tempt ye Me, ye hypocrites?”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 38.16
… the Apostles also were His “neighbours;” and they also “stood afar off,” that they might not have to suffer with Him. This may also be understood thus: “My friends,” that is, those who feigned themselves “My friends:” for they feigned themselves His friends, when they said, “We know that Thou teachest the way of God in truth;”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 102.9
9. “Mine enemies revile me all day, and they that praised me are sworn together against me” ( ver. 8 ). With their mouth they praised, in their heart they were laying snares for me. Hear their praise: “Master, we know that Thou art true, and teachest the way of God in truth, neither carest Thou for any man. Is it lawful to give tribute unto Cæsar, or not?”
22:17
St Justin Martyr † AD 165 The First Apology 17
… for at that time some came to Him and asked Him, if one ought to pay tribute to Cæsar; and He answered, “Tell Me, whose image does the coin bear?” And they said, “Cæsar’s.” And again He answered them, “Render therefore to Cæsar the things that are Cæsar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.”
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 34
… And they sent unto him their disciples, with the kinsfolk of Herod; and they said unto him, [Arabic, p. 129] Teacher, we know that thou speakest the truth, and teachest the way of God with equity, and art not lifted up by any man: for thou actest not so as to [3] be seen of any man.
Origen † AD 254 Origen's Commentary on Matthew 14.16
… as, for example, if He had said, “It is lawful,” they would have accused Him of dissolving marriages for trifles; but, if He had said, “It is not lawful,” they would have accused Him of permitting a man to dwell with a woman, even with sins; so, likewise, in the case of the tribute-money,
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 Selections from the Letters of St. Ambrose sermon-against-auxentius-on-th.30
… “Master, is it lawful to give tribute to Cæsar or not?”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 82
… And He gives a reason that cannot be gainsaid, saying, “If I were of this world, my servants would fight, that I should not be delivered.” For this purpose I say, in order to refute this suspicion, He both paid tribute,
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 61
… For that in every case they questioned Him not in order to learn, but to find fault with His words, is clear, not from this passage only, but from many others also. Since when they came to Him and asked, “Is it lawful to give tribute unto Cæsar or not?” (
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 58.8
… In such sort, that with their own mouth against themselves they should make declaration: He hath compelled them with their mouth against themselves to give sentence. They would have slandered Him, because of the tribute:
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 58.10
… What of asps? Asps treacherously desire to throw in their venom, and scatter it, and hiss. Most openly raged the nations, and roared like lions. “Wherefore have raged the nations, and the peoples meditated empty things?” When they were lying in wait for the Lord. Is it lawful to give tribute to Cæsar, or is it not lawful?
22:18
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 34
… for thou actest not so as to [3] be seen of any man. Tell us now, What is thy opinion? Is it lawful that we should [4] pay the tribute to Cæsar, or not? shall we give, or shall we not give? But Jesus knew [5] their deceit, and said unto them,
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 Selections from the Letters of St. Ambrose sermon-against-auxentius-on-th.31
… these want to give to Cæsar the right of the Church. But as these faithless ones follow their author, so also let us answer as our Lord and Author has taught us. For Jesus seeing the wickedness of the Jews said to them: Why tempt ye Me? show Me a penny. When they had given it, He said: “Whose image and superscription hath it?”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 40.10
… By the love of the truth then be that image, after which we were created, engraven anew, and His Own tribute rendered to our Cæsar. For so ye have heard from the Lord’s answer, when the Jews tempted Him, as He said, “Why tempt ye Me, ye hypocrites; show Me the tribute money,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 38.16
… when He convinced them out of their own mouth, they wished to seem to be His friends. “But He needed not that any should testify of man, for He Himself knew what was in man;” so that when they spoke unto Him words of friendship, He answered them, “Why tempt ye Me, ye hypocrites?”
22:19
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 58.8
… but if He say, Do not pay, we have Him for saying that we should not be under allegiance to Cæsar. Such a double noose as it were to catch the Lord they laid. But to whom had they come? To Him that knew how to break utterly the teeth of them in their own mouth. “Show to Me the coin,”
22:20
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 34
… for thou actest not so as to [3] be seen of any man. Tell us now, What is thy opinion? Is it lawful that we should [4] pay the tribute to Cæsar, or not? shall we give, or shall we not give? But Jesus knew [5] their deceit, and said unto them, Why tempt ye me, ye hypocrites? Shew me the [6] penny of the tribute.
St Hippolytus † AD 235 The Refutation of All Heresies 9.21
… For some of them discipline themselves above the requisite rules of the order , so that even they would not handle a current coin of the country, saying that they ought not either to carry, or behold, or fashion an image:
St Gregory of Nyssa † AD 395 On the Making of Man 16.13
13. As the Gospel calls the stamp upon the coin “the image of Cæsar
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 67
… which was a clear and plain victory. So that, when He asks, not from ignorance doth He ask, but because it is His will to cause them to be bound by their own answers. For when, on being asked, “Whose is the image?” they said, “Cæsar’s;” He saith, “Render unto Cæsar the things that are Cæsar’s.”
22:21
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 34
… shall we give, or shall we not give? But Jesus knew [5] their deceit, and said unto them, Why tempt ye me, ye hypocrites? Shew me the [6] penny of the tribute. So they brought unto him a penny. Jesus said unto them, To whom belongeth this image and inscription? They said unto him, To Cæsar. [7, 8]
St Irenaeus of Lyons † AD 202 Against Heresies 3.8.1
… Much more [would this be the case with regard to] the Lord Himself, who did also direct us to “render unto Cæsar the things that are Cæsar’s, and to God the things that are God’s;”
Tertullian † AD 220 On Idolatry 15
… and so it makes no difference whether that superstitious homage be rendered to men of a former age or of this. Idolatry is condemned, not on account of the persons which are set up for worship, but on account of those its observances, which pertain to demons. “The things which are Cæsar’s are to be rendered to Cæsar.”
Tertullian † AD 220 The Chaplet, or De Corona 12
… So you see idolatry is not without its gain, selling, as it does, Christ for pieces of gold, as Judas did for pieces of silver. Will it be “Ye cannot serve God and mammon” to devote your energies to mammon, and to depart from God? Will it be “Render unto Cæsar the things which are Cæsar’s, and unto God the things which are God’s,”
Tertullian † AD 220 On the Resurrection of the Flesh 22
… He , of course, has already quitted the grave of his own corpse—although he is even now liable to fevers and ulcers; he, too, has already trodden down his enemies—although he has even now to struggle with the powers of the world. And as a matter of course, he is already a king—although he even now owes to Cæsar the things which are Cæsar’s.
Tertullian † AD 220 Scorpiace 14
… Then he goes on also to show how he wishes you to be subject to the powers, bidding you pay “tribute to whom tribute is due, custom to whom custom,” that is, the things which are Cæsar’s to Cæsar, and the things which are God’s to God;
Tertullian † AD 220 De Fuga in Persecutione 12
… Since, therefore, Cæsar has imposed nothing on us after this fashion of a tributary sect—in fact, such an imposition never can be made,—with Antichrist now close at hand, and gaping for the blood, not for the money of Christians—how can it be pointed out to me that there is the command, “Render to Cæsar the things which are Cæsar’s?”
St Athanasius of Alexandria † AD 373 Persecution and Lapse of Hosius 1
… and as he who would steal the empire from you would resist the ordinance of God, so likewise fear on your part lest by taking upon yourself the government of the Church, you become guilty of a great offence. It is written, “Render unto Cæsar the things that are Cæsar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s
St Athanasius of Alexandria † AD 373 Against the Arians. (Orationes contra Arianos IV.) 1.12
… And so on the bare mention of such doctrine, they deserve nothing but the reply, ‘Ye do err, not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God ;’ and if they persist in it, they must be put to silence, by the words, ‘Render to’ man ‘the things that are’ man’s, ‘and to God the things that are’ God’s
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 Selections from the Letters of St. Ambrose 20.19
… My answer is: Do not, O Emperor, lay on yourself the burden of such a thought as that you have any imperial power over those things which belong to God. Exalt not yourself, but if you desire to reign long, submit yourself to God. It is written: “The things which are God’s to God, those which are Cæsar’s to Cæsar.”
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 Selections from the Letters of St. Ambrose sermon-against-auxentius-on-th.31
… For Jesus seeing the wickedness of the Jews said to them: Why tempt ye Me? show Me a penny. When they had given it, He said: “Whose image and superscription hath it?” They answered and said: Cæsar’s. And Jesus says to them: “Render unto Cæsar the things that are Cæsar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Reply to Faustus the Manichæan 22.74
… "Give," He says, "to Cæsar the things that are Cæsar’s."
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 40.9
… The impression that was stamped upon us has been rubbed out by our wandering. He has come to refashion, for He it was that fashioned us at first; and He is Himself asking for His money, as Cæsar for his. Therefore He says, “Render unto Cæsar the things that are Cæsar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s:”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 4.8
… therefore it is his true and eternal good, if by a new birth he be stamped. And I believe this to be the bearing of that which some understand skilfully; I mean, what the Lord said on seeing Cæsar’s tribute money, “Render to Cæsar the things that are Cæsar’s; and to God the things that are God’s.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 58.8
… For on His inquiring, of whom it had the image and inscription, they said, of Cæsar. Even now the Lord shall break utterly the teeth of them in their own mouth. Now ye have made answer, now have been broken utterly your teeth in your mouth. “Render unto Cæsar the things which are of Cæsar, and unto God the things which are of God.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 103.2
… First, because thou art: but a stone also is. Next, because thou livest: but a brute also liveth. What reward wilt thou give the Lord, for His having created thee above all the cattle; and above all the fowls of the air, in His image and likeness? Seek not how to reward Him: give back unto Him His own image: He requireth no more; He demandeth His own coin.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 116.13
… and indeed whosoever well considereth what he is vowing to the Lord, and what vows he is paying, let him vow himself, let him pay himself as a vow: this is exacted, this is due. On looking at the coin, the Lord saith, “Render unto Cæsar the things which are Cæsar’s, and unto God the things which are God’s:”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 119.21
… How, I ask, had they injured the kingdoms of earth? Did their King forbid His soldiers to pay and to render due service to the kings of the earth? Saith He not to the Jews who were striving to calumniate Him, “Render unto Cæsar the things that are Cæsar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s”?
Theodoret of Cyrus † AD 458 The Ecclesiastical History of Theodoret 4.7
… is our imperial will that this Trinity be preached, so that none may say “We accept the religion of the sovereign who rules this world without regard to Him who has given us the message of salvation,” for, as says the gospel of our God which contains this judgment, “we should render to Cæsar the things that are Cæsar’s and to God the things that are God’s.”
22:22
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 67
O folly! When the others had been put to silence, these made the attack, when they ought to have been the more backward. But such is the nature of rashness, shameless, and importunate, and attempting things impossible. Therefore the evangelist also, amazed at their folly, signified this very thing, by saying, “On that day came to Him.”
22:23
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 34
… For in the resurrection of the dead, have ye not read in the book of Moses, how from the bush God said unto him, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? [21] And God is not the God of the dead, but of the living: for all of them are alive with him. And ye have erred greatly.
Tertullian † AD 220 On the Flesh of Christ 1
They who are so anxious to shake that belief in the resurrection which was firmly settled before the appearance of our modern Sadducees,
Tertullian † AD 220 On the Resurrection of the Flesh 36
… Their specious inquiry concerned the flesh, whether or not it would be subject to marriage after the resurrection; and they assumed the case of a woman who had married seven brothers, so that it was a doubtful point to which of them she should be restored.
Tertullian † AD 220 To His Wife i.1
… Therefore no solicitude arising from carnal jealousy will, in the day of the resurrection, even in the case of her whom they chose to represent as having been married to seven brothers successively, wound any one of her so many husbands; nor is any (husband) awaiting her to put her to confusion.
Tertullian † AD 220 On Monogamy 7
… If “righteousness” must, of course chastity must too. If, then, forasmuch as there is in the law a precept that a man is to take in marriage the wife of his brother if he have died without children, for the purpose of raising up seed to his brother; and this may happen repeatedly to the same person, according to that crafty question of the Sadducees;
St Methodius † AD 311 From the Discourse on the Resurrection, Part I 1
… For this was the opinion of the Sadducees. Whence it was that, having contrived the parable about the woman and the seven brethren, that they might cast doubt upon the resurrection of the flesh, “There came to Him,”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 61
… Since when they came to Him and asked, “Is it lawful to give tribute unto Cæsar or not?” ( Matt. xxii. 17 ), when they spake about putting away a wife ( Matt. xix. 3 ), when they enquired about her who, they said, had had seven husbands (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 63
… Christ when He teacheth, “Not every one that saith unto Me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven” ( Matt. vii. 21 ); and again, “Many will say unto Me in that day, Lord, have we not prophesied in Thy Name? And I will profess unto them, I never knew you; depart from Me, ye that work iniquity” (
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Reply to Faustus the Manichæan 19.31
… This we learn not only from the canonical Acts of the Apostles, which the Manichæans reject, because it tells of the advent of the Paraclete promised by the Lord, but also from the Gospel, when the Sadducees question the Lord about the woman who married seven brothers, one dying after the other, whose wife she would be in the resurrection.
Pseudo-Clement The Recognitions of Clement 1.54
… The first schism, therefore, was that of those who were called Sadducees, which took their rise almost in the time of John. These, as more righteous than others, began to separate themselves from the assembly of the people, and to deny the resurrection of the dead,
22:24
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 34
[9] And on that day came the Sadducees, and said unto him, There is no life for [10] the dead.
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 67
… Now there were with us seven brethren: and the first, when he had married a wife, deceased; and, having no issue, left his wife unto his brother. Likewise the second also, and the third, unto the seventh. And last of all the woman died also. Therefore, in the resurrection, whose wife shall she be of the seven?”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 141.14
… For John gave testimony to Christ. They who heard Christ, wished to slay Him; the man who gave testimony to Him they slew not.…He is not slain by the Jews who gave free testimony to Christ, whom the Jews slew; he is slain by Herod, because he said to him, “It is not lawful for thee to have thy brother’s wife.” For his brother had not died without issue.
22:25
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 34
[9] And on that day came the Sadducees, and said unto him, There is no life for [10] the dead. And they asked him, and said unto him, Teacher, Moses said unto us, If a man die, not having children, let his brother take his wife, and raise up seed [11] for his brother.
22:27
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 34
… Now there were with us seven brethren: and the first took a wife, [12] and died without children; and the second took his wife, and died without children; [13] and the third also took her; and in like manner the seven of them also, and they [14, 15] died without leaving children.
22:28
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 34
… Now there were with us seven brethren: and the first took a wife, [12] and died without children; and the second took his wife, and died without children; [13] and the third also took her; and in like manner the seven of them also, and they [14, 15] died without leaving children. And last of them all the woman died also.
Aphrahat † AD 346 Aphrahat: Select Demonstrations 8.16
16. Again, our Lord explained to the Sadducees with regard to the resurrection of the dead, when they brought forth to Him the parable of the woman who was married to seven husbands, and said to Him:— Lo! the woman was wife of them all; in the Resurrection of the dead, to which of them shall she be wife?
22:29
St Irenaeus of Lyons † AD 202 Against Heresies 4.5.1
… but since it was impossible, without God, to come to a knowledge of God, He teaches men, through His Word, to know God. To those, therefore, who are ignorant of these matters, and on this account imagine that they have discovered another Father, justly does one say, “Ye do err, not knowing the Scriptures, nor the power of God.”
St Irenaeus of Lyons † AD 202 Against Heresies 4.5.2
… dishonour God, and lower the credit of the law, did both indicate a resurrection, and reveal God, saying to them, “Ye do err, not knowing the Scriptures, nor the power of God.” “For, touching the resurrection of the dead,” He says, “have ye not read that which was spoken by God, saying, I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob?”
St Irenaeus of Lyons † AD 202 Against Heresies 4.33.4
… Or how shall they receive adoption from God if they remain in this [kind of] generation, which is naturally possessed by man in this world? And how could He (Christ) have been greater than Solomon, or greater than Jonah, or have been the Lord of David, who was of the same substance as they were? How, too, could He have subdued
Tertullian † AD 220 On Exhortation to Chastity 13
… who have restored the honour of their flesh, and who have already dedicated themselves as sons of that (future) age, by slaying in themselves the concupiscence of lust, and that whole (propensity) which could not be admitted within Paradise!
Novatian † AD 258 A Treatise of Novatian Concerning the Trinity 25
… So that, while from these considerations it is gathered that nothing but the human nature in Christ was put to death, it appears that the Word in Him was not drawn down into mortality. For if Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, who, it is admitted, were only men, are manifested to be alive—for all they,
Archelaus † fl. AD 278 The Acts of the Disputation with the Heresiarch Manes 28
… for it is Christ Himself that “has re-deemed them from the curse of the law;” as Paul, too, has given these further testimonies, that “the letter killeth, and quickeneth no man,” and that “the law is the ministration of death,” and “the strength of sin.” Archelaus said : You err, not knowing the Scriptures, neither the power of God.
St Athanasius of Alexandria † AD 373 To the Bishops of Egypt 1.9
… for it is not the mode of speaking, but the intentions of the heart and a godly conversation that recommend the faithful Christian. And thus the Sadducees and Herodians, although they have the law in their mouths, were put to rebuke by our Saviour, who said unto them, ‘Ye do err, not knowing the Scriptures, nor the power of God
St Athanasius of Alexandria † AD 373 Against the Arians. (Orationes contra Arianos IV.) 1.12
… but laying down their own irreligion as a sort of canon of interpretation , they wrest the whole of the divine oracles into accordance with it. And so on the bare mention of such doctrine, they deserve nothing but the reply, ‘Ye do err, not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God
St Athanasius of Alexandria † AD 373 Festal and Personal Letters of Athanasius 2
… But after him and with him are all inventors of unlawful heresies, who indeed refer to the Scriptures, but do not hold such opinions as the saints have handed down, and receiving them as the traditions of men, err, because they do not rightly know them nor their
St Athanasius of Alexandria † AD 373 Festal and Personal Letters of Athanasius 19
… crucified the Lord of glory .’ And what their end is, the prophet foretold, crying, ‘Woe unto their soul, for they have devised an evil thought, saying, let us bind the just man, because he is not pleasing to us .’ The end of such abandonment as this can be nothing but error, as the Lord, when reproving them, saith, ‘Ye do err, not knowing the Scriptures
St Athanasius of Alexandria † AD 373 Festal and Personal Letters of Athanasius 39
… In these alone is proclaimed the doctrine of godliness. Let no man add to these, neither let him take ought from these. For concerning these the Lord put to shame the Sadducees, and said, ‘Ye do err, not knowing the Scriptures.’ And He reproved the Jews, saying, ‘Search the Scriptures, for these are they that testify of Me
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 67
For what saith He? “Ye do err, not knowing the Scriptures, nor the power of God.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 A Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles 2
… Are they Gentiles, or Christians? for I am ignorant. But no, I know well: they are Gentiles, who also disbelieve the work of Creation. For the two denials go together: the denial that God creates any thing from nothing, and the denial that He raises up what has been buried. But then, being ashamed to be thought such as “know not the power of God” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on First Corinthians 17
… For both the heaven, and the earth, and the sea, and the rivers, are more lasting than we are: and some even of the brutes; since the raven, and the race of elephants, and many other creatures, have a longer enjoyment of the present life. To us, moreover, life is both short and toilsome, but not to them. Theirs is both long, and freer from grief and cares.
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Epistle to the Hebrews 8
What then after so great painstaking? The Apostles also wrote, even as Paul likewise said, “they were written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come.” ( 1 Cor. x. 11 .) And again Christ said, “Ye do err not knowing the Scriptures” (
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 108.23
… But as to your objection taken from marriage, that, if the members shall remain the same, marriage must inevitably be allowed; it is disposed of by the Saviour’s words: “ye do err not knowing the scriptures nor the power of God. For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage but are as the angels.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Letters of St. Augustin 263.4
… This hope the heathen do not possess, because they know not the Scriptures nor the power of God,
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 City of God 22.17
… He, then, who created both sexes will restore both. Jesus Himself also, when asked by the Sadducees, who denied the resurrection, which of the seven brothers should have to wife the woman whom all in succession had taken to raise up seed to their brother, as the law enjoined, says, “Ye do err, not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Good of Widowhood 15
… For rebuking them, He saith, “Ye do err, not knowing the Scriptures, nor the power of God. For in the resurrection they shall neither be married, nor marry wives;
Pseudo-Clement The Clementine Homilies 2.51
… And to those who err by reason of the false scriptures He fitly showed the cause of their error, saying, ‘Ye do therefore err, not knowing the true things of the Scriptures;
Pseudo-Clement The Clementine Homilies 3.50
Then Peter: “As to the mixture of truth with falsehood, I remember that on one occasion He, finding fault with the Sadducees, said, ‘Wherefore ye do err, not knowing the true things of the Scriptures; and on this account ye are ignorant of the power of God.’
22:30
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 34
… but those that have become worthy of that world, and the resurrection from among the dead, do not take [19] [Arabic, p. 130] wives, and the women also do not become the men’s. Nor is it possible that they should die; but they are like the angels, and are the children of [20] God, because they have become the children of the resurrection.
Tertullian † AD 220 A Treatise on the Soul 37
… Human nativity has sometimes been allowed to be premature, and yet to occur in fit and perfect accordance with an hebdomad or sevenfold number, as an auspice of our resurrection, and rest, and kingdom. The ogdoad , or eightfold number, therefore, is not concerned in our formation; for in the time it represents there will be no more marriage.
Tertullian † AD 220 The Five Books Against Marcion 5.10
… “and we shall be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye. For this corruptible”—and as he spake, the apostle seemingly pointed to his own flesh—“must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality,” in order, indeed, that it may be rendered a fit substance for the kingdom of God. “For we shall be like the angels.”
Tertullian † AD 220 On the Apparel of Women 1.2
… What commerce have they who are to condemn with them who are to be condemned? The same, I take it, as Christ has with Belial. With what consistency do we mount that (future) judgment-seat to pronounce sentence against those whose gifts we (now) seek after? For you too, (women as you are,) have the self-same angelic nature promised
Tertullian † AD 220 On Monogamy 10
… But if we believe the resurrection of the dead, of course we shall be bound to them with whom we are destined to rise, to render an account the one of the other. “But if ‘in that age they will neither marry nor be given in marriage, but will be equal to angels,’
St Hippolytus † AD 235 Fragments of Discourses or Homilies 1
Men, he says, “in the resurrection will be like the angels of God,”
Origen † AD 254 Origen De Principiis iv.section24
… For He is more fully and clearly, and, so to speak, more openly in archangels than in other holy men. And this is evident from the statement, that when all who are saints have arrived at the summit of perfection, they are said to be made like, or equal to, the angels, agreeably to the declaration in the Gospels.
Origen † AD 254 Origen Against Celsus 4.29
… and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by Him.” And we know that in this way the angels are superior to men; so that men, when made perfect, become like the angels. “For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but the righteous are as the angels in heaven,”
Origen † AD 254 Origen's Commentary on the Gospel of John 2.16
… For if the life were the same thing as the light of men, and if the light of Christ were for men alone, then the life also would be only for men. But such a view is both foolish and impious, since the other Scriptures testify against this interpretation and declare that, when we are somewhat more advanced, we shall be equal to the angels.
St Methodius † AD 311 The Banquet of the Ten Virgins; or Concerning Chastity 2.7
… For there are some to whom it is not given to attain virginity; and there are others whom He no longer wills to be excited by procreations to lust, and to be defiled, but henceforth to meditate and to keep the mind upon the transformation of the body to the likeness of angels, when they “neither marry nor are given in marriage,”
St Methodius † AD 311 From the Discourse on the Resurrection, Part I 1
X. But in addition to what has been said, there is this point worth consideration, since it misleads very much, if we may be outspoken about matters of such importance, Aglaophon. For you said that the Lord declared plainly that those who shall obtain the resurrection shall then be as the angels.
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 Exposition of the Christian Faith 5.6
… standing around Him, on His right hand and on His left.” How then, when the angels stand on the right hand and on the left of the Lord God, when all the host of heaven stands, shall men sit on the right hand of God or on His left, to whom is promised as a reward for virtue likeness to the angels, as the Lord says: “Ye shall be as the angels in heaven?”
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 Concerning Virgins 1.9
… he who has lost it a devil. And hence has religion also gained its name. She is a virgin who is the bride of God, a harlot who makes gods for herself. What shall I say of the resurrection of which you already hold the rewards: “For in the resurrection they will neither be given in marriage, nor marry, but shall be,” He says, “as the angels in heaven.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 67
… “For in the resurrection,” saith He, “they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as angels of God in Heaven.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 A Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles 32
… lxxxii. 6 .) And what is greater, the power to become both God and angel and child of God is put into his own hands. Yea, so it is, man can be the maker of an angel. Perchance this saying has startled you? Hear however Christ saying: “In the Resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like unto the angels.” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on Ephesians 23
… For the words which the Cherubim above say, these hath He charged us to say also, “Holy, Holy, Holy.” He hath brought to us the virtue of the Angels. “The Angels marry not, neither are given in marriage” (
Rufinus of Aquileia † AD 411 A Commentary on the Apostles' Creed 41
… Now God is not the God of the dead but of the living.” Where in what goes before He declares what and how great is the glory of the resurrection, saying, “But in the resurrection of the dead they will neither marry or be given in marriage, but will be as the angels of God.”
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 75.2
… “In the resurrection,” the Lord tells us, “they neither marry nor are given in marriage but are as the angels…in heaven.”
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 84.6
… For their women finger their breasts, slap their chests, pinch their legs and arms, and say, “What will a resurrection profit us if these frail bodies are to rise again? No, if we are to be like angels,
St Jerome † AD 420 Against Jovinianus 1.36
… Moreover, if we deny the identity of His body because He entered though the doors were shut, and this is not a property of human bodies, we must deny also that Peter and the Lord had real bodies because they walked upon the water, which is contrary to nature.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 City of God 11.32
… At the same time, let none doubt that the holy angels in their heavenly abodes are, though not, indeed, co-eternal with God, yet secure and certain of eternal and true felicity. To their company the Lord teaches that His little ones belong; and not only says, “They shall be equal to the angels of God,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 City of God 22.17
… but “In the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on Faith and the Creed 6
13. We believe that He Ascended into Heaven , which place of blessedness He has likewise promised unto us, saying, “They shall be as the angels in the heavens,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On Baptism, Against the Donatists 2.5
… But never in any point to entertain an opinion at variance with the truth is perfection found only in the angels. Since then we are men, yet forasmuch as in hope we are angels, whose equals we shall be in the resurrection,
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Answer to the Letters of Petilian, the Donatist 3.48
… hast not lied unto men, but unto God." Lastly, even if you were to say that he was cleansed and purified by an angel when he is unacquainted with the pollution in the conscience of him that gives but not in holiness, take notice that it is said of the saints, when they shall have risen to eternal life, that they shall then be equal to the angels of God.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on Rebuke and Grace 27
… For if from the Holy Scriptures we have been able to attain the knowledge that none of the holy angels shall fall evermore, how much more have they themselves attained this knowledge by the truth more sublimely revealed to them! Because to us is promised a blessed life without end, and equality with the angels,
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Our Lord’s Sermon on the Mount 1.15
… For “there is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female;” “but Christ is all, and in all.” And the Lord Himself says: “For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Our Lord’s Sermon on the Mount 2.6
… because the Lord hath promised this also to His own: “In the resurrection,” says He, “they will be as the angels in heaven.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 82.3
… that ye may not only turn away from an unlawful connection, but may despise even a lawful look. Remember, in whichever sex ye are, whether men or women, that ye are leading on earth the life of Angels: “For the Angels are neither given in marriage, nor marry.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 12.8
… He came down for our sakes; let us ascend for His sake. For He alone descended and ascended, He who saith, “No man hath ascended into heaven, but He who came down from heaven.” Are they not therefore to ascend into heaven whom He makes sons of God? Certainly they are: this is the promise to us, “They shall be equal to the angels of God.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 71.7
… But if that which we see not we hope for, through patience we wait for it.” Now then thou groanest, now unto a place of refuge thou runnest, in order that thou mayest be saved; now being in infirmity thou entreatest the Physician: what, when thou shalt have received perfect soundness also, what when thou shall have been made “equal to the Angels of God,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 77.4
… For the Angels have a day, which we have not yet. Already we have one that unbelievers have not: but not yet have believers that which Angels have: but they will have, at the time when they will be equal to the Angels of God, that which hath been promised to them in the Resurrection.
Pseudo-Clement The Recognitions of Clement 3.30
… but I will show you how it is not contradictory. God is seen by the mind, not by the body; by the spirit, not by the flesh. Whence also angels, who are spirits, see God; and therefore men, as long as they are men, cannot see Him. But after the resurrection of the dead, when they shall have been made like the angels,
22:31
Origen † AD 254 Origen De Principiis 2.4.1
… The words, moreover, “Have you not read what was spoken by God to Moses: I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob; He is not a God of the dead, but of the living,”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 67
And again by Moses doth He stop their mouths, since they too had brought forward Moses; and He saith, “But as touching the resurrection of the dead, have ye not read, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? He is not the God of the dead, but of the living.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 43.13
… For, replying in a certain place to the Sadducees, when they stirred the question of the resurrection, the Lord Himself speaks thus: “But as touching the resurrection of the dead, have ye not read how the Lord said to Moses from the bush, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? He is not the God of the dead, but of the living.”
John Cassian † AD 435 The Conferences of John Cassian 1.14
… In the gospel too the Lord says with still greater clearness to the Sadducees: “Have ye not read that which was spoken by God, when He said to you: I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob. He is not the God of the dead but of the living: for all do live unto Him.”
22:32
Origen † AD 254 Origen Against Celsus 8.3
… For “God standeth in the assembly of the gods: He judgeth among the gods.” For “God is Lord of gods,” who by His Son “hath called the earth from the rising of the sun unto the going down thereof.” We are also commanded to “give thanks to the God of gods.” Moreover, we are taught that “God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.”
St Cyprian of Carthage † AD 258 The Epistles of Cyprian 26
… when the Church is established in the bishop and the clergy, and all who stand fast in the faith . For far be it from the mercy of God and His uncontrolled might to suffer the number of the lapsed to be called the Church; since it is written, “God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.”
St Gregory of Nazianzus † AD 389 Select Orations of Saint Gregory Nazianzen 21.1
… To speak of him and to praise virtue are identical, because he had, or, to speak more truly, has embraced virtue in its entirety. For all who have lived according to God still live unto God, though they have departed hence. For this reason, God is called the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, since He is the God, not of the dead, but of the living.
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans 11
Let us then continue living this life; for many of those who seem to breathe and to walk about are in a more wretched plight than the dead. For there are different kinds of deadness; and one there is of the body, according to which Abraham was dead, and still was not dead. For “God,” He says, “is not a God of the dead, but of the living.” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on Ephesians 18
… nay, some far more. Therefore to these also it is necessary to exclaim, “Awake, thou that sleepest, and arise from the dead, and Christ shall shine upon thee.” To these it is fitting to say this also, “God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on 1 Timothy 13
… 34, 35 .) The living differ from the dead, not only in that they behold the sun, and breathe the air, but in that they are doing some good. For if this be wanting, the living are not better than the dead. That you may learn this, hear how it is possible that even the dead should live. For it is said, “God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.” (
St Jerome † AD 420 Against Vigilantius 5
… They were forsooth, adoring Samuel and not Christ, whose Levite and prophet Samuel was. You show mistrust because you think only of the dead body, and therefore blaspheme. Read the Gospel—
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 49.15
… Such was the answer He gave the Jews concerning their fathers, long ago dead, that is, concerning Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob: I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob: He is not the God of the dead, but of the living; for all live unto Him.”
Pope St Gregory I the Great † AD 604 Register of the Epistles of St. Gregory the Great 7.40
… And to him it is said by the voice of the Truth, To thee I will give the keys of the kingdom of heaven ( Matth. xvi. 19 ). And again it is said to him, And when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren (
Pseudo-Clement The Clementine Homilies 3.55
“But to those who think, as the Scriptures teach, that God swears, He said, ‘Let your yea be yea, and nay, nay; for what is more than these is of the evil one.’ And to those who say that Abraham and Isaac and Jacob are dead, He said, ‘God is not of the dead, but of the living.’
22:33
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 34
[22, 23] And when the multitudes heard, they were wondering at his teaching. And [24] some of the scribes answered and said unto him, Teacher, thou hast well said. But the rest of the Pharisees, when they saw his silencing the Sadducees on this point, gathered against him to contend with him.
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 67
“And when the multitudes heard this, they were astonished at His doctrine.”
22:34
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 34
[22, 23] And when the multitudes heard, they were wondering at his teaching. And [24] some of the scribes answered and said unto him, Teacher, thou hast well said.
Tertullian † AD 220 An Answer to the Jews 2
… Which law had continued enough for them, had it been kept. For in this law given to Adam we recognise in embryo all the precepts which afterwards sprouted forth when given through Moses; that is, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God from thy whole heart and out of thy whole soul; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself;
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Harmony of the Gospels 2.73
… Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.”
22:35
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 34
… and if thou spendest upon him more, [43] when I return, I shall give thee. Who of these three now, thinkest thou, is nearest [44] to him that fell among the robbers? And he said unto him, He that had compassion [45] [Arabic, p. 132] on him. Jesus said unto him, Go, and do thou also likewise. And no man dared afterwards to ask him anything.
Origen † AD 254 Origen's Commentary on Matthew 14.16
… And you might find many passages, if you brought them together, in which the Pharisees tempted our Jesus, and others, different from them, as a certain lawyer,
22:36
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 27
… For as not deigning to be numbered with the multitude, and indicating that he is above the common sort, so he comes near. Because such is the Jewish character; full of unseasonable confidence. So too another afterwards, when all men were keeping silence, of his own accord springs up, and saith, “Which is the first commandment?”
Theodoret of Cyrus † AD 458 Letters of the Blessed Theodoret, Bishop of Cyprus 135
… and the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.” Then He said further “On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.”
22:37
Pope St Clement I † AD 99 The Second Epistle of Clement 3
… But in what way shall we confess Him? By doing what He says, and not transgressing His commandments, and by honouring Him not with our lips only, but with all our heart and all our mind.
St Justin Martyr † AD 165 Dialogue with Trypho 93
… And hence I think that our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ spoke well when He summed up all righteousness and piety in two commandments. They are these: ‘Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy strength, and thy neighbour as thyself.’
Tertullian † AD 220 The Five Books Against Marcion 2.13
… be loved, because He prefers the sinner’s repentance to his death; be feared, because He dislikes the sinners who do not repent. Accordingly, the divine law enjoins duties in respect of both these attributes: Thou shalt love God , and, Thou shalt fear God . It proposed one for the obedient man, the other for the transgressor.
Tertullian † AD 220 On the Resurrection of the Flesh 9
… We know by experience the goodness of God; from His Christ we learn that He is the only God, and the very good. Now, as He requires from us love to our neighbour after love to Himself,
Tertullian † AD 220 Scorpiace 6
… Thus, “love covers the multitude of sins;” and loving God, to wit, with all its strength (by which in the endurance of martyrdom it maintains the fight), with all its life
Tertullian † AD 220 On Fasting 2
… I must love God, and my neighbour as myself:
Origen † AD 254 Origen De Principiis 2.4.2
… And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.” And to these He added: “On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.”
St Cyprian of Carthage † AD 258 Exhortation to Martyrdom, Addressed to Fortunatus 2
… This is the first; and the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.”
St Gregory of Nyssa † AD 395 On Virginity 9
… It is impossible that one who has turned to the world and feels its anxieties, and engages his heart in the wish to please men, can fulfil that first and great commandment of the Master, “Thou shalt love God with all thy heart and with all thy strength
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 68
… What then saith Christ? Indicating from what they were led to this; from having no charity, from pining with envy, from being seized by jealousy, He saith, “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto this, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 A Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles 44
… iv. 15 .) “We yearn not only to give you the Gospel, but also our own souls.” ( 1 Thess. ii. 8 .) We are loved and we love (you): but this is not the question. But let us love Christ, “for the first commandment is, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God: and the second is like unto it, And thy neighbor as thyself.” (
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Confessions 3.8
15. Can it at any time or place be an unrighteous thing for a man to love God with all his heart, with all his soul, and with all his mind, and his neighbour as himself?
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Letters of St. Augustin 137.17
… “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself”?
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Letters of St. Augustin 189.2
2. All is contained in these brief sentences: “Love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength: and love thy neighbour as thyself;”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 City of God 10.3
… To this good we ought to be led by those who love us, and to lead those we love. Thus are fulfilled those two commandments on which hang all the law and the prophets: “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy mind, and with all thy soul;” and “Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On Christian Doctrine 1.22
… For this is the law of love that has been laid down by Divine authority: “Thou shall love thy neighbor as thyself;” but, “Thou shall love God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind:”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On Christian Doctrine 1.26
… “Thou shalt love,” He says, “the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind; and thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On Christian Doctrine 2.7
… and that God is to be loved with all the heart, and with all the soul, and with all the mind, and one’s neighbor as one’s self—that is, in such a way that all our love for our neighbor, like all our love for ourselves, should have reference to God.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Holy Trinity 2.17
… For it is this very appearance, for the contemplation of which every one sighs who strives to love God with all his heart, and with all his soul, and with all his mind; to the contemplation of which, he who loves his neighbor, too, as himself builds up his neighbor also as far as he may; on which two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Holy Trinity 6.5
… “On which two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Holy Trinity 8.7
… For so we should be prepared also to die profitably for our brethren, as our Lord Jesus Christ taught us by His example. For as there are two commandments on which hang all the Law and the prophets, love of God and love of our neighbor;
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Holy Trinity 10.7
… and the opinion has been held that this is the mind, nay, that it is even the whole soul altogether. And some accordingly think it to be the blood, others the brain, others the heart; not as the Scripture says, “I will praise Thee, O Lord, with my whole heart;” and, “Thou shall love the Lord thy God with all thine heart;”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Holy Trinity 15.26
46. But the reason why, after His resurrection, He both gave the Holy Spirit, first on earth, and afterwards sent Him from heaven, is in my judgment this: that “love is shed abroad in our hearts,” by that Gift itself, whereby we love God and our neighbors, according to those two commandments, “on which hang all the law and the prophets.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Catechising of the Uninstructed 23
… This law was given to the Jews in the ten commandments, which they call the Decalogue. And these commandments, again, are reduced to two, namely that we should love God with all our heart, with all our soul, with all our mind; and that we should love our neighbor as ourselves.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Catechising of the Uninstructed 27
… Howbeit, love not the unrighteousness of such; but love the persons themselves with the express intent that they may apprehend righteousness; for not only is the love of God enjoined upon us, but also the love of our neighbor, on which two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Morals of the Catholic Church 8
… "Thou shalt love," He says, "the Lord thy God." Tell me also, I pray Thee, what must be the measure of love; for I fear lest the desire enkindled in my heart should either exceed or come short in fervor. "With all thy heart," He says. Nor is that enough. "With all thy soul." Nor is it enough yet. "With all thy mind."
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Reply to Faustus the Manichæan 15.4
… Love worketh no ill to his neighbor; therefore love is the fulfilling of the law." One table contains the precept of love to God, and the other of love to man. And He who first sent these tablets Himself came to enjoin those precepts on which hang the law and the prophets.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Spirit and the Letter 64
… nor was He silent as to what these were, but declared them in the plainest words: “Thou shall love,” said He, “the Lord thy God, with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind;” and “Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise Concerning Man’s Perfection in Righteousness 11
… “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind;”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise Concerning Man’s Perfection in Righteousness 19
… although it is the flesh which is said to lust, because the soul lusts carnally. In that perfect state the just man shall live absolutely without any sin, since there will be in his members no law warring against the law of his mind, but wholly will he love God, with all his heart, with all his soul, and with all his mind
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Our Lord’s Sermon on the Mount 2.22
… “for this is the law and the prophets.” Now, in the case of these two precepts, He not merely says, The law and the prophets hang; but He has also added, “all the law and the prophets,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 56.4
… ye despise ‘judgment and charity.’ In judgment and charity give alms to thine own soul.” What is “in judgment”? Look back, and discover thyself; mislike thyself, pronounce a judgment against thyself. And what is charity? “Love the Lord God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind; love thy neighbour as thyself:”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 75.10
… “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the great commandment. The other is like it; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.” They are the words of the Lord in the Gospel: “On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 17.6
… The precepts of love, given to us by the Lord, are two: “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind;” and, “Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 41.13
… To what innkeeper? Perhaps to him who said, “We are ambassadors for Christ.” He gave also two pence to pay for the healing of the wounded man. And perhaps these are the two commandments, on which hang all the law and the prophets.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 65.2
… for along with this seeming oversight, the words “that ye love one another” appear also as if they had no reference to that second commandment, which says, “Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.” For “on these two commandments,” He says, “hang all the law and the prophets.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Ten Homilies on the First Epistle of John 10.7
… “On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.” On what two commandments? “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. And, thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 119.5
… 34 ). For when each man hath searched the law, and searched its deep things, in which its whole meaning doth consist; he ought indeed to love God with all his heart, with all his soul, with all his mind; and his neighbour as himself. “For on these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 119.12
… But what is broader than that, “on” which “hang all the Law and the Prophets”?
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 119.17
… But so much the more as the love of God reigneth in every man, so much the less hath wickedness dominion over him. What else then doth he seek than that by the gift of God he may love God? For by loving God he loveth himself, so that he may healthily love his neighbour also as himself: on which commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 121.7
… wherefore should God shield us? On account of offences. Whence come offences? Offences are to be feared from two quarters, for there are two precepts upon which the whole Law hangeth and the Prophets, the love of God and of our neighbour.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 132.19
… but since they have it not as yet, they should know that they are poor. Thus it is that God counteth among His poor all the humble in heart, who are established in that twofold charity,
Pope St Leo I the Great † AD 461 Sermons 12
And so, when the Lord says, “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God , from all thy heart and from all thy mind: and thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself
Pope St Leo I the Great † AD 461 Sermons 90
… for, when He says, “thou shalt love the Lord thy God from all thy heart, and from all thy mind, and from all thy strength
Pope St Leo I the Great † AD 461 Sermons 95
… “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God out of all thy heart, and out of all thy mind, and out of all thy strength
Anonymous A Treatise on Re-Baptism by an Anonymous Writer 13
… “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God, with all thy heart, and with all thy mind, and with all thy thought; and thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. For on these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets;”
22:38
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 34
… and, Which of the commandments is greater, and has precedence [27] in the law? Jesus said unto him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O [28] Israel; The Lord our God, the Lord is one: and thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy thought, and with all thy [29, 30] strength.
22:39
St Cyprian of Carthage † AD 258 The Epistles of Cyprian 6.5
… There ought also to be no contentions and emulations among you, since the Lord left to us His peace, and it is written, “Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.” “But if ye bite and find fault with one another, take heed that ye be not consumed one of another.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 73
But when thou hast heard of this, consider the punishment of them that remain. For neither shall they suffer that former penalty only, but this too. And as above He said, that they should say, “Blessed is He that cometh in the name of the Lord,”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans 23
… For the beginning and the end of virtue is love. This it has for its root, this for its groundwork, this for its summit. If then it be both beginning and fulfilment, what is there equal to it? But he does not seek love merely, but intense love. For he does not say merely “love thy neighbor,” but, “as thyself.” Hence also Christ said
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 City of God 21.27
… For it is not reasonable that a man who exercises charity towards his neighbor should not do so towards himself, since he hears the Lord saying, “Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On Lying 9
… The love of our neighbor hath its bounds in each man’s love of himself. “Thou shall love,” saith He, “thy neighbor as thyself.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Morals of the Catholic Church 26
… for He was not satisfied with one as knowing that God is one thing and man another, and that the difference is nothing less than that between the Creator and the thing created in the likeness of its Creator. He says then that the second precept is, "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself."
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Answer to the Letters of Petilian, the Donatist 2.69
… and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem." If you will keep peace with these words, you will not be at variance with us. For if we seek unity by war, our war could not be praised in more glorious terms, seeing that it is written, "Thou shall love thy neighbor as thyself."
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise Concerning Man’s Perfection in Righteousness 11
… “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind;” and “Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 52.6
… Wherefore doth he then exaggerate as much as he can the iniquity, and praise benignity, censuring him that hath wrought in him malignity above benignity? Be he then a rule to himself for seeing: out of himself he shall be judged. Moreover, if he do what is written, “Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself;”
Early Popes (Pseudo-Isidorian Decretals) The Epistles of Pope Fabian 2.2
… but they had all things common.” For there was no laying of accusations against each other among them, except what was friendly; neither ought there ever to be such among their followers or among believers: for the Lord says, “Do not that to another which thou wouldst not have done to thyself.” And He says also, “Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself;”
Pseudo-Clement The Clementine Homilies 12.32
… But neither does he punish the sinner. For he who loves his neighbour as himself, as he knows that when he has sinned he does not wish to be punished, so neither does he punish those who sin. And as he wishes to be praised, and blessed, and honoured, and to have all his sins forgiven, thus he does to his neighbour, loving him as himself.
22:40
St Ignatius of Antioch † AD 108 Epistle to the Smyrnæans: Shorter and Longer Versions 6
… For, “Thou shall love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and thy neighbour as thyself.” And the Lord says, “This is life eternal, to know the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom He has sent.” And again, “A new commandment give I unto you, that ye love one another. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.”
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 34
… and thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy thought, and with all thy [29, 30] strength. This is the great and preëminent commandment. And the second, which is like it, is, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. And another commandment [31] greater than these two there is not.
St Cyprian of Carthage † AD 258 On the Lord's Prayer 28
… the Lord thy God is one God: and thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength. This is the first commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.” “On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 43
“For as Jonas,” saith He, “was three days and three nights in the whale’s belly, so shall the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 68
… His commandments, and the sum of them, are, “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God, and thy neighbor as thyself.” If therefore to love God is to love one’s neighbor, “For if thou lovest me,” He saith, “O Peter, feed my sheep,” but to love one’s neighbor worketh a keeping of the commandments, with reason doth He say, “On these hang all the law and the prophets.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on 2 Timothy 7
… cold in our love to God, because cold in our love to our neighbor. For it is not, indeed it is not possible that a man, who is a stranger to the feeling of love, should have any generosity or manly spirit, since the foundation of all that is good is no other than love. “On this,” it is said, “hang all the law and the prophets.” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 77
… Wherefore it sometimes saith that there are two commandments, sometimes only one. For it is not possible that the man who hath taken hold on the first should not possess the second also. For at one time He said, “On this the Law and the Prophets hang” (
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Confessions 12.18
… But the law is good to edify, if a man use it lawfully; for the end of it “is charity out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned.” And well did our Master know, upon which two commandments He hung all the Law and the Prophets.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Letters of St. Augustin 55.38
… But I cherish a hope in the name of Christ, which is not without its reward, because I have not only believed the testimony of my God that “on these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets;”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Letters of St. Augustin 167.16
16. If these things be so, how shall a man who shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, be guilty of all? May it not be, that since the fulfilling of the law is that love wherewith we love God and our neighbour, on which commandments of love “hang all the law and the prophets,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 City of God 10.5
… For “on these two commandments,” as it is written, “hang all the law and the prophets.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Holy Trinity 15.17
… And sometimes that which was given by Moses is specially called the Law: as it is said, “The Law and the Prophets were until John;” and, “On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Enchiridion 121
… For this love embraces both the love of God and the love of our neighbor, and “on these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Catechising of the Uninstructed 4
… and if whatever has been committed to writing in times subsequent to these, and established by divine authority, is a record of Christ, and admonishes us of love, it is manifest that on those two commandments of love to God and love to our neighbor
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Morals of the Catholic Church 29
… What it is that hangs on them it would be absurd to think of learning from me. Hear Christ Himself; hear Christ, I say; hear the Wisdom of God: "On these two commandments," He says, "hang all the law and the prophets."
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Reply to Faustus the Manichæan 18.7
… To conclude, Catholic Christians are in no difficulty regarding the words of Christ, though in one sense they may be said not to observe the law and the prophets; for by the grace of Christ they keep the law by their love to God and man; and on these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Spirit and the Letter 64
But somebody will perhaps think that we lack nothing for the knowledge of righteousness, since the Lord, when He summarily and briefly expounded His word on earth, informed us that the whole law and the prophets depend on two commandments;
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise Concerning Man’s Perfection in Righteousness 11
… but the Lord, who on earth consummated and abridged His word, expressly declared that the law and the prophets hung on two commandments,
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 48.9
… although elsewhere He speaks more definitely of the law, distinguishing it from the prophets; as it is said, “The law and the prophets were until John;” and “On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 87.1
… For it would be with no true love that we loved one another, if we loved not God. For every one loves his neighbor as himself if he loves God; and if he loves not God, he loves not himself. For on these two commandments of love hang all the law and the prophets:
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 3.7
… for they have laid aside the burdens of earthly cares, and coming up from the bath, from the washing away of the filth of the world by the Sacrament of Baptism, every one beareth twins. For they fulfil the two commandments, of which it is said, “On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets;”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 26.9
9. “Destroy not my soul with the ungodly” ( ver. 9 ). Destroy not then, together with them that hate Thee, my soul, which hath loved the beauty of Thy house. “And my life with the men of blood.” And with them that hate their neighbour. For Thy house is beautified with the two commandments.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 68.15
… or because in that place is carried that light burden? For what are even the wings themselves, but the two commandments of love, whereon hangeth the whole Law and the Prophets?
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 95.9
… and come and follow Me”? They performed this bidding: shorn they came. And because those who believe in Christ are baptized, what is there said? “which come up from the washing;” that is, come up from the cleansing. “Whereof every one beareth twins.” What twins? Those two commandments, wherefrom hang all the Law and the Prophets.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 103.22
… but, “to do them.” And now perhaps each man’s soul is disturbed. Who remembereth all the commandments of God? who remembereth all the writings of God? Lo, I wish not only to hold them in my memory, but also to do them in my works: but who remembereth them all? Fear not: He burdeneth thee not: “on two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets.”
22:41
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 35
[17, 18] And when the Pharisees assembled, Jesus asked them, and said, What say ye of [19] the Messiah? whose son is he? They said unto him, The son of David. He said unto them, And how doth David in the Holy Spirit call him Lord? for he said,
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Harmony of the Gospels 2.74
… He saith unto them, How then doth David in Spirit call Him Lord, saying, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit Thou on my right hand, till I make Thine enemies Thy footstool? If David then call Him Lord, how is He his son? And no man was able to answer Him a word, neither durst any man from that day forth ask Him any more questions.”
22:42
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 35
[17, 18] And when the Pharisees assembled, Jesus asked them, and said,
Archelaus † fl. AD 278 The Acts of the Disputation with the Heresiarch Manes 47
… Nay, He does not deign even to hear it said that He is David’s son.
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 Exposition of the Christian Faith 5.8
… “What think ye of Christ? Whose Son is He? They say unto Him, The son of David. Jesus saith to them, How then doth David in spirit call Him Lord, saying: The Lord said unto my Lord: Sit Thou on My right hand”? Then he added: “If David in spirit then call Him Lord, how is He his son? And no man was able to answer Him a word.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 68
Then since He had answered, He asks also in turn, “What think ye of Christ, whose Son is He? They say unto Him, The Son of David.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 69
And again He adds, “Neither be ye called guides, for one is your guide, even Christ;” and He said not, I. For like as above He said, “What think ye of Christ?”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Reply to Faustus the Manichæan 13.3
… He asks: "What think ye of Christ? Whose son is He?" They reply: "Of David." Then, to remind them of the name Emmanuel, God with us, He says: "How does David in the Spirit call Him Lord, saying, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit Thou at my right hand, till I make Thine enemies Thy footstool?"
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 1.20
… but as being “God over all, blessed for ever,” He is David’s Lord. The Lord then saith to the Jews, “Whose Son say ye that Christ is?” They answered, “The Son of David.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 41.0
On the words of the Gospel, Matt. xxii. 42 , where the Lord asks the Jews whose son they said David was.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 41.2
2. But when the Jews could not answer the Lord proposing a question, and asking “whose Son they said Christ was;” and they answered, “the Son of David;”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 42.0
On the same words of the Gospel, Matt. xxii. 42
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 42.1
… And we indeed hope for Him too; but we hope for Him as One who is to come as Judge, not to be judged. For the Holy Prophets prophesied both, that He should come first to be judged unrighteously, that He should come afterwards to judge with righteousness. “What think ye,” then, saith he, “of Christ? whose Son is He? They answered Him, The Son of David.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 48.3
… But the Lord, to pin them down to some inquiry touching the divinity of Him whose apparent weakness they despised, answered them: “How, then, doth David in spirit call Him Lord, saying, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit Thou on my right hand, till I put Thine enemies under Thy feet? If David, then, in spirit call Him Lord, how is He his son?”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 110.1
… For when our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ asked of the Jews, whose Son they alleged Christ to be, and they had replied, “the Son of David;” He at once replied to their answer, “How then doth David in spirit call Him Lord, saying, The Lord said unto My Lord?” etc. “If then,” He asked, “David in the spirit call Him Lord, how is He his son?”
Theodoret of Cyrus † AD 458 Dialogues. The “Eranistes” or “Polymorphus” of the Blessed Theodoretus, Bishop of Cyrus 2
Orth. —Yes, for they did not need to learn what they knew; that He was a man they knew, but they did not know that He was from the beginning God. He adopted this same course in the case of the Pharisees; for when He saw them accosting Him as a mere man He asked them “What think ye of Christ? Whose son is He?”
22:43
St Barnabas † AD 61 The Epistle of Barnabas 12
… Jesus who was manifested, both by type and in the flesh, is not the Son of man, but the Son of God. Since, therefore, they were to say that Christ was the son of David, fearing and understanding the error of the wicked, he saith, “The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit at My right hand, until I make Thine enemies Thy footstool.”
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 35
[17, 18] And when the Pharisees assembled, Jesus asked them, and said, What say ye of [19] the Messiah? whose son is he? They said unto him, The son of David.
St Irenaeus of Lyons † AD 202 Against Heresies 3.21.8
… that the Egyptians themselves might testify that it is the finger of God which works salvation for the people, and not the son of Joseph. For if He were the son of Joseph, how could He be greater than Solomon, or greater than Jonah, or greater than David,
St Irenaeus of Lyons † AD 202 Against Heresies 4.33.4
… Or how shall they receive adoption from God if they remain in this [kind of] generation, which is naturally possessed by man in this world? And how could He (Christ) have been greater than Solomon, or greater than Jonah, or have been the Lord of David,
St Cyril of Jerusalem † AD 386 The Catechetical Lectures of S. Cyril 14
… And the Saviour, confirming this saying in the Gospels, says that David spoke not these things of himself, but from the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, saying, How then doth David in the Spirit call Him Lord, saying, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit Thou on My right hand
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 On the Holy Spirit 3.15
… but therefore called the Son his Lord, that you might not think Him to be the Son, but the Lord of the prophet, as the Lord Himself showed in the Gospel, when He said: “If David in the Spirit called Him Lord, how is he his Son?”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 26
… and thereby stopping their mouths, He said, “How then doth David in spirit call Him Lord, saying, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand ?”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 68
And not even at this doth He stop, but in order to move them to fear, He adds what followeth also, saying, “Till I make Thine enemies Thy footstool;”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 80
3. And yet what kind of blasphemy was this? For indeed before He had said, when they were gathered together, “The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit Thou on my right hand,”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 A Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles 6
… not requiring worthiness: and not simply gave, but with abundance. Whence does this appear? Henceforth after the mention of His giving the Spirit, he confidently speaks also of His ascension into heaven; and not only so, but again adducing the witness, and reminding them of that Person concerning Whom Christ once spake. (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 8
… Concerning the Patriarch Christ Himself speaks by name, “that your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and he saw it, and was glad.” ( c. viii. 56 .) And concerning David, confuting the Jews He said, “How then doth David in spirit call Him Lord, saying, the Lord said unto my Lord, Sit Thou on My right hand.” (
Rufinus of Aquileia † AD 411 A Commentary on the Apostles' Creed 32
… and every tongue shall confess to Him that Jesus is Lord in the glory of God the Father;” of Whom also David thus speaks, “The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit Thou on my right hand until I make Thine enemies Thy footstool.” Referring to which words the Lord in the Gospel said to the Pharisees, “If therefore David in spirit calleth Him Lord, how is He his Son?”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 1.20
… When they answered then that Christ was David’s Son, Jesus said to them, “How then doth David in spirit call Him Lord, saying, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit Thou on My right hand, till I put Thine enemies under Thy feet. If David then in spirit call Him Lord, how is He his Son?”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 41.2
… If David then,” He saith, “in spirit call Him Lord, how is He his Son?”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 42.1
… whose Son is He? They answered Him, The Son of David.” And this was entirely according to the Scriptures. But He said, “How then doth David in spirit call Him Lord, saying, The Lord said unto My Lord, Sit Thou on My right hand, till I make Thine enemies Thy footstool. If David then in spirit call Him Lord, how is He his Son?”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 10.15
… “God shall give unto Him the throne of His father David.” Nor to this understanding of it is the sentence opposed in which the same Lord asks of the Jews, “If Christ be the Son of David, how then doth he in spirit call Him Lord, saying, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit Thou on my right hand, until I put Thine enemies under Thy feet.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 55.3
… He saw that they had stayed at the flesh, and had lost sight of the divinity; and He reproveth them by propounding a question: “How then doth David himself in spirit call Him Lord, ‘The Lord hath said unto my Lord.’…If then He in spirit calleth Him Lord, how is He is Son?”
Theodoret of Cyrus † AD 458 Dialogues. The “Eranistes” or “Polymorphus” of the Blessed Theodoretus, Bishop of Cyrus 2
… He adopted this same course in the case of the Pharisees; for when He saw them accosting Him as a mere man He asked them “What think ye of Christ? Whose son is He?” And when they said “Of David” He went on “How then doth David calling him Lord say ‘The Lord said unto my Lord sit thou on my right hand.’”
Pope St Leo I the Great † AD 461 Sermons 28
… sit thou on My right hand till I place thy enemies as the footstool of thy feet
22:44
Tertullian † AD 220 The Five Books Against Marcion 5.9
… Now they say that this Psalm was a chant in honour of Hezekiah, because “he went up to the house of the Lord,” and God turned back and removed his enemies. Therefore, (as they further hold,) those other words, “Before the morning star did I beget thee from the womb,”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 68
And He Himself too in like manner for this cause introduces the doctrine in the way of question and inference, saying, “How then doth David in spirit call Him Lord, saying, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit Thou on my right hand, until I make Thy foes Thy footstool;”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 69
And since He had made mention of “the Lord” and “my Lord,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 City of God 17.14
… Which opinion is refuted by the voice of the Saviour Himself in the Gospel, when He says that David himself by the Spirit said Christ was his Lord; for the 110th Psalm begins thus, “The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit Thou at my right hand, until I make Thine enemies Thy footstool.”
22:45
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 35
[21, 22] If then David calleth him Lord, how is he his son? And no one was able to answer him; and no man dared from that day again to ask him of anything.
St Gregory of Nyssa † AD 395 Against Eunomius 7.1
… For how could any one, being but man, know the supercelestial converse of the Father with the Son? But being “in the Spirit” he said that the Lord spoke to the Lord those words which He has uttered. For if, He says, “David in the Spirit calls him Lord, how is He then his son
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 68
And He Himself too in like manner for this cause introduces the doctrine in the way of question and inference, saying, “How then doth David in spirit call Him Lord, saying, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit Thou on my right hand, until I make Thy foes Thy footstool;” and again, “If David then call Him Lord, how is He then his Son,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 8.9
… and son of David because son of Mary. Hear the apostle openly declaring, “Who was made of the seed of David according to the flesh.” Hear Him also declared the Lord of David; let David himself declare this: “The Lord said to my Lord, Sit Thou on my right hand.” And this passage Jesus Himself brought forward to the Jews, and refuted them from it.
22:46
Tatian † AD 180 The Diatessaron 35
[21, 22] If then David calleth him Lord, how is he his son?
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 68
For they were silent from thenceforth, not willingly, but from their having nothing to say; and they received so deadly a blow, as no longer to dare to attempt the same things any more. For, “no one,” it is said, “durst from that day forth ask Him any more questions.”
22:1
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Hom. lxix.
Forasmuch as He had said, And it shall be given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof, He now proceeds to shew what nation that is.
The Gloss interlin.
Answered, that is, meeting their evil thoughts of putting Him to death.
St Augustine † AD 430 de Cons. Ev. ii. 71.
This parable is related only by Matthew. Luke gives one like it, but it is not the same, as the order shews.
St Gregory the Great † AD 604 Hom. in Ev. xxxviii. 2.
Here, by the wedding-feast is denoted the present Church; there, by the supper, the last and eternal feast. For into this enter some who shall perish; into that whosoever has once entered in shall never be put forth. But if any should maintain that these are the same lessons, we may perhaps explain that that part concerning the guest who had come in without a wedding garment, which Luke has not mentioned, Matthew has related. That the one calls it supper, the other dinner, makes no difference; for with the ancients the dinner was at the ninth hour, and was therefore often called supper.
Origen † AD 253
The kingdom of heaven, in respect of Him who reigns there, is like a king; in respect of Him who shares the kingdom, it is like a king’s son; in respect of those things which are in the kingdom, it is like servants and guests, and among them the king’s armies. It is specified, A man that is a king, that what is spoken may be as by a man to men, and that a man may regulate men unwilling to be regulated by God. But the kingdom of heaven will then cease to be like a man, when zeal and contention and all other passions and sins having ceased, we shall cease to walk after men, and shall see Him as He is. For now we see Him not as He is, but as He has been made for us in our dispensation.
St Gregory the Great † AD 604 ubi sup.
G marriage feast for God the Son, when He joined Him to human nature in the womb of the Virgin. But far be it from us to conclude, that because marriage takes place between two separate persons, that therefore the person of our Redeemer was made up of two separate persons. We say indeed that He exists of two natures, and in two natures, but we hold it unlawful to believe that He was compounded of two persons. It is safer therefore to say, that the marriage feast was made by the King the Father for the King the Son when He joined to Him the Holy Church in the mystery of His incarnation. The womb of the Virgin Mother was the bride-chamber of this Bridegroom.
Pseudo-Chrysostom
Otherwise; When the resurrection of the saints shall be, then the life, which is Christ, shall revive man, swallowing up his mortality in its own immortality. For now we receive the Holy Spirit as a pledge of the future union, but then we shall have Christ Himself more fully in us.
Origen † AD 253
Or, by the marriage of Bridegroom with Bride, that is, of Christ with the soul, understand the Assumption of the Word, the produce whereof is good works.
St Hilary † AD 367
Rightly has the Father already made this wedding, because this eternal union and espousal of the new body is already perfect in Christ.
Pseudo-Chrysostom
When the servants were sent to call them, they must have been invited before. Men have been invited from the time of Abraham, to whom was promised Christ’s incarnation.
St Jerome † AD 420
He sent his servant, without doubt Moses, by whom I le gave the Law, to those who had been invited. But if you read servants as most copies have, it must be referred to the Prophets, by whom they were invited, but neglected to come. By the servants who were sent the second time, we may better understand the Prophets than the Apostles; that is to say, if servant is read in the first place; but if ‘servants,’ then by the second servants are to be understood the Apostles;
Pseudo-Chrysostom
whom He sent when He said unto them, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, but rather go to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. (Mat. 10:5.)
Origen † AD 253
Or; The servants who were first sent to call them that were bidden to the wedding, are to be taken as the Prophets converting the people by their prophecy to the festival of the restoration of the Church to Christ. They who would not come at the first message are they who refused to hear the words of the Prophets. The others who were sent a second time were another assembly of Prophets.
St Hilary † AD 367
Or; The servants who were first sent to call them that were bidden, are the Apostles; they who, being before bidden, are now invited to come in, are the people of Israel, who had before been bidden through the Law to the glories of eternity. To the Apostles therefore it belonged to remind those whom the Prophets had invited. Those sent with the second injunction are the Apostolic men their successors.
St Gregory the Great † AD 604 ubi sup.
But because these who were first invited would not come to the feast, the second summons says, Behold, I have prepared my dinner.
St Jerome † AD 420
The dinner that is prepared, the oxen and the fatlings that are killed, is either a description of regal magnificence by the way of metaphor, that by carnal things spiritual may be understood; or the greatness of the doctrines, and the manifold teaching of God in His law, may be understood.
Pseudo-Chrysostom
When therefore the Lord bade the Apostles, Go ye and preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand, it was the same message as is here given, I have prepared my dinner; i. e. I have set out the table of Scripture out of the Law and the Prophets.
St Gregory the Great † AD 604 ubi sup.
By the oxen are signified the Fathers of the Old Testament; who by sufferance of the Law gored their enemies with the horn of bodily strength. By fatlings are meant fatted animals, for from ‘alere’, comes ‘altilia,’ as it were ‘alitilia’ or ‘alita.’ By the fatlings are intended the Fathers of the New Testament; who while they receive sweet grace of inward fattening, are raised by the wing of contemplation from earthly desires to things above. He says therefore, My oxen and my fallings are killed; as much as to say, Look to the deaths of the Fathers who have been before you, and desire some amendment of your lives.
Pseudo-Chrysostom
Otherwise; He says oxen and fatlings, not as though the oxen were not fatted, but because all the oxen were not fat. Therefore the fatlings denote the Prophets who were filled with the Holy Spirit; the oxen those who were both Priests and Prophets, as Jeremiah and Ezekiel; for as the oxen are the leaders of the herd, so also the Priests are leaders of the people.
St Hilary † AD 367
Or otherwise; The oxen are the glorious army of Martyrs, offered, like choice victims, for the confession of God; the fatlings are spiritual men, as birds fed for flight upon heavenly food, that they may fill others with the abundance of the food they have eaten.
St Gregory the Great † AD 604 ubi sup.
It is to be observed, that in the first invitation nothing was said of the oxen or fatlings, but in the second it is announced that they are already killed, because Almighty God when we will not hear His words gives examples, that what we suppose impossible may become easy to us to surmount, when we hear that others have passed through it before us.
Origen † AD 253
Or; The dinner which is prepared is the oracle of God; and so the more mighty of the oracles of God are the oxen; the sweet and pleasant are the fatlings. For if any one bring forward feeble words, without power, and not having strong force of reason, these are the lean things; the fatlings are when to the establishment of each proposition many examples are brought forward backed by reasonable proofs. For example, supposing one holding discourse of chastity, it might well be represented by the turtle-dove; but should he bring forward the same holy discourse full of reasonable proof out of Scripture, so as to delight and strengthen the mind of his hearer, then he brings the dove fatted.
Pseudo-Chrysostom
That He says, And all things are now ready, means, that all that is required to salvation is already filled up in the Scriptures; there the ignorant may find instruction; the self-willed may read of terrors; he who is in difficulty may there find promises to rouse him to activity.
The Gloss interlin.
Or, All things are now ready, i. e. The entrance into the kingdom, which had been hitherto closed, is now ready through faith in My incarnation.
Pseudo-Chrysostom non occ. sed vid. Gloss. ord.
Or He says, All things are now ready which belong to the mystery of the Lord’s Passion, and our redemption. He says, Come to the marriage, not with your feet, but with faith, and good conduct. But they made light of it; why they did so He shews when He adds, And they went their way, one to his farm, another to his merchandize.
St John Chrysostom † AD 407
These occupations seem to be entirely reasonable; but we learn hence, that however necessary the things that take up our time, we ought to prefer spiritual things to every thing beside. But it seems to me that they only pretended these engagements as a cloak for their disregard of the invitation.
St Hilary † AD 367
For men are taken up with worldly ambition as with a farm; and many through covetousness are engrossed with trafficking.
Pseudo-Chrysostom
Or otherwise; When we work with the labour of our hands, for example, cultivating our field or our vineyard, or any manufacture of wood or iron, we seem to be occupied with our farm; any other mode of getting money unattended with manual labour is here called merchandize. O most miserable world! and miserable ye that follow it! The pursuits of this world have ever shut men out of life.
St Gregory the Great † AD 604
Whosoever then intent upon earthly business, or devoted to the actions of this world, feigns to be meditating upon the mystery of the Lord’s Passion, and to be living accordingly, is he that refuses to come to the King’s wedding on pretext of going to his farm or his merchandize. Nay often, which is worse, some who are called not only reject the grace, but become persecutors, And the remnant took his servants, and entreated them despitefully, and slew them.
Pseudo-Chrysostom
Or, by the business of a farm, He denotes the Jewish populace, whom the delights of this world separated from-Christ; by the excuse of merchandize, the Priests and other ministers of the Temple, who, coming to the service of the Law and the Temple through greediness of gain, have been shut out of the faith by covetousness. Of these He said not, ‘They were filled with envy,’ but They made light of it. For they who through hate and spite crucified Christ, are they who were filled with envy; but they who being entangled in business did not believe on Him, are not said to have been filled with envy, but to have made light of it. The Lord is silent respecting His own death, because He had spoken of it in the foregoing parable, but He shews forth the death of His disciples, whom after His ascension the Jews put to death, stoning Stephen and executing James the son of Alphæus, for which things Jerusalem was destroyed by the Romans. And it is to be observed, that anger is attributed to God figuratively and not properly; He is then said to be angry when He punishes.
St Jerome † AD 420
When He was doing works of mercy, and bidding to His marriage-feast, He was called a man; (homini regi) now when He comes to vengeance, the man is dropped, and He is called only a King.
Origen † AD 253
Let those who sin against the God of the Law, and the Prophets, and the whole creation, declare whether He who is here called man, and is said to be angry, is indeed the Father Himself. If they allow this, they will be forced to own that many things are said of Him applicable to the passible nature of man; not for that He has passions, but because He is represented to us after the manner of passible human nature. In this way we take God’s anger, repentance, and the other things of the like sort in the Prophets.
St Jerome † AD 420
By His armies we understand the Romans under Vespasian and Titus, who having slaughtered the inhabitants of Judæa, laid in ashes the faithless city.
Pseudo-Chrysostom
The Roman army is called God’s army; because The earth is the Lord’s, and the fulness thereof; (Ps. 24:1.) nor would the Romans have come to Jerusalem, had not the Lord stirred them thither.
St Gregory the Great † AD 604 ubi sup.
Or, The armies of our King are the legions of His Angels. He is said therefore to have sent His armies, and to have destroyed those murderers, because all judgment is executed upon men by the Angels. He destroys those murderers, when He cuts off persecutors; and burns up their city, because not only their souls, but the body of flesh they had tenanted, is tormented in the everlasting fire of hell.
Origen † AD 253
Or, the city of those wicked men is in each doctrine the assembly of those who meet in the wisdom of the rulers of this world; which the King sets fire to and destroys, as consisting of evil buildings.
St Gregory the Great † AD 604 ubi sup.
But when He sees that His invitation is spurned at, He will not have His Son’s marriage-feast empty; the word of God will find where it may stay itself.
Origen † AD 253
He saith to His servants, that is, to the Apostles; or to the Angels, who were set over the calling of the Gentiles, The wedding is ready.
Remigius † AD 908
That is, the whole sacrament of the human dispensation is completed and closed. But they which, were bidden, (Rom. 10:3.) that is, the Jews, were not worthy, because, ignorant of the righteousness of God, and going about to establish their own righteousness, they have not submitted themselves to the righteousness of God. The Jewish nation then being rejected, the Gentile people were taken in to the marriage-feast; whence it follows, Go ye out into the crossings of the streets, and as many as ye shall find, bid to the wedding.
St Jerome † AD 420
For the Gentile nation was not in the streets, but in the crossings of the streets.
Remigius † AD 908
These are the errors of the Gentiles.
Pseudo-Chrysostom
Or; The streets are all the professions of this world, as philosophy, soldiery, and the like. And therefore He says, Go out into the crossings of the streets, that they may call to the faith men of every condition. Moreover, as chastity is the way that leads to God, so fornication is the way that leads to the Devil; and so it is in the other virtues and vices. Thus He bids them invite to the faith men of every profession or condition.
St Hilary † AD 367
By the street also is to be understood the time of this world, and they are therefore bid to go to the crossings of the streets, because the past is remitted to all.
St Gregory the Great † AD 604 ubi sup.
Or otherwise; In holy Scripture, way is taken to mean actions; so that the crossings of the ways we understand as failure in action, for they usually come to God readily, who have had little prosperity in worldly actions.
Origen † AD 253
Or otherwise; I suppose this first bidding to the wedding to have been a bidding of some of the more noble minds. For God would have those before all come to the feast of the divine oracles who are of the more ready wit to understand them; and forasmuch as they who are such are loth to come to that kind of summons, other servants are sent to move them to come, and to promise that they shall find the dinner prepared. For as in the things of the body, one is the bride, others the inviters to the feast, and they that are bidden are others again; so God knows the various ranks of souls, and their powers, and the reasons why these are taken into the condition of the Bride, others in the rank of the servants that call, and others among the number of those that are bidden as guests. But they who had been thus especially invited contemned the first inviters as poor in understanding, and went their way, following their own devices, as more delighting in them than in those things which the King by his servants promised. Yet are these more venial than they who ill-treat and put to death the servants sent unto them; those, that is, who daringly assail with weapons of contentious words the servants sent, who are unequal to solve their subtle difficulties, and those are illtreated or put to death by them. The servants going forth are either Christ’s Apostles going from Judæa and Jerusalem, or the Holy Angels from the inner worlds, and going to the various ways of various manners, gathered together whomsoever they found, not caring whether before their calling they had been good or bad. By the good here we may understand simply the more humble and upright of those who come to the worship of God, to whom agreed what the Apostle says, When the Gentiles which have not the Law do by nature the things contained in the Law, they are a law unto themselves. (Rom. 2:14.)
St Jerome † AD 420
For there is an infinite difference among the Gentiles themselves; some are more prone to vice, others are endowed with more incorrupt and virtuous manners.
St Gregory the Great † AD 604 ubi sup.
Or; He means that in this present Church there cannot be bad without good, nor good without bad. He is not good who refuses to endure the bad.
Origen † AD 253
The marriage-feast of Christ and the Church is filled, when they who were found by the Apostles, being restored to God, sat down to the feast. But since it behoved that both bad and good should be called, not that the bad should continue bad, but that they should put off the garments unmeet for the wedding, and should put on the marriage garments, to wit, bowels of mercy and kindness, for this cause the King goes out, that He may see them set down before the supper is set before them, that they may be detained who have the wedding garment in which He is delighted, and that he may condemn the opposite.
Pseudo-Chrysostom
The King came in to see the guests; not as though there was any place where He is not; but where He will look to give judgment, there He is said to be present; where He will not, there He seems to be absent. The day of His coming to behold is the day of judgment, when He will visit Christians seated at the board of the Scriptures.
Origen † AD 253
But when He was come in, He found there one who had not put off his old behaviour; He saw there a man which had not on a wedding garment. He speaks of one only, because all, who after faith continue to serve that wickedness which they had before the faith, are but of one kind.
St Gregory the Great † AD 604 ubi sup.
What ought we to understand by the wedding garment, but charity? For this the Lord had upon Him, when He came to espouse the Church to Himself. He then enters in to the wedding feast, but without the wedding garment, who has faith in the Church, but not charity.
St Augustine † AD 430 cont. Faust. xxii. 19.
Or, he goes to the feast without a garment, who goes seeking his own, and not the Bridegroom’s honour.
St Hilary † AD 367
Or; The wedding garment is the grace of the Holy Spirit, and the purity of that heavenly temper, which taken up on the confession of a good enquiry is to be preserved pure and unspotted for the company of the kingdom of heaven.
St Jerome † AD 420
Or; The marriage garment is the commandments of the Lord, and the works which are done under the Law and the Gospel, and form the clothing of the new man. Whoso among the Christian body shall be found in the day of judgment not to have these, is straightway condemned. He saith unto him, Friend, how camest thou in hither, not having a wedding garment? He calls him friend, because he was invited to the wedding as being a friend by faith; but He charges him with want of manners in polluting by his filthy dress the elegance of the wedding entertainment.
Origen † AD 253
And forasmuch as he who is in sin, and puts not on the Lord Jesus Christ, has no excuse, it follows, But he was speechless.
St Jerome † AD 420
For in that day there will be no room for blustering manner1, nor power of denial, when all the Angels and the world itself are witnesses against the sinner.
Origen † AD 253
He who has thus insulted the marriage feast is not only cast out therefrom, but besides by the King’s officers, who are set over his prisons, is chained up from that power of walking which he employed not to walk to any good thing, and that power of reaching forth his hand, wherewith he had fulfilled no work for any good; and is sentenced to a place whence all light is banished, which is called outer darkness.
St Gregory the Great † AD 604 ubi sup.
The hands and feet are then bound by a severe sentence of judgment, which before refused to be bound from wicked actions by amendment of life. Or punishment binds them, whom sin had before bound from good works.
St Augustine † AD 430 de Trin. xi. 6.
The bonds of wicked and depraved desires are the chains which bind him who deserves to be cast out into outer darkness.
St Gregory the Great † AD 604 ubi sup.
By inward darkness we express blindness, of heart; outer darkness signifies the everlasting night of damnation.
Pseudo-Chrysostom
Or, it points to the difference of punishment inflicted on sinners. Outer darkness being the deepest, inward darkness the lesser, as it were the outskirts of the place.
St Jerome † AD 420
By a metaphor taken from the body, there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth, is shewn the greatness of the torments. The binding of the hands and feet also, and the weeping of eyes, and the gnashing of teeth, understand as proving the truth of the resurrection of the body.
St Gregory the Great † AD 604 ubi sup.
There shall gnash those teeth which here delighted in gluttony; there shall weep those eyes which here roamed in illicit desire; every member shall there have its peculiar punishment, which here was a slave to its peculiar vice.
St Jerome † AD 420
And because in the marriage and supper the chief thing is the end and not the beginning, therefore He adds, For many are called, but few chosen.
St Hilary † AD 367
For to invite all without exception is a courtesy of public benevolence; but out of the invited or called, the election will be of worth, by distinction of merit.
St Gregory the Great † AD 604 ubi sup.
For some never begin a good course, and some never continue in that good course which they have begun. Let each one’s care about himself be in proportion to his ignorance of what is yet to come.
Pseudo-Chrysostom
Or otherwise; Whenever God will try His Church, He enters into it that He may see the guests; and if He finds any one not having on the wedding garment, He enquires of him, How then were you made a Christian, if you neglect these works? Such a one Christ gives over to His ministers, that is, to seducing leaders, who bind his hands, that is, his works, and his feet, that is, the motions of his mind, and cast him into darkness, that is, into the errors of the Gentiles or the Jews, or into heresy. The nigher darkness is that of the Gentiles, for they have never heard the truth which they despise; the outer darkness is that of the Jews, who have heard but do not believe; the outermost is that of the heretics, who have heard and have learned.
The Latin text
Chrysostomus in Matth
Quia dixerat: dabitur genti facienti fructum eius, hic ostendit cui genti: unde dicitur et respondens Iesus, dixit iterum in parabolis eis, dicens: simile factum est regnum caelorum
, et cetera. Glossa
Dicit autem respondens, idest obvians pravae cogitationi eorum de morte sua
Augustinus de Cons. Evang
Parabolam autem istam solus Matthaeus narrat: simile quidem etiam Lucas commemorat; sed non est hoc, sicut et ipse ordo indicat
Gregorius in Evang
Hic per nuptias, praesens Ecclesia; illic per coenam, aeternum et ultimum convivium designatur; quia et in hanc nonnulli exituri intrant; ad illud quisquis semel intraverit, ulterius non exibit. At si quis forte contendat hanc eamdem esse lectionem, intelligi forsitan potest quia de proiecto eo, qui cum nuptiali veste non intraverat, quod Lucas tacuit, Matthaeus dixit; quod vero per illum coena, per hunc autem prandium dicitur, nequaquam obsistit: quia cum ad horam nonam apud antiquos prandium fieret quotidie, ipsum quoque prandium coena vocabatur
Origenes in Matth
Regnum autem caelorum simile est, secundum eum quidem qui regnat, homini regi; secundum eum autem qui conregnat, filio regis; secundum ea vero quae sunt in regno regis, servis et invitatis ad nuptias; inter quod est et exercitus regis. Additum est autem homini regi, ut hominibus quasi homo loquatur, et dispenset homines non cupientes dispensari a Deo. Sed tunc cessabit regnum caelorum esse simile homini, cum cessante zelo et contentione et ceteris passionibus et peccatis, cessaverimus secundum hominem ambulare, et videbimus eum sicuti est. Nunc enim videmus eum non sicuti est, sed sicuti per nostram dispensationem factus fuerit nobis
Gregorius
Tunc autem Deus pater Deo filio nuptias fecit quando hunc in utero virginis humanae naturae coniunxit. Sed quia ex duabus personis fieri solet nuptiarum coniunctio, absit hoc ab intellectibus nostris ut personam redemptoris nostri ex duabus personis credamus esse unitam. Ex duabus quippe atque in duabus hunc naturis existere dicimus, sed ex duabus personis credere compositum ut nefas vitamus. Securius ergo dici potest, quia in hoc rex pater regi filio nuptias fecit, quod ei per incarnationis mysterium sanctam Ecclesiam sociavit. Uterus autem genitricis virginis huius sponsi thalamus fuit
Chrysostomus super Matth
Vel aliter. Cum resurrectio fuerit facta sanctorum, tunc suscipiet hominem vita, quae est Christus, mortalitatem eius sua immortalitate absorbens. Nunc enim quasi arrhas futuri coniugii spiritum sanctum accipimus; tunc autem ipsum Christum plenius in nobis habebimus
Origenes
Vel coniunctionem sponsi ad sponsam, idest Christi ad animam, verbi susceptionem intellige; partus autem opera bona
Hilarius
Merito autem a patre iam sunt hae nuptiae factae, quia aeternitatis huius societas et novi corporis desponsata coniunctio habetur iam perfecta in Christo. Sequitur et misit servos suos vocare invitatos ad nuptias; et noluerunt venire
Chrysostomus super Matth
Ergo quando misit servos suos, iam invitati prius erant. Invitati sunt enim homines a tempore Abrahae, cui Christi incarnatio promittebatur
Hieronymus
Misit autem servum suum; nec dubium quin Moysen, per quem legem invitatis dedit. Si autem servos legerimus, ut plura habent exemplaria, ad prophetas referendum est: quia invitati per eos, venire contempserunt. Sequitur iterum misit alios servos, dicens: dicite invitatis, et cetera. Servi qui secundo missi sunt, melius est ut prophetae intelligantur, quam apostoli; ita tamen si servus supra fuerit scriptus; sin autem servos ibidem legas, hic servi secundi, apostoli sunt intelligendi
Chrysostomus super Matth
Quos misit cum eis dixit: in viam gentium ne abieritis (...) sed potius ite ad oves perditas domus Israel
Origenes in Matth
Vel qui primi mittuntur servi vocare invitatos ad nuptias habentur prophetae convertentes ex populo per suas prophetias ad laetitiam et restitutionem Ecclesiae ad Christum. Qui autem noluerunt venire in primis invitati, sunt qui noluerunt audire verba prophetarum. Iterum alii transmissi, alia congregatio prophetarum est
Hilarius in Matth
Vel servi primo missi, qui invitatos vocarent, apostoli sunt; qui autem admonentur ut veniant, invitati antea, populus Israel est: in gloriam enim aeternitatis per legem est advocatus. Apostolorum ergo erat proprium commonefacere eos quos invitaverant prophetae. Qui vero iterum cum praeceptorum conditione mittuntur, apostolici viri sunt successores eorum
Gregorius in Evang
Sed quia hi qui prius invitati sunt, ad nuptiarum convivium venire noluerunt, in secunda invitatione iam dicitur ecce prandium meum paravi
Hieronymus
Prandium paratum, et tauri, et altilia occisa, vel per metaphoram opes regiae describuntur, ut ex carnalibus intelligantur spiritualia; vel certe dogmatum magnitudo et doctrina Dei lege plenissima sentiri potest
Chrysostomus super Matth
Cum ergo dominus apostolis dixit: euntes praedicate, dicentes quia appropinquavit regnum caelorum, hoc significavit quod hic dicitur prandium meum paravi: idest, ex lege et prophetis Scripturarum mensas ornavi: unde sequitur tauri mei et altilia occisa sunt
Gregorius
Per tauros autem patres veteris testamenti significantur; qui ex permissione legis inimicos suos virtutis corporeae cornu feriebant. Altilia vero saginata dicimus: ab eo enim quod est alere, altilia, quasi alitilia, vel quasi alita vocamus. Per altilia ergo patres novi testamenti figurantur; qui dum gratiam pinguedinis internae dulcedinis percipiunt, a terrenis desideriis ad sublimia contemplationis suae penna sublevantur. Dicit ergo tauri mei et altilia occisa sunt; ac si diceret: patrum praecedentium mortes aspicite, et remedia vitae vestrae cogitate
Chrysostomus super Matth
Vel aliter. Ideo dicit et saginata et tauros, non quia et tauri non fuerint saginati, sed quia non omnes saginati fuerunt tauri; ergo saginata tantummodo dicit prophetas, qui fuerunt spiritu sancto repleti; tauros autem qui prophetae fuerunt et sacerdotes, sicut Ieremias et Ezechiel: ut enim tauri duces sunt gregis, ita et sacerdotes principes sunt populi
Hilarius
Vel aliter. Tauri gloriosa martyrum species est, qui confessioni Dei, tamquam hostia electa, sunt immolati; saginata vero sunt homines spirituales, tamquam caelesti pane ad evolandum aves pastae, ceteros accepti cibi ubertate expleturae
Gregorius
Notandum vero, quod in priore invitatione nil de tauris et altilibus dicitur; in secunda autem iam tauri et altilia mactata memorantur: quia omnipotens Deus, cum verba eius audire volumus, adiungit exempla: ut omne quod impossibile credimus, tanto nobis ad superandum fiat facilius, quanto per hoc transisse et alios audimus
Origenes in Matth
Vel quia prandium quod paratur, est eloquium Dei; fortia quaeque eloquiorum Dei, tauri intelligantur; suavia vero et delectabilia eorum, sunt saginata. Si quis enim proferat quaedam dicta modica et non firma, et non magnam virtutem rationis habentia, videntur macra esse quae proferuntur; saginata autem sunt cum ad unamquamque propositionem exempla multa rationis probatione repleta inducuntur: puta si aliquis de castitate sermonem loquitur, recte intelligitur turtur; sed cum ipsum sanctitatis sermonem cum rationis probatione de Scripturis repletum protulerit, ita ut delectet et confirmet animum audientis, protulit eum saginatum
Chrysostomus super Matth
Quod autem dicitur et omnia parata sunt, intelligitur quia quicquid quaeritur ad salutem, iam adimpletum est in Scripturis: qui enim ignorans est, invenit ibi quod discat; qui contumax est, invenit ibi quod timeat; qui laborat, invenit ibi promissa, quibus excitetur ad opus
Glossa
Vel omnia parata sunt, idest, introitus regni paratus est per fidem meae incarnationis, qui ante fuerat clausus
Chrysostomus super Matth
Vel omnia parata dicit quae pertinent ad mysterium dominicae passionis et nostrae redemptionis. Dicit autem venite ad nuptias, non pedibus, sed fide et moribus. Sequitur illi autem neglexerunt. Quare autem neglexerint, manifestat cum subditur et abierunt alius in villam suam, alius vero ad negotiationem suam
Chrysostomus in Matth
Quamvis autem videantur rationabiles occasiones esse; sed hinc discimus quod etiam si necessaria sint quae detinent, omnibus tamen praeponere spiritualia oportet. Mihi autem videtur quod his occasionibus usi, negligentiae velamina proponebant
Hilarius in Matth
Ambitione enim saeculi, tamquam villa, homines occupantur; plures vero propter pecuniae cupiditatem negotiatione detinentur
Chrysostomus super Matth
Vel aliter. Cum labore manuum nostrarum aliquid facimus, puta exercentes agrum vel vineam, aut opus ligni vel ferri, villam colere videmur; cum autem non labore manuum nostrarum alia lucra sequimur, totum hoc negotiatio appellatur. O miserrimus mundus, et miseri qui eum sequuntur. Semper enim mundialia opera homines excluserunt a vita
Gregorius in Evang
Qui ergo intentus labori terreno, vel mundi actionibus deditus, mysterium incarnationis dominicae pensare, et secundum illud vivere dissimulat, quasi ad villam vel negotium pergens, venire ad regis nuptias recusat; et plerumque, quod est gravius, nonnulli vocati gratiam non solum respuunt, sed etiam persequuntur: unde subditur reliqui vero tenuerunt servos eius, et contumeliis affectos occiderunt
Chrysostomus super Matth
Vel per occupationem villae, populares Iudaeorum significat, quos mundi delectatio separavit a Christo; per occupationem vero negotiationis, sacerdotes, ceterosque ministros templi significavit, quos lucri obtentu venientes ad ministerium legis et templi, avaritia separavit a fide; de quibus non dixit quod malignati sunt, sed neglexerunt: qui enim odio aut invidia crucifixerunt Christum, illi malignati sunt: qui autem negotiis impediti non crediderunt, illi neglexisse dicuntur, non malignari. De sua tamen morte dominus tacet, quia in priori parabola dixerat; sed ostendit mortem discipulorum suorum, quos post ascensum ipsius occiderunt Iudaei, Stephanum lapidantes, et Iacobum Alphaei occidentes: propter quae Ierusalem destructa est a Romanis. Et notandum, quod ira in Deo non proprie, sed translative dicitur; tunc enim irasci dicitur quando ulciscitur; unde et hic dicitur rex autem cum audisset, iratus est
Hieronymus
Quando invitabat ad nuptias, et agebat opera clementiae, hominis nomen appositum est: nunc autem quando ad ultionem venit, homo siletur, et rex tantum dicitur
Origenes in Matth
Dicant autem qui peccant in Deum legis et prophetarum et totius creationis, utrum iste qui et homo dicitur et iratus proponitur, ipse est pater Christi. Quod si dixerint hunc ipsum esse, cogendi sunt confiteri quoniam multa in eo secundum passibilem hominum naturam esse dicuntur: non quia ipse passibilis est, sed quia morem gerit passibilis naturae hominum. Et secundum hanc consequentiam suscipere convenit et iram Dei et poenitentiam et cetera huiusmodi in prophetis. Sequitur et missis exercitibus suis
Hieronymus
Per hos exercitus, Romanos intelligimus sub duce Vespasiano et Tito, qui, occisis Iudaeae populis, praevaricatricem incenderunt civitatem
Chrysostomus super Matth
Romanus autem exercitus dicitur exercitus Dei: quia domini est terra et plenitudo eius; nec etiam venissent Romani Ierusalem, nisi eos dominus excitasset
Origenes in Matth
Vel Angelorum agmina sunt exercitus regis nostri. Missis ergo exercitibus extinxisse homicidas dicitur, quia in hominibus omne iudicium per Angelos exercetur. Homicidas ergo perdit, quia persequentes interimit; civitatem eorum igni succendit, quia illorum non solum animae, sed caro quoque in qua habitaverunt, aeternae Gehennae flamma cruciantur
Origenes
Vel civitas impiorum est, secundum unumquodque dogma, congregatio eorum qui conveniunt in sapientia principum huius saeculi: quam succendit rex et exterminat, quasi ex malis aedificationibus consistentem
Gregorius
Sed is qui invitantem se contemni conspicit, filii sui nuptias vacuas non habebit: quandoque enim sermo Dei inventurus est ubi requiescat: unde subditur tunc ait servis suis
Origenes
Idest apostolis, aut Angelis, qui praepositi erant in vocatione gentium. Nuptiae quidem paratae sunt
Remigius
Idest, omne sacramentum humanae dispensationis iam peractum atque completum est. Sed qui invitati erant, idest Iudaei, non fuerunt digni: quia Dei iustitiam ignorantes, et suam statuere volentes, indignos se iudicaverunt aeternae vitae. Reprobato ergo Iudaico populo, ad has nuptias gentilis populus est susceptus: unde sequitur ite ergo ad exitus viarum, et quoscumque inveneritis vocate ad nuptias
Hieronymus
Gentilis enim populus non erat in viis, sed in exitibus viarum
Remigius
Qui sunt errores gentilium
Chrysostomus super Matth
Vel viae sunt omnes professiones huius mundi, ut puta philosophiae, militiae, et huiusmodi. Dicit ergo ite ad exitus viarum: ut cuiuslibet conditionis homines vocent ad fidem. Adhuc, sicut castitas via est quae ducit ad Deum, sic fornicatio via est quae ducit ad Diabolum; et sic de virtutibus et vitiis. Iubet ergo, ut cuiuscumque conversationis vel conditionis homines invitent ad fidem
Hilarius in Matth
Per viam etiam tempus saeculi intelligendum est; atque ideo ad exitus viarum iubentur ire, quia omnibus retroacta donantur
Gregorius
Vel aliter. In Scriptura sacra vias actiones accipimus; exitus viarum intelligimus defectus actionum, quia illi plerumque facile ad eum veniunt quos in terrenis actionibus prospera nulla comitantur
Origenes
Vel aliter. Puto hanc primam vocationem fuisse ad nuptias aliquarum ingenuarum animarum: principaliter enim Deus vult venire ad epulationem divini eloquii eos qui ad intelligendum sunt ingeniosiores; et quoniam qui huiusmodi sunt, nolunt ad istam vocationem venire, transmittuntur alii servi provocantes eos, et promittentes quod, si venerint, percipient prandium paratum a rege. Sicut enim in corporalibus alia est quae nubit sponsa, alii invitatores, alii qui invitantur ad nuptias, sic Deus scit diversos ordines animarum, earumque virtutes, et causas ob quas hi quidem in constitutione sponsae accipiuntur, alii in ordine servorum vocantium, alii in numero invitatorum ad nuptias. Sed qui principaliter quidem fuerant invitati, primos invitatores quasi pauperes sensu neglexerunt, et abierunt sua sequentes, in quibus magis sunt delectati quam in his quae rex per servos quos promittebat. Sed hi leviores sunt his qui servis transmissis iniuriantur et interficiunt; qui scilicet praeparatione contentiosorum verborum ausi sunt tenuisse servos missos, qui non sunt praeparati ad solvendas quaestiones eorum versutas; et contumeliis afficiuntur, vel interficiuntur ab eis. Sequitur et egressi servi eius in vias, congregaverunt omnes quos invenerunt bonos et malos
Origenes
Egredientes servi, sive de Iudaea et Ierusalem apostoli Christi, sive ab interioribus Angeli sancti, et venientes ad vias diversas diversorum morum, congregaverunt quoscumque invenerunt; et non curant, utrum aliquando ante vocationem mali fuerint aut boni. Bonos autem intelligere hic simpliciter convenit humiliores et rectiores ex eis qui veniebant ad cultum Dei, quibus conveniebat quod apostolus ait: cum gentes quae legem non habent, ea quae legis sunt faciunt, ipsi sibi sunt lex
Hieronymus
Inter ipsos enim gentiles infinita est diversitas; cum alios sciamus esse procliviores ad vitia, alios ad honestatem morum virtutibus deditos
Gregorius
Vel hoc dicit, quia in hac Ecclesia nec mali sine bonis, nec boni sine malis esse possunt. Bonus autem non fuit qui malos tolerare recusavit. Sequitur et impletae sunt nuptiae discumbentium
Origenes in Matth
Nuptiae, scilicet Christi et Ecclesiae, sunt impletae dum restituti Deo qui ab apostolis sunt inventi recubuerunt ad epulandum in nuptiis. Sed quoniam bonos et malos oportuit quidem vocari, non autem ut mali permanerent mali, sed ut deponerent vestimenta contraria nuptiis et induerent nuptialia indumenta, scilicet viscera misericordiae et benignitatis; ideo rex egreditur, ut videat discumbentes priusquam apponatur eis prandium, ut retineat habentes nuptialia vestimenta, et delectet; condemnetque contrarios: unde sequitur intravit autem rex, ut videret discumbentes
Chrysostomus super Matth
Non quia alicubi ipse non est; sed ubi vult per iudicium aspicere, ibi dicitur praesens; ubi autem non vult, absens videtur. Dies autem aspectionis est dies iudicii, quando visitaturus est Christianos, qui super mensam Scripturarum recumbunt
Origenes
Ingrediens autem invenit quemdam qui non mutaverat proprios mores: unde sequitur et vidit ibi hominem non vestitum veste nuptiali. Singulariter dixit, quia unius sunt generis omnes qui servant malitiam post fidem, quam habuerant ante fidem
Gregorius
Quid autem debemus intelligere per nuptialem vestem nisi caritatem? Quia hanc in se dominus habuit, dum ad sociandae sibi Ecclesiae nuptias veniret. Intrat ergo ad nuptias, sed sine veste nuptiali, qui in Ecclesia fidem habet, sed caritatem non habet
Augustinus contra Faustum
Vel sine veste nuptiali nuptias adit qui quaerit ibi gloriam non sponsi, sed suam
Hilarius in Matth
Vel vestis nuptialis est gratia spiritus sancti, et candor habitus caelestis, qui bonae interrogationis confessione susceptus, usque in coetum regni caelorum immaculatus et integer est reservandus
Hieronymus
Vel vestis nuptialis praecepta sunt domini, et opera quae complentur ex lege et Evangelio, novique hominis efficiunt vestimentum; quod qui in die iudicii inventus fuerit sub nomine Christiano non habere, statim corripitur: unde sequitur et ait illi: amice, quomodo huc intrasti non habens vestem nuptialem? Amicum vocat, quia est invitatus ad nuptias, quasi sit amicus per fidem. Arguit autem impudentiae, quod veste sordida munditias polluerit nuptiales
Origenes
Et quoniam qui peccat et non induit dominum Iesum Christum, non habet excusationem aliquam, ideo sequitur at ille obmutuit
Hieronymus
In tempore enim illo non erit locus impudentiae, nec negandi facultas; cum omnes Angeli et mundus ipse testes sint peccatorum
Gregorius
Non autem solum reiectus est a nuptiis qui iniuriam nuptiis fecit, sed adhuc a ministris regis super vincula constitutis ligatus incessione, qua non est usus ad bonum, et apprehensoria virtute, qua nullum opus ad bonum implevit; et condemnatus est in loco ab omni lumine alieno, qui vocatur tenebrae exteriores: unde sequitur tunc rex dixit ministris: ligatis manibus et pedibus, mittite eum in tenebras exteriores
Gregorius
Ligantur tunc pedes et manus per districtionem sententiae, qui modo a pravis operibus ligari noluerunt per meliorationem vitae, vel tunc ligat poena quos modo a bonis operibus ligavit culpa
Augustinus de Trin
Pravarum vero atque distortarum voluntatum implicatio vinculum est quo alligatur qui hoc agit, ut proiciatur in tenebras exteriores
Gregorius
Interiores autem tenebras dicimus caecitatem cordis, exteriores vero tenebras aeternam noctem damnationis
Chrysostomus super Matth
Vel per hoc designatur differentia tormentorum in peccatoribus. Sunt enim primae tenebrae exteriores, interiores autem minores, et novissima loci. Sequitur ibi erit fletus et stridor dentium
Hieronymus
In fletu oculorum et stridore dentium, per metaphoram membrorum corporalium, magnitudo ostenditur tormentorum. Manus quoque ligatas et pedes, fletum oculorum, et stridorem dentium, ad comprobandam resurrectionis intellige veritatem
Gregorius in Evang
Ut illic dentes strideant, qui de edacitate gaudebant; illic oculi defleant, qui hic per illicitas concupiscentias versabantur; quatenus singula membra supplicio subiaceant, quae hic singulis quibusque vitiis subiecta serviebant
Hieronymus
Et quia in convivio nuptiali non initium, sed finis quaeritur, subditur multi enim sunt vocati, pauci vero electi
Hilarius in Matth
In invitante enim sine exceptione, publicae bonitatis humanitas est; in invitatis vero, vel vocatis, de iudicio meritorum probitatis electio est
Gregorius
Nonnulli enim bona nec incipiunt, nonnulli vero in bonis quae inceperunt, minime persistunt. Tanto ergo sibi unusquisque sollicite metuat quanto ignorat quae restant
Chrysostomus super Matth
Vel aliter. Quoties Deus tentat Ecclesiam suam, ingreditur ad eam, ut videat discumbentes; et si invenerit aliquem non habentem vestem nuptialem, interrogat eum: ut quid factus es Christianus, si haec opera negligebas? Talem ergo Christus tradit ministris suis, idest aliquibus magistris seductionis; et ligant manus eius, idest opera, et pedes, idest motus animae; et mittunt eum in tenebras, idest in errores vel gentium, vel Iudaeorum, vel haeresim: propinquiores enim sunt tenebrae gentilium, quia veritatem spernunt quam non audierunt; sed exteriores Iudaeorum, qui audierunt, sed non crediderunt; sed magis exteriores haereticorum, qui audierunt et didicerunt
22:15
Pseudo-Chrysostom
As when one seeks to dam a stream of running water, as soon as one outlet is stopped up it makes another channel for itself; so the malevolence of the Jews, foiled on one hand, seeks itself out another course. Then went the Pharisees; went to the Herodians. Such as the plan was, such were the planners; They send unto Him their disciples with the Herodians.
The Gloss ord.
Who as unknown to Him, were more likely to ensnare Him, and so through them they might take Him, which they feared to do of themselves because of the populace.
St Jerome † AD 420
Lately under Cæsar Augustus, Judæa, which was subject to the Romans, had been made tributary when the census was held of the whole world; and there was a great division among the people, some saying that tribute ought to be paid to the Romans in return for the security and quiet which their arms maintained for all. The Pharisees on the other hand, self-satisfied in their own righteousness, contended that the people of God who paid tithes and gave first-fruits, and did all the other things which are written in the Law, ought not to be subject to human laws. But Augustus had given the Jews as king, Herod, son of Antipater, a foreigner and proselyte; he was to exact the tribute, yet to be subject to the Roman dominion. The Pharisees therefore send their disciples with the Herodians, that is, with Herod’s soldiers, or those whom the Pharisees in mockery called Herodians, because they paid tribute to the Romans, and were not devoted to the worship of God.
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Hom. lxx.
They send their disciples and Herod’s soldiers together, that whatever opinion the might give might be found fault with. Yet would they rather have had Him say somewhat against the Herodians; for being themselves afraid to lay hands on Him because of the populace, they sought to bring Him into danger through His liability to pay tribute.
Pseudo-Chrysostom
This is the commonest act of hypocrites, to commend those they would ruin. Thus, these break out into praises of Him, saying, Master, we know that Thou art true. They call Him Master, that, deceived by this shew of honour and respect, He might in simplicity open all His heart to them, as seeking to gain them for disciples.
The Gloss non occ.
There are three ways in which it is possible for one not to teach the truth. First, on the side of the teacher, who may either not know, or not love the truth; guarding against this, they say, We know that Thou art true. Secondly, on the side of God, there are some who, putting aside all fear of Him, do not utter honestly the truth which they know respecting Him; to exclude this they say, And teachest the way of God in truth. Thirdly, on the side of our neighbour, when through fear or affection any one withholds the truth; to exclude this they say, And carest for no man, for Thou regardest not the person of man.
St John Chrysostom † AD 407
This was a covert allusion to Herod and Cæsar.
St Jerome † AD 420
This smooth and treacherous enquiry was a kind of challenge to the answerer to fear God rather than Cæsar, and immediately they say, Tell us therefore, what thinkest Thou? Is it lawful to give tribute to Cæsar or not? Should He say tribute should not be paid, the Herodians would immediately accuse Him as a person disaffected to the Emperor.
St John Chrysostom † AD 407
They knew that certain had before suffered death for this very thing, as plotting a rebellion against the Romans, therefore they sought by such discourse to bring Him into the same suspicion.
Pseudo-Chrysostom
He makes an answer not corresponding to the smooth tone of their address, but harsh, suitable to their cruel thoughts; for God answers men’s hearts, and not their words.
St Jerome † AD 420
This is the first excellence of the answerer, that He discerns the thoughts of His examiners, and calls them not disciples but tempters. A hypocrite is he who is one thing, and feigns himself another.
Pseudo-Chrysostom
He therefore calls them hypocrites, that seeing Him to be a discerner of human hearts, they might not be hardy enough to carry through their design. Observe thus how the Pharisees spoke fair that they might destroy Him, but Jesus put them to shame that He might save them; for God’s wrath is more profitable to man, than man’s favour.
St Jerome † AD 420
Wisdom does ever wisely, and so the tempters are best confuted out of their own words; therefore it follows, Shew me the tribute money; and they brought unto Him a denarius. This was a coin reckoned equivalent to ten sesterces, and bore the image of Cæsar. Let those who think that the Saviour asks because He is ignorant, learn from the present place that it is not so, for at all events Jesus must have known whose image was on the coin. They say unto Him, Cæsar’s; not Augustus, but Tiberius, under whom also the Lord suffered. All the Roman Emperors were called Cæsar, from Caius Cæsar who first seized the chief power. Render therefore unto Cæsar the things which are Cæsar’s; i. e. the coin, tribute, or money.
St Hilary † AD 367
For if there remain with us nothing that is Cæsar’s, we shall not be bound by the condition of rendering to him the things that are his; but if we lean upon what is his, if we avail ourselves of the lawful protection of his power, we cannot complain of it as any wrong if we are required to render to Cæsar the things of Cæsar.
St John Chrysostom † AD 407
But when you hear this command to render to Cæsar the things of Cæsar, know that such things only are intended which in nothing are opposed to religion; if such there be, it is no longer Cæsar’s but the Devil’s tribute. And moreover, that they might not say that He was subjecting them to man, He adds, And unto God the things that, are God’s.
St Jerome † AD 420
That is, tithes, first-fruits, oblation, and victims; as the Lord Himself rendered to Cæsar tribute, both for Himself and for Peter; and also rendered unto God the things that are God’s in doing the will of His Father.
St Hilary † AD 367
It behoves us also to render unto God the things that are His, namely, body, soul, and will. For Cæsar’s coin is in the gold, in which His image was pourtrayed, that is, God’s coin, on which the Divine image is stamped; give therefore your money to Cæsar, but preserve a conscience void of offence for God.
Origen † AD 253
From this place we learn by the Saviour’s example not to be allured by those things which have many voices for them, and thence seem famous, but to incline rather to those things which are spoken according to some method of reason. But we may also understand this place morally, that we ought to give some things to the body as a tribute to Cæsar, that is to say, necessaries. And such things as are congenial to our souls’ nature, that is, such things as lead to virtue, those we ought to offer to God. They then who without any moderation inculcate the law of God, and command us to have no care for the things required by the body, are the Pharisees, who forbad to give tribute to Cæsar, forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created. (1 Tim. 4:3.) They, on the other hand, who allow too much indulgence to the body are the Herodians. But our Saviour would neither that virtue should be enfeebled by immoderate devotedness to the flesh; nor that our fleshly nature should be oppressed by our unremitting efforts after virtue. Or the prince of this world, that is, the Devil, is called Cæsar; and we cannot render to God the things that are God’s, unless we have first rendered to this prince all that is his, that is, have cast off all wickedness. This moreover let us learn from this place, that to those who tempt us we should neither be totally silent, nor yet answer openly, but with caution, to cut off all occasion from those who seek occasion in us, and teach without blame the things which may save those who are willing to be saved.
St Jerome † AD 420
They who ought to have believed did but wonder at His great wisdom, that their craft had found no means for ensnaring Him: whence it follows, When they had heard these words, they marvelled, and left Him, and went their way, carrying away their unbelief and wonder together.
The Latin text
Chrysostomus super Matth
Sicut si aliquis claudere voluerit aquae currentis meatum, si exclusa fuerit per aliquam violentiam, aliunde sibi semitam quaerit, sic Iudaeorum malignitas, ex una parte confusa, alium sibi aditum adinvenit: unde dicitur tunc abeuntes Pharisaei consilium inierunt, ut caperent eum in sermone. Abierunt, inquam, ad Herodianos. Quale consilium, tales et consiliatores; et ideo sequitur et mittunt ei discipulos suos cum Herodianis
Glossa
Tamquam ignotis, ut facilius deciperent, et per eos illum caperent; cum timentes turbam, hoc per se non praesumerent facere
Hieronymus
Nuper quidem sub Caesare Augusto Iudaea subiecta Romanis, quando in toto orbe est celebrata descriptio, stipendiaria facta fuerat; et erat in populo magna seditio, dicentibus aliis pro securitate et quiete, qua Romani pro omnibus militarent, debere tributa persolvi; Pharisaeis vero qui sibi applaudebant in iustitia, e contrario nitentibus non debere populum Dei, qui decimas solveret, et primitias daret, et cetera quae in lege scripta sunt, humanis legibus subiacere. Caesar autem Augustus Herodem filium Antipatris alienigenam et proselytum regem Iudaeis constituerat, qui tributis praeesset, et Romano pareret imperio. Mittunt igitur Pharisaei discipulos suos cum Herodianis, idest militibus Herodis, seu quos illudentes Pharisaei, quia Romanis tributa solvebant, Herodianos vocabant, et non divino cultui deditos
Chrysostomus in Matth
Propter hoc autem suos discipulos et Herodis milites simul mittunt, ut quodcumque dixerit reprehendatur: cupiebant enim magis adversum Herodianos eum aliquid dicere: quia enim eum detinere timebant propter turbas, voluerunt ei periculum immittere ex hoc quod esset publicis tributis obnoxius
Chrysostomus super Matth
Haec est autem hypocritarum prima simulatio, quia laudant quos perdere volunt; et ideo in laudem prorumpunt, dicentes magister, scimus quia verax es. Magistrum eum vocant, ut quasi honoratus et laudatus mysterium sui cordis simpliciter eis aperiat, tamquam volens eos habere discipulos
Glossa
Tripliciter autem contingit aliquem veritatem non docere. Primo ex parte ipsius docentis: quia scilicet veritatem vel non novit, vel non amat; et contra hoc dicunt scimus quia verax es. Secundo ex parte Dei, cuius timore postposito, quidam veritatem de eo, quam noverunt, non pure annuntiant; et contra hoc dicunt et viam Dei in veritate doces. Tertio ex parte proximi, ex cuius timore vel amore aliquis veritatem tacet; et ad hoc excludendum dicunt et non est tibi cura de aliquo, scilicet homine: non enim respicis personam hominum
Chrysostomus in Matth
Hoc de Herode et Caesare occulte insinuabant
Hieronymus
Blanda quidem et fraudulenta interrogatio illuc provocat respondentem ut magis Deum quam Caesarem timeat: unde dicunt dic ergo nobis: quid tibi videtur? Licet censum dare Caesari, an non? Ut si dicat non debere tributa solvi, statim audientes Herodiani, seditionis reum contra Romanum principem eum teneant
Chrysostomus in Matth
Quia enim sciebant quod quidam hanc discordiam meditantes occisi erant, volebant et ipsum per sermones hos in talem suspicionem immittere. Sequitur cognita autem Iesus nequitia eorum, ait: quid me tentatis, hypocritae?
Chrysostomus super Matth
Non secundum sermones eorum pacificos blande respondit; sed secundum conscientiam eorum crudelem, aspera dixit: quia Deus voluntatibus respondet, non verbis
Hieronymus
Prima ergo virtus est respondentis, interrogantium mentes cognoscere, et non discipulos, sed tentatores vocare. Hypocrita ergo vocatur qui aliud est, et aliud simulat
Chrysostomus super Matth
Dicit ergo eis hypocritae, ut considerantes eum humanorum cordium cognitorem, quod facere cogitabant, perficere non auderent. Vide ergo quod Pharisaei blandiebantur ut perderent; sed Iesus confundebat eos ut salvaret: quia utilior est homini Deus iratus quam homo propitius
Hieronymus
Sapientia enim semper sapienter agit, ut suis potissimum tentatores sermonibus confutentur: et ideo sequitur ostendite mihi numisma census. At illi obtulerunt ei denarium. Hoc genus nummi est quod pro decem nummis computabatur, et habebat imaginem Caesaris; unde sequitur et ait illis Iesus: cuius est imago haec et superscriptio? Qui putant interrogationem salvatoris ignorantiam esse, et non dispensationem, discant ex praesenti loco, quod utique poterat scire Iesus, cuius imago esset in nummo. Sequitur dicunt ei: Caesaris. Caesarem non putemus Augustum, sed Tiberium significari, sub quo et passus est dominus. Omnes autem reges Romani a primo Caio Caesare, qui imperium arripuerat, Caesares appellantur. Sequitur reddite ergo quae sunt Caesaris Caesari, idest nummum, tributum et pecuniam
Hilarius in Matth
Si enim nihil quod Caesaris est, penes nos resederit, conditione reddendi ei quae sua sunt non tenebimur. Porro autem si rebus illius incumbamus, si iure potestatis suae utimur, extra querelam iniuriae est reddere Caesari quod Caesaris est
Chrysostomus in Matth
Tu autem cum audieris reddite quae sunt Caesaris Caesari, illa scito eum dicere solum quae in nullo pietati nocent: quia si aliquid tale fuerit, non adhuc Caesaris est, sed Diaboli tributum. Deinde ut non dicant quoniam hominibus nos subicis, subdit et quae sunt Dei Deo
Hieronymus
Idest decimas, primitias, oblationes et victimas, sicut et ipse dominus reddidit Caesari tributa pro se et Petro; et Deo reddidit quae Dei sunt, patris faciens voluntatem
Hilarius in Matth
Deo etiam quae eius sunt reddere nos oportet, idest corpus et animam et voluntatem. Numisma enim Caesaris in auro est, in quo est eius imago depicta. Dei autem numisma homo est, in quo est Dei imago figurata: ideo divitias vestras date Caesari, Deo autem innocentiae vestrae conscientiam servate
Origenes in Matth
Ex hoc loco discimus salvatoris exemplo, ut non his quae a multis dicuntur, et propterea gloriosa videntur, occasione pietatis attendamus: sed quae convenienter secundum ordinem rationis dicuntur. Possumus autem et moraliter intelligere locum istum, quoniam debemus corpori quaedam dare, quasi tributum Caesari, idest necessaria. Quaecumque autem sunt convenientia animarum naturae, idest ea quae ducunt ad virtutem, debemus Deo offerre. Qui ergo supra modum docent legem Dei, et de rebus debitis corpori nihil curare praecipiunt, sunt Pharisaei qui reddere Caesari tributum vetabant, prohibentes scilicet nubere, et abstinere a cibis quos Deus creavit: qui vero supra modum aestimant oportere corporibus indulgere, ipsi sunt Herodiani. Salvator autem noster vult ut nec virtus minoretur dum supra modum carni servimus, nec carnis natura gravetur, dum abundantius virtutibus adhaeremus. Vel princeps mundi, idest Diabolus, dicitur Caesar: non enim possumus reddere Deo quae Dei sunt, nisi prius reddiderimus principi quae sunt sua, idest, nisi deposuerimus malitiam universam. Hoc etiam discamus ex loco praesenti; quod contra tentantes nec omnino tacere debemus, nec simpliciter respondere, sed circumspecte, ut praecidamus occasionem quaerentium in nobis occasionem, et doceamus irreprehensibiliter quae possunt salvare volentes salvari
Hieronymus
Qui autem credere debuerant, ad tantam sapientiam mirati sunt quod calliditas eorum insidiandi non invenisset locum: unde sequitur et audientes mirati sunt et, relicto eo, abierunt, infidelitatem pariter cum admiratione reportantes
22:23
St John Chrysostom † AD 407
The disciples of the Pharisees with the Herodians being thus confuted, the Sadducees next offer themselves, whereas the overthrow of those before them ought to have kept them back. But presumption is shameless, stubborn, and ready to attempt things impossible. So the Evangelist, wondering at their folly, expresses this, saying, The same day came to him the Sadducees.
Pseudo-Chrysostom
As soon as the Pharisees were gone, came the Sadducees; perhaps with like intent, for there was a strife among them who should be the first to seize Him. Or if by argument they should not be able to overcome Him, they might at least by perseverance wear out His understanding.
St Jerome † AD 420
There were two sects among the Jews, the Pharisees and the Sadducees; the Pharisees pretended to the righteousness of traditions and observances, whence they were called by the people ‘separate.’ The Sadducees (the word is interpreted ‘righteous’) also passed themselves for what they were not; and whereas the first believed the resurrection of body and soul, and confessed both Angel and spirit, these, according to the Acts of the Apostles, denied them all, as it is here also said, Who say that there is no resurrection. (Acts 23:8.)
Origen † AD 253
They not only denied the resurrection of the body, but took away the immortality of the soul.
Pseudo-Chrysostom
For the Devil finding himself unable to crush utterly the religion of God, brought in the sect of the Sadducees denying the resurrection of the dead, thus breaking down all purpose of a righteous life, for who is there would endure a daily struggle against himself, unless he looked to the hope of the resurrection?
St Gregory the Great † AD 604 Mor. xiv. 55.
But there are who observing that the spirit is loosed from the body, that the flesh is turned to corruption, that the corruption is reduced to dust, and that the dust again is resolved into the elements, so as to be unseen by human eyes, despair of the possibility of a resurrection, and while they look upon the dry bones, doubt that they can be clothed with flesh, and be quickened anew to life.
St Augustine † AD 430 Enchir. 88.
But that earthy matter of which the flesh of men is made perishes not before God; but into whatsoever dust or ashes reduced, into whatsoever gases or vapours dispersed, into whatsoever other bodies incorporated, though resolved into the elements, though become the food or part of the flesh of animals or men, yet is it in a moment of time restored to that human soul, which at the first quickened it that it became man, lived and grew.
Pseudo-Chrysostom
But the Sadducees thought they had now discovered a most convincing argument in favour of their error.
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 non occ.
For because death to the Jews, who did all things for the present life, seemed an unmixed evil, Moses ordered that the wife of one who died without sons should be given to his brother, that a son might be born to the dead man by his brother, and his name should not perish, which was some alleviation of death. And none other but a brother or relation was commanded to take the wife of the dead; otherwise the child born would not have been considered the son of the dead; and also because a stranger could have no concern in establishing the house of him that was dead, as a brother whose kindred obliged him thereto.
St Jerome † AD 420
As they disbelieved the resurrection of the body, and supposed that the soul perished with the body, they accordingly invent a fable to display the fondness of the belief of a resurrection. Thus they put forward a base fiction to overthrow the verity of the resurrection, and conclude with asking, in the resurrection whose shall she be? Though it might be that such an instance might really occur in their nation.
St Augustine † AD 430 Quæst. Ev. i, 32.
Mystically; by these seven brethren are understood the wicked, who could not bring forth the fruit of righteousness in the earth through all the seven ages of the world, during which this earth has being, for afterwards this earth also shall pass away, through which all those seven passed away unfruitful.
Pseudo-Chrysostom
Wisely does He first convict them of folly, in that they did not read; and afterwards of ignorance, in that they did not know God. For of diligence in reading springs knowledge of God, but ignorance is the offspring of neglect.
St Jerome † AD 420
They therefore err because they know not the Scriptures; and because they know not the power of God.
Origen † AD 253
Two (1 Cor. 1:24.) things there are which He says they know not, the Scriptures and the power of God, by which is brought to pass the resurrection, and the new life in it. Or by the power of God, which the Lord here convicts the Sadducees that they knew not, He intends Himself, who was the power of God; and Him they knew not, as not knowing the Scriptures which spoke of Him; and thence also they believed not the resurrection, which He should effect. But it is asked when the Saviour says, Ye do err not knowing the Scriptures, if He means that this text, They neither marry, nor are given in marriage, is in some Scripture, though it is not read in the Old Testament? We say that these very words are indeed not found, but that the truth is in a mystery implied in the moral sense of Scripture; the Law, which is a shadow of good things to come, whenever it speaks of husbands and wives, speaks chiefly of spiritual wedlock. But neither this do I find any where spoken in Scripture that the Saints shall be after their departure as the Angels of God, unless one will understand this also to be inferred morally; as where it is said, And thou shalt go to thy fathers, (Gen. 15:15.) and He was gathered to his people. (Gen. 25:8.) Or one may say; He blamed them that they read not the other Scriptures which are besides the Law, and therefore they erred. Another says, That they knew not the Scriptures of the Mosaic Law, for this reason, that they did not sift their divine sense.
Pseudo-Chrysostom
Or, when He says, In the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, He referred to what He had said, Ye know not the power of God; but when the proceeded, I am the God of Abraham, &c. to that Ye know not the Scriptures. And thus ought we to do; to cavillers first to set forth Scripture authority on any question, and then to shew the grounds of reason; but to those who ask out of ignorance to shew first the reason, and then the authority. For cavillers ought to be refuted, enquirers taught. To these then who put their question in ignorance, the first shews the reason, saying, In the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage.
St Jerome † AD 420
In these words the Latin language cannot follow the Greek idiom. For the Latin word ‘nubere’ is correctly said only of the woman. But we must take it so as to understand marry of men, to be given in marriage of women.
Pseudo-Chrysostom
In this life that we may die, therefore are we born; and we marry to the end that that which death consumes, birth may replenish; therefore where the law of death is taken away, the cause of birth is taken away likewise.
St Hilary † AD 367
It had been enough to have cut off this opinion of the Sadducees of sensual enjoyment, that where the function ceased, the empty pleasure of the body accompanying it ceased also; but He adds, But are as the Angels of God in heaven.
St John Chrysostom † AD 407
Which is an apt reply to their question. For their reason for judging that there would be no resurrection, was that they supposed that their condition when risen would be the same; this reason then He removes by shewing that their condition would be altered.
Pseudo-Chrysostom
It should be noted, that when He spoke of fasting, alms, and other spiritual virtues, He did not bring in the comparison of Angels, but only here where He speaks of the ceasing of marriage. For as all acts of the flesh are animal acts, but this of lust especially so; so all the virtues are angelic acts, but especially chastity, by which our nature is bound to the other virtues.
St Jerome † AD 420
This that is added, But areas the Angels of God in heaven, is an assurance that our conversation in heaven shall be spiritual. PSEUDO-DIONYSIUS. (de Divin. Nom. i.) For then when we shall be incorruptible and immortal, by the visible presence of God Himself we shall be filled with most chaste contemplations, and shall share the gift of light to the understanding in our impassible and immaterial soul after the fashion of the exalted souls in heaven; on which account it is said that we shall be equal to the Angels.
St Hilary † AD 367
The same cavil that the Sadducees here offer respecting marriage is renewed by many who ask in what form the female sex shall rise again. But what the authority of Scripture leads us to think concerning the Angels, so must we suppose that it will be with women in the resurrection of our species.
St Augustine † AD 430 de Civ. Dei, xxii. 17.
To me they seem to think most justly, who doubt not that both sexes shall rise again. For there shall be no desire which is the cause of confusion, for before they had sinned they were naked; and that nature which they then had shall be preserved, which was quit both of conception and of child-birth. Also the members of the woman shall not be adapted to their former use, but framed for a new beauty, one by which the beholder is not allured to lust, which shall not then be, but God’s wisdom and mercy shall be praised, which made that to be which was not, and delivered from corruption that which was made.
St Jerome † AD 420
For none could say of a stone and a tree or inanimate things, that they shall not marry nor be given in marriage, but of such things only as having capacity for marriage, shall yet in a sort not marry.
Rabanus Maurus † AD 856
These things which are spoken concerning the conditions of the resurrection He spoke in answer to their enquiry, but of the resurrection itself He replies aptly against their unbelief.
St John Chrysostom † AD 407
And because they had put forward Moses in their question, He confutes them by Moses, adding, But concerning the resurrection of the dead, have ye not read.
St Jerome † AD 420
In proof of the resurrection there were many plainer passages which He might have cited; among others that of Isaiah, The dead shall be raised; they that are in the tombs shall rise again: (Is. 26:19. juxta LXX.) and in another place, Many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake. (Dan. 12:2.) It is enquired therefore why the Lord should have chosen this testimony which seems ambiguous, and not sufficiently belonging to the truth of the resurrection; and as if by this He had proved the point adds, He is not the God of the dead, but of the living. We have said above that the Sadducees confessed neither Angel, nor spirit, nor resurrection of the body, and taught also the death of the soul. But they also received only the five books of Moses, rejecting the Prophets. It would have been foolish therefore to have brought forward testimonies whose authority they did not admit. To prove the immortality of souls therefore, He brings forward an instance out of Moses, I am the God of Abraham, &c. and then straight subjoins, He is not the God of the dead, but of the living; so that having established that souls abide after death, (forasmuch as God could not be the God of those who had no existence any where,) there might fitly come in the resurrection of bodies which had together with their souls done good or evil.
St John Chrysostom † AD 407
How then is it said in another place, Whether we live or die, we are the Lord’s. (Rom. 14:8.) This which is said here differs from that. The dead are the Lord’s, those, that is, who are to live again, not those who have disappeared for ever, and shall not rise again.
St Hilary † AD 367
It should be further considered, that this was said to Moses at a time when those holy Patriarchs had gone to their rest. They therefore of whom He was the God were in being; for they could have had nothing, if they had not been in being; for in the nature of things that, of which somewhat else is, must have itself a being; so they who have a God must themselves be alive, since God is eternal, and it is not possible that that which is dead should have that which is eternal. How then shall it be affirmed that those do not, and shall not hereafter, exist, of whom Eternity itself has said that He is?
Origen † AD 253
God moreover is He who says, I am that I am; (Ex. 3:14.) so that it is impossible that He should be called the God of those who are not. And see that He said not, I am the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, but The God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. But in another place He said thus, The God of the Hebrews hath sent me unto thee. (Exod. 7:16.) For they who in comparison of other men are most perfect before God, have God entirely in them, wherefore He is not said to be their God in common, but of each in particular. As when we say, That farm is theirs, we shew that each of them does not own the whole of it; but when we say, That farm is his, we mean that he is owner of the whole of it. When then it is said, The God of the Hebrews, this shews their imperfection, that each of them has some small portion in God. But it is said, The God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, because each one of these possessed God entirely. And it is to the no small honour of the Patriarehs that they lived to God.
St Augustine † AD 430 cont. Faust. xvi. 24.
Seasonably may we confute the Manichæans by this same passage by which the Sadducees were then confuted, for they too though in another manner deny the resurrection.
St Augustine † AD 430 in Joan. Tr. xi. 8.
God is therefore called in particular The God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, because in these three are expressed all the modes of begetting the sons of God. For God begets most times of a good preacher a good son, and of a bad preacher a bad son. This is signified in Abraham, who of a free woman had a believing son, and of a bondslave an unbelieving son. Sometimes indeed of a good preacher He begets both good and bad sons, which is signified in Isaac, who of the same free woman begot one good and the other bad. And sometimes He begets good sons both of good and bad preachers; which is signified in Jacob, who begot good sons both of free women and of bondmaids.
Pseudo-Chrysostom
And see how the assault of the Jews against Christ becomes more faint. Their first challenge was in a threatening tone, By what authority doest thou these things, to oppose which firmness of spirit was needed. Their second was with guile, to meet which was needed wisdom. This last was with ignorant presumption which is easier to cope with than the others. For he that thinks he knows somewhat, when he knows nothing, is an easy conquest for one who has understanding. Thus the attacks of an enemy are vehement at first, but if one endure them with a courageous spirit, he will find them more feeble. And when the multitudes heard this, they were astonished at his doctrine.
Remigius † AD 908
Not the Sadducees but the multitudes were astonished. This is daily done in the Church; when by Divine inspiration the adversaries of the Church are overcome, the multitude of the faithful rejoice.
The Latin text
Chrysostomus in Matth
Confutatis Pharisaeorum discipulis cum Herodianis, Sadducaei se immittunt; cum tamen ex confusione priorum eos oporteret effici pigriores. Sed praesumptio inverecundum quid est et pertinax et impossibilia tentans: propter hoc et Evangelista stupens eorum dementiam, hoc ipsum significat, dicens in illa die accesserunt ad eum Sadducaei
Chrysostomus super Matth
Quando recedebant Pharisaei, accedebant Sadducaei; forte tali consilio, quia decertabant quis eum ante deprehendere posset: vel si ratione eum non possent superare, saltem per ipsam frequentiam subverterent sensum eius
Hieronymus
Duae haereses erant in Iudaeis: una Pharisaeorum, et altera Sadducaeorum; Pharisaei traditionum et observationum iustitiam praeferebant, unde et divisi vocabantur a populo; Sadducaei autem, qui interpretantur iusti, et ipsi vindicabant sibi quod non erant; ac prioribus et corporis et animae resurrectionem credentibus confitentibusque, et Angelos et spiritum sequentes, iuxta actus apostolorum, omnia denegabant; unde et hic dicitur: qui dicunt resurrectionem non esse
Origenes in Matth
Non solum autem carnis resurrectionem negabant, sed etiam animae immortalitatem tollebant
Chrysostomus super Matth
Videns enim Diabolus quia iustitiam Dei omnino extinguere non potuit, introduxit haeresim Sadducaeorum, qui dicerent non esse resurrectionem mortuorum; quae res omne propositum faciendae iustitiae frangit: quis enim contentus erit adversus seipsum quotidie luctamina exercere, nisi ad spem resurrectionis aspiceret?
Gregorius Moralium
Sunt autem nonnulli qui considerantes quod spiritus a carne solvitur, quod caro in putredinem vertitur, quod putredo in pulverem reducitur, quod pulvis in elementa solvitur, ut nequaquam ab humanis oculis videatur, resurrectionem fieri posse desperant; et dum arida ossa inspiciunt, haec vestiri carnibus, rursumque ad vitam virescere, posse fieri diffidunt
Augustinus in Enchir
Non autem perit Deo terrena materies, de qua mortalium creatur caro; sed in quemlibet pulverem cineremve solvatur, in quoslibet halitus aurasque diffugiat, in quamcumque aliorum corporum substantiam, vel in ipsa elementa vertatur, in quorumcumque animalium, aut etiam hominum, cibum cedat, carnemque mutetur, animae illi humanae in puncto temporis redditur quae eam primitus ut homo fieret, viveret et cresceret, animavit
Chrysostomus super Matth
Ad defensionem autem sui erroris invenisse se argutissimam rationem Sadducaei putabant: unde sequitur et interrogaverunt eum, dicentes: magister, Moyses dixit: si quis mortuus fuerit
, et cetera. Chrysostomus in Matth
Quia enim immitigabile malum mors erat apud Iudaeos, qui omnia pro praesenti vita faciebant, in legem deduxit Moyses, defuncti sine filiis uxorem fratri dari oportere, ut defuncto filius nasceretur ex fratre, et non excideret nomen eius; quod erat quaedam mortis mitigatio; non autem alius quam frater vel propinquus iubebatur accipere uxorem defuncti: quoniam non ita putaretur qui ex tali coniunctione erat nasciturus, esse filius eius qui obiit; et iterum extraneus non ita haberet necessitatem statuere domum eius qui obierat, sicut frater, cui etiam ea cognatione hoc facere iustum erat. Sequitur erant autem apud nos septem fratres
Hieronymus
Qui resurrectionem corporum non credebant, et animam putabant interire cum corporibus, recte istiusmodi fingunt fabulam, quae deliramenti arguat eos qui resurrectionem asserant mortuorum. Turpitudinem ergo fabulae opponunt, ut resurrectionis denegent veritatem: unde concludunt in resurrectione ergo cuius erit? Potest autem fieri ut vere in gente eorum hoc aliquando acciderit
Augustinus de quaest. Evang
Per hos autem septem fratres mystice intelliguntur homines impii, qui fructum iustitiae non potuerunt afferre in terra per omnes septem mundi aetates, quibus ista terra consistit: postea enim et ipsa terra transiet, per quam omnes illi quasi septem steriliter transierunt. Sequitur respondens autem Iesus, ait illis: erratis nescientes Scripturas, neque virtutem Dei
Chrysostomus super Matth
Sapienter primum arguit stultitiam eorum, quia non legebant; secundo ignorantiam, quia non cognoscebant Deum. Ex diligentia enim dilectionis nascitur scientia Dei: ignorantia autem negligentiae filia est
Hieronymus
Propterea ergo errant, quia Scripturas nesciunt; et quia Scripturas nesciunt, consequenter ignorant virtutem Dei
Origenes in Matth
Duas autem res dicit eos nescire: unam quidem Scripturas, alteram autem virtutem Dei, per quam resurrectio fit, et nova vita in ea. Vel dominus arguens Sadducaeos nescire virtutem Dei, se eos non cognoscere arguebat: ipse enim erat virtus Dei, et non cognoscebant eum, quasi nescientes Scripturas quae loquuntur de eo: propterea nec resurrectionem credebant, quam facturus fuerat ipse. Quaeritur autem, cum salvator dicat erratis nescientes Scripturas, an dicat quod in quibusdam Scripturis positum est quod sequitur: in resurrectione neque nubent neque nubentur: quod in veteri testamento non legitur scriptum. Nos autem dicimus, quia scriptum est non in ipsis sermonibus manifeste ista dicentibus, sed in mysterio indicantibus secundum intellectum moralem: nam cum sit lex umbra futurorum bonorum, dicens quodlibet de viris et uxoribus, de spiritualibus nuptiis principaliter dicit. Sed nec hoc invenio alicubi Scripturam dicentem, sanctos post exitum fore sicut Angelos Dei: nisi forte quis et hoc moraliter intelligat, secundum illud quod dicitur: tu autem ibis ad patres tuos; item: appositus est ad populum suum. Dicet autem aliquis: ideo eos increpabat, quia non legebant ceteras Scripturas quae sunt extra legem et ideo errabant. Alius autem dicit, quod nesciebant Mosaicae legis Scripturas ex eo quod divinum sensum earum non scrutabantur
Chrysostomus super Matth
Vel quod dicit in resurrectione neque nubent neque nubentur, retulit ad hoc quod dixerat nescitis virtutem Dei; quod autem dixit ego sum Deus Abraham, etc., ad illud quod dixit nescitis Scripturas. Et quidem calumniatoribus primum oportet in aliqua quaestione auctoritatem Scripturae proferre, deinde rationem exponere; interrogantibus autem per ignorantiam, prius rationem exponamus; postea auctoritate confirmemus: quoniam calumniatores convincere oportet, interrogatores autem docere; ideo his interrogantibus per ignorantiam, prius rationem exposuit, dicens in resurrectione
, et cetera. Hieronymus
in hoc autem quod dicitur neque nubent neque nubentur, Latina consuetudo Graeco idiomati non respondet. Nubere enim apud Latinos proprie dicuntur mulieres. Sed nos simpliciter dictum intelligamus quod nubere de viris, et nubi de mulieribus dictum sit
Chrysostomus super Matth
In hoc quidem saeculo, quia morimur, ideo nascimur; quia nascimur, ideo uxores ducimus, ut quod moriendo minuitur, nascendo suppleatur: ibi autem moriendi necessitas tollitur, unde et nascendi causa soluta est
Hilarius in Matth
Et quidem suffecerat adversus Sadducaeos opinionem illecebrae corporeae recidisse, et officiis cessantibus inania haec corporum gaudia sustulisse; sed adiecit sed sunt sicut Angeli Dei in caelo
Chrysostomus in Matth
Per quod ad interrogatum convenienter respondet: quia enim haec erat eis causa aestimandi resurrectionem non esse, quia credebant eamdem fore resurgentium conditionem; hanc causam removit, ostendens eos alterius conditionis futuros
Chrysostomus super Matth
Notandum vero, quod cum de ieiuniis et eleemosynis ceterisque virtutibus spiritualibus locutus fuit, nunquam Angelorum similitudinem introduxit, nisi cum de absolutione a coitu loqueretur; quoniam sicut omnes actus carnales opera sunt animalium, praecipue tamen actus libidinis; sic omnes virtutes sunt res angelicae, praecipue tamen castitas, per quam vincitur natura virtutibus
Hieronymus
Quod ergo infertur sed sunt sicut Angeli in caelo, spiritalis conversatio repromittitur
Dionysius
Tunc enim quando incorruptibiles et immortales erimus, visibili quidem ipsius Dei apparitione in castissimis contemplationibus adimplebimur; intelligibilis autem luminis dationem participabimus in impassibili et in immateriali mente secundum imitationem supercaelestium mentium: propter quod dicitur, quod erimus Angelis aequales
Hilarius in Matth
Eamdem autem calumniam quam Sadducaei afferunt de coniugio, afferre plures solent, in quam formam muliebris sexus resurgat. Sed qualis in Scripturis auctoritas est de Angelis opinandi, talem in resurrectione speciei nostrae sensum oportet esse de feminis
Augustinus de Civ. Dei
Sed mihi melius videntur sapere qui utrumque sexum resurrecturum esse non dubitant: non enim libido ibi erit, quae confusionis causa est; nam priusquam peccassent, nudi erant; natura autem servabitur, quae tunc quidem et a concubitu et a partu immunis erit: erunt tamen membra feminea non accommodata usui veteri sed decori novo; quo non allicitur aspicientis concupiscentia, quae nulla erit, sed Dei laudatur sapientia atque clementia, qui et quod non erat fecit, et liberavit a corruptione quod fecit
Hieronymus
Nemo enim dicit de lapide et arbore, et his rebus quae non habent membra genitalia, quod non nubent neque nubentur; sed de his qui cum possint nubere, tamen aliqua ratione non nubunt
Rabanus Maurus
Haec autem quae dicta sunt de resurrectionis conditionibus, propositae reddidit quaestioni; de ipsa vero resurrectione contra eorum infidelitatem convenienter loquitur
Chrysostomus in Matth
Et quia illi interrogando, Moysen praemiserant, per Moysen eos confutat: unde subdit de resurrectione autem mortuorum non legistis
Hieronymus
Ad comprobandum resurrectionis veritatem multis aliis exemplis manifestioribus uti potuit, ex quibus est illud: resuscitabuntur mortui, et resurgent qui in monumentis sunt; et in alio loco: multi dormientium de terrae pulvere resurgent. Quaeritur ergo quid sibi voluerit dominus hoc proferre testimonium quod videtur ambiguum, vel non satis ad resurrectionis pertinens veritatem; et quasi hoc prolato probaverit quod volebat, statim intulerit non est Deus mortuorum, sed viventium. Supra diximus autem Sadducaeos nec Angelum, nec spiritum, nec resurrectionem corporum confitentes, et animarum quoque interitum praedicasse: hi quinque tantum libros Moysi recipiebant, prophetarum vaticinia respuentes. Stultum autem erat inde proferre testimonia cuius auctoritatem non sequebantur. Porro ad aeternitatem animarum probandam, de Moyse ponit exemplum: ego sum Deus Abraham; statimque infert: non est Deus mortuorum, sed viventium: ut cum probaverit animas permanere post mortem (neque enim poterat fieri ut eorum esset Deus qui nequaquam subsisterent), convenienter introduceretur et corporum resurrectio, quae cum animabus bona malaque gesserunt
Chrysostomus in Matth
Sed qualiter alibi ait: ut vivorum et mortuorum dominetur? Sed hoc non est simile ei quod hic dicitur: mortuorum enim ibi dicitur esse dominus, eorum scilicet qui victuri sunt; non autem eorum qui semel disparuerunt, et ultra non resurgent
Hieronymus
Considerandum etiam, quod sermo hic ad Moysen factus fuerat, sanctis istis patriarchis iam pridem quiescentibus, erant ergo quorum Deus erat: nihil enim habere poterant, si non erant: quia in natura rei est ut esse id necesse sit cuius sit alterum; atque ita habere Deum, viventium est; cum Deus aeternitas sit, et non sit eorum quae mortua sunt, habere id quod aeternum est: et quomodo esse illi futuri semper negabuntur, quorum se esse profiteatur aeternitas?
Origenes in Matth
Deus etiam est qui dicit: ego sum qui sum. Sic ergo impossibile est ut dicatur eorum Deus esse qui non sunt. Et vide, quia non dicit: ego sum Deus Abraham, Isaac et Iacob; sed Deus Abraham, Deus Isaac et Deus Iacob. In alio autem loco sic dixit: Deus Hebraeorum misit me ad te. Qui enim perfectissime sunt circa Deum, quantum ad comparationem ceterorum hominum, totum habent Deum in se: propterea non communiter, sed singulariter dicitur eorum Deus; ut puta si dicamus: ager ille illorum est, ostendimus quod unusquisque eorum non habet eum in toto. Si autem dicimus, quod ager illius est, demonstramus quia totum agrum possidet ille. Ubi ergo dicitur Deus Hebraeorum, imperfectio demonstratur eorum: quia unusquisque eorum aliquid modicum de Deo habebat. Dicitur autem Deus Abraham, Deus Isaac et Deus Iacob, quia singuli eorum totum habebant Deum. Non autem ad modicam laudem respicit patriarcharum quod Deo vivebant
Augustinus contra Faustum
Opportune itaque eadem voce nunc convincuntur Manichaei, qua tunc convicti sunt Sadducaei: nam et ipsam resurrectionem alio quidem modo, sed tamen etiam ipsi negant
Augustinus super Ioannem
Ideo autem specialiter Deus Abraham, Deus Isaac et Deus Iacob dicitur, quia in istis tribus omnes modi generationis filiorum Dei vocantur. Generat enim Deus multoties de bono praedicatore bonum filium, et de malo malum: quod significatur per Abraham, qui de libera uxore fidelem filium habuit, et de ancilla infidelem genuit. Aliquando vero generat per bonum praedicatorem, bonum et malum filium: quod significatur in Isaac, qui de libera unum bonum, et alterum malum generavit. Aliquando generat bonos per bonum et malum praedicatorem; quod significatur per Iacob, qui bonos filios genuit et de liberis et de ancillis
Chrysostomus super Matth
Et vide quomodo sit infirmior congressio Iudaeorum contra Christum. Prima fuit cum terrore, dicendo: in qua potestate haec facis? Contra quam necessaria fuit constantia cordis. Secunda fuit cum dolo, contra quam necessaria fuit acuta sapientia. Haec autem fuit cum praesumptione ignara, quae praecedentibus facilior est. Hominem enim putantem se aliquid scire, cum nesciat, viro scienti facile est convincere. Sic et operatio inimici in primis gravis est; sed si quis forti animo sustinuerit, inveniet eum infirmiorem. Sequitur et audientes turbae mirabantur in doctrina eius
Remigius
Non quidem Sadducaei, sed turbae mirantur. Hoc etiam quotidie agitur in Ecclesia: cum enim divina inspiratione adversarii Ecclesiae superantur, turbae fidelium laetantur
22:34
St Jerome † AD 420
The Pharisees having been themselves already confuted (in the matter of the denarius), and now seeing their adversaries also overthrown, should have taken warning to attempt no further deceit against Him; but hate and jealousy are the parents of impudence.
Origen † AD 253
Jesus had put the Sadducees to silence, to shew that the tongue of falsehood is silenced by the brightness of truth. For as it belongs to the righteous man to be silent when it is good to be silent, and to speak when it is good to speak, and not to hold his) peace; so it belongs to every teacher of a the Not indeed to be silent, but to be silent as far as any good purpose is concerned.
St Jerome † AD 420
The Pharisees and Sadducees, thus foes to one another, unite in one common purpose to tempt Jesus.
Pseudo-Chrysostom
Or the Pharisees meet together, that their numbers may silence Him whom their reasonings could not confute; thus, while they array numbers against Him, shewing that truth failed them; they said among themselves, Let one speak for all, and all speak, through one, so if He prevail, the victory may seem to belong to all; if He be overthrown, the defeat may rest with Him alone; so it follows, Then one of them, a teacher of the Law, asked him a question, tempting him.
Origen † AD 253
All who thus ask questions of any teacher to try him, and not to learn of him, we must regard as brethren of this Pharisee, according to what is said below, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of mine, ye have done it unto me. (Matt. 25:40.)
St Augustine † AD 430 de Cons. Ev. ii. 73.
Let no one find a difficulty in this, that Matthew speaks of this man as putting his question to tempt the Lord, whereas Mark does not mention this, but concludes with what the Lord said to him upon his answering wisely, Thou art not far from the kingdom of God. (Mark 12:34.) For it is possible that, though he came to tempt, yet the Lord’s answer may have wrought correction within him. Or, the tempting here meant need not be that of one designing to deceive an enemy, but rather the cautious approach of one making proof of a stranger. And that is not written in vain, Whoso believeth lightly, he is of a vain heart. (Ecclus. 19:4.)
Origen † AD 253
He said Master tempting Him, for none but a disciple would thus address Christ. Whoever then does not learn of the Word, nor yields himself wholly up to it, yet calls it Master, he is brother to this Pharisee thus tempting Christ. Perhaps while they read the Law before the Saviour’s coming, it was a question among them which was the great commandment in it; nor would the Pharisee have asked this, if it had not been long time enquired among themselves, but never found till Jesus came and declared it.
Pseudo-Chrysostom
He who now enquires for the greatest commandment had not observed the least. He only ought to seek for a higher righteousness who has fulfilled the lower.
St Jerome † AD 420
Or he enquires not for the sake of the commands, but which is the first and great commandment, that seeing all that God commands is great, he may have occasion to cavil whatever the answer be.
Pseudo-Chrysostom
But the Lord so answers him, as at once to lay bare the dissimulation of his enquiry, Jesus saith unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. Thou shalt love, not ‘fear,’ for to love is more than to fear; to fear belongs to slaves, to love to sons; fear is in compulsion, love in freedom. Whoso serves God in fear escapes punishment, but has not the reward of righteousness because he did well unwillingly through fear. God does not desire to be served servilely by men as a master, but to be loved as a father, for that He has given the spirit of adoption to men. But to love God with the whole heart, is to have the heart inclined to the love of no one thing more than of God. To love God again with the whole soul is to have the mind stayed upon the truth, and to be firm in the faith. For the love of the heart and the love of the soul are different. The first is in a sort carnal, that we should love God even with our flesh, which we cannot do unless we first depart from the love of the things of this world. The love of the heart is felt in the heart, but the love of the soul is not felt, but is perceived because it consists in a judgment of the soul. For he who believes that all good is in God, and that without Him is no good, he loves God with his whole soul. But to love God with the whole mind, is to have all the faculties open and unoccupied for Him. He only loves God with his whole mind, whose intellect ministers to God, whose wisdom is employed about God, whose thoughts travail in the things of God, and whose memory holds the things which are good.
St Augustine † AD 430 de Doctr. Christ. i. 22.
Or otherwise; You are commanded to love God with all thy heart, that your whole thoughts—with all thy soul, that your whole life—with all thy mind, that your whole understanding—may be given to Him from whom you have that you give. Thus He has left no part of our life which may justly be unfilled of Him, or give place to the desire after any other final good1; but if aught else present itself for the soul’s love, it should be absorbed into that channel in which the whole current of love runs. For man is then the most perfect when his whole life tends towards the life2 unchangeable, and clings to it with the whole purpose of his soul.
The Gloss
Or, with all thy heart, i. e. understanding; with all thy soul, i.e. thy will; with all thy mind, i.e. memory; so you shall think, will, remember nothing contrary to Him.
Origen † AD 253
Or otherwise; With all thy heart, that is, in all recollection, act, thought; with all thy soul, to be ready, that is, to lay it down for God’s religion; with all thy mind, bringing forth nothing but what is of God. And consider whether you cannot thus take the heart of the understanding, by which we contemplate things intellectual, and the mind of that by which we utter thoughts, walking as it were with the mind through each expression, and uttering it. If the Lord had given no answer to the Pharisee who thus tempted Him, we should have judged that there was no commandment greater than the rest. But when the Lord adds, This is the first and great commandment, we learn how we ought to think of the commandments, that there is a great one, and that there are less down to the least. And the Lord says not only that it is a great, but that it is the first commandment, not in order of Scripture, but in supremacy of value. They only take upon them the greatness and supremacy of this precept, who not only love the Lord their God, but add these three conditions. Nor did He only teach the first and great commandment, but added that there was a second like unto the first, Thou shall love thy neighbour as thyself. But if Whoso loveth iniquity hath hated his own soul, (Ps. 11:5.) it is manifest that he does not love his neighbour as himself, when he does not love himself.
St Augustine † AD 430 de Doctr. Christ. i. 30.
It is clear that every man is to be regarded as a neighbour, because evil is to be done to no man. Further, if every one to whom we are bound to shew service of mercy, (vid. Rom. 13:10.) or who is bound to shew it to us, be rightly called our neighbour, it is manifest that in this precept are comprehended the holy Angels who perform for us those services of which we may read in Scripture. Whence also our Lord Himself would be called our neighbour; for it was Himself whom He represents as the good Samaritan, who gave succour to the man who was left half-dead by the way.
St Augustine † AD 430 de Trin. viii. 6.
He that loves men ought to love them either because they are righteous, or that they may be righteous; and so also ought he to love himself either for that he is, or that he may be righteous. And thus without peril he may love his neighbour as himself.
St Augustine † AD 430 de Doctr. Christ, i. 22.
But if even yourself you ought not to love for your own sake, but because of Him in whom is the rightful end of your love, let not another man be displeased that you love even him for God’s sake. Whoso then rightly loves his neighbour, ought to endeavour with him that he also with his whole heart love God.
Pseudo-Chrysostom
But who loves man is as who loves God; for man is God’s image, wherein God is loved, as a King is honoured in his statue. For this cause this commandment is said to be like the first.
St Hilary † AD 367
Or otherwise; That the second command is like the first signifies that the obligation and merit of both are alike; for no love of God without Christ, or of Christ without God, can profit to salvation. It follows, On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets.
St Augustine † AD 430 Quæst. Ev. i. 33.
Hang, that is, refer thither as their end.
Rabanus Maurus † AD 856
For to these two commandments belongs the whole decalogue; the commandments of the first table to the love of God, those of the second to the love of our neighbour.
Origen † AD 253
Or, because he that has fulfilled the things that are written concerning the love of God and our neighbour, is worthy to receive from God the great reward, that he should be enabled to understand the Law and the Prophets.
St Augustine † AD 430 de Trin. viii. 7.
Since there are two commandments, the love of God and the love of our neighbour, on which hang the Law and the Prophets, not without reason does Scripture put one for both; sometimes the love of God; as in that, We know that all tilings work together for good to them that love God; (Rom. 8:28.) and sometimes the love of our neighbour; as in that, All the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this, Thou shall love thy neighbour as thyself. (Gal. 5:14.) And that because if a man love his neighbour, it follows therefrom that he loves God also; for it is the selfsame affection by which we love God, and by which we love our neighbour, save that we love God for Himself, but ourselves and our neighbour for God’s sake.
St Augustine † AD 430 De Doctr. Christ. i. 30. et 26.
But since the Divine substance is more excellent and higher than our nature, the command to love God is distinct from that to love our neighbour. But if by yourself, you understand your whole self, that is both your soul and your body, and in like manner of your neighbour, there is no sort of things to be loved omitted in these commands. The love of God goes first, and the rule thereof is so set out to us as to make all other loves center in that, so that nothing seems said of loving yourself. But then follows, Thou shall love thy neighbour as thyself, so that love of yourself is not omitted.
The Latin text
Hieronymus
Quia supra Pharisaei in ostensione denarii fuerant confutati, et adversae partis viderant factionem subrutam, debuerant ex hoc moveri, ne ultra molirentur insidias; sed malevolentia et livor nutrit impudentiam; unde dicitur Pharisaei autem audientes quod silentium imposuisset Sadducaeis, convenerunt in unum
Origenes in Matth
Silentium autem Sadducaeis imposuit Iesus, volens ostendere quoniam mendacii vocem obmutescere facit claritas veritatis. Sicut enim proprium est iusti tacere cum sit tempus tacendi, et loqui cum sit tempus loquendi, non tamen obmutescere, sic proprium est omnium qui mendacii sunt doctores, obmutescere quidem quantum ad rem, non autem tacere
Hieronymus
Pharisaei ergo et Sadducaei, qui inter se contrarii sunt, ad tentandum Iesum pari mente consentiunt
Chrysostomus super Matth
Vel convenerunt in unum Pharisaei, ut multitudine vincerent quem rationibus superare non poterant; a veritate nudos se professi sunt, qui multitudine se armaverunt. Dicebant enim apud se: unus loquatur pro omnibus, et omnes loquamur per unum; ut si quidem vicerit, omnes videamur vicisse, si autem convictus fuerit, vel solus videatur confusus; et ideo sequitur et interrogavit eum unus ex eis legis doctor, tentans eum
Origenes
Omnes ergo qui non discendi, sed tentandi causa interrogant aliquem doctorum, aestimare debemus illius Pharisaei fratres, secundum illud: quod uni ex minimis meis fecistis, mihi fecistis
Augustinus de Cons. Evang
Non moveat autem quod Matthaeus hic dicit tentantem fuisse a quo dominus interrogatus est; Marcus autem hoc tacet, et in fine ita concludit, quod ei dominus Iesus sapienter respondenti dixerit: non longe es a regno Dei. Fieri enim potest ut quamvis tentans accesserit, domini tamen responsione correctus sit. Aut certe ipsam tentationem, de qua loquitur Iacobus non accipiamus malam tamquam decipere volentis inimicum, sed cautam potius tamquam experiri amplius volentis ignotum: neque frustra scriptum est: qui facile credit, levis est corde. Quid autem interroget, subditur magister, quod est mandatum magnum in lege?
Origenes
Tentans dicebat magister, quoniam non tamquam discipulus Christi proferebat hanc vocem. Si quis ergo non discit aliquid a verbo, nec tradit se ei ex toto animo suo; dicit autem ei magister, frater Pharisaei est Christum tentantis. Cum ergo ante salvatoris adventum legeretur lex, forsitan quaerebatur quod est mandatum magnum in ea: neque enim interrogasset hoc Pharisaeus, nisi diu apud illos de hoc quaesitum fuisset et non inventum, donec veniens Iesus hoc doceret
Chrysostomus super Matth
De magno tamen mandato interrogat qui nec minimum observabat. Ille debet interrogare de maiori iustitia qui iam minorem complevit
Hieronymus
Vel non de mandatis interrogat, sed quod sit primum mandatum magnumque: ut cum omnia quae Deus mandaverit, magna sint, quicquid ille respondeat, occasionem habeat calumniandi
Chrysostomus super Matth
Dominus autem sic ei respondit ut interrogationis eius fictam conscientiam statim primo responso percuteret: unde sequitur ait illi Iesus: diliges dominum Deum tuum ex toto corde tuo, et ex tota anima tua, et in tota mente tua. Diliges, inquit; non: timebis, quia diligere magis est quam timere: timere enim servorum est, diligere filiorum; timor sub necessitate est, dilectio in libertate. Qui in timore servit Deo, poenam quidem evadit, mercedem vero iustitiae non habet, quia invitus fecit bonum propter timorem. Non vult ergo Deus ut timeatur serviliter ab hominibus quasi dominus; sed ut diligatur quasi pater, qui adoptionis spiritum donavit hominibus. Diligere autem Deum ex toto corde, est ut cor tuum non sit inclinatum ad alicuius rei dilectionem magis quam Dei. Diligere autem Deum in tota anima, est certissimum animum habere in veritate, et firmum esse in fide. Alius est enim amor cordis, et alius est amor animae. Amor cordis quodammodo carnalis est, ut etiam carnaliter diligamus Deum; quod facere non possumus, nisi recedamus ab amore mundialium rerum. Cordis ergo amor sentitur in corde; amor vero animae non sentitur, sed intelligitur, quia in iudicio animae consistit. Qui enim credit apud Deum esse omne bonum, et nihil boni esse extra ipsum, hic diligit Deum in tota anima. Tota vero mente diligere Deum est ut omnes sensus Deo vacent: cuius enim intellectus Deo ministrat, cuius sapientia circa Deum est, cuius cogitatio ea quae Dei sunt tractat, cuius memoria quae bona sunt recordatur, tota mente diligit Deum
Augustinus de Doctr. Christ
Vel aliter. Deum ex toto corde diligere praeciperis, ut omnes cogitationes tuas; ex tota anima, ut omnem vitam tuam; ex tota mente tua, ut omnem intellectum tuum in illum conferas, a quo habes ea quae confers. Nullam ergo vitae nostrae partem reliquit quae vacare debeat, et quasi locum dare ut alia re velit frui. Sed quicquid aliud diligendum venerit in animum, illuc rapiatur quo totus dilectionis impetus currit: tunc enim est optimus homo cum tota vita sua pergit in incommutabile bonum
Glossa
Vel ex toto corde, idest intellectu, anima, idest voluntate, mente, idest memoria, ut nihil ei contrarium velis, sentias, aut recorderis
Origenes in Matth
Vel aliter. Ex toto corde, id est secundum totam recordationem et operationem et cogitationem; ex tota anima, idest ut parati sint eam ponere pro pietate Dei; in tota mente, nihil aliud scilicet proferentes nisi quae Dei sunt. Et vide si potes cor quidem accipere pro intellectu, quo intelligibilia speculamur, mentem autem ad proferendas res: mente enim proferimus singulas res, et per unumquodque quod significatur quasi mente nostra inambulamus atque proferimus. Si autem tentanti Pharisaeo dominus non respondisset, aestimare possemus non esse unum mandatum maius altero. Sed dominus respondens subdit hoc est maximum et primum mandatum: ubi discimus sententiam de mandatis, quod est magnum, et sunt inferiora usque ad minima. Respondet autem dominus non solum, quod est magnum mandatum; sed etiam primum, non pro ordine Scripturae, sed pro dignitate virtutis. Hi autem soli huius mandati in se suscipiunt magnitudinem et primatum qui non solum diligunt dominum Deum suum, sed etiam illa tria susceperint, scilicet ex toto corde et cetera. Docuit autem, quod non solum est magnum et primum, sed etiam quod esset secundum simile priori: unde sequitur secundum autem simile est huic: diliges proximum tuum sicut teipsum. Si autem qui diligit iniquitatem, odit animam suam, manifestum est quod non diligit proximum sicut seipsum, cum nec seipsum diligat
Augustinus de Doctr. Christ
Manifestum est autem omnem hominem proximum esse putandum, quia erga neminem operandum est malum. Iam vero si vel cui praebendum, vel a quo praebendum est nobis officium misericordiae, recte proximus dicitur, manifestum est hoc praecepto, quo tenemur diligere proximum, etiam sanctos Angelos contineri, a quibus nobis tanta misericordiae impenduntur officia, quanta nobis in Scripturis animadvertere facile est. Ex quo et ipse dominus noster proximum se nobis dici voluit, quoniam seipsum dominus Iesus significat opitulatum esse semivivo iacenti in via
Augustinus de Trin
Qui autem amat homines, aut quia iusti sunt, aut ut iusti sint, amare debet; sic enim et seipsum amare debet, aut quia iustus est, aut ut iustus sit: sic enim diligit proximum sicut seipsum sine ullo periculo
Augustinus de Doctr. Christ
Si autem teipsum non propter te debes diligere, sed propter illum ubi dilectionis tuae rectissimus finis est, non succenseat aliquis homo, si et ipsum propter Deum diligis. Quisquis ergo recte proximum diligit, hoc cum eo debet agere ut etiam ipse toto corde diligat Deum
Chrysostomus super Matth
Qui autem hominem amat, simile est sicut qui Deum amat: quia imago Dei est homo, in quo Deus diligitur, sicut rex in sua imagine honoratur. Et propter hoc dicitur hoc mandatum simile esse primo
Origenes
Vel aliter. Quod mandatum sequens primo est simile, significat idem esse officii et meriti in utroque: neque enim aut Dei sine Christo, aut Christi sine Deo potest utilis esse dilectio ad salutem. Sequitur in his duobus mandatis tota lex pendet et prophetae
Augustinus de quaest. Evang
Pendet, dixit, idest illuc refertur ubi habet finem
Rabanus Maurus
Ad duo enim haec praecepta pertinet totus Decalogus: praecepta quidem primae tabulae ad dilectionem Dei, praecepta secundae ad dilectionem proximi
Origenes in Matth
Vel quia qui omnia implevit quae scripta sunt de Dei dilectione et proximi, dignus est magnas gratias a Deo percipere, ut intelligat omnem legem et prophetas
Augustinus de Trin
Cum autem sint duo praecepta, in quibus pendet lex et prophetae, dilectio Dei et proximi, non immerito Scriptura plerumque pro utroque unum ponit: sive dilectionem Dei, sicut est illud: scimus enim quoniam diligentibus Deum omnia cooperantur in bonum; sive dilectionem proximi, sicut est istud: omnis lex in uno sermone impletur: diliges proximum tuum sicut teipsum. Sed hoc ideo quia qui proximum diligit, consequens est etiam ut Deum diligat: ex una enim eademque caritate Deum proximumque diligimus; sed Deum propter Deum; nos autem et proximum propter Deum
Augustinus de Doctr. Christ
Sed tamen quoniam excellentior et supra nostram naturam est divina substantia, praeceptum quo diligimus Deum a proximi dilectione distinctum est; quod si te totum intelligas, idest animam et corpus, et proximum tuum, idest animam et corpus, nullum diligendarum rerum genus in his duobus praeceptis praetermissum est. Cum enim praecurrat dilectio Dei, sequatur dilectio proximi, eiusque dilectionis modus praescriptus sit, ut eum sicut te ipsum diligas; simul et tui abs te dilectio praetermissa non est
22:41
Pseudo-Chrysostom
The Jews tempted Christ, supposing Him to be mere man; had they believed Him to be the Son of God, they would not have tempted Him. Christ therefore, willing to shew that He knew the treachery of their hearts, and that He was God, yet would not declare this truth to them plainly, that they might not take occasion thence to charge Him with blasphemy, and yet would not totally conceal this truth; because to that end had He come that He should preach the truth; He therefore puts a question to them, such as should declare to them who He was; What think ye of Christ? whose Son is He?
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Hom. lxxi.
He first asked His disciples what others said of Christ, and then what they themselves said; but not so to these. For they would have said that He was a deceiver, and wicked. They thought that Christ was to be mere man, and therefore they say unto Him, The Son of David. To reprove this, He brings forward the Prophet, witnessing His dominion, proper Sonship, and His joint honour with His Father.
St Jerome † AD 420
This passage is out of the 109th Psalm. Christ is therefore called David’s Lord, not in respect of His descent from him, but in respect of His eternal generation from the Father, wherein He was before His fleshly Father. And he calls Him Lord, not by a mere chance, nor of his own thought, but by the Holy Spirit.
Remigius † AD 908
That He says, Sit thou on my right hand, is not to be taken as though God had a body, and either a right hand or a left hand; but to sit on the right hand of God is to abide in the honour and equality of the Father’s majesty.
Pseudo-Chrysostom
I suppose that He formed this question, not only against the Pharisees, but also against the heretics; for according to the flesh He was truly David’s Son, but his Lord according to His Godhead.
St John Chrysostom † AD 407
But He rests not with this, but that they may fear, He adds, Till I make thine enemies thy footstool; that at least by terror He might gain them.
Origen † AD 253
For God puts Christ’s enemies as a footstool beneath His feet, for their salvation as well as their destruction.
Remigius † AD 908
But till is used for indefinite time, that the meaning be, Sit Thou for ever, and for ever hold thine enemies beneath thy feet.
The Gloss ap. Anselm.
That it is by the Father that the enemies are put under the Son, denotes not the Son’s weakness, but the union of His nature with His Father. For the Son also puts under Him the Father’s enemies, when He glorifies His name upon earth. He concludes from this authority, If David then call Him Lord, how is He his son?
St Jerome † AD 420
This question is still available for us against the Jews; for these who believe that Christ is yet to come, assert that He is a mere man, though a holy one, of the race of David. Let us then thus taught by the Lord ask them, If He be mere man, and only the Son of David, how does David call Him his Lord? To evade the truth of this question, the Jews invent many frivolous answers. They allege Abraham’s steward, he whose son was Eliezer of Damascus, and say that this Psalm was composed in his person, when after the overthrow of the five kings, the Lord God said to his lord Abraham, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool. Let us ask how Abraham could say the things that follow, and compel them to tell us how Abraham was born before Lucifer, and how he was a Priest after the order of Melchisedech, for whom Melchisedech brought bread and wine, and of whom he received tithes of the spoil?
St John Chrysostom † AD 407
This conclusion He put to their questionings, as final, and sufficient to stop their mouth. Henceforward accordingly they held their peace, not by their own good-will, but from not having aught to say.
Origen † AD 253
For had their question sprung of desire to know, He would never have proposed to them such things as should have deterred them from asking further.
Rabanus Maurus † AD 856
Hence we learn that the poison of jealousy may be overcome, but can hardly of itself rest at peace.
The Latin text
Chrysostomus in Matth
Iudaei aestimantes Christum esse hominem purum, eum tentabant; nec eum tentassent, si filium Dei credidissent. Volens ergo Christus ostendere quod cognoscebat fallaciam cordis eorum, et quia Deus erat, nec manifeste voluit dicere veritatem, ne occasionem blasphemiae invenientes Iudaei amplius insanirent, nec omnino tacere, quia ad hoc venerat ut veritatem annuntiaret: ideo talem interrogationem eis proposuit, ut ipsa interrogatio eis ostenderet quis esset; unde dicitur congregatis autem Pharisaeis, interrogavit eos Iesus, dicens: quid vobis videtur de Christo? Cuius filius est?
Chrysostomus in Matth
Discipulos quidem primum interrogavit quid alii dicerent de Christo, et tunc quid ipsi dicerent; hos autem non ita. Profecto enim seductorem eum dixissent et malum. Existimabant autem quoniam Christus purus homo erat; et ideo dixerunt eum esse filium David; et hoc est quod subditur dicunt ei: David. Ipse autem hoc reprehendens, inducit prophetam dominationem eius et proprietatem filiationis, et cohonorationem quae est ad patrem, testantem; unde dicitur quomodo ergo David in spiritu vocat eum dominum, dicens: dixit dominus domino meo: sede a dextris meis, donec poenam
, et cetera. Hieronymus
Testimonium hoc de Psalmo 109, I sumptum est. Dominus ergo David vocatur, non secundum id quod de eo natus est, sed secundum id quod natus ex patre semper fuit, praeveniens ipsum carnis suae patrem. Vocat autem eum dominum suum, non errore incerto, nec propria voluntate, sed spiritu sancto
Remigius
Quod autem dicit sede a dextris meis, non intelligendum est quod Deus corporeus sit, ut dexteram vel sinistram habeat; sed a dextris Dei sedere est in honore et aequalitate paternae dignitatis manere
Chrysostomus super Matth
Puto autem quod hanc interrogationem non solum contra Pharisaeos, sed etiam contra haereticos posuit: nam secundum carnem vere filius erat David, dominus autem secundum divinitatem
Chrysostomus in Matth
Non autem in hoc stat; sed ut timeant, subdit donec ponam inimicos tuos scabellum pedum tuorum: ut saltem ita eos inducat
Origenes in Matth
Deus etiam non ad perditionem solum ponit scabellum pedum Christi inimicos ipsius, sed ad eorum salutem
Remigius
Donec autem pro infinito ponitur, ut sit sensus: sede semper, et inimici tui in sempiternum subicientur pedibus tuis
Glossa
Quod autem a patre inimici subiciuntur filio, non infirmitatem filii, sed unitatem naturae significat: nam et filius subicit inimicos patri, quia patrem clarificat super terram. Et ex hac auctoritate concludit si ergo David vocat eum dominum, quomodo filius eius est?
Hieronymus
Interrogatio haec nobis proficit usque hodie contra Iudaeos: et hi enim qui confitentur Christum esse venturum, hominem simplicem et sanctum virum asserunt de genere David. Interrogemus ergo eos docti a domino: si simplex homo est, et tantum filius David, quomodo David vocat eum dominum suum? Iudaei autem ad diluendam interrogationis veritatem, frivola multa confingunt, vernaculum Abrahae asserentes, cuius filius fuit Damascus Eliezer, et ex ipsius persona scriptum Psalmum, quod post caedem quinque regum, dominus Deus domino suo Abraham dixerit: sede ad dexteram meam, donec ponam, et cetera. Quos interrogemus quomodo dixerit Abraham ea quae sequuntur; et respondere cogamus quando Abraham ante Luciferum genitus sit, et quomodo sacerdos fuerit secundum ordinem Melchisedech, pro quo Melchisedech obtulerit panem et vinum, et a quo decimas praedae acceperit
Chrysostomus in Matth
Hoc tantum imposuit finem ipsorum disputationibus, quasi magnum et sufficiens praecludere eorum ora: unde sequitur et nemo poterat respondere ei verbum, neque ausus fuit quisquam ex illa die eum amplius interrogare. Siluerunt enim ex tunc non volentes, sed non habendo aliquid dicere
Origenes
Si autem interrogatio eorum fuisset ex voluntate discendi, nunquam eis talia proposuisset ut amplius non essent ausi eum interrogare
Rabanus Maurus
Ex hoc autem intelligimus venena invidiae superari posse, sed difficile quiescere
22:1
And Jesus answered, &c., refuting the incredulity of the Scribes. The meaning is: it is the same in the kingdom of Heaven, i.e., in the Church militant here on earth, as if a king made a marriage for his son, &c. For in other respects the kingdom of Heaven is not directly and precisely like a king, but a kingdom. S. Gregory treats this parable at length (Hom. 38, in Evang.). The parable is similar to that which Luke records (Luk 14:16). Maldonatus thinks it is the same with that, and that Matthew has not here observed the historical order. With more reason S. Augustine (l. 2, de consens. Evang. c. 71), S. Thomas, Jansen, and others think that this is a different parable from that in Luke; or if the same, that they were uttered upon two occasions, and in different words. It is clear on comparison that they have numerous differences. For, not to speak of other things, Luke says that the parable was spoken in the house of a Pharisee. Matthew here asserts that it was spoken publicly in the temple. This is plain from ver. 23. Again, Luke calls this marriage feast a supper; Matthew, a dinner.
22:3
And sent his servants, &c. For marriage, the Syriac version has throughout feast, meaning marriage feast. The whole parable may be expounded and applied as follows: 1st The king is God the Father; the son of the king, the bridegroom is God's Incarnate Son, Jesus Christ, whose spouse is the Church, whose nuptials were begun in the Incarnation of Christ, for in it Christ espoused human nature to Himself, hypostatically, and the Church, that is, all faithful people, mystically, to be His Spouse by grace. But in Heaven these nuptials shall be consummated with glory. So Origen, SS. Hilary, Jerome, Gregory, and others. Wherefore, tropologically, "by marriage, understand," says Origen, "the union of Christ with the soul; and by offspring, good works." 2d. God the Father made a marriage feast for Christ, since in Judea, and in the whole world, He hath, through Christ, spread a table of evangelical doctrine and sacraments, especially the Sacrament of the Eucharist. 3d. To this nuptial feast the Jews were invited by God, through Moses and the prophets, as the servants of God, both before and after the incarnation of Christ, that they might believe first that it was about to take place, and then that it had taken place; that so, believing in Christ, repenting and seeking grace from Him, they might obtain justice and salvation. 4th Bulls and fatlings have only the general signification of rich provision for a banquet. They denote the grandeur of the doctrines of the Gospel, says S. Jerome, and of the Sacraments. Moreover, fatlings (altilia, Vulg.) do not mean winged creatures, birds and fowls, but bulls and calves, and other creatures which are fed up. Altilia is derived from alo, to nourish. The Greek is σιτιστά, fatlings. Wherefore the Arabic translates, and my calves are now fed, and have been killed, Gr. τεθυμένα, i.e., have been immolated. For in olden time, as now, weddings were wont to be inaugurated by a sacrifice, and marriage feasts were kept with victims slain and offered in sacrifice. So also the marriage feast of Christ, which is here parabolically described, took its beginning from the sacrifice of the Cross. Symbolically, by bulls (Vulg.) S. Gregory understands the Fathers of the Old Covenant, who, by the permission of the Law, smote their enemies with the horn of corporeal strength. But the fatlings, saith he, are the Fathers of the New Testament, raised by contemplation from the things of earth to things above. But Chrysostom says, " fatlings are Prophets; bulls, those who were both Prophets and Priests." As bulls are leaders of the herd, so are Priests the princes of the people. S. Hilary says, the bulls are martyrs, who, like victims, have been immolated. The fatlings are spiritual persons, filled as it were with spiritual bread. Lastly, Origen says, the dinner is the word of God. Bulls signify the strong meat of the word; fatlings its sweeter portions. 5th. The field, the farm, whither those who were invited went away, despising the invitation, signify temporal good things, which drew away the Jews from the faith of Christ, and from heavenly good things; and which led them to slay the servants of God, yea, even Christ Himself. Wherefore, God sent Titus, who slew the Jews as being murderers, and burnt up their city, namely, their capital, Jerusalem. Christ in this parable has an allusion to Isa 25:6, "And in this mountain shall the Lord of hosts make unto all people a feast of fat things, a feast of wines on the lees, of fat things full of marrow, of wines on the lees well refined;" and Isa 30:23-24, "Then shall he give the rain of thy seed, that thou shalt sow the ground withal; and bread of the increase of the earth, and it shall be fat and plenteous: in that day shall thy cattle feed in large pastures. The oxen likewise and the young asses that ear the ground shall eat clean provender, which hath been winnowed with the shovel and with the fan." Learn from hence that Christ always sets before us in the Church a rich spiritual banquet of holy doctrine and grace, abundantly seasoned with sacred lections, sermons, exhortations, and with innumerable examples in every kind of virtue, of Apostles, Martyrs, Confessors, Virgins, with frequent receiving of the Sacraments, especially the Eucharist, which is "the corn of the elect, and the wine that maketh virgins," as Zechariah saith (Zec 19:17); with the Sacrifice of the Mass, with such great adornment of the sacred ministers, altars, and temples, and with the heavenly harmony of music and organs, and many other things which feed, delight, inebriate the souls of the faithful, so that Christianity is to the pious one continual banquet, according to the words in Isa 66:23, "The feast of the new moon shall be from one month to another, and from sabbath to sabbath." Lastly, Christ Himself, Incarnate, is the perennial food and joy of the faithful. For He, through the Incarnation, really communicates to them not only all the gifts of His grace, but Himself, in all His fulness, and therefore His very Deity itself. And this He gives them to taste, to eat, to enjoy, as it is said in S. Joh 6:51, "I am the Living Bread, who came down from heaven. Whosoever shall eat of this Bread, shall live eternally." This is the reason why Isaiah, when declaring beforehand the delights and happiness which were to come to the new Church from Christ Incarnate, everywhere rejoices and exults, and invites all Christians evermore to rejoice and exult with him. See chaps. 2, 7.; chaps. 30,35,60., 61.,62., &c. Let Christians therefore, and especially Priests and Religions, take care to feed in these feasts in their souls; and serve Christ in righteousness and holiness, that thus they may begin that life of beatitude with Him now, which by and by will be perfected and consummated in Heaven. Ver. 8. Then saith he, &c. This is the second part of the parable of the guests. Then, that is to say, when these who were invited, meaning the Jews, refused to come to the nuptial table of the evangelical doctrine of Christ, because they were not worthy of it, because they despised it then saith the King, that is God, to His servants, the Apostles
22:9
Go ye into the highways; Vulg. the ends of the ways; Gr. διεξόδους όδω̃ν, the passages, the outlets of the ways. The meaning is, Traverse and run through all the ways, and the turnings, and corners, and bendings of the roads. Let there be no nook which you do not traverse. Do ye, O ye Apostles, travel over the whole world; go into all the countries of the nations, that ye may preach the faith of Christ to them, and invite all men to it. He also bids the Apostles to transfer the Gospel from the invited guests, that is the Jews, to all nations. Wherefore He adds And his servants went out, &c. The Apostles were to go and preach the Gospel in all nations unto the ends of the earth, according to the words in Psa 19:4-5, "Their sound is gone out into all lands, and their words unto the end of the world." Mystically: the servants are angels who preside over the conversion of the Gentiles, says Origen. Symbolically: the highways are the various and contradictory errors and sects of the Gentiles, which the Apostles destroyed. So Remigius. 2d. S. Chrysostom says, The ways are the various professions of men in the world, as the profession of philosophy, arms, &c. Christ therefore bids that men of every profession shall be invited to believe. 3d. S. Hilary says, " The way is the time of the world. They are bidden to go out to the end, because the past is forgiven to all." 4th. S. Gregory says, The ways are actions: their terminations (exitus) are defects.
22:10
They gathered together all, &c. This is an ornament (emblema) of the parable, and only signifies that all men, without any distinction whatsoever, are invited to the faith of Christ.
22:11
And the wedding, &c. The Church has been filled with a copious multitude of all nations.
When the king came in, &c., that he might survey and examine them. This shall take place when God shall come to the general judgment at the end of the world, to judge, and reward or punish all mankind. So Origen, &c.
And he saw... wedding garment; Syr. a festal garment. The garment for the wedding, that is, one which is clean, precious, and splendid, is not faith, as the heretics say. For all who were at this feast of the Church, indeed, could not have entered in except by faith. Therefore this garment is charity, and holiness of life. A pure and holy life is like a clean and splendid robe, woven of virtues and good works, which are a glorious adornment of a man. So SS. Jerome, Hilary, Tertullian, and others. S. Gregory explains the not having a wedding garment to mean faith without works of charity, by which the Lord comes to unite the Church in marriage with Himself. But S. Augustine (lib. 2, contra Faust. c. 19) explains it to mean one who seeks his own, not the Lord's glory. But S. Hilary says, the wedding garment is the grace of the Holy Spirit, and the brightness of heavenly conversation, which being received by the good answer of confession, is preserved spotless for the celestial company. S. Jerome says, works which are fulfilled out of the Law and the Gospel, form the garment of the new man. Many in the day of judgment who believed in Christ shall be found without this robe of charity and sanctity; yet one only is mentioned, because this matter is spoken of, as it were, by the way. For the direct object of Christ in this parable was to declare that when the unbelieving Jews were rejected, the Gentiles were called to Christ. This one, however, denotes all who are like Him. It also signifies that not even one wicked person can lie hid in the day of judgment, or go away unpunished.
22:12
And said to him, Friend (Syr. my comrade), &c. The word friend signifies that God will speak thus to the wicked, not out of hatred, or a desire to condemn them, but in a friendly manner, from zeal of justice. S. Jerome adds, he calls him friend, because he was invited to the wedding feast. Therefore he rebukes him for his impudence, because he came in a rude manner without a wedding garment. Whence S. Gregory says, "It is marvellous how he calls him friend, and yet rejects him." It is as though he said plainly, "Friend, and not friend; friend by faith, but not friend by works." But he was speechless. For, says S. Jerome, that was no place of denial; for God shall there "bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and make manifest the counsels of the heart," according to the words, "I will search Jerusalem with candles." (Zep 1:12).
22:13
Then said the king to his servants, his angels, as is plain from Mat 13:39. And as Daniel saith concerning them, "Thousand thousands ministered unto Him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before Him."
Bind him, &c. This is an emblem, signifying that the damned cannot resist the sentence of God, nor from thenceforth do any good thing; altogether as if they had their hands and feet, their mouth and souls, their will and judgment bound. For as S. Augustine says (lib. II, de Trin.), "The binding of an evil will is a chain." And S. Gregory says, "They who now are willingly in bonds to sin, shall then, against their will, be bound in punishment."
Cast him... teeth. These are the teeth which delighted in gluttony, says S. Gregory. And again the same S. Gregory says appositely, " The inner darkness is the darkness of the heart; the outer darkness is the night of eternal damnation."
22:14
Many are called, &c. Because all who were first invited and refused to come were rejected, that is to say, all the Jews, who would not believe in Christ, to whom this parable bears special reference. Besides these, one was rejected, even of those who were called, and did come, who entered in, not having a wedding garment, who represents all wicked Christians. For inasmuch as Christ did not intend in this place specially to refer to these, it sufficed that by naming one, He should refer to that matter by the way, to signify that not all who believe in Christ shall be saved, but those only who adorn their faith with a wedding garment, that is, with love and holy works. This saying of Christ ought to raise great fear and awe. For no one knoweth whether he be elect or reprobate. Every one therefore ought to strive, by means of good works, to make his calling and election sure. S. Gregory gives the example of his three paternal aunts. The first of these was named Tharsilla. She lived in holy virginity, and was called away to Heaven by her grandfather, who was already among the blessed, in these words, "Come, that I may receive thee into this mansion of light." Then she, looking up, beheld Jesus, and cried aloud, "Depart ye, depart ye, Jesus cometh," and so delivered up her soul to Him to be eternally blessed. The second sister, Emiliana, was called away to Heaven by Tharsilla herself on the Feast of the Epiphany; and being anxious about her third sister Gordiana, she answered, "And if I come alone, to whom shall I leave Gordiana?" Again she heard her sister's voice saying, "Come, for Gordiana hath chosen her lot with the world." For, shortly afterwards, Gordiana, forgetful of her consecration to virginity, married her bailiff. Ver. 15. Then went the Pharisees... entangle, &c. For entangle, the Greek has παγιδεύσωσιν, i.e., ensnare; for παγίδες are snares. And so the Syriac has prepare gins like bird-catchers. The Pharisees put captious questions to Christ with the design that whatever way He might answer, He should incur blame; and that so they might, as it were, entrap Him in His answer, and that He might be open to the charge of treason against either human or Divine Majesty. "They laid a plot by means of a dilemma," says S. Augustine (l. I, contra Crescen. c. 17), that whichever He should choose of its two horns, He might be caught. If He answered that it was lawful, He would he a traitor to the people of God; but if He said it was not lawful, He would be punished as an enemy to Cæsar.
22:16
With the Herodians; Syr. with those who were of the house of Herod. The Herodians were a Jewish sect, who favoured the Roman Cæsar, and the payment of tribute to him. They were named from the first Herod of Ascalon, the infanticide, who was entirely devoted to Cæsar, inasmuch as he had been made king of Judea by Augustus Cæsar and the Roman Senate. So S. Jerome, Origen, and others. S. Epiphanius (lib. I, hæres. 20) and S. Jerome (Dialogo cont. Luciferanos) add that these Herodians were Jewish sectaries, or heretics, who held that Herod of Ascalon was the Messiah or Christ promised by the prophets, because they saw that in him the sceptre had failed from Judah. Herod eagerly encouraged these flatterers. And the reason why he slew the infants at Bethlehem was that he might kill Christ, that no one but himself might be accounted Christ. For the same reason, he built a most magnificent temple for the Jews, vieing with that of Solomon, as Josephus shows (Lib. Ant. 15, c. 14). Listen to S. Jerome briefly enumerating the Jewish sects, "I say nothing about the Jewish heretics, who, before the coming of Christ, made light of the law delivered to them. There was Dositheus, prince of the Samaritans, who rejected the prophets. There were the Sadducees, sprung from his root, who went on to deny the resurrection of the flesh. There were the Pharisees, divided from the rest of the Jews on account of certain superfluous observances. There were the Herodians, who took Herod for their king instead of Christ." Theophylact, Euthymius, and Philastrius say the same, with the exception, that for Herod of Ascalon, they substituted his son, Herod Antipas, who put John the Baptist to death. But they are mistaken in their assertion that Herod Antipas was ever regarded by the Jews as Messiah. The Pharisees, therefore, who took the opposite side, namely, that Herod was not the Messiah, and that tribute ought not to be paid to the Roman Cæsar, who put themselves forward as vindicators of the law of Moses and of Jewish liberty, suborned these Herodians to go together with their own disciples to Jesus, as to a prophet and teacher, and proposed this question to Him concerning giving tribute to Cæsar. This they did with the crafty design that if Christ should assert that tribute ought to be given to Cæsar, He would incur the hostility of the Jewish populace; if, on the other hand, He should say that it was not to be paid, He might fall under the anger of Cæsar and the Romans, who would condemn Him to death as being guilty of sedition.
Master; Heb. Rabbi. Rabbi means not only a doctor of the law, such as are the Rabbins, but a potentate and a prince, endowed with authority.
We know... the way of God, i.e., the law of God For the law is the way by which we go to God, and to His grace and glory. For the law teaches what is pleasing to God, what He wills us to do, that we may be justified and blessed by Him.
And carest not, &c. Thou fearest neither the anger of Herod nor the power of Cæsar, so as to be afraid to give a true answer, and deliver your opinion in behalf of your countrymen, even though you should expose yourself to the hostility of Herod and Cæsar; even as John the Baptist, when he rebuked Herod's adultery, did not shrink from incurring his anger. For they trusted that Christ would pronounce in favour of the Jews, as being faithful against Cæsar, an unbeliever. So S. Chrysostom, "By means of flattery they hope to urge Him on to boldness, that He might say something against the existing institutions, and the existing state of things;" "that He might come into collision with Cæsar on a charge of rebellion."
For Thou regardest not the person; Syr. the face, &c. To look whether it be the face of a rich man and a prince, or a poor man and a plebeian, so that Thou shouldest flatter and defend a prince, and condemn a poor man. Rather wilt Thou, as it were, shut Thine eyes, and give sentence in favour of truth and justice, and say, Cæsar is My friend, but truth is a greater friend." The Gr. πζόσωπον signifies both person and face.
22:17
Tell us therefore... tribute; Syr. capitation-tax, because each head or each person was assessed. The Jews, as God's faithful people, held aloof from the Gentiles, as idolaters. And many of them thought that it was not lawful for them to acknowledge Cæsar as their lord, and pay him tribute; because God alone was their Master, to whom they paid tithes and tribute. By Cæsar, Tiberius Cæsar, the successor of Augustus, is meant. The occasion of this question being propounded to Christ, was as follows. About this time one Judas, of Galilee, had taught that it was not lawful for the Jews to be in subjection to the Romans, and pay them taxes. Now Christ and the Apostles were regarded as Galilæans; and the Jews professed to look upon them as upholders of this teaching of Judas the Galilæan, as being their countryman. And for this reason they frequently repudiated this error of theirs. Hear S. Jerome (in cap. 3, ad Tit. ver. I), "I think," says he, "this precept was given by the Apostle, because at that time the teaching of Judas the Galilæan was still in vogue, and had many followers. Among their other tenets, they held it probable that, according to the law, no one ought to be called lord, except God only; and that those who paid tithes to the Temple ought not to render tribute to Cæsar. This sect increased to so great an extent as to influence a great part of the Pharisees as well as the rest of the people, so that they referred this question about the lawfulness of paying tribute to Cæsar to our Lord, who answered prudently and cautiously, Render, &c. S. Paul's teaching is in agreement with this answer, in that he bids believers be in subjection to princes and powers." When Jesus knew, &c. It is as though He said, "You pretend to be friends, and to desire to maintain a good conscience, that you may know what you ought to do in this case truly and justly, according to the law of God, when all the while you are My enemies, and are thirsting for My blood." "The prime virtue," says S. Jerome, "in one who gives an answer is to know the mind of him who asks the question." Ver. 19. Show Me the coin of the census. That is, Show me the coin which Cæsar exacts as a tax from each person. The Arabic has, Show Me the figure of the denarius. And they brought unto Him a denarius. You will say that, according to Mat 22:17, it appears that the Jews paid a capitation-tax of a didrachma, or a half-shekel. But the Roman denarius was only worth about half a didrachma, or ninepence. My answer is, that the didrachma was, for the sake of convenience, divided into two denarii, and that each individual paid two denarii, or one didrachma. So Jansen and Maldonatus. Lastly, it would appear that Tiberius and the other emperors ordered a denarius of this value to be struck off, which coin they required to be paid by the Jews in the way of tribute. As Baronius shows from Lampridius, the Romans were in the habit of striking off coins of such weight and value as they required to be paid in the way of tribute, and of greater or less value, according to the necessity of times and requirements.
22:20
And Jesus saith... superscription; Gr. ε̉πιγραφή; for which the Vulg. in Mark has inscription. For coins are wont to be stamped with the name and image of the prince who coins them. Hence the Arab. has, Whose figure and inscription is this ? They say unto Him, Cæsar's, i.e., Tiberius Cæsar's, who then reigned. Christ already knew this, but He put the question that He might draw from their own mouth a reply which He could turn against them and convict them. The cognomen Cæsar was first given to Julius Cæsar, from whom it passed to the succeeding emperors. Servius and Spartianus, and from them Charles Sigonius (lib. de Nomin. Rom.), say that Cæsar was called originally from the slaughter of an elephant. For Caesar signifies elephant in the Punic tongue. I have seen on some silver coins, on one side an elephant, with the inscription Cæsar; on the reverse, instruments by means of which the Romans were wont to slay elephants.
22:21
Then saith He, &c. As though He said, "Since ye, O ye Jews, are now subject to Cæsar, and use his coins, do ye not so much give as render or restore (reddite) to him the denarius which is due to him as tribute. But spiritual things, that is to say, worship and piety, give ye (date) to God. For this God exacts as what is rightly His due. So shall it come to pass that ye will offend neither against God nor Cæsar." Observe: that Christ is here unwilling to enter into the question whether the Jews were justly or unjustly subjects and tributaries of the Romans. For this was a doubtful question. For prima facie, the negative, that they were not justly subject, would seem the more correct. For Pompey, who first reduced the Jews under the Roman yoke, was only called in by Hyrcanus and Aristobulus, the grandsons of Simon the high priest, to decide between them which of the two was to succeed to the Jewish sovereignty and high-priesthood. By what right then did Pompey pass them over, and transfer the sovereign power over Judea to the Romans? For this is Turkish justice. For when the Turk is called in to aid them by Christian princes quarrelling between themselves, he seizes upon and enslaves both. And yet, if we examine what happened more carefully, we shall perceive that the contrary proposition is the more probable, namely, that Pompey seized upon Judea by the right of a just war. For when Pompey had justly decided in favour of Hyrcanus, as being the elder, his younger brother, Aristobulus, attacked Jerusalem, and filled it with his soldiers, who fought against both Pompey and Hyrcanus. Then Pompey took Jerusalem by storm, and made it subject, with the consent of Hyrcanus, to the Roman yoke. Hyrcanus being unable to keep it by himself, delivered it to Pompey, with the consent of the elders and nobles of the Jews, who preferred to be subject to the Romans rather than to Hyrcanus and Aristobulus. For they saw that without the Romans, the Jewish state would be annihilated by schisms and seditions. See the relation in Josephus (lib. 24, c. 5, &c.). Lastly, prescription was on the side of the Romans, for they had been in peaceful possession of Judea for about a hundred years, with at least the tacit assent of the Jewish people. And without doubt the position of the possessor is the stronger. Wherefore, if the Pharisees wished to deprive the Romans of this possession, the onus probandi lay upon them of showing that they had acquired it unjustly. Since they were not able to do this, the Romans rightly retained possession. For when the accuser does not prove his charge, the accused is absolved. In this case the accusers were the Pharisees, the accused the Romans, whom the accusers wished to deprive of their possession. Christ therefore, in this place, does not choose to enter into the question whether the Roman dominion over Judea, and their imposition of tribute, was just or unjust: but He takes for granted that, as a matter of fact, that which was strengthened and confirmed by the various titles specified above was just. For the Pharisees, in propounding this question about the payment of tribute to the Romans, did not put forward the plea of justice, but of religion and piety; that is to say, that it was neither lawful nor becoming that they, who were the alone people of God, should pay tribute to Cæsar, a Gentile and a heathen. They do not ask, "Are we bound to pay tribute to Cæsar?" but, "Is it lawful to pay tribute to Cæsar?" And they imply that to do so was contempt of God, a disgrace to the Jews, and an injury to their religion. Christ answers, on the contrary, that it was not an injury to God and the faith, nor an indignity to a faithful nation, if the people of God were subject to Cæsar, a Gentile; and that the Jews themselves might both profitably and honourably obey both God and a Gentile prince, if they would but render to both their due; and if they would do this with prudence, so as to arouse against them neither God nor Cæsar, and so destroy their whole nation, as they did not long afterwards. For it is better to pay money than to lose life and everything.
Render therefore, &c. That is, give to Cæsar the didrachma, which he rightly exacts from you to sustain the burdens of the state, and especially to maintain soldiers to defend you against the attacks of enemies. But give God also the didrachma tithes, oblations, victims, as S. Jerome says, such as are prescribed in Leviticus, which He, by the right of supreme dominion, demands of you as His creatures, and as faithful to Him. "Because," says Origen, "a man renders to Cæsar what belongs to Cæsar, it is not a hindrance to him in rendering to God what belongs to God." The rights which belong to Cæsar are different from those which belong to God. Political obligations are not adverse to religion; neither is religion adverse to political duties. "Wherefore, since Tiberius Cæsar reigns over you, and you are his subjects, which clearly is the case, because he has the right of coining money, I mean the denarius of such a weight and value as seems good to him; and inasmuch as you yourselves, by receiving the coin of the census from Tiberius, as your prince, acknowledge that you are his subjects, and bound to pay his taxes, therefore by this very fact you are under obligation to pay." "What Christ spoke with His mouth," says S. Bernard (Epist. 42), "He was careful to fulfil in act. This Creator of Cæsar delayed not to pay tribute to Cæsar." Hear Tertullian (lib. de idololat. c. 15), " Render to Cæsar the things of Cæsar, and to God the things of God, i.e., the image of Cæsar, which is in money, to Cæsar; and the image of God, which is in man, to God; so that thou mayest give money to Cæsar, to God thyself." And S. Chrysostom, "When thou hearest that the things of Cæsar must be rendered to Cæsar, doubt not that those things only are spoken of which do no harm to piety and religion to pay thein. For the tribute, or toll, which is opposed to virtue or the faith, is the tribute and revenue of the devil" And S. Hilary says, "If we have nothing in our possession which belongs to Cæsar, then we are free from the obligation of giving him that which is his." Which is as though Christ said, "If ye wish to be exempt from tribute, renounce all things, as I and the apostles have done; for where there is nothing, there Cæsar hath no right." Politically: Christ here tacitly admonishes Cæsars and sovereigns that, being contented with what belongs to them, they must not intermeddle with the affairs of God and the Church. Wisely and piously did Constantine the Great, as Eusebius testifies (Vita Constant. iv. 24), say to the prelates of the Church, "You are bishops within the Church; I have been appointed by God a bishop without the Church." And Valentinian the Elder said, "It is not lawful for me, who am a layman, to interfere in such matters as this." When his son, Valentinian the Younger, was instigated by his mother, Justina, who was an Arian, to ask for a church from S. Ambrose (as he himself relates, Epist. 33 ad Marcellinam), he heard the following reply: "Do not burden yourself, O emperor, by thinking that you have any imperial rights over things divine. Do not lift up yourself; but if you desire a long reign, be subject to God; for it is written, 'Give the things of God to God, the things of Cæsar to Cæsar.' To the emperor pertain palaces, but churches to the priest. You have authority over fortifications, not sacred buildings." And Hosius of Cordova said to the Arian emperor Constantius, "Do not intermeddle with matters ecclesiastical, neither give us orders with respect to such things, but rather learn them from us. To thee God has entrusted the imperial power, to us the things of the Church." And Theodosius the Younger said (Epist. ad Conc. Ephesin.), "It is wickedness for one who has not been enrolled in the catalogue of the holy bishops to thrust himself into ecclesiastical affairs and deliberations." Tropologically: S. Hilary says, "We are bound to render unto God the things of God, our body, soul, and will; for the coin of Cæsar is in gold, in which his image is engraven; but God's coin is man, in whom is the image of God. Give your money then to Cæsar, but keep for God the consciousness of your innocence." And S. Augustine says, "To God must be given Christian love, to kings human fear." And S. Bernard, or whoever was the author of the book on the Lord's Passion, says (cap. 3), "Render unto Cæsar the penny which has Cæsar's image; render unto God the soul which He created after His own image and likeness, and ye shall be righteous." Symbolically: the author of the sermon to the Brethren in the wilderness (apud S. Augus. tom. 10, sum. 7) says, "Then do we render to Cæsar the things of Cæsar, when we pay to the Saints the reverence (dulia) which is due to them; and we give the things of God to God, when we render unto Him that Divine worship (latria) which is due to Him alone." Lastly: S. Augustine (in Sententiis, Sent. 15) rightly applies these words to vows, and those who make vows. "Whosoever thinks well of what he may vow to God, and what vowing pay, let him vow and render himself. This is required, and this is due. Let Cæsar's image he rendered to Cæsar, God's image to God. This is what the Psalmist commands when he says, 'Vow, and pay unto the Lord your God; all ye who are round about Him bring presents.'" (Psa 76:12).
22:22
Ver. 22. And when they heard, they marvelled, &c. They marvelled at the wisdom of Christ, who thus easily extricated Himself from the snare which to the Pharisees seemed so impossible of escape, and twisted it round their own necks, who had laid it, according to the words of the Psalm, "In their own net which they laid privily is their foot taken." And again it is said (Pro 21:30), "There is neither wisdom, nor prudence, nor counsel against the Lord."
22:23
Ver. 23. Then there came unto Him, &c.The Sadducees had heard Christ teaching the Resurrection, and by means of it persuading men to repentance and a holy life. They oppose Him therefore with this question, which seemed to them unanswerable, in order that they might confute and overthrow Christ and His doctrine by the absurdities in which they thought to involve Him.
22:24
Ver. 24. Saying, Master, &c. Seed, i.e., posterity, a son, as the Syriac translates, who should be called after the name of the dead, that so the dead man might seem still to survive in him. This law is found in Deu 25:5. The Sadducees expected by this question to confound Christ. For if He should say the woman was the wife of one of the men, it would incite the other brothers to wrath, and envy, and perpetual strife, since there was no reason why she should be given to one more than another. For the first husband, who might seem to have had the best right to her, lost his right by death. If, on the other hand, Christ had said that she was the wife in common of all the seven, they ould have accused Him as a teacher of shameful doctrine and public incest. It was as though they said, "Such are the absurdities which follow from the doctrine of the Resurrection. Thou therefore, O Christ, ought not to assert it. And thus your silly followers imagine, in their stupidity, that you are wise." Then Christ, by a word, brushes aside their fallacy, as it were a spider's web, and shows them their ignorance, by adding what these men with their crass and carnal minds never took into consideration, namely, that in the world to come this widow would be no one's wife at all.
22:29
Know not the Scriptures, which clearly declare the Resurrection, as Job 19:25; Job 19:2 Macc. 7:9 et seq. and 2 Macc. 12:44; Isa 26:19 and Isa 66:14; Eze 37:1, Eze 37:9; Dan 12:12, &c.
The power of God; Gr. δύναμις. He means, "Ye know not that God is omnipotent, and therefore can raise to life again the bodies which have been reduced to dust, even as He created them out of nothing at the beginning. For greater power is required to create a thing out of nothing than to raise it from the dead." Christ here touches upon the double root of the Sadducean error. The first was ignorance of the Scriptures, which clearly teach the Resurrection. The other was ignorance, or want of consideration, of the omnipotence of God. This caused them to interpret the Scriptures which treat of the Resurrection as referring to a mystical resurrection from vice to virtue.
22:30
In the Resurrection, i.e., in the world to come, in Heaven, and celestial bliss. Nor are given in marriage; for women who are good and modest do not choose husbands for themselves, but are given to husbands by their parents.
But they shall be as the angels, &c. The blessed in Heaven after the Resurrection shall be like the angels, not by nature, but, 1, by purity; 2, by spiritual life, for they live by spiritual not corporeal food; 3, by incorruption and immortality; 4, by happiness and glory, in which, like the angels, they will continue for all eternity. Wherefore there will be no need then of marriage and generation; for these things have been instituted for the perpetuation of the race and the individual, by means of children. Because the father is mortal, therefore he begets a son, that after death he may live and continue in his son. But in Heaven there shall be no death, and they shall live for ever. Marriage, therefore, and procreation of children would be without an object there. Wherefore S. Luke adds (Luk 20:35), Neither can they die any more. Appositely says S. Augustine (Quæst. Evang. in Luk 20:35), "Marriage is for the sake of children, children for the sake of succession, succession on account of death. Where, therefore, death is not, marriage is not." S. Luke adds, And they are the sons of God, being the sons of the Resurrection. Blessed are they that rise again; they shall be like God both in body and soul; for they shall he spiritual, glorious, immortal, and eternal as God is, forasmuch as they are born the sons of the Resurrection, and are born again to a blessed and endless life, wherefore they shall neither need nor delight in the procreation of children. From this passage Auctor Imperfecti teaches that chastity is the most angelic of all the virtues. The angels know not by experience the meaning of lust. And S. Cyril of Jerusalem (Cat. 12) calls "virginity the conversation of angels and the purity of incorporeal nature." Wherefore S. Basil (de Virginit. 79) teaches that virginity is the seed of future incorruption; yea, that virgins anticipate here, and begin that future likeness with the angels in Heaven, and desire to be rewarded with its perfection there, by constant struggling with and victory over the flesh here. S. Basil adds that chastity makes us like not only to the angels, but to God Himself. "How great and glorious a thing," saith he, "is virginity, which makes a corruptible man most like unto God, that he should receive the similitude of God in himself, as in a most clear mirror, from God Himself, with His favours flowing unto him after the manner of a most sweet ray (of light)!" Elegantly and piously saith S. Bernard, "What is more beautiful than chastity, which makes clean what hath been conceived unclean, which makes a servant of an enemy, and, in short, an angel of a man? For a chaste man differs from an angel only in felicity, not in virtue. Although the chastity of the one has more happiness, the chastity of the other is stronger. Chastity stands alone in this that in the place and time of mortality it represents the state of immortality. In the midst of marriage rites, it alone asserts the customs of that blessed country, in which they neither marry nor are given in marriage, affording here on earth some experience of that celestial converse." Lastly, from this place S. Hilary, S. Athanasius (Serm. 3, cont. Arian), S. Basil (in Psa 11 4 v.), S. Jerome (in Eph 4:13), upon the words, "until we all come... to a perfect man," seem to assert that after the Resurrection, in Heaven, there will be no female sex, as there is none in the angels, so that all females will be changed into males, and rise again in the male sex. S. Augustine testifies that many held this opinion in his own day (de Civit. xxii. 19). But S. Augustine himself teaches the contrary. So does S. Chrysostom in this passage and Tertullian (lib. de Resurrect.), also S. Jerome and the Scholastics, passim. The a priori reason is, that the female sex is not a defect (vitium), but a natural condition. It existed in a state of innocence in Paradise. For Eve was created by God to be "the mother of all living," as Adam was created a man. Now, in the Resurrection the same nature shall rise again altogether in every one whatsoever; and with this the difference of sex has much to do. Sex, therefore, shall then remain, lest different individuals, different men from what they were in this life, should seem to rise again. The same thing is clear from the words of Christ. They neither marry nor are given in marriage. They neither marry, spoken of males, nor are given in marriage, of females. Christ, therefore, so far from denying, presupposes that there will then be females; but in such manner that sex will not be used for the purposes of marriage and generation. And this is what is to be understood as the meaning of the Fathers above cited, who seem at first to hold a different opinion. Vers. 31, 32. But concerning the resurrection of the dead, &c. Christ, not satisfied with having refuted the Sadducean objection to the Resurrection, proceeds to prove it to them by the words of God to Moses, I am the God of Abraham, &c. Although Christ might have cited clearer proofs of the Resurrection from Job, Isaiah, &c., He preferred this from the Pentateuch, because it only did the Sadducces receive. They rejected the Prophets. So Origen, Bede, and others. Josephus says of the Sadducees, "They are of opinion that nothing besides the Law is to be observed." Although in that passage Josephus may be more properly taken as speaking of the Law as opposed, not to the Prophets, but to traditions (Ant. 18. 2), and to include the Prophets under the Law. For otherwise they would have been manifest heretics, and would have been disavowed as such by all the rest of the Jews. Wherefore a better reason for this quotation would seem to be, that the authority of Moses was of greater weight with the Jews than that of the Prophets. The highest veneration was given to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, as their great forefathers, whom also they regarded not as dead, but as living with God, and taking care of the Hebrews, their posterity. Whence no one would dare openly to assert that they had ceased to exist.
22:32
I am the God of Abraham. First, as though it were said, "I am God, who boast of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as of My faithful prophets and friends; and who entered into covenant with them, to give the land of Canaan to them, that is, to their descendants. And this, dwelling with Me in the Limbus of the Fathers, they continually ask of Me. And I should not glory in them unless they were alive, forasmuch as I am especially the living God, and the Giver of life. They therefore themselves live as to the soul, and in consequence shall live in the Resurrection as to the body also; and that too in a very short time, even as it were in a few days, when I shall rise from death. Then shall I raise them also from the dead, and shall carry them with Me in triumph to Heaven." See S. Mat 27:52. Here observe that the Sadducees and Epicurean philosophers denied the Resurrection, because they denied the immortality of the soul. The two things are closely connected. For if the soul is immortal, since it naturally has an interpendence with that (propendeat) of which it is the form, it verily behoves that the body should rise again. Otherwise the soul would continue always in an unnatural condition, and would only possess, as it were, a semi-existence. 2d. S. Chrysostom, Irenæus (l. 4, c. 11) say that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob do not signify the souls only of those Patriarchs, but the entire men. They therefore, though they be dead to men, are living unto God. They are, as it were, asleep; and God shall shortly awake them out of sleep, to a blessed and eternal life. Thus Luke adds, by way of explanation, For all live unto Him.
22:34
But when the Pharisees had heard, &c. They wished to humble Him, as imagining Him to be puffed up with His victory over the Sadducees, and to hurl back upon Himself the charge of ignorance of the Scriptures which He had brought against the Sadducees. But these foolish men only kicked against the pricks. For Christ is the eternal Truth and Wisdom, who reveals to all men the darkness of their ignorance. And a certain lawyer asked Him, &c. This was one of the Pharisees, who put himself forward to propose a most difficult question to Jesus, in order to try whether or not He was skilful in the Law and in the Scriptures; not only in speculative matters, such as was the question of the Sadducees, but in practical matters likewise. The word tempting means the same as trying, making proof. For this man, although he pretended, in the presence of the Pharisees, that he wished to catch and entrap Jesus, yet in his heart desired to hear what Jesus would reply to this most difficult question, about which he himself hung in doubt. So, when he heard Jesus answer, that love of God and our neighbour is the greatest of the commandments, he immediately expressed his approval by saying, Well, Master, Thou hast said the truth, &c. And Jesus said to him, Thou has answered wisely: thou art not far from the kingdom of God.
22:36
Master, which is the first commandment in the Law? Bede says (in Mark c. 12) that this was a much debated point of controversy among the Jews in the time of Christ. Many of them thought that the chief commandment of the Law was concerning sacrifices and victims to be offered to God according to the Levitical Law, beceause by these God is properly worshipped as Lord above all. And this was why the Pharisees told children to say to their parents, corban. This, too, shows why the lawyer, when he heard Christ's answer, said accordingly, To love (God), and one's neighbour as one's self, is more than all whole burnt offerings and sacrifices (Mar 12:33). Ver. 37. Jesus saith to him, &c. Moses, in Deu 6:5, and from thence Mark and Luke add, with all thy strength. The Persian has, with the utmost power of thy mind. This answers to the Hebrew meodecha of Deuteronomy. Observe, as against Calvin, that this precept is in every one's power as possible to keep. For the complete and highest love of God, in its utmost extent, is not that which is here spoken of, but that only which is to be understood comparatively. Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and soul, and mind, is the same thing as to say, Thou shalt love God with thy whole will, namely, 1st. Comparatively, that thou shalt give no portion of thy love to an idol, or to anything whatsoever that is contrary to God. 2d. Finally, that altogether thou shouldst wish God to be the final object of all thy thoughts, actions, and thy love; and that thou shouldst choose Him as thy chief good and Last End, before all things whatsoever. 3d. Appreciatively, that thou shouldst esteem nothing as of so much worth as God, in such manner that thou shouldst apply thy whole heart, that is, thy will, to fulfil all His precepts, and to be obedient to Him in all things. What is here spoken of as the whole heart, is called in other passages an entire and perfect heart. Hence the expression so often repeated, His heart was perfect with God. (See 1Ki 14:8, &c.) This is what S. Bernard says in his Treatise on the love of God "The measure of loving God is to love without measure."
22:38
Ver. 38. This is the greatest and first commandment. For the greatest virtue, and the queen of all virtues, is charity. Wherefore charity is more noble than religious worship (religione). For it is more noble to love God with all the heart than to offer Him sacrifices. You may add that charity, like a queen, commands sacrifices and all other acts of religion. Lastly, love is the most noble affection and act (of the soul), and is more excellent than fear, honour, and all others.
22:39
The second is like, &c., as thyself; Syr. as thy soul. Second not in order of legislation, but of dignity and perfection, although far below the first. For God is far more to be loved than all angels and men, and all creatures whatsoever. But after God, among creatures, our neighbour is to be loved above all things. Like, in love and affection, and in the duties and offices which spring from them. Christ here omits love of ourselves. For this is innate with all, and a natural property, as it were; in such wise, that if thou hast charity towards others, thou shouldst exercise it first to thyself. "For he who is bad to himself, to whom will he be good?" Whence Christ here presupposes that love of oneself, yea, appoints it, as it were, the ideal and the measure of love to our neighbour, saying love as thyself. Wherefore S. Augustine says (lib. 1, de Doct. Christ. c. 27), "Love of thyself is not here omitted, for it is said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. " In the first place, then, God is to be loved with the whole heart above everything. Secondly, one's own self. Thirdly, one's neighbour. In the expression, as thyself, the word as does not signify equality, but similarity of love. For we ought to love ourselves more than our neighbour; but yet the same things which we desire for ourselves we ought to desire for our neighbour. (See Lev 19:18, where I have expounded the law.) The Hebrew רצ properly signifies companion. But the Vulgate translates neighbour, in order to give a great stimulus of love to every one; because every man, which is what is here meant, is very near, and most closely united to us, and, as it were, our brother. This is both by creation, for mankind have been created by the same God the Father; as also by recreation, because we have been regenerated by the same Father, Christ, in baptism; and we are fed by His Body and Blood in the Eucharist. He commands, therefore, that God shall be loved with the whole heart; and our neighbour, not with the whole heart, but as ourselves. This does not mean 1st That thou shouldst love thyself only, and neglect thy neighbour, which is what self-love, arising from a nature corrupted by sin, suggests; but that thou shouldst extend to thy neighbour the love wherewith thou lovest thyself. 2d. That as thou dost not love thyself frigidly, nor feignedly, but ardently and sincerely; so, in like manner, shouldst thou love thy neighbour. This is what Christ sanctioned when He said, "Whatsoever ye would that men should do unto you, do likewise unto them." And what Tobias, when he was dying, commanded his son (Tob. 4:16), "What thou hatest that another should do unto thee, take heed that thou do not to another." "For this is the law of love," says S. Augustine (de Vera Religion. c. 46), that the good things which a man wishes to come to himself, he should wish likewise for his neighbour. And the evils which he wishes not to happen to himself, he should be unwilling for them to happen to him." Dost thou wish that thy property, thy honour, thy wife, thy life should be taken from thyself? Do not take them from others. Dost thou wish that they should be given and preserved to thyself? Do thou likewise preserve them for others.
22:40
On these two, &c. All the precepts of the Law and the Prophets rest upon these two commandments of love. Indeed, they spring and grow out of them, just as many branches spring from one tree and one root. Wherefore in these two precepts all are contained, as in their principles and premisses. For all commandments are included in the Decalogue. And the Decalogue contains nothing else except precepts of love to God and our neighbour. The three commandments of the first Table deal with love to God. The seven commandments of the second Table deal with love to our neighbour, as S. Augustine says (lib. 8, de Ttin. c. 7). Wherefore the Apostle says (Rom 13:9), "For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself." For all the precepts of mercy, and of all the other virtues, natural and supernatural, have to do with these two commandments of love to God and our neighbour, and are contained in them. The precepts of faith, hope, and charity, and of religious worship, are included in love to God. The precepts of justice, truth, fidelity, friendship, mercy, gratitude, are included in love to our neighbour. Christ, therefore, signifies that these two precepts ought to be always in every one's heart, and ought to direct their whole life. Ver. 41. When the Pharisees were gathered together, &c. This was in the Temple, as appears from Mark xii. 35. Christ made use of this occasion of the Pharisees tempting Him to instruct them concerning the Person and dignity of Messiah, that He might teach how to return good for evil, and turn a temptation into an occasion of instruction. He taught them that Messiah, or the Christ, was not a mere man, as they supposed, but the God-Man. They must not wonder, therefore, that He asserted Himself to be the Son of God. Ver. 42. Whose Son is Christ? They say unto Him, David's. They ought to have said, that Christ, as God, will be the Son of God; Christ, as man, will be the son of David. But as to the first, the Pharisees were either ignorant or unbelieving. Wherefore they only made the second reply. But even from it Christ draws and proves the former. When Peter was asked, whom he thought Christ to be, being inspired by God he answered, Thou art the Christ the Son of the Living God. But the Pharisees were devoid of the Divine inspiration, wherefore they savoured only of human things, and believed Christ to be only a man. Observe: Luke and Mark relate these things somewhat differently; but the apparent discrepancy is to be reconciled by considering that the meaning of the two former Evangelists is, that Christ, in the first place, asked the Pharisees, "Whose son was Christ?" They replied that the Scribes, or Doctors of the Law, said, "that He was the son of David." Then Christ rejoined, "How say the Scribes that Christ is the son of David, when David calls Him his Lord?"
22:43
David in Spirit, being, inspired by the Holy Ghost. For the Holy Ghost dictated the Psalms to David, endued him with their living sense. Therefore it was not so much David in Spirit, as Spirit in David, which thus spake.
Calleth Him lord, for the son is less than his father. Wherefore the father is not wont to call the son his lord, but the son his father, as is common with the Italians and other nations. From this passage the modern Rabbins are confuted, who expound this 110th Psalm not of Messiah, or Christ, but of Abraham, or David, or Hezekiah. For the Scribes and Pharisees of Christ's time understood it of Christ, and regarded it as a prophecy of Him. For had they not done so, they would have replied that Christ wrongly applied the Psalm to Messiah, when it ought to be understood of Abraham or David, &c. That it does apply to Christ is evident from the 4th verse of the same Psalm, With Thee is the beginning (secum principium, Vulg.), the headship, which is the force of the Heb. נדבוֹת, nedabot, and the Gr. α̉ρχή, in the day of thy strength, in the splendours of the saints: from the womb, before the day-star, I have begotten Thee (Vulg.). This can refer to no one save Christ. Lastly, Jonathan, the Chaldee, Rabbi Barachias, R. Levi, and the ancient Rabbins take it as referring only to Christ.
22:44
Ver. 44. Saying, The Lord said, &c. From this verse Christ clearly proves that the Messiah was not a mere man, as the Pharisees believed, but that He was David's God, and therefore his Lord. The meaning therefore is as if David said, "The Lord God hath said to my Lord, even Christ, Sit on My right hand, in that after the Death and Resurrection of Christ He will raise Him up, and exalt Him above all powers and principalities, and will set Him next to Himself in Heaven, that He may reign with the most perfect happiness, glory, and authority over all created things." The Heb. for said is נאם, neum, i.e., pronounced, spoken prophetically, decreed by the Lord concerning David's Lord, and therefore something fixed, certain, immutable. For neum is, by metathesis, the same as Amen, or sure and faithful. And the meaning is, that "God the Father from eternity hath firmly and inviolably decreed concerning Christ His Son, not as He is God, but in that He became Incarnate and was made man (for this is the force of the Heb. אדונ׳, Adoni), that He is, by virtue both of the Hypostatic Union and of the Redemption which He accomplished on the Cross, of all men, and therefore of David, the Lord." He hath said, interiorly in His own mind, from all eternity. But He said also, in the sense that He will say at the time of the Ascension of Christ in triumph into Heaven, " Come and sit on My right hand; reign and triumph in the glory of My majesty." So S. Jerome, Theodoret, and others. For this 110th Psalm, Psa 110:1-7 celebrates the most "glorious Kingdom of Christ both in Heaven and earth that kingdom in which Christ, after His Ascension, began from Zion and Jerusalem to reign over all nations, and by His Apostles to bring them to His faith and worship, until He shall put down all His enemies, that is, all the wicked, under His feet in the day of judgment."
Thy footstool. This means, reign with Me in glory, until I make all Thine enemies subject unto Thee. Thus it is said that Sapor, king of Persia, made use of the Emperor Aurelian, whom he had taken captive in battle, to mount upon his horse, placing his foot upon the back of the emperor, as upon a kind of footstool. The expression until here does not signify end or conclusion, but continuation and amplification of sitting and reigning. Reign even in the time which seems contrary and opposed to Thy Kingdom, even when Thine enemies shall seem to reign rather than Thee. Reign even in the midst of crosses, persecutions, and the tumults of Satan and his ministers.
22:46
And no one was able to answer Him a word; Syr. to give Him a reason; because, as I have said, they believed Messiah to be a mere man. "They were silent," says S. Chrysostom, "being smitten with a mortal blow." "They preferred," says S. Augustine, "to be broken to pieces in their swelling taciturnity, rather than to be instructed by lowly confession."
22:1
Dictum est supra quod Christi persecutores provocati sunt ad occidendum eum tribus de causis: ex eius gloria, ex eius sapientia qua confutabat eos, ex eius iustitia qua arguebat eos. Qualiter autem provocati sunt ex gloria Christi, dictum est; nunc autem dicendum qualiter ex sapientia. Et primo inquantum eorum damnationem praemonstrat; secundo inquantum disputando confutat, ibi tunc abeuntes Pharisaei consilium inierunt ut caperent eum in sermone. In ista parabola, in qua determinatur de reprobatione Iudaeorum et vocatione gentium, primo ponitur instructio nuptiarum; secundo de vocatione Iudaeorum et recusatione; tertio de vocatione gentium. Secunda ibi et misit servos suos vocare invitatos; tertia ibi tunc ait servis suis et cetera. Dicit ergo et respondens Iesus dixit. Cui respondit? Non est dictum quod alicui loqueretur.
22:2
Sed eum tenere volebant, ideo non verbis, sed malitiae eorum respondit, ideo in parabolis dicit eis: simile est regnum caelorum homini regi qui fecit nuptias filio suo. Hic ponitur parabola de nuptiis, et similis parabola ponitur Lc. XIV, 16. Et non videtur eadem secundum Gregorium, quia ibi fit mentio de coena, hic de nuptiis. Item nullus exclusus est ab illa coena, hic autem est aliquis exclusus. Unde alia est parabola. Per illam convivium caeleste intelligitur, per istam convivium quod fit in terra. Et ideo illud dicitur coena, quia ab eo nullus excluditur, ab isto aliquis excluditur. Potest dici, secundum aliquos, quod eadem est parabola, quia antiquitus prandium et coena idem appellabatur, quia non solebant comedere homines nisi usque ad nonam. Vel potest dici quod Lucas dicit quod Matthaeus tacuit. Sed credo quod alia est. Circa istam videamus quis est iste homo rex. Et dicitur quod iste est Deus, et intelligitur persona patris, quia dicit filio suo. Sed quare dicit homini regi? Ratio est, ut dicit Origenes, quia rex dicitur a regendo. Nos autem non possumus, nec sumus capaces regni eius secundum quod est, sed regit nos secundum modum nostrum. Deut. XXXII, 11: sicut aquila provocans pullos ad volandum. Et ideo dicitur homini regi, quia regit nos humano modo. Sed cum videbitur sicuti est, tunc erit rex, quia tunc secundum se reget. Unde apostolus I Cor. XIII, 12: videmus nunc per speculum in aenigmate, tunc autem facie ad faciem. Dicit simile est regnum caelorum homini regi. Sicut enim in regno sunt multa est enim rex, regnum, et qui serviunt sic in illo regno; ideo simile est homini regi qui fecit nuptias filio suo. Filius est Christus, de quo dicitur I Io. ult., 20: ut simus in vero filio eius. Hic est verus Deus, et vita aeterna. Quae sint istae nuptiae, quadrupliciter potest exponi. Primo per unitatem naturae humanae ad divinam, ut humana natura sit sponsa, thalamus fuit uterus virginis. Ps. XVIII, 6: ipse enim tamquam sponsus procedens de thalamo suo. Et haec expositio habet aliquid dubietatis, quia posset credi quod non alia esset persona patris, alia filii. Unde potest dici quod iste sponsus est verbum incarnatum; sponsa Ecclesia; unde apostolus Eph. V, 32: sacramentum hoc magnum est: ego autem dico in Christo et Ecclesia. Item ipsius verbi ad animam nostram. Fit enim anima particeps gloriae Dei per fidem, et sic fiunt nuptiae nostrae. Osee II, 20: sponsabo te in fide. Item nuptiae erunt in communi resurrectione. Huius autem resurrectionis Christus est via; Io. XIV, 6: ego sum via. Tunc erunt nuptiae, quando mortale nostrum absorbebitur a vita, ut habetur II Cor. V, 4. Sed si loquamur secundum Gregorium, oportet exponere de praesentibus, secundum quod Ecclesia Christo, et anima nostra Deo per fidem desponsatur. Sequitur de vocatione Iudaeorum. Et primo ponitur duplex vocatio; secundo excusatio, ibi illi autem neglexerunt et cetera. Circa primum duo facit secundum duas vocationes.
22:3
Unde dicit et misit servos suos, vocare invitatos. Et secundum quod dicit ibi Origenes, duplex est ibi littera, quia quaedam littera habet misit servum suum, quaedam servos suos. Si sit littera servum, sic tria sunt consideranda. Primo invitatio; secundo vocatio; et tertio alia invitatio. Fuerunt ergo Iudaei invitati in patriarchis; unde dictum est Abrahae: in semine tuo benedicentur omnes gentes. Ad Gal. III, 16: Abrahae dictae sunt promissiones et semini eius et cetera. Primum fuit missus Moyses. Num. c. XII, 7: non talis servus meus Moyses, qui in omni domo mea fidelissimus est. Et sequitur, quare non timuistis eum? Et nolebant venire. Deut. XXXI, 27: adhuc vivente me, et egrediente vobiscum, semper contentiose egistis erga dominum. Secunda vocatio est per prophetas, de quibus Amos III, 7: non faciet dominus verbum, nisi revelaverit secretum suum ad servos suos prophetas. Vel potest esse littera servos; et tunc per primos significantur prophetae, quibus semper Iudaei rebelles fuerunt; Act. VII, 51: vos semper spiritui sancto restitistis. Per secundos apostoli, quibus dictum est supra X, 5: in viam gentium ne abieritis. Vel per primos prophetas, primos apostolos; per secundos, successores apostolorum. Iterum misit alios servos. Hic ponitur alia invitatio. Et ponitur augmentum benignitatis ex parte invitantis, et augmentum malitiae ex parte excusantis.
22:4
In prima vocatione nihil promisit; in ista vero promittit, quia dicit dicite invitatis: ecce prandium meum paravi. Istud prandium est spiritualis refectio; Prov. c. IX, 2: sapientia immolavit victimas, miscuit vinum, et posuit mensam suam, misit ancillas ut vocarent ad arcem. Tauri mei et altilia mea occisa sunt. Et hoc dictum potest exponi secundum Origenem, quod est dispositio sapientiae Dei. Tauri dicuntur rationes fortes; Is. VIII, 11: in forti manu sua erudivit me. Altilia dicuntur quasi alita bene. Altilia dicuntur proprie aves saginatae, quae nutriuntur et impinguantur, et significant subtiles sensus, et fiunt saginatae quando sacris sensibus multiplicantur, quibus anima saginatur; Ps. LXII, 6: sicut ex adipe et pinguedine repleatur anima mea. Quicquid enim necessarium est, invenitur in sacra Scriptura. Ideo omnia sunt parata. Ps. XVIII, 8: lex domini immaculata convertens animas. Haec est invitatio sapientiae, Prov. IX, 5: venite, comedite panem meum et bibite vinum quod miscui vobis. Vel, significat refectionem spiritualem, per tauros significantur exempla sanctorum, quae dominus praeparavit in exemplum; Iac. V, 10: accipite in exemplum exitus mali, et longanimitatis, et laboris, et patientiae, prophetas. Unde tribulationes sanctorum ponit in exemplum. Secundum Gregorium, per tauros significantur patres veteris testamenti, quia taurus ferit cornibus, et in tempore patrum semper quaerebatur vindicta, et praecipiebatur oculum dari pro oculo. Per altilia patres novi testamenti, qui omnia dimiserunt pro Christo, et impinguantur sapientia Dei, occisi propter Deum, et utrique occisi sunt. Omnia parata sunt, venite ad nuptias. Passus est Christus, aperuit caelos, misit apostolos. Vel per tauros intelliguntur sacerdotes veteris testamenti, quia taurus est animal immolatitium; per altilia prophetae qui impinguati sunt sapientia Dei. Sed illi, scilicet indurati in malitia, neglexerunt. Quidam dimittunt ex negligentia, quidam autem ex malitia, qui persequuntur praedicatores; unde dicit illi autem neglexerunt. Et quae fuit causa? Quia abierunt unus in vineam suam, alius ad negotiationem suam. Videbantur habere iustam causam exterius, sed dominus non recipit, quia nulla temporalia debent detinere de veniendo ad Deum. Secundum Hilarium, per hoc quod dicit, in vineam suam, significat appetitum humanae gloriae; Io. XII, 43: dilexerunt magis gloriam hominum quam gloriam Dei; Ier. c. V, 4: ego autem dixit: forsitan pauperes sunt et stulti, ignorantes viam domini et iudicium Dei sui.
22:5
Per hoc quod dicit alius in negotiationem suam, signatur appetitus avaritiae; Ier. VI, 13: a maiori usque ad minorem omnes avaritiae student. Secundum Chrysostomum quidam habent occupationem laborando propriis manibus, alii in negotiationem, idest in proprium officium suum.
22:6
Sequitur reliqui vero tenuerunt servos suos, idest apostolos, et contumeliis affectos occiderunt, quia multos occiderunt ex veteri et novo testamento. Unde infra XXIII, v. 34: mitto ad vos sapientes et Scribas, et ex illis occidetis et cetera. Et non facit hic mentionem de morte sua, sed solum discipulorum quia satis superius fecerat mentionem. Tunc sequitur punitio eorum rex vero cum audisset, iratus est et cetera. Supra posuit poenam spiritualem, hic autem ponit temporalem; unde supra dicebatur homini regi, hic autem dicitur rex, quia nomen hominis ad pietatem pertinere videtur, regis vero ad punitionem; ideo hic solum dicitur rex; Sap. XIV, 17: hos quos in palam homines honorare non poterant propter hoc quod longe essent, a longinquo figura eorum allata, evidentem imaginem regis, quem honorare volebant, fecerunt: ut illum qui aberat tamquam praesentem colerent sua sollicitudine. Rex autem iratus. Notandum quod quando ira attribuitur Deo, non commotionem significat, sed vindictam: quia irati punire solent, unde ira punitio vocatur. Quod est notandum contra haereticos, quia solent obiicere Deum veteris testamenti non esse bonum, quia praecepit punitiones et cetera.
22:7
Unde missis exercitibus suis perdidit homicidas illos. Exercitus sunt spiritus angelici, vel cives Romani qui sub Tito et Vespasiano occiderunt multos; Ps. XXIII, 1: domini est terra, et plenitudo eius. Et civitates illorum succendit, quia combustae sunt; Is. I, 7: civitates vestras ignis comburet. Vel potest mystice intelligi, scilicet corpora eorum, vel congregationes haereticorum. Sequitur vocatio gentium, et ponitur examinatio. Et tria facit. Primo ponitur mandatum; secundo executio; tertio effectus. Secunda ibi et egressi servi eius etc.; tertia ibi et impletae sunt nuptiae discumbentium. Circa primum duo facit. Primo assignat rationem praecepti; secundo ponit praeceptum.
22:8
Dicit ergo tunc ait servis suis: nuptiae quidem paratae sunt, sed qui invitati erant non fuerunt digni. Nuptiae quidem praeparatae sunt, idest filius incarnatus est, secundum illud Is. V, v. 4: quid ultra potui facere tibi, vinea mea? Sed qui fuerant invitati, indigni fuerunt, idest, indignos se reddiderunt. Et quomodo? Sicut dicitur ad Rom. X, 3: ignorantes Dei iustitiam, et suam volentes statuere, iustitiae Dei non sunt subiecti; et Act. c. XIII, 46: sed quoniam repellitis illud, et indignos vos iudicastis vitae aeternae, ideo convertimur ad gentes. Unde per delictum Iudaeorum salus facta est gentibus; Apoc. III, v. 11: tene quod habes, ne alter accipiat coronam tuam.
22:9
Sequitur mandatum ite ergo ad exitus viarum et cetera. Per vias intelliguntur diversa dogmata, quia ista sunt viae quaedam, quae ducunt nos ad veritatem. Gentiles sunt in exitibus dogmatum. Unde ite ad exitus viarum, idest ad illos qui haerent erroneis dogmatibus. Vel aliter. Is. IX, 2: populus qui ambulabat in tenebris, vidit lucem. Unde per vias intelliguntur actiones bonae, de quibus Prov. c. IV, 27: vias quae a dextris sunt, novit dominus; per exitus, quaecumque possunt concurrere ad actiones. Et quoscumque inveneritis, vocate ad nuptias. Unde infra ult., 19: ite, docete omnes gentes et cetera.
22:10
Sequitur executio et egressi servi eius in vias, congregaverunt omnes; Marci ult., 20: illi autem profecti praedicaverunt ubique, domino cooperante. Sed quid est quod dicit bonos et malos? Potest dici quod illos, qui primo mali, et post boni. Vel potest dici, cum dicit bonos et malos, quod loquitur comparative, quod inter illos aliqui sunt boni secundum virtutes civiles. Vel bonos et malos, quia postquam congregati fuerint, commiscentur boni et mali. Et impletae sunt nuptiae discumbentium, idest fidelibus. Supra XIII, 48 simile ponitur, quam cum impleta esset, educentes, et secus littus sedentes, elegerunt bonos in vasa sua, malos autem foras miserunt.
22:11
Intravit autem rex et cetera. Hic ponitur examinatio congregatorum. Et primo ponitur examinans; secundo examinatio; tertio condemnatio. Examinans intravit. Intrat enim quando exercet iudicium super eos; Gen. c. XVIII, 21: intrabo, et videbo: et hoc in finali iudicio; item in morte; item quando imminent tribulationes Ecclesiae. Sed quis est examinatus? Vidit hominem non habentem vestem nuptialem. Quae est ista vestis? Christus. Qui sumus Christi, Christum induamus. Apostolus Rom. XIII, 14: induimini dominum Iesum Christum. Quidam enim induunt Christum per sacramentum; Gal. III, 27: quicumque in Christo baptizati estis, Christum induistis. Quidam sunt in Christo per caritatem et amorem; Col. III, 15: super omnia autem caritatem habete, quod est vinculum perfectionis. Et pax Christi exultet in cordibus vestris, in qua et vocati estis in uno corpore. Item per mortis rememorationem. Item per operum conformitatem; ad Rom. XIII, 14: induimini dominum Iesum Christum. Habere ergo vestem nuptialem est induere Christum per operationem bonam, per conversationem sanctam, per caritatem veram; et si unum deficiat, malum. Tunc sequitur examinatio. Deinde dicit qualiter defecit. Dicit ergo amice. Amicum vocat per fidem, vel quia ipse amavit eum. Vel potest dici quod ubicumque vocat aliquem amicum, improperando dicit: unde improperat amorem quo amavit eum.
22:12
Quomodo huc intrasti non habens vestem nuptialem? Sed posset dicere aliquis: qua occasione punivit illum, quia vocavit bonos et malos? Sed noluit quod mali venirent, nisi pararent se et disponerent se, ut essent boni. Deinde sequitur qualiter defecit. Unde sequitur at ille obmutuit, quia non potest habere sufficientem rationem peccator, quare vestem nuptialem contempsit; Iob IX, v. 3: si voluerit contendere eum eo, non poterit respondere ei. Et concludit sententia parabolae. Ponitur poena duplex, poena damni et poena sensus. Nam in mundo tripliciter perficitur: per intellectum cogitando, per affectum tendendo in summum bonum, item per actum; ideo tripliciter punitur. Unde dixit rex ministris: ligatis manibus et pedibus eius, mittite eum in tenebras exteriores. Per pedes intelliguntur affectus. Mali in mundo isto pedes habent, sed non ligatos, quia possunt fieri boni; sed post ligabuntur, quia post redire non poterunt; Eccl. IX, 10: quodcumque potest facere manus tua, instanter operare, quia nec opus, nec ratio, nec scientia erunt apud Inferos quo tu properas. Item modo potest homo proficere in cogitando veritates, sed tunc non; ideo dicitur mittite eum in tenebras exteriores. Modo enim aliqui peccatores non sunt tenebrosi quantum ad cognitionem exteriorem, licet quoad cognitionem interiorem; sed tunc habebunt tenebras exteriores. Vel, ad litteram, quia non solum quoad animam, sed quoad corpus, quia separabuntur a societate sanctorum.
22:13
Tunc sequitur poena sensus ibi erit fletus et stridor dentium. Fletus procedit ex tristitia, stridor ex ira. In Act. VII, v. 54: stridebant dentibus in eum. Aliqui flent pro peccatis, et humiliantur, et mundantur. Ibi erit tristitia, sed non ad humilitatem, sed vertetur in iram. Item stridor propter impatientiam, quia superbia eorum qui te oderunt, ascendit semper, Ps. LXXIII, 23. Vel potest dici in resurrectione, quia non solum in anima, sed etiam in corpore punientur; vel quia calorem et frigora patientur; Iob XXIV, 19: transibunt ab aquis nivium ad calorem nimium.
22:14
Deinde concludit multi sunt vocati, pauci vero electi, quia quidam nolunt venire, quidam non habent vestem nuptialem. Unde supra VII, 14: arcta est via quae ducit ad vitam, et pauci sunt qui inveniunt eam.
22:16
Supra dominus confutavit Pharisaeos per parabolam; secundo hic manifestat disputando. Et primo respondendo; secundo obiiciendo, ibi congregatis autem Pharisaeis, interrogavit et cetera. Et respondet dominus triplici quaestioni. Primo de solutione tributi; secundo de resurrectione; tertio de lege. Secunda ibi in illo die accesserunt ad eum Sadducaei; tertia ibi Pharisaei autem audientes et cetera. Circa primum tria facit. Primo ponitur interrogatio; secundo responsio; tertio effectus. Secunda ibi cognita autem Iesus nequitia eorum; tertia ibi et audientes mirati sunt. In ista interrogatione tria sunt consideranda. Primo interrogantium intentio; secundo ministri interrogantes; tertio interrogatio; intentio interrogantium aperitur cum dicitur abeuntes inierunt, idest inter se, consilium, scilicet stultum fecerunt, ut Iesum caperent in sermone. Et hoc erat stultum, quia ipse erat verbum Dei, et verbum Dei non est comprehensibile; Eccli. XLIII, 29: multa loquimur, et deficimus in verbis. Fuit autem consilium impium; Ps. I, 1: beatus vir qui non abiit in consilio impiorum, et in via peccatorum non stetit. Et Genes, penult., 6: in consilium eorum non veniat anima mea. Ministri describuntur cum dicit et mittunt discipulos suos cum Herodianis. Sed quare non iverunt? Ratio est, quia dolose interrogare voluerunt: unde si ivissent, non haberet locum dolus; sed ipsi etiam discipuli erant; Eccli. X, 2: secundum iudicem populi, sic et ministri eius. Cum Herodianis. Qui sunt isti Herodiani? Secundum quod in Luca tangitur, sub Herode facta est Iudaea tributaria Romanis. Iste filius Antipatris alienigenae constitutus est rex a Romanis; ideo voluit compellere Iudaeos reddere censum Romanis. Unde Herodiani, idest famuli deputati ad colligendum institutionem Herodis. Sed iste iam mortuus erat, et dimisit tres filios. Unus Herodes, et iste erat tunc praesens, sicut dicitur in Lc. c. XXII, quod fuit etiam in morte domini: ideo facile fuit quod famuli sui irent cum aliis. Sed quare iverunt cum Herodianis? Una ratio, quia Herodiani zelabant pro imperatore. Ideo discipuli Pharisaeorum secum duxerunt eos, ut si diceret quod esset solvendum tributum, accusarent eum ad Phariseos: si diceret quod non, tunc Herodiani caperent eum. Item isti non cognoscebantur, ideo credebant quod non perciperet; unde faciebant contra illud Ps. XXV, 4: non sedi in consilio vanitatis et cum iniqua agentibus non introibo. Vel aliter, quia cum Iudaea facta esset tributaria Romanis, divisi sunt, quia quidam dicebant quod plebs Deo dedicata non debebat esse homini tributaria; alii vero dicebant, quod quia pro pace militabat omnium, quod omnes debebant Caesari dare tributum. Ideo illi qui dicebant solvi tributa Caesari, dicebantur Herodiani. Positis ministris, ponitur interrogatio. Et primo ponitur adulatio; secundo interrogatio, ibi dic quid tibi videtur. Homines mali ab adulatione incipiunt. Loquuntur bona, mala autem in cordibus suis, Ps. XXIII, 3. Et primo commendant personam; secundo doctrinam; tertio constantiam. Personam commendant ex auctoritate et virtute. Ex auctoritate cum dicunt magister. Et licet mentirentur secundum cor suum, quia non eum magistrum putabant, sed seductorem, ut habetur infra XXVII, 63: recordati sumus quod seductor ille dixit, quia die tertia resurgam etc. tamen in veritate erat magister, ut infra: unus est magister vester et cetera. Item, scimus quia verax es. Verax est qui veritatem loquitur; et hoc est proprium Dei, et eius qui Deo coniunctus est; Ps. CXV, 11: ego dixi in excessu meo: omnis homo mendax; Rom. III, 4: est autem Deus verax, omnis autem homo mendax. Christus autem est Deo coniunctus per unionem, et ideo verax est. Et sic commendatur ab auctoritate. Deinde a virtute et viam Dei in veritate doces. Primo oportet quod sciat quae doceat; Sap. VII, 13: quam sine fictione didici, et sine invidia communico. Item aliqui docent, sed non utilia; sed iste docet utilia, scilicet viam Dei; Is. XLVIII, 17: ego sum Deus tuus docens te utilia. Item aliqui docent quae Dei sunt, sed non in veritate, ut haeretici; iste autem docet in veritate. De isto in Ps. XXIV, 4: vias tuas, domine, demonstra mihi, et semitas tuas edoce me. Dirige me in veritate tua et cetera. Item commendant de constantia; unde dicunt non est tibi cura de aliquo, non praetermittis timore alicuius quod debes dicere vel facere; Is. LI, 12: quis tu ut timeas ab homine mortali? Et quare? Non enim respicis personam hominum, scilicet contra Deum. Ille enim accipit personam qui, ratione hominis, dimittit dicere veritatem quam debet dicere; Deut. I, 17: non accipietis personam cuiusquam. Et videte qualiter malitiosi erant. Quaestio habebat duo membra, scilicet quod non solverent, ad honorem Dei pertinebat; quod solverent, ad favorem hominum. Unde voluerunt quod favorem Dei quaereret, et viam Dei doceret: et sic si diceret quod non, quod magis volebant, statim caperetur ab Herodianis.
22:17
Sequitur interrogatio dic ergo nobis (...) licet ne censum dare Caesari, aut non? Census erat tributum quod pro capite dabatur.
22:18
Sequitur responsio cognita autem Iesus malitia eorum ait. Et primo respondet ad mentem eorum; secundo ad verba, ibi reddite. Quia hominis est respondere ad verba, Dei autem respondere ad mentem, ideo quia Christus erat Deus et homo, ideo ad utrumque respondet. Scrutans corda et renes Deus, Ps. VII, 10. Hypocritae. Et bene dicit hypocritas, quia hypocritae sunt proprie qui aliud in ore habent, aliud in corde. Quid me tentatis? Hoc enim erat prohibitum Deut. VI, 16: non tentabis dominum Deum tuum. Item isti blande allocuti sunt Christum; Christus autem aspere respondit, quia respondit ad cor eorum, non ad verba. Item datur nobis exemplum, quod non debemus adulatoribus credere; Prov. XXIX, 12: princeps qui libenter audit verba mendacii, omnes ministros suos habet impios. Item quando vult, aliquid respondere, non potest melius confutare opponentem, quam secundum verba sua. Unde primo ponit quaestionem; secundo ex responsione elicit veritatem. Et primo quaerit de numismate; secundo de forma: sensibiliter enim volebat ostendere intentum; Prov. XIV, 6: doctrina prudentum facilis.
22:19
Dicit ostendite mihi numisma census, idest denarium qui pro censu datur. Iste denarius valet decem usuales, et quilibet solvit unum denarium.
22:20
Deinde quaerit de forma cuius est imago haec et superscriptio? In qualibet enim denarii publici forma ponitur inscriptio, sic erat in isto. Dicunt, Caesaris: intelligatis non Caesaris Augusti, sed Tiberii Caesaris. Et debetis intelligere, quod dominus interrogabat non erat ex ignorantia, sed potius ex dispensatione. Bene erat tantae aetatis, et tantum inter homines conversatus fuerat, quod bene noverat formam denarii, sed petiit ad significationem.
22:21
Consequenter concludit veritatem reddite ergo quae sunt Caesaris Caesari, et quae sunt Dei Deo; quasi dicat: vos estis Dei et Caesaris, et habetis in usu vestro et quae Dei sunt et quae Caesaris. Habetis divitias naturales a Deo, scilicet panem et vinum, et de his date Deo: habetis ista artificialia, ut denarios, a Caesare, et haec Caesari reddite. Mystice sic: nos habemus animam quae est ad imaginem Dei, ideo eam Deo reddere debemus; secundum ea quae a mundo habemus, pacem cum mundo habere debemus. Etiam sancti viri hic elevati a mundo, quia tamen in mundo cum aliis conversantur, debent pacem requirere Babylonis, ut habetur Baruch I, 10 ss. Et hoc est quod omnia quae sunt carnis, quae sunt mundi, vel hominum cum quibus conversantur, reddant Deo.
22:22
Sequitur effectus et audientes mirati sunt, et relicto eo abierunt. Mirum fuit, quia statim, sapientia sua visa, debuissent esse conversi; sed non potuerunt capere, et recesserunt; Ps. CXXXVIII, 6: mirabilis facta est scientia tua ex me, confortata est, et non potero ad eam.
22:23
In illo die. Hic ponitur secunda interrogatio, et tria facit. Primo ponitur interrogatio; secundo responsio; tertio effectus. Secunda ibi respondens autem Iesus etc.; tertia ibi et audientes turbae mirabantur. Circa primum primo ponitur dispositio et conditio interrogantis; secundo interrogatio. Dicit ergo in die illo. Et quare in die illo? Non sine ratione, quia cum viderunt illos confusos, non sine praesumptione quaesierunt eum. Sed, secundum Chrysostomum, concordati erant ad invicem quod caperent eum in sermone, et quilibet volebat honorem victoriae: ideo illis confusis isti accedere voluerunt; Iob XIX, 12: venerunt latrones eius, et fecerunt sibi viam per me. Duae enim erant sectae: Pharisaei, idest divisi, et Sadducaei, idest iusti. Et hi errabant in dogmatibus, quia non recipiebant prophetias, nec credebant resurrectionem. Item credebant quod mortuo corpore totus homo moreretur: et hoc est quod dicit qui dicunt non esse resurrectionem. Sequitur interrogatio. Et primo ponit legem; secundo casum; tertio interrogationem.
22:24
Dicunt ergo et interrogaverunt eum dicentes: magister, Moyses dicit: si quis mortuus fuerit non habens filium et cetera. Deut. XXV, 5 s. Quae fuit causa legis? Populus carnalis fuit. Unde nil nisi temporalia quaerebat. Lex ergo illa promisit. Manifestum enim est, quod homo non potest durare in se, ideo consolatio est ei quod maneat in suo simili, scilicet in filio; et hoc natura desiderat, ut quod non potest in se salvari, salvetur in suo simili. Unde contingebat quod aliquis sine filio moreretur, ideo subvenit huic casui Moyses secundum hanc legem, ut frater suus haberet uxorem suam. Nec ponebatur extraneus, qui nihil pertineret ad eum; item non haberet tantam curam de domo et familia sicut frater: et hoc est quod dicit et suscitaret semen fratri suo, idest generet filium qui habeat haereditatem illius.
22:25
Posita lege, ponunt casum erant apud nos septem fratres, et primus, uxore ducta, defunctus est, et non habens semen reliquit uxorem suam fratri suo et cetera. Potest esse quod talis casus accidit, vel quod ipsi confinxerunt. Tamen secundum Augustinum per septem fratres homines mali signantur, qui in septem aetatibus moriuntur sine fructu. Apost. Rom. VI, 21: quem fructum habetis (vel habuistis) in his, in quibus nunc erubescitis? Ista mulier est mundana conversatio; Ps. ci, 27: ipsi peribunt, tu autem permanebis, et omnes sicut vestimentum veterascent. Unde quaerunt: omnes mortui sunt, et omnes eam habuerunt: cuius uxor erit in resurrectione, quia omnium esse non poterit? Ista opinio non est bona, et est contra Pharisaeos, quia credebant quod resurrectio debet esse quantum ad hanc vitam, quod quisque rehabeat uxorem suam et possessionem suam et cetera. Unde dicunt cuius erit uxor? Quia non potest esse uxor omnium. Ista opinio reprobatur in Iob VII, 10: non revertetur in domum suam. Unde non resurget ad eumdem modum vivendi. Sequitur responsio. Et primo ostendit errorem et causam; secundo insinuat veritatem. Unde dicit respondens Iesus ait: erratis, idest erroneam opinionem habetis; Sap. II, 21: cogitaverunt, et erraverunt; excaecavit enim eos malitia eorum. Et quae est causa erroris?
22:29
Nescientes Scripturas. Unde non meditabantur in mandatis Dei; Ps. CXVIII, 100: super senes intellexi, quia mandata tua quaesivi. Unde qui meditatur in mandatis Dei, potest vitare errores; unde Io. V, 39: scrutamini Scripturas. Isti autem non scrutabantur, ideo errabant, sicut faciunt aliqui qui male intelligunt. Item aliqui nescientes virtutem Dei, volentes virtutem Dei metiri secundum inferiora; ad Rom. I, 20: invisibilia Dei a creatura mundi per ea quae facta sunt intellecta conspiciuntur. In resurrectione neque nubent, neque nubentur. Manifestat propositum. Et quia duo dixerat, scilicet quod nesciebant Scripturas, nec virtutem Dei, ideo primo declarat quod virtutem Dei ignorabant; secundo quod Scripturas. Et cum primo dixerit de Scripturis, quare hoc secundo declaratur? Chrysostomus respondet, quia cum aliquis disputat cum aliquo qui errat ex malitia, primo debet allegare auctoritatem; quando cum eo qui ex ignorantia, primo debet proponere rationem, et post auctoritatem. Sic facit dominus.
22:30
Primo rationem proponit; unde dicit in resurrectione neque nubent, neque nubentur. Primum, secundum litteram, verum est. Neque nubent etc., quia tunc non erit necessarium sicut nunc est. Hieronymus: aliter accipitur nubere secundum Latinum, aliter secundum Graecum, quia proprie nubere secundum Latinum mulierum est: unde dicitur esse neutrum passivum; sed secundum Graecum viri nubent, idest ducunt uxores, mulieres nubentur, non nubent. Ideo dicit, non nubent, viri; nec nubentur, mulieres. Cum enim nuptiae sint ad prolis procreationem, ut conservetur homo in esse in suo simili, qui non potest in seipso conservari, ideo cum resurrectio fiat ad immortalitatem, tunc non erunt necessariae nuptiae. Ideo isti errabant, et virtutem Dei ignorabant. Sed sunt sicut Angeli in caelo. Ille status est status praemii, et finis istius vitae. Iob XIV, 14: putas ne homo mortuus rursum vivat? Cunctis diebus quibus nunc milito, expecto donec veniat immutatio mea; et illa immutatio erat praemium. Vita illa erit refulgentium intellectu. Sed quare erunt similes Angelis? Quia erunt immunes a passionibus; quia nunc homo habet intellectum adnexum sensibus, et in hoc excedunt Angeli, sed tunc depurabitur, ideo similes erunt Angelis: II Reg. XIV, 17: sicut enim Angelus domini, sic et dominus meus rex, ut nec benedictione, nec maledictione moveatur. Unde qui habent animum a passionibus elevatum, similes sunt Angelis. Passiones autem quae magis faciunt homines bestiales, sunt passiones venereorum, quae exercentur per coniugium; ideo tunc nec nubent, nec nubentur. Item quidam dixerunt quod non omnes resurgent, sed solum homines. Sed hoc Augustinus destruit dicens quod sexus resurget; sexus autem non salvatur in homine solum. Hanc opinionem tollit, cum dicit nec nubent, nec nubentur. Ex quo datur intelligi quod uterque sexus, sed nec nubent, nec nubentur. De resurrectione autem mortuorum et cetera. Postquam ostendit quod ignorabant virtutem Dei, hic ostendit quod ignorabant Scripturas.
22:31
Unde non legistis quod dictum est a domino dicente vobis: ego sum Deus Abraham, Isaac et Iacob? Hoc scribitur Ex. III, 6. Sed quaerit Hieronymus, cum aliae auctoritates sint magis expressae de resurrectione, ut habetur Is. VI et Ez. XXXIII et Dan. XII, quare istam quae ambigua est posuit? Respondet quod non recipiebant prophetas, sed quinque libros Moysi. Et quomodo facit ad propositum?
22:32
Dicit ego sum Deus Abraham, Deus Isaac et Deus Iacob. Deus dicitur aliquorum in colendo eum. Isti ergo colunt eum. Sed colere Deum non est mortuorum, sed viventium. Ergo Abraham, Isaac et Iacob vivunt; sed non secundum corpus: ergo secundum animam. Sed quid valet hoc ad resurrectionem? Valet, quia isti dicebant animam non esse; ipse autem ostendit animam remanere: et si anima remanet, ergo et resurrectio, quia naturaliter anima inclinatur ad corpus. Sed quid est quod dicit, quod non est Deus mortuorum? Verum est secundum corpus. Est tamen etiam Deus mortuorum, quia vivunt secundum spiritum; Rom. c. XIV, 8: sive vivimus, sive morimur, domini sumus. Item est contra haereticos qui damnant patres veteris testamenti, quia hic dicit quod vivunt secundum animam. Item dicit singulariter, quia in aliis gentibus quilibet Deum suum habebat. Audi, Israel: dominus Deus tuus unus est, Deut. VI, 4.
22:33
Sequitur effectus, quia mirabantur et audientes turbae mirabantur in doctrina eius. Ps. CXVIII, 129: mirabilia testimonia tua, domine et cetera.
22:34
Supra dominus respondit quaestioni factae de solutione tributi, quaestioni etiam de resurrectione; hic autem respondet quaestioni de comparatione mandatorum divinorum: et duo facit. Quia primo ponitur interrogatio; secundo responsio, ibi ait illis Iesus et cetera. Circa primum duo facit. Primo describit nequitiam interrogantium; secundo interrogationem, ibi magister, quod est mandatum magnum in lege? Nequitiam describit quantum ad tria. Primo quantum ad impudentiam; secundo quantum ad excogitatam malitiam; tertio quantum ad fraudulentiam. Quantum ad impudentiam, cum dicitur audientes quod silentium imposuisset. Iam confutaverat Pharisaeorum discipulos et Sadducaeos, unde ex hoc satis poterant ei credere et erubescere. Unde Chrysostomus: livor et ira impudentiam nutriunt et causant. Sed isti non propter hoc dimiserunt, quin adhuc interrogaverunt eum; Is. LVI, 11: canes impudentissimi nescierunt saturitatem. Et significatur quod quamvis hoc audirent, non tamen siluerunt. Aliquis servat silentium sponte, et hoc est prudentis. Item aliquis servat, quia imponitur ei silentium, et hoc est imprudentis; Eccli. XX, 6: est tacens, non habens sensum loquelae; et est tacens, sciens tempus aptum; Eccl. III, 7: est tempus tacendi, est tempus loquendi. Item tangitur excogitata malitia, quia, ut melius convincant eum, simul congregantur; Ps. II, 2: principes convenerunt in unum adversus dominum. Convenerunt in unum. Potest dici quod Pharisaei et Sadducaei convenerunt, quamvis in sectis differrent, tamen in unum ad tentandum dominum. Vel Pharisaei convenerunt in unum adversus dominum. Item fraudulentia significatur, quia cum in multitudine essent congregati, noluerunt quod omnes interrogarent, sed unus; ut si ille vinceretur, alii non confutarentur, et si iste vinceret, omnes in eo gloriarentur.
22:35
Et interrogavit eum unus ex eis legis doctor tentans eum, quia non animo addiscendi; Iob c. XVI, 11: aperuerunt in me ora sua, et exprobrantes percusserunt maxillam meam. Hic potest esse obiectio litteralis, quia Marcus dicit quod dominus intuitus eum dixit: non longe es a regno Dei. Et quomodo hic dicitur quod tentat eum? Solvit Augustinus, quia primo venit causa tentandi, sed cum Christus satisfaceret ei, consensit ei. Et ideo quod tentavit eum, debet referri ad principium; quod non longe est a regno Dei, debet retorqueri ad finem. Et sic non fuit mirum si verba domini animum eius mutaverunt. Sciendum autem quod aliqui tentant eo quod non sunt certi, quia, secundum quod dicit sapiens Eccli. XIX, 4, qui cito credit, levis est corde. Iste cum multa audisset de Christo, voluit experiri si talis esset: et haec tentatio non esset mala.
22:36
Unde dicit magister, quod est mandatum magnum in lege? Haec tamen quaestio videbatur calumniosa et praesumptuosa: calumniosa, quia omnia mandata Dei sunt magna; Prov. VI, 23: mandata lucerna, et lex lux. Item indeterminate quaesivit, quia omnia sunt magna, ut si responderet de uno, obiiceret de alio. Item fuit praesumptuosa, quia non deberet de magno quaerere qui minimum non implevit; Iob XV, 12: quid te elevat cor tuum, et quasi magna cogitans, attonitos habes oculos? Et poterat esse quod esset controversia super hac quaestione inter eos, quia aliqui dicebant salutem esse in aliquibus exterioribus; unde Is. XXIX, 13: populus hic labiis me honorat, cor autem eorum longe est a me. Sed respondet dominus, quod solum est in interioribus. Unde sequitur responsio ait Iesus ei: diliges dominum tuum et cetera. Et non solum respondet ad quaestionem propositam, sed veritatem docet. Et primo docet quod sit primum; secundo quod ei est simile; tertio rationem assignat. Secunda ibi secundum autem simile est huic et cetera. Tertia ibi in his duobus mandatis universa lex pendet et prophetae. Dicit ergo diliges dominum Deum tuum et cetera. Istud scribitur Deut. VI, 5. Item dominus per Moysen dicit Deut. X, 14: numquid dominus petit a te, nisi ut timeas et diligas eum? Ergo duo praecipit, timorem scilicet et dilectionem. Et quare non respondet dominus de timore, sicut de dilectione? Dicendum quod quidam timent Deum, qui timent pati ab eo, ut qui timent poenam Gehennae, vel qui timent amittere aliquid quod habent a Deo; et hic est timor servilis, quia illud diligit in quo timet puniri. Alius est, qui ipsum Deum timet propter se, qui timet eum offendere; et talis timor est ex amore, et ex hoc timet, quod amat; ergo principium est amor; I Io. c. IV, 16: Deus caritas est, et qui manet in caritate, in Deo manet, et Deus in eo. Et ideo dicit diliges dominum; non timeas, quia Deus diligendus est sicut primum diligibile, quia ipse finis primus est, sed quaecumque alia diliguntur propter finem. Qui ergo diligit Deum ut finem, diligit in toto corde; Ioel II, 12: convertimini ad me in toto corde vestro. Et quantumcumque nitamini, non poteritis eum comprehendere, quia Deus maior est toto corde.
22:37
Sed quid est quod dicit ex toto corde tuo, et ex tota anima tua, et in tota mente tua? Chrysostomus exponit sic: quia in dilectione sunt duo: unum quod est principium; secundum quod est dilectionis effectus et sequela dilectionis. Principium dilectionis est duplex. Dilectio enim potest fieri ex passione, et ex iudicio rationis: ex passione, cum nescit homo vivere sine eo quod diligit; ex ratione, secundum quod diligit ut ratio dictat. Dicit ergo quod ille ex toto corde diligit, qui diligit carnaliter; ille ex anima, qui ex iudicio rationis. Et nos Deum utroque modo debemus diligere: carnaliter, ut cor carnaliter afficiatur circa Deum; unde in Ps. LXXXIII, 3: cor meum et caro mea exultaverunt in Deum vivum. Tertium est sequela dilectionis, quia illud quod diligo, libenter video, libenter de eo cogito, libenter facio quod ei placet; Io. XIV, 23: qui diligit me, sermones meos servabit; et totum refero in ipsum; Ps. LXXXIII, 2: quam dilecta tabernacula tua, domine virtutum. Concupiscit et deficit anima mea in atria domini. Et possumus addere illud quod Marcus addit, et in omni fortitudine tua, quia qui Deum diligit, totum se transfert in illum, et fortitudinem expendit in ipsum. Augustinus sic distinguit inter cor et animam et mentem, secundum tria quae procedunt ex ipsis. De corde exeunt cogitationes, ut habetur supra XV, 19, ex anima vita procedit, ex mente scientia et intelligentia. Unde quod dicit ex toto corde, intelligendum est ut omnes cogitationes in ipsum referamus; quod ex tota anima, quod tota vita; quod ex tota mente, ut tota scientia referatur in eum, idest ut scientiam captives in obsequium eius; II Cor. X, 5: in captivitatem redigentes omnem intellectum in obsequium Christi. Magistralis quaedam Glossa exponit quod anima est imago Dei secundum suas potentias, secundum memoriam, intelligentiam et voluntatem, ita quod illud quod dicitur ex corde, ad intelligentiam referatur; quod dicitur ex anima, ad voluntatem; quod ex mente, ad memoriam, ita ut perfecte Deo vivatur. Origenes sic exponit: diliges Deum ex tota anima, ita ut sis paratus animam tuam ponere pro eo si necesse est; Io. XIII, 37: animam meam ponam pro te. Sed differentia est inter mentem et cor. Mens enim dicitur a metiendo; cor sumitur pro simplicitate intellectus; mens vero quoad prolationem, quia per sermonem metitur intellectus, sive cogitatio: unde vult dicere quod in locutionibus et in meditationibus Deum totaliter diligamus. Hoc posito, subdit hoc est primum et maximum mandatum. Maximum capacitate: istud enim est, in quo omnia continentur, quia in isto dilectio proximi continetur, secundum quod I Io. IV, 21 dicitur: qui diligit Deum, diligit et fratrem suum; et ideo maximum. Item primum origine, maximum dignitate et capacitate.
22:38
Non primum in Scriptura, quia in Scriptura primum mandatum fuit, dominus Deus tuus Deus unus est, Deut. VI, 4. Et quare? Quia omnis inclinatio appetitivae virtutis est in amore: ideo habemus mandatum quod colamus Deum in dilectione; ad Rom. XIII, 10: plenitudo legis dilectio est; ad Eph. III, 17: in caritate radicati et fundati.
22:39
Secundo, ponit secundum mandatum secundum autem simile huic est: diliges proximum tuum sicut teipsum. Voluit significare quod in mandatis est ordo. Et quae est causa? Constat quod mandata sunt de actibus virtutum; virtutes autem habent ordinem, quia una dependet ab alia, et sicut virtutes, sic et mandata. Sed quare dicit quod est simile primo? Quia quando diligitur homo, cum homo sit ad similitudinem Dei, diligitur Deus in illo; ideo simile est primo mandato, quod est de dilectione Dei. Sed quid intelligit nomine proximi, cum dicit diliges proximum? Istud satis signatur in parabola Lc. X, 36, ubi quaeritur, quis tibi videtur, quod fuerit eius proximus? Et respondetur, qui fecit misericordiam in eum. Unde qui debet facere misericordiam nobis, vel nos ipsi, sub nomine proximi continetur. Sed non est aliqua rationalis creatura, cui non debeamus misereri, et e converso: et ideo sub nomine proximi continetur homo et Angelus. Et quod dicit sicut teipsum, non intelligitur quantum teipsum, quia hoc esset contra ordinem caritatis; sed sicut teipsum, idest eo fine quo teipsum, vel eo modo quo teipsum. Eo fine, quia te non debes diligere propter te, sed propter Deum, sic etiam proximum. Apostolus I Cor. X, 31: omnia in gloriam Dei facite. Item in eo quod teipsum diligis, diligis te in eo in quo vis tibi bonum, et tale bonum, quod sit secundum te et legem Dei, et hoc est bonum iustitiae. Sic etiam et proximo debes optare bonam iustitiam; unde debes eum diligere, vel quia iustus est, vel quia iustus fit. Item debes eum diligere eo modo quo teipsum, quia cum dico diligo istum, dico volo bonum ei. Unde actus dilectionis cadit super duo: vel super ipsum qui bonus est, vel super ipsum bonum, quod volo sibi; unde diligo istum, quia volo ipsum esse bonum mihi. Unde aliquis diligit bona temporalia, quia scit ea bona esse sibi; aliqui vero diligunt aliquid, quia bonum est in se: sic debes diligere teipsum, et etiam proximum.
22:40
Consequenter assignat rationem quare ista duo sint maxima mandata in his duobus mandatis universa lex pendet, et prophetae. Tota doctrina legis et prophetarum dependet ab his. Finis in appetibilibus se habet ut principium in speculativis: procedit enim scientia a principiis ad conclusiones, et sic tota scientia ex principiis iudicatur, sicut et in omnibus operabilibus totum dependet a fine. Quia ergo dilectio est finis; I ad Tim. c. I, 5: finis praecepti est caritas; ideo ab istis dependent omnia alia, et haec est expositio Augustini. Origenes sic exponit: in his, idest in observantia istorum, dependet intellectus legis et prophetarum, quia qui haec observat, meretur intelligentiam legis et prophetarum; Eccli. II, 10: qui timetis dominum, diligite illum, et illuminabuntur corda vestra. Ps. CXVIII, 104: a mandatis tuis intellexi, propterea odivi omnem viam iniquitatis. Congregatis autem Pharisaeis interrogavit eos Iesus. Postquam responderat eis, ipse voluit obiicere: et facit duo. Primo ponitur interrogatio; secundo eius effectus, ibi nemo poterat ei respondere verbum. Circa primum primo proponit interrogationem; secundo responsionem; tertio obiicit contra.
22:41
Dicit ergo congregatis autem Pharisaeis, interrogavit eos Iesus.
22:42
Congregati autem erant ad tentandum; unde ponit interrogationem quid vobis videtur de Christo, cuius filius est? Haec quaestio difficillima erat et congrua. Difficillima, quia habetur Is. LIII, 8: generationem eius quis enarrabit? Erat etiam congrua, quia habebant opinionem, quod esset purus homo, et non credebant ipsum esse Deum, quia sic non tentarent eum, quia scriptum est Deut. VI, 16: non tentabis dominum Deum tuum. Ideo ut ostendat se Deum dicit quid vobis videtur de Christo? Sequitur responsio dicunt ei: David. Christi enim erat duplex generatio: una secundum carnem, alia secundum divinitatem, secundum quam est filius Dei patris, de qua dicitur Ps. II, 7: dominus dixit ad me: filius meus es tu et cetera. Ideo ipsi respondent de generatione secundum carnem, cum dicunt David. Ier. XXIII, 5: suscitabo David germen iustum. Et ad Rom. I, 3: qui factus est ei ex semine David secundum carnem. Et isti insufficienter responderunt, quia insufficienter cognoscebant eum.
22:43
Tunc obiicit ut eis det intelligere aliam generationem quomodo ergo David in spiritu vocat eum dominum, dicens: dixit dominus domino meo: sede a dextris meis? Ps. CIX, 1. Habetur in lege quod pater maior est filio. Non ergo filius dominus est patris. Ergo vel Christus non est filius David, vel in eo est aliquid maius David, cum vocet eum dominum. Sed forte dicerent quod David fuit deceptus: quod removet, quia in spiritu hoc dicit, unde spiritu sancto Dei locuti sunt homines, II Petri I, 21. Possumus autem tria videre in auctoritate ista Psalmi. Primo praeeminentiam ad sanctos, aequalitatem ad patrem, et dominium super rebelles. Praeeminentiam ad sanctos, cum dicit dixit dominus domino meo. Dominus, scilicet pater, domino, scilicet filio: ipse enim filius habet dominium super omnes sanctos: nullus enim sanctus illuminatur nisi a lumine vero: ipse autem est lumen verum; Io. I, 4: vita erat lux hominum. Si ergo ipse est, cuius participatione omnes sancti lumen recipiunt, praeeminentiam habet ad omnes sanctos in eo quod dicitur: tecum principium in die virtutis tuae, in splendoribus sanctorum etc.; unde ipse originaliter est splendor omnium sanctorum. Item aequalitas patris tangitur, cum dicitur sede a dextris meis: non quod sint sedes locales, sed metaphorice, quia honorabilior locus est sedere a dextris. Dicere enim est emittere verbum. Quod ergo dixit dominus sede a dextris meis quid est aliud, nisi quod generando me verbum, dedit mihi potestatem, aequalitatem et auctoritatem? Potest etiam exponi de temporalibus, idest in potioribus bonis, sed non est ad propositum. Dominus enim semper videtur a dextris, ut in Marc. ult., 5: viderunt iuvenem sedentem a dextris. Et Stephanus, Act. VII, 55, vidit Iesum sedentem a dextris virtutis Dei. Et quid fiet de inimicis eius?
22:44
Ei omnes subiicientur; unde subdit donec ponam inimicos tuos scabellum pedum tuorum. Isti vel sunt penitus infideles, vel hi qui noluerunt obedire et subesse; unde istos ponet scabellum pedum tuorum. Scabellum enim est quod ponitur sub pedibus; illud autem quod est sub pedibus totaliter ei subiicitur, non autem illud quod est in manu. Quidam ponuntur scabellum ad punitionem, quidam ad salutem: ad punitionem, qui nolunt facere eius voluntatem; ad salutem, qui faciunt eius voluntatem. Sed obiiciunt Ariani: ergo non est aequalis patri. Dico quod legitur utrumque, et quod subiicitur patri, et quod est aequalis patri; I ad Cor. XV, 25: oportet autem illum regnare, donec ponat inimicos sub pedibus. Item Christus sibi omnia subiiciet; Phil. III, 21: reformabit corpus humilitatis nostrae configuratum corpori claritatis suae. Unde illud dicit ad demonstrandum unitatem potestatis: unde omnia quae potest pater, eadem potest et filius. Sed quid est quod dicit donec ponam inimicos tuos scabellum pedum tuorum? Ergo videtur quod postquam supposuerit inimicos, quod ultra non sedebit a dextris. Dicendum quod donec aliquando importat tempus determinatum, aliquando infinitum. Hic vero importat infinitum. Sed diceret aliquis: nonne multi rebellant Christo? Ita, verum est quod multi rebellant, et ideo poterat esse dubium de tempore quando multi rebellarent: ideo voluit Christus exprimere.
22:45
Si ergo David vocat eum dominum, quomodo filius eius est? Ergo dominus est et filius, quia filius est secundum carnem, quia ab ipso traxit originem, et dominus secundum divinitatem. Et nemo poterat respondere ei verbum. Hic ponitur effectus, et est duplex, quia Christus fuit respondens et opponens. Quia opponens: nemo poterat respondere; Iob IX, 3: si voluerit contendere cum eo, non poterit ei respondere unum pro mille.
22:46
Item quia in respondendo confutaverat eos, ideo sequitur nec ausus fuit quisquam ex illa die eum amplius interrogare. Ideo potestis videre, quod isti non interrogabant ut eos doceret, sed ut eum tentarent; Deut. XXXII, 7: interroga patrem tuum et annuntiabit tibi.
22:1
And Jesus answering. " ANSWERING " is put for " speaking " by a Hebraism, as frequently before.
22:2
Is likened. Authorities differ as to whether or not this is the same parable as that of S. Luke (xiv. 16). Some, for many reasons, think it a different one. 1. The giver of the feast in this is a king. In 5. Luke he is not. 2. Here the feast is a dinner (prandiuin). There it is a supper (ccena). 3. Here are many servants, and they were sent frequently to call those who were invited. There there is only one, and he was only sent once. 4. In this the invited guests do not excuse themselves, but merely neglect to come. In that they excuse themselves, each in his own manner. 5. In this the servants are ill-treated or killed. In that they are not. 6. In this an army is sent by the lord of the vineyard (sic in the text, but read " the king ") to slay the " husband men ". In that there is none. 7. In this the king enters the guest-chamber and finds a man not having on a wedding-garment, whom he commands to be bound and cast into outer darkness. In that nothing of the kind takes place. This is the opinion of S. Augustin (De Consens., u. 70), S. Gregory (Horn, xxxviii. in Evangel^ Strabus, and S. Thomas. ^Others think the two parables the same because they have each a marriage, the feast of which is called a dinner by S. Matthew and a supper by S. Luke. This is the opinion of S. Irenaeus (w. 70, 76) and Theophylact (in loc.). Even S. Gregory thinks it probable. It appears to be the more so because the other facts recorded here by S. Matthew, and elsewhere by S. Luke, are very similar ; while the differences are too slight to cause them to be regarded as different parables. For there being mention of a king in one and not in another, and S. Matthew's speaking of a dinner, and S. Luke of a supper, is without weight. S. Gregory himself says that the Ancients did not dine before the ninth hour, and they called supper (ccenam) prandium. This may not be certain. All the arguments on the other side of the question, however, can be answered with one word. The Evangelists, when describing the same parable, or even the same history, do not relate all the facts, nor use the same words, but give the same meaning. This is the case here. What may appear to be of greater weight is that S. Luke relates this parable as having been given at a different time and place, namely, when Christ was supping at the house of one of the chief Pharisees, and a guest said : " Blessed is he that shall eat bread in the kingdom of God " (xiv. 15). This objection can be answered without difficulty. Either S. Matthew or S. Luke did not observe the ordo temporis, as is often the case with them. It is more probable that S. Luke followed time and place, while S. Matthew related the parable here, because it resembled the preceding one, and he was not solicitous to construct a history of the events as they happened, but to relate the teaching of Christ. He therefore referred all His discourses of the same signification, and containing the same doctrine, to the same place.
To a king. That is, the same thing happens in the kingdom of heaven, as if a king had made a marriage for his son, as explained on chap. xxi. 16 ; for the kingdom of heaven — that is, the Church — is not compared to the king, but to the guest-chamber where the supper was held. We must first see to what the parable tends, and then, as we have said before, what are the peculiar and necessary parts that contain the meaning. Christ seems to have intended to teach two things : First, That many are called to the kingdom of heaven, — that is, the Church, — but few come. With this He concludes at verse 14. Secondly, That not all who come when they are called to the Church will be saved, — that is, are worthy of the heavenly banquet, because some have not on the wedding-garment (as in verse n). The parable is directed against the Jews, who, when invited, would not come, and the Gentiles were therefore put into their place. The necessary portions of the parable appear to be seven. 1. The first is the king, who is undoubtedly God. That He is not called " a man," but " a king," may be partly to show His Divine Majesty, and partly to account for the splendour of the feast. 2. The second part is the marriage — that is, the feast — for the Evangelist all through the chapter calls the marriage a feast. Some say that the feast, signifies the glory of heaven and the life of beatification, under which similitude they are often described in Scripture (as in Ps. xvi. 15 ; Apoc. xix. 9 ; 5. Luke xiv. 15 ; xxii. 29, 30). So says S. Hilary (Can. xxii. on S. Matt.). Others think the feast to have been the outpouring of divine grace, given to those who come into the Church, or the Word of God, by which they are fed ; for the Word of God is often compared to food, as by S. Paul (i Cor. iii. 2; Heb. v. 12). In Amos (viii. 11), in like manner, God threatens to send a famine into the land : not, indeed, a famine of bread, but of the WTord of God. So Origen (Tract, xx. on S. Matt), The Author, and Euthymius. 3. The third part is the son of the king, whose marriage is celebrated. He is clearly Christ, who is often called the bridegroom (as ix. 15; xxv. I ; *S. John iii. 29 ; Apoc. xix. 7-9). It is not so clear who the bride is. Some think that she is each man's soul ; as Theophylact, The Author (Horn. xli.). Others say that she is the Church ; as Origen ( Tract. xx. in S. Matt.), S. Hilary (Can. xxii.), S. Jerome (in Comment), S. Gregory (Horn, xxxviii. in Evangel). This would appear more probable, because S. John (Apoc. xxi. 2) calls the Church "the spouse of Christ". S. Paul (Ephes. v. 25) exhorts husbands to love their wives as Christ loved the Church : signifying that the Church was His bride ; and in verses 31, 32. Authorities vary as to when this marriage between Christ and the Church is celebrated. Some say that it was to be after the Resurrection, but that the guests were invited to a future marriage. So Origen and S. Hilary. And it is hardly to be doubted from the parable (xxv. i) of the bridegroom coming in the middle of the night that the time of the Resurrection and the last advent of Christ are signified. S. John also (Apoc. xix. 9) speaks of this marriage, which is to be celebrated, not on earth, but in heaven, after the time of the Resurrection. Others say that the marriage was celebrated when the Son of God was made the Son of man, for He then united the Church to Himself as to a bridegroom. So says S. Gregory (Horn, xxxviii. in Evangel?). Each opinion is true ; for, as has been said elsewhere, the marriage of Christ has been celebrated often : (i) When He was made man, His Incarnation being as a spousal rite. (2) It will be celebrated when He shall have formed for Himself a glorious Church not having spot or wrinkle. This will be when He shall unite it to Himself in heaven freed from every stain. Men are invited to both these marriages — to the first, that they may come to the Church of God and be fed by the Word of God ; to the second, that they may be saved, and may eat and drink at the table of Christ in the kingdom of God. 4. They who are invited. These are said by S. Ambrose (Comment, on S. Luke xiv.) to be Gentiles, Jews, and here tics. All other authorities explain it only of the Jews. It is very plain that Christ propounded the parable most especially against them, to show that the Jews who were invited would not come, but that the Gentiles did. It may be a question whether this is to be understood of all Jews, or only of those who lived after the Incarnation of Christ. S. Hilary says that those alone are invited whom Christ Himself, as man, or the Apostles and their successors, called. Origen, however (Tract, xx. on S. Matt.\ S. Athanasius (Quest. 45), S. Jerome, Bede, Euthymius, Theophylact (in his Comment.), and S. Gregory (Horn. xxxviii.) think that it should be understood of all Jews, even of those who lived before the Incarnation of Christ. This is the more likely because they were, without doubt, the men who ill-treated and killed the servants that were sent by the king, that is, the ancient prophets. But how could they who are so far remote from the coming of Christ be invited to His marriage ? They were invited to His future marriage that they might believe in the Christ who was to come, and be fed in the meantime by the word of the Law and the Prophets. If they kept their Law and precepts, they would be invited to that final, that is, to that heavenly marriage, to which we also who are now guests at the first are bidden. As S. Gregory says, " God invites both those who were before the Incarnation of Christ and those who were after it " — because " He announced by the Prophets that the Incarnation of the Only-begotten Son should be brought to pass, and by the Apostles that it should be accomplished ". 5. The fifth part is the servants. S. Jerome says that in many copies the word is found in the singular, as in 5. Luke; but our version reads it in the plural, and the sense of the passage seems to require this, as being more expressive. Who the servants were whom the king sent first to invite the Jews is obvious, yet all the authorities do not agree on the point. S. Hilary says that it was the Apostles alone ; all others — Origen, S. Chrysostom, S. Jerome, S. Gregory, and Bede — say that they were the Prophets and Apostles. For the Prophets were sent first, and were treated with contumely, and put to death. Afterwards the Apostles were sent into the streets and highways, to bring in all — not the Jews only, but also the Gentiles. Theophylact and The Author ask how they were called who had before been invited ; or how they were invited before they were called ; since the same persons seem to have been both invited and called. Theophylact answers that they were probably invited by the natural law to live rightly and holily, and were afterwards called by the Prophets, to come. It would have been better to have said that they were invited through the Law of Moses. For not only the Jews, but all men, were invited by the natural law, and there is no distinction in the parable to signify that men were first invited and afterwards called ; but Christ spoke as from custom, and described not what God did to the Jews, but what men did usually to each other. Thus it often happens that men are first invited and bidden to a feast, and afterwards, when the time is come, are called to it. 6. The sixth part is the entrance of the king into the guestchamber, while the feast was in progress. The Author explains this to mean God's proving men, to see their value and fitness for their place in the Church. S. Jerome and Bede say better that it means the coming of God to judgment ; to retain those who have the wedding-garment, and to reject those who are without it. That the Day of Judgment is intended is clear from the fact that the man who had no wedding-garment was to be bound hand and foot and cast into outer darkness, where was the weeping and gnashing of teeth. We see the same thing in this parable and the previous one of the cockles (xiii. 24), and of the net. The reader will ask how it can be said that the king would come into the guest-chamber, when it is not the king himself, but the king's son — that is, Christ — who would come to judgment. The king will come because his son will come for him (S. John v. 22). 7. The seventh part is that of the man who had not on a wedding-garment. There have been different opinions as to what the wedding-garment is. S. Irenseus (w. 70) and S. Hilary (in loc.} explain it to mean the Holy Spirit, as Christ says in 5. Luke xxiv. 49. But S. Augustin (Cont. Faust., xxii. 19) says that it is the glory of Christ, and that whoever seeks this is endued with the marriage-garment ; whilst all who seek not this but their own glory have it not, because they bear not His " insignia," but their own. S. Augustin seems to think that the marriage-garment was some well-known and remarkable dress, such as the bridegroom himself wore, and such as we see the children of kings wear, of some marked and notable colour, called the royal colour, to distinguish them from the children of other men. But there is no account in the history of the Jews, or any other people, of such a thing. It would seem, rather, to have been not any certain and peculiar attire, which all such guests wore, but some habiliment more costly and splendid than that of ordinary life ; such as was worn by those who were invited to do honour to a bridegroom, and to adorn his feast ; and that the man who was cast out had none such, and was sent away for his shamelessness in entering in his ordinary sordid and ragged attire, where all the rest wore garments of cost. But the question is, what is signified by that garment ? The followers of Calvin say that it is faith — for everything is faith with them when they themselves have no faith ; nor, acute as they think themselves, do they consider that that guest came only by faith, without which he could not have entered the guest-chamber — that is, the Church. For to come is to have faith. They who are invited and do not come are said not to come because they have no faith. This man had faith, indeed, but he had no marriagegarment. The marriage -garment, therefore, is not faith. The opinion, then, of Tertullian (De Resurrect. Carn^ Origen, S. Chrysostom, The Author, S. Ambrose (Serm. xiv. de Natal. Doming, S. Jerome, S. Gregory, Theophylact, and Euthymius is true, that the marriage-garment is chanty, good works, and a life answering to the faith of Christ. The whole history agrees with this view most perfectly and aptly. For as they who are invited to a wedding ought to have clothing proper to the occasion, so they who are invited and come to the Church through faith, ought to lead a life worthy of faith, and of a follower of Christ. We see that a good life is figured in Scripture by a garment, as in Apoc. iii. 17, 18 ; EpJies. w. 24 ; Coloss. iii. 9, 10. Let these men pardon us, then, if we show from this passage that faith alone is not sufficient for salvation ; for the guest at this feast had faith, but because he had no marriage-garment — that is, good works — he was cast into outer darkness. It will be asked how, if he had faith, he was cast out of the guest-chamber, that is, the Church? as if the king preferred not to have his faith, to having it without his works. The answer is easy. The whole question is to be referred to the Day of Judgment, when God will cast those who have faith without its good works out of the feast, that is, out of heaven — not that they were inheaven before, but that when they were in the Church they appeared to be in heaven.^If to their faith they had added good works, they would have been transferred to heaven. The rest of the parable consists of accretions, which were uttered to complete and beautify the narrative ; such as verse 4 : "I have prepared my dinner, my beeves and fatlings," &c., which means that all was prepared, that God is waiting for men, that His grace is at hand for all, and that it does not remain with Him that men are not converted from their sins. He named beeves and fatlings, because these formed the provisions at costly banquets. Bulls or young bullocks are such as have never been subjected to the knife or yoke, and which are often mentioned in Scripture as peculiar delicacies (Gen, xviii. 7 ; I Kings xxviii. 24). The man whose prodigal son returned to him (S. Luke xv. 23) slew the fatted calf. Such is the true meaning of these words, though many ancient Fathers thought this a necessary and peculiar part of the parable, with its own proper and distinctive meaning. S. Gregory thinks that the bulls signify the Fathers of the Old Testament, and the fatlings those of the New, who have received a higher grace, and are mentioned in a spiritual sense. Theophylact takes the bulls to be the Old Testament itself, and the fatlings to be the New. S. Jerome and Euthymius more correctly take them for nothing more than the liberal furniture of the feast. What is said inverse 5, and S. Luke's words, " I have bought five yoke of oxen (xiv. 19), and another, I have married a wife," means nothing more than that the invited guests went each to his own occupation, his farm, or his merchandise, preferring their temporal to their spiritual interests. The more abstruse meaning may be found in Origen (in loc^} and S. Ambrose (Comment, in Luc. xiv.). The king sending forth his army to destroy those murderers shows that the wrath of God will descend upon all who refuse His invitation. There may, however, be something in the suggestion of S. Chrysostom, The Author, and Euthymius, that the Roman armies of Titus and Vespasian may be foreshown, as about to take the most utter vengeance on the Jews ; though the opinion of S. Jerome and S. Gregory is more probable — that the army was the evil angels whom God sometimes uses to punish men ; as Ps. Ixxvii. 49. So by the servants who are sent a second time into the high ways and hedges to call, or, as S. Luke says, to compel all to enter, nothing else is meant than that there is no distinction of countries, but the Gospel is to be preached throughout the whole world to every creature, as Christ afterwards declared (xxviii. 19; 5. Mark xvi. 15). So again the words of S. Luke (xiv. 21), that they should bring in the poor, weak, blind, lame, means only that there should be no distinction of nation or persons, but that all should equally be invited to the Gospel ; and Christ names the poor, the weak, the blind, the lame, rather than any other class of persons, because such are not usually invited, and we are to understand that from the banquets of the Gospel no one whatever is to be excluded. The words " compel them to come in " do not mean that men will be literally forced into the Gospel, but that they should be so entreated and urged as almost to appear to be, in a manner, compelled. Lastly, the binding of the man who had not on the wedding-garment shows only that they who will be condemned will be no more able to resist the execution of their sentence than if they were literally confined by manacles and fetters.
22:13
Into the exterior darkness. On this see chap. viii. 12.
22:14
Many are called^ but feiu are chosen. This is the conclusion of the parable, and it appears to contain a difficulty. For while one only of all the guests was rejected, Christ says, " Many are called, but few are chosen " ; whereas not a few only, but, with one exception, all were chosen. S. Augustin (Lib. Cont. Donat.) says that the one who was cast out represents in his own person all the reprobate, who are many more in number than the elect, and that Christ, therefore, concluded with the words, " Many are called, but few are chosen ". These words would seem to apply not so much to those immediately preceding as to the whole of the earlier part of the parable, in which we see that many were called but few, in fact, came, while of these not all were chosen. Why was one only cast out, when the greater number are to be finally cast out — that is, condemned — as Christ signifies in chap. vu. 13, 14, and I Pet. w. 18? It is easy to answer that Christ spoke the parable, not against the Gentiles, but against the Jews, who, when invited in the first place, not only refused to come, but treated the servants of the king who were sent to call them with outrages and death. Of them, therefore, Christ concluded, " Many are called ". He would also have them know, by the way, that they who had come, whether Jews or Gentiles, ought not to trust in themselves, merely because they were permitted to enter the guest-chamber ; for they would be cast out if they had not on the wedding-garment. To show this, it was enough that one of those who were present was cast out, as not having on that garment. But if a greater number were to be cast out than retained, why did not Christ say : "The many shall be cast out, the few only shall be retained " ? Because this was not done in fact. Christ only said what He did to show that many were called, few chosen.
22:16
And they send their disciples with the Herodians. For the Herodians, see chap. xii. 14. Maldonatus goes into the question of who they probably were at length. He shows : 1. That they were not Gentiles under the rule of Herod. 2. Nor the followers of Herod Antipas, who was taken by them for the Messiah. 3. Nor the soldiers of Herod the Great ; for he was dead, and his sons ruled in Galilee, not Judaea. 4. Nor those Jews who denied the payment of tribute to Caesar (Acts v. 37). Two opinions remain which have some show of probability. I. That of those (Origen, Tract, on S. Matt. xxi. ; S. Jerome, Comment. ; and, apparently, S. Cyril of Alexandria) who think that they who allowed the payment of tribute to Caesar were called Herodians, because Herod was a thorough follower of Caesar, and, as Josephus says, had been overseer of the tribute in Judaea. S. Cyril says that the Herodians were publicans and collectors of the tribute. This is the more likely because the Pharisees, who were the chief supporters of Jewish liberty, and were opposed to Herod, as Josephus says, pretended to constitute Christ judge of the question, the better to conceal their own hatred, and to show that they referred to Him for the purpose, not of trying Him, but of putting an end to the question ; whereas their real object was to excite ill-will against Him. For if He had answered that the tribute was not to bepaid, they would have accused Him of lese-majesty, as they afterwards did (S. Luke xxiii. 2). If He had said that it ought to be paid, He would not have been thought to be Christ, and the promised king of the Jews ; for, so far from freeing them, as they hoped, from the foreign rule, He would rather have brought them under the Gentile power. This opinion is strengthened at once by S. Luke, who calls the false accusers simulatores, and by Christ Himself, in verse 18 : "Why do you tempt Me, ye hypocrites ? " 2. The other opinion is that of those who think that the Herodians were some domestic sect, who followed Herod, to whom, so that he could keep his crown, every religion was good. But this is less likely to be true than the former, because there is neither authority nor probability for it in history ; although, on the other hand, it may be so far possibly true, that there is nothing against it, and the Evangelists seem to describe the Herodians as some sort of a religious sect like the Pharisees and Sadducees, for they mention them in conjunction with these.
22:19
Show me the coin of the tribute. A coin of the kind in which the tribute was paid. And they offered Him a penny. This is to be understood of the Roman penny, which had Caesar's image and superscription on it; things which, as most especially hateful, the Jews would by no means permit on their coins. The penny seems to have been equal to an Attic drachma in value. A question has arisen as to how a Roman penny could be called the tribute-money, as if each person paid a penny, when Christ paid a stater for Himself and Peter (S. Matt. xvii. 26) ; that is, four silver drachmas, or fourpence. It has been suggested that this was a different tribute ; but the Romans exacted no other tribute from the Jews than the poll-tax, which they had previously paid to the Temple : that is, half a side, equal to two Roman denarii. Pliny (xxxiii. 13) says that the Romans required from conquered nations only silver money. It is more probable, as others say, that each Jew paid two denarii, and that the money was divided into two parts for the sake of convenience.
22:21
The things that are God's. These words do not refer merely to the tribute paid for the Temple, but they are spoken generally. The things that are God's are faith, hope, charity, obedience.
22:23
That day. It is not quite certain whether this happened on the same day as that on which Christ was tempted by the Pharisees and Herodians ; for it may be a Hebraism and mean " about that time ". But it is more probable, as Origen and The Author think, that it was the same day, because S. Matthew here, S. Mark (xii. 18), and S. Luke (xx. 27) so unite this with the preceding events, that the conversation would appear to have taken place on the same day.
TJtere came to Him the Sadducees. For the Sadducees, see chap. iii. 7. They would believe nothing above or beyond nature, and therefore they would not believe the resurrection of the dead. Hence their senseless question to Christ.
22:24
Moses said, If a man die. For an explanation of these words, see chap. i. 16.
22:29
Ye err, not knowing the Scriptures. Because the Sadducees had appealed to the Scriptures, Christ answers that they did not understand the Scriptures, as S. Chrysostom says. Christ shows two sources of error in them ; one, that they did not understand the Scriptures : the other, that they did not allow for the goodness and power of God, as S. Mark (xii. 24) describes more plainly.
22:30
In the resurrection. " In " is used by a Hebraism for " after," as in Ps. cxxv. i : " When the Lord turned back," in convertendo. The time which will ensue after the Resurrection is called the Resurrection ; as in verse 28 the whole time during which the law of circumcision was in force is called " the Circumcision " (Rom. w. 10).
They shall neither marry, nor be married. A Hebraism and a Graecism at once. A Hebraism because the third person plural is put for the passive verb impersonal, as in some Latin works dicunt is put for dicitur, nubent for nubetur. It is a Graecism, which the Latin translator would not render perhaps, for some reason, idiomatically. For as the Greek word yafielv was applied to the marriage of either man or woman, and nubere was used in Latin of the woman, and uxorem ducere of the man, and the Greek expresses both in one word, the Latin author chose to follow the Greek, because it was not in that age considered barbarous. This is the opinion of Tertullian (De Resurrect^ and Ruffinus (In. Exposit. Symb.}. S. Jerome says himself that he would not have so rendered it, though he would not correct it. The meaning appears to be that after the Resurrection men will not marry women, nor will women be married to men. In a word, there will then be no marriages.
But shall be as the angels of God. Christ does not compare the blessed to the angels in everything, but only in the point on which He was speaking — marriage; as S. Jerome has observed. For the angels are immortal, and therefore have no need of marriage, the object of which is the continuance of the human race, as explained by S. Luke (xx. 35,36). It may be observed that all the three Evangelists — S. Matthew, S. Mark, and S. Luke — here use the present tense, " are equal to the angels," when they had before used the future, nubent — nubentur. Christ probably desired to place the future state of beatitude before the sight, and spoke of it as a thing present. The Author, not without reason, asks why, when Christ spoke of fasting, alms, and other spiritual virtues, He did not institute any comparison of men with angels, but only did so when His subject was chastity. His answer, which is a true one, is that there is no virtue so angelical as this one. / am t/te God of Abraham. There is a double difficulty in this passage. First, it does not appear how it can rightly be concluded from the words, " I am the God of Abraham," &c.} that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were still living ; for God might be called their God, not because He was so then, but because He had been so before : as James and John are called the sons of Zebedee when Zebedee was now dead, and no one is the son of a dead man, but of a living one. The meaning is, that they had been his sons. Secondly, that even if it could be proved that the souls of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were alive, it is not therefore proved thereby that they will rise again. To the first question, it has been replied that the force of the argument consists in this : that God did not say, " I was " (fui out eranij, but " I am " their God. So say S. Chrysostom, Euthymius, and Theophylact. But it may be objected that the passage should be understood, " I am that God who was the God of Abraham while Abraham was alive". Or, according to others, God is called the God of those of whom He receives acknowledgment and worship, as He is called the God of Elias and Daniel^ because Elias and Daniel worshipped Him. Hence Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are not wholly dead, because God was called their God — that is, He was worshipped by them. Others suppose that the force of the words lies in this, that although in that sense God can be called the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, because He was once their God, yet it is not to be thought that God would deign to be called the God of those who were now dead. But this is not of much weight. There appears to be a higher than common meaning in the words. S. Chrysostom, Theophylact, and Euthymius have said what seems true, but is not sufficient. For the force of the whole undoubtedly lies in God not having said, " I was," but " I am " ; not fui or erani, but sum ; and the meaning may be : "I am the God who made a covenant with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob to perpetuate their seed, and I therefore wish to keep it, because they still live and urge Me daily by their prayers to deliver their children from the captivity of Egypt ". For we keep covenant, not with the dead, but with the living. And Christ pleased to bring, not an unanswerable argument, but one so far convincing as to be sufficient for the conviction of the Sadducees. For He by these means repressed their arrogance and shamelessness ; so that when they proposed, in derision, a Scripture, as if Christ could not escape from it, He showed them that they were so dull and ignorant that they could not reply to even the very lightest argument of Moses in proof of the Resurrection. The explanation of the second question is less difficult. The Sadducees, as Origen and S. Jerome and The Author have observed, denied the Resurrection, because they did not believe in the immortality of the soul, as is clear from Acts xxiii. 8. And, therefore, if the immortality of the soul were proved by an admitted testimony, the Resurrection would be also proved. Formerly, too, not only among the Jews, but also almost all the schools of philosophy, the two questions of the Immortality of the Soul and the Resurrection were so united together as to be taken for one and the same thing. Thus, we see, the author of the second Book of Machabees (xii. 43) from the Immortality of the Soul proves the Resurrection. The same is also done by S. Paul (i Cor. xv.), where all the arguments for the resurrection of the body only avail to prove the immortality of the soul ; but as no one denied the Resurrection who did not believe that the soul died, the same arguments prove the Resurrection. He is not the God of the dead, but of the living. Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were now dead. But Christ denied that they were dead in the sense supposed by the Sadducees ; that is, that their souls were dead. For, in the sense in which we call men dead whose souls are separated from their bodies, God is called the Lord, not only of the living, but also of the dead (Rom. xiv. 8), as S. Chrysostom has observed. S. Luke (xx. 38) adds what seems rather to weaken than add force to the argument ; for he says, " all live " ; for if all the former live to God, even those who are dead, these live also ; and then it does not follow that Abraham, Isaaac, and Jacob are not dead, as Christ would have proved. The answer may be that when Christ added these words, He only gave a reason for calling Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob living who had died ; for all, not only those who are alive in the body, but also those who are dead, are alive to God : not only because their souls are alive, but also because God wills to bring it to pass that they should return to their bodies, and live in the same way as they had lived before ; as Christ said (ix. 24), " The girl is not dead, but sleepeth ". Or they are dead to us, but live to God, because we only see their bodies, and their bodies are dead : God sees their souls, and these are truly alive. Many ask why, as there are so many and plain testimonies in Holy Scripture to the Resurrection, Christ Himself did not most especially bring them forward. Origen (On S. Matt, xxi.), S. Jerome, and Bede reply that the Sadducees only received as Scripture the five books of Moses, and that in consequence Christ must necessarily answer them out of these.
22:35
And one of them, a doctor of the law. S. Luke (xx. 39, 40) says that one of the Scribes, when the Sadducees had been answered, said to Him, " Master, Thou has well said ; and after that they durst not ask Him any more questions ". This appears to apply, not to the Scribes and Pharisees (who take this opportunity, as S. Matthew says, of tempting Christ again, to show that they were more learned than the Sadducees), but to the Sadducees themselves. For the man whom S. Matthew calls a doctor of the law, S. Mark (xii. 28) calls a Scribe. Hence we see that although the duties of the Pharisees and Scribes were different, the same person was at times both a Pharisee and a Scribe. For it is clear from verse 34 that this doctor of the law of whom S. Matthew speaks was a Pharisee.
22:36
Which is the great commandment in the Law ? The positive is here by a Hebraism put for the superlative ; as in 5. Mark xii. 28, 29.
22:37
Thou shalt love the Lord thy God. S. Mark (xii. 29) begins with, " Hear, O Israel ". S. Matthew only gives the first words, because in Moses both commandments are in the same place and refer to the same thing (Deut. vi. 4, 5). The first is, Thou shalt believe in one God. The second, Thou shalt love Him with thy whole heart, and with thy whole soul ; because he that believes in more than one divides his love, and does not love one with his whole heart ; as in chap. vi. 24 : " No man can serve two masters," &c. With thy whole heart, and with thy whole soul. Some raise on these words a distinction apparently too subtle. The meaning simply appears to be that we should love God with all our strength, and look to Him for every thing. S. Augustin has expressed this in the following words : " When God said, ' with the whole heart, the whole soul, the whole mind,' He left no part of our life from which He would be absent, and which should yield, as it were, to the fruition of some other object. But whatever else enters the mind as an object of love, it should be carried off at once whither the impulse of entire love hurries it." Lastly, what is read in Dent. vi. 5, in other words, is compressed by S. Luke into one word (x. 27) : " Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy strength ".
22:39
Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. Christ says that these are the two great precepts of the Law. They are not distinct from the others, but a compendium of them. Of the first table, " Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart," &c. Of the second, "Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself". It will be asked how Christ says that this is the greatest of all the commandments, if they are not different commandments? It would seem to be as if He had said all the commandments are the greatest. In answer Christ meant only that all the commandments tend to the result that we should love God with our whole hearts, and our neighbours as ourselves ; as S. Paul said to the Romans : "Love is the fulfilling of the Law" (xiii. 10) ; and as Christ Himself said (verse 40) : " On these two command ments dependeth the whole Law and the Prophets ". How we are to understand the words, " Thou shalt love our neighbour," depends on two things : (i) on our knowing who is called our neighbour ; (2) the meaning of the word " as," sicut. Christ has explained who our neighbour is by an entire parable (S. Luke x. 30). He says that every man is our neighbour. The meaning of the word " as " is not so obvious. Some take it materially, as if we were ordered to wish for our neighbour all that we wish for ourselves. Others regard the quality and manner, and that we must love our neigh bour in the degree in which we love ourselves. Others regard the result, that we should love our neighbour with such effort and feeling (conatu et effectii) as those with which we love ourselves. All these meanings seem contained in the word " as ". For there can be no question but that God willed us to desire for our neighbour all that we desire for ourselves, and, for the sake of God, to love him as we love ourselves. But the question is, as S. Augustin has said, how we are commanded to wish for our neighbour what we wish for ourselves, when we often wish for evils — riches, honours, pleasures ; or how we are to love him as ourselves, when we often love ourselves wrongly or more than we ought. It is certain that we ought to wish for ourselves only what is good, and to love ourselves only propter Deum. If we do this, we cannot love ourselves otherwise than as we ought ; and we are therefore commanded to love our neighbour in the same way. It will be objected that even from the first command ment of loving God with our heart, the second of loving our neighbour will follow ; and there was no need in consequence to command us to love our neighbour as ourselves. The obvious reply is, that it is less natural to us to love our neighbour than it is to love ourselves ; that everyone loves himself most ; and that the law in question was given us for this especial reason.
22:41
And the Pharisees being gathered together. S. Mark (xii. 35) says that Christ proposed this question while He was teaching in the Temple ; but the explanation is more obvious, that the Pharisees were assembled in the Temple. SS. Mark and Luke do not say that Christ asked the Pharisees, but said to them, when He was teaching, " How do the Scribes say ? " but, as S. Augustin (De Consensu, u. 74) says, it is a matter of no moment S. Matthew has given both the question and the objection, " What think you ? " He said, " How then doth David in spirit call him Lord ? " The other two Evangelists have not given the question, but only the objection. And because they had not said that Christ asked the Scribes and Pharisees, they do not say " as you say," but " as the Scribes say ". Their saying " as the Scribes say " when it was not the Scribes, but Scripture, has been explained on chap. xvii. 10; for Scripture is said to say what is not found in it, because the interpreters of Scripture said it.
22:43
How then dotJi David in spirit. That is, when he was full of the Spirit of God, not of his own, which might be deceived and lie, but of the Spirit of God, which can do neither. It is a Hebraism, as in Ps. xxx. 23 and cxv. 2.
22:44
The Lord said to my Lord. (See Ps. cix. 6.) The objections of the Jews were chiefly two : i. That the psalm was not written by David, but either by Melchisedech, as Rabbi Abraham says in his commentaries, or by Eliezer, the servant of Abraham, or by someone who wrote psalms in the time of David, as Aben Ezra supposes. 2. The second objection is that the words are not to be understood of Christ, but either of Abraham — as is the present opinion of the Jews — or of David, as Aben Ezra and Rabbi David think ; or of Ezechia, king of the Jews, as we learn from S. Justin Martyr (In Tryph^} and Tertullian (Cent. Marcion., v.) that the Jews used to explain them after the time of Christ. This has been refuted on the Psalm cix. For if it had not been certain in the time of Christ that the Psalms were both written by David, and must be understood of Christ, it would have been obvious for the Scribes and Pharisees, who were much more learned than the Jews of later ages, to have replied to it. Now, however, the modern Jews are clearly confuted by the silence of their forefathers.
22:45
If David then call Him Lord, how is He his son ? Christ speaks from the opinion of the Pharisees, who thought that Christ would be a mere man, although Scripture declared that He would be not only man, but also God. The words of Christ, then, do not prove that He was not the son of David, but that He was more than the son of David : that is, the son of God, and true God ; and, therefore, David called Him Lord.
22:1
v. 1 etrespondens Iesus, scil. eorumtacitae cogitation! ((7#z. Fit.} dixit iterum in parabolis eis dicens :
In hac parabola Ghristus aperte docet, ludaeos, populum olim a Deo vocatum et electum, repetitis invitationibus ad ingressum in reg-num messiaimm non obedituros esse ; immo apostolis mortem esse molituros ; quare fore ut ipsi pereant et eorum urbs incendio deleatur. In eorum locum autem vocatum iri gentes easque accepturas invitationem ; sed vae ei qui invitatione accepta non integer moribus a Deo repertus fuerit. Est prophetia; quare a rationalises Christo denegatur. Haec parabola est quaedam continuatio doctrinaein antecedent! traditae. Id quod iam S. Ch?'?/s. adnotavit : praenuntiat ludaeorum eiectionem et gentium vocationem; post haec vero ostendit et vivendi disciplinam et quanta negligentibus sit poena parata. Quia enim dixit : dabitur genti facienti fructum , hie declarat , cui genti ; neque hoc tantum, sed et se rursus ineffabili erga ludaeos providentia uti ; ibi enim ante crucem vocat , hie etiam post necem instat et pergit illos vocare... Quia in antecedentibus mortem dixit, monstrat hie post mortem nuptias sponsumque fore . Quod supra dictum est lapidem quern reprobassent aedificantes factum esse lapidem angularem, hie alia imagine explicatur, in nuptiis scil. quae filio parantur ; supra significabatnr primates synagogae iri abiectum , hie declaratur cum eis et populum et civitatem iri perditum , immo etiam modus ultionis divinae incendio urbis et exercitu misso indicatur. Supra significatum est regnum messianum dandum esse gentibus; hie porro docetur non omnes qui ex gentibus vocati invitationem acceperint salvos fore; proin.de minim e sufficere, ut quis sit in regno messiano. Sive itaque ludaei, sive gentes spectantur, haec parabola praecedenti .apte subiungitur (lam.}. Ex cogitatione principum synagogae aifectantium se capere Christus occasionem arripit ulterius ostendendi quanta perversitate agant; eorum sciens Dominus voluntatem increpat saevientes (5. Chrys.}] unde
22:2
v. 2 simile factum est regnum coelorum homini regi i. e. tale quid eveniet in regno messiano conclendo ac propagando , ac si quis rex filio suo parat convivium nuptiale, qui fecit nuptias filio suo; rex est Deus Pater; sponsus est Messias, qui ut talis iam in psalmo 44 celebratur et tali appellatione a loanne baptista est salutatus(Ioan. 3,29) et qui seipsum eodem nomine designavit (vide ad 9,15). Uti in vetere foedere populus electus hand raro tamquam sponsa Domini describitur (cf. Is. 50,1. ler. 2,2. Ez. 16,8 inde idololatria nomine fornicationis appellatur), ita quoque instauratio foederis messiana eodem modo ut sacrum quoddam connubium exhibetur, cf. Os. 2,19 et sponsabo te mihi in sempiternum. Pari ratione Ecclesia dicitur sponsa Christi (cf. 2 Cor. 11,2. Eph. 5,25-27). D.eus Pater autem nuptias parat Filio; nam Pater Filio parat sponsam Ecclesiam; nemo potest venire ad me nisi Pater traxerit eum , et : manifestavi nomen tuum hominibus quos dedisti mihi cle mundo; tni erant et mihi eos dedisti; serva eos quos dedisti mihi (loan. 6,44; 17,6. 9, 11. 12. 24), uti Christus repetito affirmat suos sibi dari a Patre. Eo ipso autem quod Ecclesia seu regnum messianum constituitur, etiam hominibus ingentia beneficia a Deo praeparantur et offenmtur. Quare optime clici potesfc ratione coniunctionis Christi cum Ecclesia Deum patrem convivium nuptiale hominibus praeparasse. Ad tale itaque convivium ii primi vocantur qui iam olim erant vocati in regnum Dei veteris foederis
22:3
v. 3 et misit servos suos vocare invitatos , ludaei enim iam erant xe^V/i^e'voi, iam vocati et invitati et praeparati ad regnum messianum per prophetas (S. Chrys. Euth. Hil. Cai. Sc/ianz) et iam electione ilia in Abraham facta et foedere in Sinai concluso gens israelitica constttuebatur peculium Dei, gens sancta, regnum sacerdotale (Ex. 19,5) et eo ipso destinabatur ad regnum quod in plenitudine temporis ex vetere illo regno Dei exoriri debebat (uti symbolo montis Domini elevati Is. 2, 2 seq. declarator). Servi itaque qui mittuntur ad hos iam ab antiquo tempore vocatos et qui priores mittuntur sunt loannes baptista, sunt apostoli et discipuli Ghristi, per quos ludaei invilabantur, ut Ghristo crederent; et nolebant venire; maiorpars renuit Christofidem adhibere. Cum nollent venire , instat rex et ratione etiam efficaciore eos invitat et urget ut tandem veniant ad convivium splendide paratum
22:4
v. 4 iterutn misit olios servos dicens : dicite invitatis : ecce prandium meum paravi; tauri mei et altilia occisa sunt et omnia parata; venite ad nuptias; in priore missione eos solum vocant ad nuptias; in altera pluribus exponunt omnia esse parata, convivium grande esse instructum. Qua re significatur apostolos post Ghristi ascensionem ex Dei iussionepraedicasse iam omnia esse peracta quae ad hominum salutem essent necessaria; verus ille agnus paschalis erat immolatus, sacramenta instituta , dona Spiritus sancti large fidelibus communicabantur; apostoli praedicabant ludaeis in Palaestina et in exteris regionibus et miraculis patratis et Dei donis ac beneficiis ostensis eos urgebant , ut in regnum messianum et ad participationem tot bonorum accederent;
22:5
v. 5 illi autem neglexerunt et abierunt alms in villam suam, alius vero ad negotiationem suam; contemnunt invitationem ; abstrahuntur a cura regni Dei sollicitudine bonorum et negotiorum huius mundi; alius in proprium agrum abiit, hocest, indulsit deliciis et voluptatibus vitae, alius in negotiationem suam, hoc est, avaritiae deditus fait ; ostendit igitur parabola quod qui a spiritualibus nuptiis et convivio et Christi societate destituuntur, ob has duas potissimum causas excluduntur, vel propter corporales voluptates vel avaritiae morbum (Theoph.). Alii peiore etiam moclo se habebant
22:6
v. 6 reliqui vero fenuerunt servos eius et contumelies affectos occidentnt; quo magis rexpatiens est et benignus , eo duriores efficiimtur hi ac ferociores (Euth.}. Atque ludaei persecutiones moverunt in apostolos; caesis denuntiaverunt ne omnino loquerentur in nomine Iesu; at apostoli ibant gaiidentes a conspectu concilii , quoniain digni habiti sunt pro nomine Iesu contumeliam pati (Act. 5,40. 41); occiderunt Stephanum, Quare cum ita rependerent regis benignitatem, merito exstincti sunt
22:7
v. 7 rex autem cum audisset, iratus est et missis exercitibus suis perdidit homicidas illos et civitatem illorum succendit; in aperto est praedici excidium nationi et urbi ludaeorum per Romanos, per Vespasianum et Titum, illatum (cf. Orig. Ghrys. Hier. op. imp. Br. etc.). Gum Romani ultionem divinain in ludaeos exsecuti sint , dicuntur exercitus Dei regis, uti v. g. Medi appellantur sanctificati mei a Domino (Is. 13, 3) et Nabuchodonosor dicitur servitute magna Domino serviisse adversus Tyrum (Ez. 29,18). Multis quoque manifestum est in ilia ruina illoque incehdio cerni vindictam divinam et ipse Titus rem et eventum ilium ad numen divinum retulisse dicitur. Contumaciae ludaeorum statim adhmgitur poena divinitus inflicta, ut causa et effectus iuxta se ponantur. Sequitur vocatio gentium , quamvis gentes iam ante eversionem urbis et reipublicae ad regnum messianum efficaciter vocatae sint. Verum in involucro parabolico rem ita describi posse et apte describi patet, quia etiam in sermon e prophetico singula proponunturnon secundum seriem temporis, sed secundum internam quandam rerum cognationem. Praeterea ea collocatione exsistitordo concinnus parabolae. In priore enim parte continetur invitatio ludaeis facta, eorum pervicacia et quae inde sequitur castigatio; in altera vocatio gentium quae fit propter illorum perversitatem et nequitiam et quae re ipsa citius facta est illis renuentibus; cf. Act. 13,46. Rom. 11,11.15. Servos qui priores missi sunt v. 3 multi intelligunt Moysen et prophetas; ita Orig. Theoph. Hier. op. imp. Br. Pasch. Alb. Thorn. Dion. Fab. Maid. Lap. Calm. Grimm, Fit.; at non ita posse concipi ex eo colligitur quia rex dicitur iam fecisse nuptias filio suo et servi invitant ad .nuptias. Iam nuptiae hae filii non possunt aliter intelligi nisi de Christo sponsam suam Ecclesiam sibi iungente et despondente. Secundum loquendi modum multorum Verbum Dei nuptias celebravit cum humana natura in Incarnatione , uti. etiam S. Gregorius loquitur (horn, in ev. 38,3) : tune Deus Pater Filio suo nuptias fecit, quando hunc in utero Virginis humanae naturae coniunxit . Sed ad has nuptias homines non sunt invitati. Proinde intelligendae sunt nuptiae illae quibus Christus, Ecclesiam sponsam sibi coniungit; aliis verbis si in parabola invitantur ad nuptias, significatio est homines vocari ut sese Christo adiungant, ut in Ecclesiam Christ! intrent. Ex eo quod Incarnatio et institutio Ecclesiae ab aeterno sit a Deo ordinata et de T slinata, non sequitur dici posse Deum fecisse nuptias Filio suo ante In carnation em ; nam quamvis apostoli in praescientia etiam ab aeterno electi sint , tamen nemo dixerit iam tempore veteris foe'deris Christo Petrum et loannem a Deo Patre datos esse apostolos. Quare etsi prophetae annuntiaverint Messiam eiusque regnum, tamen dicinequeunt invitasse et voeasse homines ad nuptias quas Pater Filio suo fecerit. Unde cum S. Chrys. Theod. her. Euth. Hil. Cai. Salmeron, fans. Lamy, Schegg, Schanz servi illi intelligendi sunt qui Christo iam in terris degente et regnum suum instituente ad hoc regnum vocaverint. Neque obstat quod Sylv. obiicit, in v. 4 dici olios servos esse missos. Hos utique esse apostolos omnes fatentur ; sed ex eo non sequitur prio- ) res servos debere esse prophetas veteres. Nam in parabola proponitur saepius illos invitatos esse vocatos ad nuptias ; dein post adventum , Spiritus sancti re ipsa etiam alii vocabant ludaeos, uti varii qui nomine evangelistarum designantur (Act. 21,8. Eph. 4,11),, S. Paulus .et qui cum eo laborabant etc. Proinde etsi vocem urgere volueris, revera alii quoque missi sunt. QuodS. Paulus dicit ludaeis : vobis oportebat primum loqui verbum Dei, sed quoniam repellitis illud etindignos vos iudicatis aeternae vitae, ecce convertimur ad gentes (Act. 13,46), idem Christus praeformavit in parabola
22:8
v. 8 tune ait servis sttis : nuptiae quidem paratae sunt, sed qui invitati erant, non fuerunt digni; iudicio divino declaratur maiorem partetn ludaeorum iam se reddidisse indignam quam Deus efficaci sua gratia vocaret. Quomodo id factum sit; iam loannes baptista indicat eos reprehendens de vanitate ilia qua dicunt : filii Abraham sumus, id non uno loco Christus innuit propter mala eouum opera, id S. Paulus docet Rom. 10,3, id declaratur ex exspectatione regni messiani cum pompa et fastu et dominatione in gentes ;
22:9
v. 9 ite ergo ad exitus viarum i.e. ad ea loca in urbibus, ubi complures viae conveniunt eaque de causa multi confluere solent et quoscumque inv&- neritis vacate ad nuptias; ergo omnes sunt vocandi;
22:10
v. 10 et egressi serm ems in vias, congregaverunt omnes , malos et bonos i. e. nullo discrimine facto : id unum spectabant , utrum invitationem acciperent necne. Bonos inter gentiles eos saepe intelligunt qui ea quae legis sunt naturaliter faciunt (Rom. 2,14), qui itaque anteqnam praedicationem evangelicam audiunt vitam degebant satis honestam et ab hominibus inter viros probos numerabantur. Geterum cum mali et boni dicantur accipere invitationem , sequitur Deum gratia sua in gremium Ecclesiae ad praedicationem apostolicam vocare quos voluerit etiam tales qui antea male vixerint. Ita studio servorum impletae sunt nuptiae discumbentium i. e., ut lans. monet, discumbentibns; nam genetivus ille coniungendus est cum impletae sunt. Declaratur itaque nuptiale illud convivium habiturum plenum suum numerum, nee quidquam eius plenitudini ac celebritati defuturum eo quod primi illi venire noluerunt. Praeformatur etiam hac parabola quod S. Paulus dicit delictum ludaeorum divitias esse mundi, esse salutem gentium et divitias (Rom. 11,11. 12). Serio autem monet Christus non satis esse intrasse in Ecclesiam
22:11
v. 11 intravit autem rex ut videret discumbentes et vidit ibi hominem non vestitum veste nuptialii. e. veste quae talem deceat sollemnifcatem. Merito enim exigitur, ut quisquis invitationem ad convivium nuptiale acceperit, non vili habitu et quotidiano se ad festivitatem conferat, sed optimo quo uti possit vestimento indutus appareat et ipso habitu ostendat quanto in honore habeat talem invitationem; et certe si quis ad nuptias esset invitatus, vestem mutaret, congaudere se sponso etsponsae ex ipso sui habitus decore ostenderet, inter gaudentes et festa celebrantes despectis vestibus apparere erubesceret (S. Greg. horn. 38,9). In tanta multitudine unum ilium rex detegit ; accurate igitur in con vivas inquirit ; ne unus quidem ille latere potest. Districto itaque iudicio singuli erunt examinandi;
22:12
v. 12 et ait illi : amice, quomodo hue intrasti npn habens vesfem nuptialem? de appellatione amici vide 20,13 ; monet Cai. notandum esse quod non contumeliose increpat; non dicit : indigne, praesumptuose ; non quomodo ausus es, sed quomodo intrasti , proponendo factum simplex, ut ipse se ipsum damnet, ad erudiendum nos , ut etiam in notorio facto non iudicemus inauditum et exarninemus absque contumelia, -absque convicio, cum dilectione hominum et odio vitiorum . Ut parabolam explicent, aliqui dicunt morem fuisse ut invitatis ab ipso rege vestes darentur pretiosae, quibus digne coram rege apparerent (cf. Am. Reischl, Fil. Fonck}. Eum morem in aula regum Persarum luxu et voluptate diffluentium exstitisse , utique verum est ; at apud Hebraeos tale quid unquam usitatum fuisse nulluin reperitur vestigium. Neque id ex eo deduci potest quod saepius inter munera quae donantur vestes recenseantur (Gen. 45,22. lud. 14,12. 4 Reg. 5,22) neque exlocis quos affert Wetstein de coenatoriis apud Romanes, uti per se liquet, neque ex consuetudine quam commemorat Eustathius (ad Odyss. VI, 28) e'Oo? viv TOC? vu^cpa? TOK TOU vufjwptou scO-flTa? ev T(ji TOU y<f/.ou >wupw ^apt^ecOai. Praeterea in parabola talis donationis non fit mentio , quamvis ea. multum conferret et ad iram regis declarandam ^et ad culpam hominis exaggerandam qui quod liberaliter illi donatum fuerit ne accipere quidem voluerit ideoque in veste sordida apparens maximam contumeliam regi intulerit. Insuper si servi iussi . fuissent unicuique convivae praebere vestem nuptialem , eo ipsi iussi fuissent non permittere ut quis sine ea admitteretur; ergo iam non explicaretur in parabola, quomodo ille potuisset intrare. Quare vestem nuptialem in parabola explica de veste decenti; supponitur itaque eos qui invitationem acceperint, ad eiusmodi festivitatem meliores induisse vestes et ornatu decent! se ad regis palatium contulisse. Id etiam ipsi application! et doctrinae melius convenire videtur. Significatur enim non sufficere venire ad nuptias, invitationem accipere, i. e. evangelicae annuntiationi credere, verum hominem adultum (de quibus hie solum sermo est) clebere etiam praeterea aliud ex sua parte praestare , debere curare , ut decenti ornatu intersit convivio nuptiali, ut decenti ornatu vitam degat in Ecclesia. Eiusmodi ornatus autem quern quisque gerere debet ne in districto iudicio a regno excludatur, est gratia sanctificans quam in baptismo acceptam sedula virtutum exercitatione conservare , vel si peccato perdita fuerit, vera poenitentia recuperare oportet. Bene dicit S. Greg. : quid exprimi per nuptialem vestem putamus? si enim vestem nuptialem baptisma vel fidem dicimus, quis sine baptismate et fide has nuptias intravit? eo enim ipso foris est quo necdum credidit. Quid ergo debemus intelligere nuptialem vestem, nisi caritatem? iptrat enim ad nuptias, sed cum nuptiali veste non intrat, qui in sancta Ecclesia assistens fidem habet , sed caritatem non habet . Hanc vestem nuptialem describit apostolus dicens : induite novum hominem qui secundum Deum creatus est in iustitia et sanctitate (Eph. 4,24. Col. 3,10-12. Gal. 3,27 : Christum induistis ; cf. op. imp. Br. Aid.), hanc, cum laudes et praeconia caritatis recitat 1 Cor. 13,1 seq. (S. Aug. serm. 90,6). Quare recte quoque earn vestem esse dicunt virtutes (Orig. Hier.}, esse vitam et opera (S. Ghrys.}, vitam puram, in modum vestis virtutibus contextam (Euth. Theoph.}, esse Christum (S. Thorn.} quern soil, homo baptismo induit, ut apostolus loquitur, et cum in animis iustorum etiam habeatur inhabitatio Spiritus sancti, merito quoque exisfcimat S. Hit. vestem illam esse gloriam Spiritus sancti. Veteres protestantes et aliqui etiam recentiores vestem nuptialem rectam fidem intelligi volunt; sed earn explicationem ineptam esse, iam S. Greg. aeque bene ac breviter ostendit et merito dicit Maid, veram et propriam esse veterum sententiam, vestem nuptialem caritatem, bona opera et vitam fidei christianae respondentem significare ; nam ut qui ad nuptias invitati sunt, vestem illo loc'o dignam gestare debent, ita qui ad Ecclesiam per. fidem invitati veniunt , vitam agere debent fide dignam et videmus in Scripturis bonam vitam per vestem significari Apoc. 3,17. 18. Eph. 4,24. Col. 3,9. 10 . AtqueJfaws. : omnes enim Patres intelligunt hac parte parabolae admoneri fideles, ne satis sibi esse putent quod credant et baptismate abluti sint atque intra Ecclesiam recepti eisdem participent sacramentis eodemque nutriantur doctrinae pabulo, sed opus esse ut vivant vitam sua vocatione dignam, et ut Paulus habet, ambulent digne vocatione qua vocati sunt . Ceterum res estnimis clara; quare etiam protestantes requirunt et veste nuptiali designari dicuntmorum 8iy.ato<rjvY)v ( Weiss) , regenerationem internam per Spiritum (Mansel), caritatem cum fructibus suis (Holtzm.). Verum ille quo se valeat defendere minime habet; at ille obmutuit, quia quod dici sine gemitu non potest, in ilia districtione ultimae increpationis omne argumentum cessat excusationis (S. Greg.). Quamvis res sit manifesta et culpa hominis aperta, tamen, ut S. Chrys.- adnotat, Deus non prius supplicia infert quam ipse peccator sententiam tulerit ; quia enim nihil respondere poterat , semetipsum damnabat;
22:13
v. 13 tune dixit rex ministris : ligatis manibus et pedibus ems mittite eum in tenebras exteriores; ibi eril fletus et stridor dentium; vide supra 8,12 et 13,42. Quod in parabola zizaniorum et sagenae missae in mare (13,25. 47) exprimitur fore in Ecclesia malos homines bonis intermixtos usque ad consummationem saeculi et ultimum iudicium, idem etiam hac parabola significatur. Manns et pedes ligantur; qua re declaratur eum nequaquam ex loco supplicii posse effugere ; qui nunc sponte ligantur in vitio , tune in supplicio ligantur invite (S. Greg. horn. 38,13), neque ulla ratione illud imminuere aut evitare poterunt. Ergo vinculis illis idem significatur quod in parabola alia eo declaratur quod ei qui in flamma hac eruciatur ne gutta quidem aquae concedatur ad linguam refrigerandam (Luc. 16,24), ne minimum quidem levamen et solamen in supplicio illo reperiri posse. Tenebris quoque summa miseria ac desperatio significatur. Goncluditur parabola v. 14 multienim suntvocati,paucivero electi; ex parabola quae contra ludaeos erat.proposita, videri poterat ac si nemo ludaeorum qui vocati erant venturus esset ad convivium nuptiale (v. 2-8); quare Christus subiungit paucos ita vocatum iri, ut simul eligantur, ut revera veniant. Ita quoque superbia pharisaeorum retunditur, qui se aliosque nation e ludaeos tamquam filios Abraham debere assumi in regnum messianum arbitrabantur. Simul indicatur esse gratiae Dei ut qui vocentur re ipsa veniant. Demum quod prophetae iam praedixerunt solum reliquias ex Israel salvatum iri (Is. 10, 21. Am. 3,12), et quod apostolus re ipsa esse factum attestatur (Rom. 11,5), Christus hoc loco praedicit : tantnm abest ut populns integer vocatus Messiae obediat, ut tantum pauci ex tanta multitudine ad nuptias illas perveniant. Sensum bene declarat Orig. : et ut multos vocatos esse , non omnes autem sed paucos ex ipsis venisse doceat , toti demumparabolaeidsubiungitur et Theoph. : ostendit igitur quod propter ludaeos dicta sit parabola, qui vocati quidem fuere, non autem electi eo quod non audierunt . Vocati itaque ii sunt ad quos invitandos servi iterum iterumque mittuntur; electi autem qui invitationi obsequuntur et gratia Dei tracti et adiuti revera Ecclesiae nomen dant, fidem suscipiunt. Hos qui fidem susceperunt, etiam S. Paulus non uno loco electos appellat (Rom. .11,5. 7. 1 Cor. 1,27. Eph. 1,4. 1 Thess. 1,4. 2Thess. 2,12; cf. lac. 2,5. 1 Petr. i,l; 2,9. 2 Petr. 1,10). Verba' haec itaque pertinent ad id quod in parabola potissimum spectatur, ludaeos vocari quidem, at maximam partem non sequi; eos itaque a Deo non eligi, sed reiici; illis autem praeferri gentiles. Sunt quidem qui verba haec ad ultimam partem parabolae referant explicantes etiam ex iis qui nuptiis intersint paucos ad beatitudinem coelesteni esse perventuros. Ita saepius concipit S. Aug. (germ. 90 et 95) qui in illo uno qui eiectus sit multos intelligendos esse ait et solum paucos esse qui discumbentes remansissent , ideoque addi : multi simt vocati etc.; similiter sententiam hanc referunt ad eos qui iam sint in Ecclesia S. Greg. Rab. Alb. Calm. Am.; quae tamen acceptio omnino erronea videtur. Gum enim iinus eiiciatur ex magna discumbentium multitudine (v. 10 impletae sunt nuptiae discumbentium), sane in parabola nullo pacto designatur ex discumbentibus iterum longe maiorem partem esse eiiciendam et solum paucos ab Ecclesia hisce in terris versante migraturos esse in Ecclesiam triumphantem. Proinde nisi rem parabolae plane in contrarium vertere velimus , verba ilia de paucis electis non possunt ita concipi ut ex iis ipsis qui iam vocati nuptiis^intersint magno numero , solum pauci eligantur ad nuptias in coelo celebrandas, verum ut maiorpars eiiciatur in tenebras exteriores. Sed, ut dictum est, vocati ii debent esse qui a servis invitantur, elect! autem qui revera invitationi obsequuntur. Utique in illo uno graviter monemur non satis esse intrasse Ecclesiam; at quot ex ipsa Ecclesia terrestri non admittendi sint in coelestem , de hac re hie nihil statuitur. Neque aliunde ostendi potest in illo uno debere maiorem partem declarari, quamvis Maid, quoque fidenter affirmet maiorem partem eorum qui Ecclesiam ingrediantur esse condemnandam. sint ad nuptiale convivium, sive ludaei sint sive gentiles, non debere sibi confidere, propterea quod in convivium ingressi essent; posse enim eiici, si' vestem nuptialem non habuerint. Quod ut unumquemque moneret, satis fuit inducere regem qui investigaret in discunibentes et unum ilium veste nuptiali non indutum ad supplicium eiiceret (cf. Maid. Lap. Sylv. Schegg}.
22:15
v. 15 tune abeuntes pharisaei consilium inierunt, consultarunt, inter se deliberarunt , ut caperent eum in sermone , ut illaquearent eum , ut eum ope sententiae vel doctrinae quasi quodam laqueo irpetirent; Xoyo? non potest intelligi de quaestione, ut aliqui volunt, sed de responsione, de sententia, quam ex eo elicere volunt. Hac enim, non autem ipsa interrogatione , poterat capi. Statuunt itaque tentare ut aliquid ex eo eliciant cuius obtentu accusari posset (Lamy}. Quern in fin em
Captiosa interrogatione pharisaei Iesum illaqueare student , ut eum vel tamquam seditiosum praesidi romano denuntient vel ut pseudoprophetam apud populum traducant. Iesus autem eorum vafritiem.. sapientissime eludit et confundit. ludaei domination! Romanorum inviti se subiiciebant. Suam populi Dei dignitatem maxime extollebant ; semen Abrahae sumns et nemini servivimus unquam, Gliristo superbe respondebant (loan. 8,33). Qui studium et aemulationem legis praetendebant, iis plane indigmimet contra legem esse videbatuy alienigenae tributum solvere. Nam lahve erat rex populi neque secundum legem alius rex erat constituendus nisi quern Dominus Deus elegerit de numero fratrum tuorum (Deut. 17,15) et explicite additur : non poteris alterius gentis hominem regem facere qui non sit f rater tuus. Hoc itaque obtentu species pie- tatis conciliari potuit studio illi iugum Romanorumexcutiendi. Neque enim considerabant tempora esse mutata ; insuper in poenam gentem iudaicam iam saepius alienigenis esse a Deo subiectam et tempore Teremiae Detim iterum iterumque iussisse colla subdere iugo Chaldaeorum.' Illud religionis studiura prae se ferens ludas gaulanites populum ad seditionem concitaverat (Act. 5,37) cohortans ne censui sese subiicerent sed libertatem sibi vindicarent ; quod si facerent, habituros gloriam et 'laudem ex animi magnitudine et Deum ipsisprompto anxilio adfuturum (cf. losephus, Antiq. .18,1. 1). Hoc itaque ludae dogma Caesari nequaquam solvendum esse tributum, quod ad illur strandam hanc narrationem in medium afferunt iam Orig. S.Chrys. Theoph. Pasch. lans. Maid. Lap., turn temporis animos multorumoccupabat et habebat , ut S. Hier. dicit (ad Tit. 3,1 ; M. 26,590), plurimos sectatores. Quaestio haec eo magis erat captiosa et insidiosa et responsio lubricitate plena , quia aeque periculosum erat illam negare et affirma.re. Si negaretur tt'ibutum esse pendendum, posset facillime accusatio deferri ad praesidem Iesum praedicare rebellionem et defectionem a Caesare ; si affirmaretur, posset aeque facile ei magna creari apudpopulum invidia, utpote qui suaderet servire alienigenis et gentibus subiiceret populum Dei electum et qui contra legem alienigenam regem esse constituendum doceret et iam idcirco pseudopropheta esset habendus. Dubium non est quin pharisaei exspectarent Iesum esse negaturum ; sed pro eorum malitia et vafritie cum plerisque assumendum erit eos alterum quoque speciasse, uteum apudplebem auctoritate privarent si affirmaret (cf. Orig. S. Chrys. Euth. Thorn. Cai. lans. Maid. Am. Fil. Welstein, Weiss, Ed. II p. 385). Parabolas iilasintellexerunt pharisaei dici contra se et populum. Inde odium eorum quam maxime inflammatum est. Quare inter se deliberant quomodo moles turn ilium monitorem perdere possent ; omnis quidem malitia confunditur aliquoties ratione veritatis, corrigitur autem nunquam, maxime eorum qui proposito malo et non ignorantia peccant; eorum malignitas ex una parte confnsa aliunde sibi aditum adinvenit; animus enim malus quanto magis veritatem audierit, eo amplius in malitiam excitatur (op. imp.}\
22:16
v. 16 mittunt ei discipulos suos cum Herodianis; subornapt discipulos quasi minus suspectos (op. imp. Pasch. Cai.}; sciebant enim se iam satis superque esse suspectos , discipulos autem si discendi cupidi accedere se simularent, ut a tarn sancto et celebri magistro quaestio summi moment! solveretur, sperabant veteratores illi facilius posse Christum inducere, utsententiam suamin alterutram partem aperiret et ita in.insidias incideret. De Herodianis parum constat. Eos a partibus stetisse Romanorum aliqui censent, praesertim veteres (cf. Orig. Chrys. Maid.}, sed etiam Fil.;. alii probabilius censent eos minime favisse Romanis, sicut Herodes inimicitias gerebat cum Pilato , verum id appetiisse , ut tota regio palaestinensis et natio iudaica sceptro Herodis committeretur (cf. Lamy , Schegg , Schanz, Keil). Uti nomen ipsiim dicit, erant asseclae et fautores familiae herodianae, qui itaque hanc familiam alienigenam et moribus gentilium satis imbutam populo iudaico dominari volebant et idcirco dici possunt inimici Romanorum; quamvis ex altera parte, cum penes Ro~ manos esset, utrum Herodes Antipas regnum Herodis magni acciperet neche, certe etiam parati essent Romanis adulari, si adulatione et simulata subiectione ad id quod desiderabant pervenire possent. Pharisaeis autem tamquam aemulatoribns legis etiam dominatio Herodis in populum Dei erat abominationi. Unde facile concipitur pharisaeos minime favisse Herodianis , verum inter utrosqtie exstitisse simultates. Sed quo certius Christum perderent, non verentur cum adversariis legis et theocratiae foedus inire. Nam cum Christus ultimo tern pore saepius versatus esset in ditione Herodis, ad quam eum rediturum esse coniiciebant, multumintererat, ut sua responsione etiam Herodis iram incurreret. Si autem Romanis ut alienigenis 'negandum diceret tributnm, etiam Herodi non esse obediendum facile potuit inferri; si Romanis tributum affirmaret, iam se declararet inimicum dominationis Herodis. Ita Christo sperabant posse accusationem intendi et apud praesidem et apud Herodem vel saltern apud plebera. Discipuli autem captationem benevolentiae praemittunt qua simul sincerum studium ac desiderinm discendi verum a tanto magistro simulant : magister, scimus quia verax es, et mam Dei in veritate doces, viam quam Deus praescribit, mandata Dei (Alb.}, rationem vitae ex Dei voluntate instituendae vere ac sincere doces , et non est tibi.cura de aliquo, nullius timore vel auctpritatetu moveris, utpropterea veritatem vel dissimules vel abscpndas; non enim respicis personamhominis; respicere personam est considerare externam aliquam hominum conditionem, potentiam, dignitatem, familiaritatem etc. et tali consideratione , non autem secundum causae meritum et veritatem rei , agere , iudicare. Tali itaque laude eumincitant ne Caesarem vereatur, ne eius timore omittat ad interrogata respondere (Orig. Chrys. Theoph. Euth.}\ ea adulatione eum provocant ut aperte enuntiet id quod legis Dei studiosi non decere arbitrabantur, verum quod plerique publice fateri non audebant ; ei itaque dicunt : tu non es ut alii, qui timore hominum dissimulant et celant veritatem. Tali enim encomio homines circumveniri solent , ut aperte dicant quod sentiunt. Interpretes merito in istosinsidiatoresinvehuntur; nunc honoratis et doctorem putatis , qui ilium , cum de salute vestra dissereret , contempsistis saepe et contumelia affecistis (S. Chrys.}. Cum alias Ghristo minime crediderint et nunc eiinsidias struant et ea laude eum ad sententiain pertrahere cupiant qua sibi perniciem creet , merito eorum sermonem dicit Euth. impudentem. adulationem, S. Hier. blandam et fraudulentam interrogationem , et S. Br. ex veiienoso fonte dulcia verba prorumpere et Cat. laudem hanc ex adulatoria officina proficisci ad Iesum provocandum , ne timeat praeferre Deum Gaesari. Blandiuntur autem, ut Alb. rem rimatur satis subtiliter, a quattuor : ab auctoritate magisterii , .a veritate serin onis, a veritate docfcrinae , a veritate iudicii sine -personarum acceptione ; vel commendant eum ab amore veritatis , ab odio falsitatis , ab amore veritatis in sensu et doctrina; blandiuntur, ut laude delectatus mysterium cordis aperiat. Hoc prooemio iam satis indicatur qualem responsionem elicere cupiant quaerentes
22:17
v. 17 die ergo nobis quid tibi videtur : licet censum dare Caesari? an non? sperant enim eum responsurum contra Caesarem (cf. S. Hil. Hier. Theoph. Euth. Pasch. Br. lans. Lamy] et ita fore occasionem eum perdendi ; quia igitur videbant ludam l hac de causa ante periisse, utqui rebellionem meditaretur, cupiebant ipsum quoque circa res easdem suspicioni obnoxium reddere (,5. Chrys.}. Pharisaei pro sua superbia et elatione rem plane indignam esse iudicabant tributum solvere extraneis et ludam ilium et qui ex eo tempore eius vestigiis insistebant aemulatores legis maximi aestimabant; at quae erat hominum malitia et odium in Iesum implacabile , Iesum propter eandem sententiam quam in aliis laudabant et quam ipsi amplectebantur secreto perdere desiderabant. Census x,"?ivcroc proprie est apud Romanos descriptio et aestimatio bonorum ac facultatum, secundum quamtributa erant solvenda; sed apud scriptores novi testamenti (et etiam in cod. lust. 4,47) etiam ea voce designatur tributum imperatum. Nihil interest intelligaturne hoc loco solum tributum in capita singulorum impositum an etiam tributum ex agris opibusque imperatum. Gum prius semper solvendum esset pecunia , alterum pecunia et frugibus , et cum a priore nemo , ne servi quidem , immunes essent , prius intelligere satius erit. Notat -S. Hier. omnes reges romanos a primo Caio Caesare qui imperium arripuisset Caesares appellatos esse. Sed quia nequitia eorum perfecta et manifesta erat, acriuspungit illos primo confundens illorumque ora obstruens eo quod secreta eorum in medium adducebat et palam omnibus reddebat quo ad se animo accessissent (S. Chrys.}
22:18
v. 18 cognita autem Iesus nequitia eorum ait : quid me tentatis , hypocritae? statim probat se perspicere insidias eorum et simulationem pessimam qua fingunt se accessisse discendi desiderio et animis optime in Iesum affectis ; simulantes quidem interrogare ut quodiustum sit cognoscatis, foveam autem fodien.tes per interrogationem in quam me praecipitetis (Euth.). Nam hypocrita est, ut S. Hier. dicit, qui aliud est et aliud simulat, aliud opere agit et aliud voce praetendit. Respondit illis Christus secundum eorum conscientiam ; vide , quod pharisaei quidem blandiebantur ut perderent, Iesus vero confundebat ut salvaret (op. imp.}. Ostendit itaque iis Dominus illorum hypocrisin quam adeo studiose texerint sibi minime esse incognitam nee se falsa posse capi laude. Quamquam hac ratione potuisset merito declinare responsionem , tamen ne videretur quaerere occasionem declinandi responsionem et ut ostenderet se eorum captiosa quaestione capi non posse, sed e contra ut eos caperet propriis ipsorum verbis (lans.}, dixit ad eos
22:19
v. 19 ostendite mihi numisma census; sapientia semper sapienter agit ut suis potissimum tentatores sermonibus confutentur (S. Hier.}; at illi obtulerunt ei denarium; est numus eiusdem valoris cum drachma attica, numus decem asses aequans; vide ad 18,28. Quos interrogat
22:20
v. 20 cunts est imago haec et superscriptio? apposite mpnet S. Hier. : qui putant interrogationem Salvatoris ignorantiam esse et non dispensationem, discant ex praesenti loco quod utique potuerit scire Iesus cuius imago esset in numo; sed interrogat, ut ad sermonem eorum competenter respondeat ;
22:21
v. 21 dicunt ei : Caesaris; sua se responsione illaqueant. Nam eo ipso quod numus romanus apud ipsos in usu erat ostendebant se esse Caesari subiectos et proinde illi debere tributum solvi (Cai. lans. Lap.}. Rem quippe numariam constituere eius semper erat et ab omnibus habebatur qui dominationem exercebat et eo quod ludaei numos romanos accipiebant iisque utebantuf, re ipsa imperium romanum agnoscebant. Quotiescumque enim ludaei libertatem affectabant eamque asserere conabanlur contra alios, etiam immos cudebant (cf. 1 Mach. 15,6; hoc ius eis conceditur in testiraonium autonomiae) ; idem attentabat Barkochba (cf. Wttnsche p. 256) et rabbinorum determinate erat quod Maimonides dicit : ubicumque numisma regis alicuius obtinet, illic incolae regem istum pro domino agnoscunt (Lightfoot, Wetstem 1 ' adh. 1.). Cum itaque re ipsa Caesarem agnoscant et habeant dominum , tune, ait illis : reddite ergo aTro^o-jvai solet dici de iis quae quis iure solvere debet ~ (cf. 20,8 ; 21,41. Luc. 7,42. Rom. 13,7 etc.) quae sunt Caesaris Caesdri et quae sunt Dei Deo; o plenam miraculi responsionem et perfectam dicti coelestis absolutionem (S. Hil.). Ergo dicit ea quae Caesar iure poscit et imponit ei esse pendenda; quaenam sint ilia, vel sintne omnia tributa quae imponantur iuste imposita, sapienter non indicat. Documentum tradit quod impugnare nemo potest : ea esse solvenda quae revera debeantur et quae quis iuste exigere possit atque exigat. Simul alterum addit de Deo quo cavet ne violatae vel .neglectae religionis insimulari possit et docet subiectionem illam qua Caesari obstringuntur nullatenus esse impedimento ., quominus omnia Deo praestent quae debeant. Admodum opportune hoc addit, ut omnis occasio calumniandi iis praecidatur atque ex eo quod hoc adeo graviter monet, praeter alia concludendum erit illis revera propositum fuisse , ut si Christus censum dari iuberet , eum spretae legis ac 'religionis apud plebem accusarent. Hac. sententia Christus simul enuntiat Deo esse magis obediendum quam hominibus. Nam quotiesicumque quidquam exigitur quod sit contra pietatem vel contra mandata Dei, id iniuste exigitur; id itaque iam non pertinet ad ea quae sunt Caesaris , uti praeclare monet S. Chrys. : tu vero cum audis : redde T TOU xaurapos xaicapi , de iis id solum intellige quae nihil pietatem laedunt; iq[uippe si laedunt, iam non Caesaris, sed diaboli vectigal et tributum sunt . Notant Lap. Sylv. Christum etiam noluisse disputare an ludaei iuste sint ;Romanis subditi factique vectigales et tributarii, an vero iniuste ac tyrannice. Ab hac quaestione abstinet Dominus (quam aliqui adductis in utramque partem rationibus discutiunt) et solum id quod revera obtinet suppo- 1. Et earn nolionem animis insedisse etiam concludi potest ex eo quod ulerque affert ex Sanhedrin, tract, lalm. : dixit Abigail Davidi : quidnam ego mail feci vel lilii mei vel pecorarnea? respondit ille : maritus tuns regnum Davidis vilipendit. Tune ergo, inquit ilia, rex es? cui ille : nonne Samuel me unxit in regem? cui ilia : numisma domini nostri Saulis adhuc obtinet. Quo dicere vult : nonne Saul eliamnum reipsa rex est, cum eius numisma vulgo apud omnes in usu sit? 2. Euth. : ideo non dixit core, a),).' auoSoTe, d>; exetvou ovra. nit : ostenso numo se profitentur subditos et se habere eum in principem qui ius exerceat cudendi numos; quare in universum statuit ea esse solvenda quae debeantur. Nonne Ghristus ea responsione et iis quae non tangit etiam docere videtur, ne ministri sacri nimium sese misceant rebus profanis' et quae ad eorum officium et conditionem non pertineant? Haud ineleganter monent anirnam hominis prae se ferre imaginem et s^ perscriptionem Dei, indeque omnia hominis in D.eum enasci oflicia. Quae sententia d.eprompta est ex Tertulliano, de idololatria cap. 15 : reddite imaginem Gaesaris Caesari, quae est in numo , et imaginem Dei Deo quae in homine est, ut Gaesari quidena pecuniam reddas, Deo temetipsum . Responsione m sapientissimam qua insicliae adeo callide structae plane elusae sint ipsi insidiatores non possunt non admirari
22:22
v. 22 et audientes miratisunt et relic to eo abierunt; qui credere debtierunt ad tantam sapientiam mirati suni quod calliditas eorum insidiandi non invenisset locum et abierunt infidelitatem cum miraculo pariter reportantes (5. Hier. Pasch.), et qui ad hoc venerant ut Christum caperent seipsos in suis sermonibus captos esse cognoscunt (S. Br.}. ft) Sadducaei quaerunt de resurrectione 22,^3-33. Sadducaei quaestione de resurrections Iesum aggredi et confundere tentant. Yerum Ghristus eos palam convincit quippe qui et Scripturas et Dei potentiam ignorent. Opinatur Fab. sadducaeos eiusmodi casu proposito pharisaeos expugiiasse et eorum de resurrectione doctrinam irrisioni tradidisse neque pharisaeos validas habuisse responsiones ; unde astu pharisaeorum submissos esse sadducaeos, ut Dominum eadem quaestione caperent ant certe (quod ipsis evenisset) silendi necessitatem ei iniicerent. De saddjicaeis vide quae dixi ad 3,7. Uno illo die Dominus impugnatur acriter. Eum impetunt synedristae 21,23; pharisaei sues subornant discipulos 22,16; dein
22:23
v. 23 in illo die accessentnt ad eum sadducaei qui dicunt non esse resurrectionem; secundum lectionem ta'yovTe? sine articulo explica : dicentes, accedunt ad Iesum et statim . coram ipso et turba circumf usa negant resurrectionem , quam soil, ut absurdam esse ostendant casum ilium de septem fratribus fingunt. Gum Matthaeus ludaeis scribens omnino supponere possit ac debeat sadducaeorum opinionem passim esse notam, non erat cur scriberet simili modo quo Marc. 12,19 (omve? 'Xe- Youffiv) et Luc. 20,27 01 ^eyovrs?. Sadducaei teste quoque losepho (Antiq. 18,1. 4) animas simul cum corpore interire docebant et animas permanere et supplicia apud inferos et praemia negabant (de belto iud. 2,8. 14); ceterum vide Act. 23,8. Ex lege leviratus Deut. 25,5 suam depromunt obiectionem : magister, fortasse ironice eum ita salutant quenl sperant fore ut haereat ; Moyses dixit : si quis mortuus fuerit non habens filitim Te'y.va (Deut. 25,5 : et filius ]2 non est ei r LXX <7TC6p(/.a ? quod recte dicitur, nam si filiam reliquerit, lex leviratus non obtinuit; cf. Num. 27,1 seq.), ut ducat frater eius uxorem illius, swtYa^peucrst , qua voce felici imitatione exprimitur hebr. D3^ (levirum egit, eius officio functus est i. e. fratris mortui uxorem duxit; cf. D3^ levir, yap.6po'<;). Praescriptio mosaica ad sensum fideliter refertur ; additur etiam quo quid lex sibi velit indicatur, et suscitet semen fratrisuo, id quod ex Gen. 38,8 ubi prima vice mentio fit eius consuetudinis depromptum est. Filius enim ex hoc matrimonio ortus censebatur illius qui sine prole defunctus erat; fuit quippe legis ratio, ne nomen illius deleretur de populo, fuit, ut Alb. dicit, memoria patrum quam in filiis remanere voluit Dominus et disfcinctio hereditatum. Ex hac itaque lege narrationem quandam confingunt et rem nunquam, ut puto, gestam comminiscuntur sperantes se ilium in angustias coniecturos esse volebantque confutare resurrectionem esse (5. Chrys.};
22:25
v. 25 erant autem apud nos septem fratres etc. septem eos supponunt, utmagis intricatum videatur problema (Euth.). Eos autem fabulam quandam (pOov, Orig.} consarcinasse et totum esse commentum (icXcfcajAoc) bene ostendit -S. Chrys, : neque enim tertius accepisset duos iam sponsos defunctos videns; si tamen tertius, certe non quartus nee quintus, multoque minus sextus efc Septimus, sed; uxorem suspectam habuissent; tales quippe sunt ludaei. Nam si multi nunc ita sunt affecti, multo magis tune temporis, quandoquidem hoc etiam.am.oto obice haec connubia.tunc fugiebant, etiamsi id lex prae-| ciperet; sic Ruth moabitis in remotiorem cognationis suae devoluta est . Opponunt turpitudinem fabulae, ut resurrectionis denegent veritatem (S. Hier.}, ideoque
22:28
v. 28 in resurrectione ergo cuius erit de, septem uxor, cuinam dabitur ilia in matrimonium? omnes enim ha-\ buerunt earn; ergo uni prae aliis dari esfc iniustum; omnibus septem! et turpissiinum etomnilegeprohibitum.Putabantigitur seinvenisse. acutissimam rationem, hoc modo apud se dicentes : sicut non est possibile, ut ea mulier quae fuit septem virorurn sit unius uxorprivata aut omnium communis, sic non estpossibile ut fiat resurrectio mortuorum (op. imp.} et ita putabant se posse Christum concludere (S. Pasch.}. Vide quae de Glaphyra narrat losephus (Ant. 17, 13, 1. 4 ; Bell. 2,7,4). Istud quippe tel urn erat quo pharisaeos expugnabant, at Domino minus fuit quam plumbeus pugio (Fab.}',
22:29
v. 29 respondens autem Iesus ait illis : erratis nescientes Scripturas neque mrtutem Dei,' non intelligitis Scripturas quae non talem qualem vos suspicamini resurrectionem decent; ignoratis virtutem Dei quae mortuos resuscitare potest sine prioribus habitibus et affectibus (Euth}.\ stulti qui saeculum illud huic saeculo simile existimabant ; in hoc saeculo quia morimur, ideo morimur quianascimur ; ideo uxores ducimus, ut quod moriendo minuitur nascendo suppleatur; tolle moriendi necessitatem et nascendi utilitas superflua invenitur ; tolle nascendi utilitatem et nubendi causa soluta est (op. imp.}. Illi enim non alium vivendi modum comprehendebant nisi quern in hac terra videbant sc. comedendo, bibendo, generando; non cogitabanjt virtutem Dei i. e. Deuni posse corpora humana transmutare in gloriam impassibilitatis sine cibo, potu etc. (Cai.}. Duos fontes erroris assignat : nescientes Scrip- , turas quae aniniarn esse immortalem decent, quae rfesurrectionem \ quoque corporum indicant (cf. lob 19,25-27. Is. 26,19. Ez. 37,3 seq. Dan. 12,2) et quae illam vitam post mortem apud Deum aeternam ac beatam describunt, proinde satis aliam quam quae hisce in terris est (cf. Ps. 15,11; 48,16; Is. 35,10; 51,6 etc.); nescientes virtutem Dei, alias intellexissent Deum nobis facillime vitam dpnare posse longe aliam atque earn quam nunc agimus. Duo.haec v. 30. 31 declarantur. Et prius quidem qualem mutationem corporum gloriosam Dei virtus sit effectura exponit
22:30
v. 30 in resurrectione enim neque nubent negue nubentur; i. e. simul cum resurrectione vel quando corpus mortuum ad novam vitam suscitatur, alia plane vitae eius forma et ratio exsistit; ibi iam nulla erunt connubia ; sed erunt siciit angeli Dei in -coelo; sicut angeli cum sint spiritus puri nulla ineunt connubia, ita corporibus illis glorificatis ac spiritualibus (1 Cor. 15,44) iam nullus inesse potest coniugii appetitus. De verbis nota : latina consuetude graeco idiomati non respondet; nubere enim proprie dicuntur mulieres, et viri uxores dticere; sed nos simpliciter dictum intelligamus , quod nubere de viris et nubr de uxoribus scriptum sit (S. Hier.}\ ceterum nubere de viris etiam apud profanos scriptores saepius dicitur. Explica ex graeco : sicut angeli in coelo sunt i. e. vitam in coelo degunt, vitam ergo coelestem agunt sicut angeli ; ita in coelo iungi posse iam vidit Salmeron et videtur praeferendum , quia vita eorum coelestis statim significatur. Comparatio autem inducitur ut ostendatur beatos ab omni commercio coniugali longissime abesse. Id enim quo efiicacius exprimatur non invenies nisi ea comparatione angelorum qui puri spiritus cum exsistant natura sua a materia sunt remotissimi. Et quia sadducaei ad irridendum adeo crasse sibi fingebant resurrectionem , Christus consulto earn vitae novae formam quam maxime spiritualem et ab appetitu et desideriis carnis alienissimam effert. Quare simul apparet quid ex comparatione non sit colligendum. Non est colligendum angelos quoque corpus habere tenue, aethereum, coelesfce, uti eos habere volunt veteres aliqui et recentiores quidam protestantes (Meyer, Weiss); neque inferri potest fore corpora beatorum sine discrimine sexus. Hanc sexus diversitatem aliqui negabant, uti S. Hll. Orig. etteste S. Augustino (de civ, D. 22, 17) eo tempore multi, quosdpse tamen strenue impugnat. At dicendum est cum S. Hier. : quando dicit sicut angeli, non natura et substantia corporum tollitur, sed gloriae magnitudo monstratur; neque enim scriptum est erunt angeli, sed sicut angeli; ubi similitude promittitur, veritas denegatur. Erunt, inquit, sicut angeli, i. e. similes ange- lorum ; ergo homines esse non desinent ; inclyti quidem et angelico splendore decorati, sed tamen homines, ut et apostolus apostolus sit et Maria Maria (ep. 73,2; M. 22,683) et : non substantiam nobis angelorum, sed conversationem et beatitudinem Dominus repromittit (ep. 108,22; M. 22,900 quo loco sexuum diversitatem servari in resurrectione pluribus propugnat). . Ad sadducaeorum cavillationem declarandam inserviunt quae Wetstein ad tiunc locum affert : Maimonides statuit homines post resurrectionem cibo et potu usuros et liberorum generationi operam daturos esse; quia sapiens architectus nihil frustra faciat necesse esse ut membra corporis non sint otiosa sed ministeriis suis defungantur. Saadia : quaeritur an post resurrectionem homines cibo et potu sint usuri et uxores ducturi ? ita statuo : sicut filius viduae sareptanae quem Creator per Eliam suscitavit, et films Sunamitidis quem Deus per Elisam excitavit a mortuis, ederunt et biberunt.et sine dubio uxores duxerunt etc." In libro Sohar : mulier ilia quae duobus nupsit in hoc mundo, priori restituitur in mundo future . Melius statuitur in tractatu talmudico berachoth : Raf ilia verba frequenter in ore habuit : in mundo futuro non .edent neque bibent. neque generabunt liberos, non exercebunt commercia ; non est ibi invidia neque odium neque rixa, sed iusti sedebunt coronis cincti et delectabunt se splendore maiestalis divinae (cf. Wetstein, Wunsche p. 265). Huic autem effato et aliis compluribus quae recitat Wetstein alia opponuntur quibus vita in mundo futuro modo satis crasso depingitur et fore generationem liberorum , cibos ex leviathan et behemoth paratos etc. ; vide Weber, System der altsynagogalen palaest. Theologie p. 402 seq. Neque improbabile est eiusmodi opiniones rudiores etiamtempore Ghristi multis fuisse familiares. Nam cum Ghristus dixisset : retribuetur tibi in resurrectione iustorum, quidam de simul discumbentibus haec audiens dixit Ghristo : beatus qui manducabit panem in regno Dei (Luc. 14,14. 15). Et in libro Sohar dicitur : mulier quae duobus nupsit in hoo mundo, priori restituitur in futuro. Exposita virtute Dei quae cernitur in vita beatorum coelesti et angelis.simili Christus uno exemplo verbisque notissimis ostendit sadducaeos errare nescientes Scripturas (cf. -S. Pasch. Cai,}
22:31
v. 31 de resurrectione autem mortuorum non legistis quod dictum est a Deo dicente vobis : v. 3"2 ego sum Deus Abraham et Deus Isaac et Deus lacob? non est Deus mortuorum sed viventium ; quaerunt aliqui cur Ghristus eos nonconvincat ex locis clarioribus; nam, ut S. Hier. elicit, multo manifestioribus exemplis uti potuit; et rationem inde repetit quod sadducaei tantum quinque libros Moysis receperint prophetarum vaticinia respuentes ; stultum ergo erat inde proferre testimonia, cuius auctoritatem non seqtiebantur . Eos solum leg-em mosaicam recepisse multi pariter arbitrantur (cf. Orig. Hil. Pasch. Alb. Fab. Salmewn, Cai. lans. Lap. Lamy , Calm.), sed recentiores hanc opinationem merito reliquerunt. Ex iis quae losephus refert solum constat eos traditiones et explicationes pharisaeorum reiecisse. Sed aliquid veri illi opinion! inest eo quod libros Moysis tamquam normam et regulamfidei et morum omnino completam et perfectam considerabant; unde cum in iis doctrinam resurrectionis non reperirent statuerunt illam etiam apud prophetas non posse exprimi, verum omnes locos esse alio sensu, sensu metaphorico, intelligendos. Alii existim ant Christum respondisse ex libris Moysis quia illi legem mosaieam adhibuerint ad resurrectionis doctrinam explodendam .(Euth. Theoph. lans.}. Quo autem magis eorum ignoratio Scripturarum pateat,~Christus videtur selegisse verba ilia quae notissima erant et quae a ludaeis merito considerabautur tamquam magnum gentis iudaicae praeconium. Detis enim hisce sese profitetur speciali ratione Deum progenitorum populi , proinde ipsi pbpulo hac appellatione magna accedit laus et dignitas. Ea quippe voce Deus se profitetur protectorem , defensorem, dominum, benefactorem , remuneratorem (Calm. Ldmy) brevi omne bonum et summum bonum illorum. Verba deprompta siint ex Ex. 3,6; vocantur dicta vobis (graece), quia sacra Scriptura non est solum liber narrationum rerum gestarum sed est verbum Dei loquentis per scriptorem ad omnes , ut omnes erudiantur et doceantur et ad omnem virtu tern admoneantur (cf. 2 Tim. 3,16). Haec eadem verba repetit Deus Ex. 3,15 etc. et addit : hoc nomen mihi est in aeternum et hoc memoriale meum in generationem et generationem. lam vero Deus non est Deus (sese communicans , boua largiens , . servans promissa) mortuorum sedviventium; autigitur Deuseorum Deus est qui sunt; aut eorum qui non sunt; absurdum est autem Deum qui dixit : ego sum qui sum , horum e'sse Deum pronuntiare qui neutiquam sunt, quod si illud absurdum est, eorum profecto Deus est qui sunt et qui vivunt et qui exsistunt (Oeo? u<peGTY]x,oTcov) quique beneficium a Deo in se collatum sentiunt (Orig.). Proxime itaque sequitur Abraham, Isaac , lacob adhuc exsistere et vivere et cum Deus eo nomine se Deum populi Israel declaret etiam eos exsistere et vivere qui iam e populo mortui sunt. Proxime itaque docetur et sequitur corporibus mortuis superstites esse animas ,- animas esse immortales (cf. S. Hier. Pasch. Thorn. Fab. Cai.}. At hie est mitiime sistendum. Probatur enim etiam ipsa resurrectio. Na.m sadducaei negabant resurrectionem solum propterea quia negabant animam post mortem remanere; apud ludaeos autem doctrina de animae immortalitateintime copulata erat cum doctrina de resurrectione. Hae duae doctrinae pro una eademque habebantur, id quod etiam ex 2 Mach. 12,43-46 colligitur (cf. Cai. lans. Maid. Arn. Schegg, Fi7.)..Gnm enim Deus mortern non fecerit, sed hominem creaverit immortalem , merito poterat concludi , Deum qui veniam peccatorum concedit etiam id quod per peccatum inductum sit ablaturum et proinde etiam mortem deleturum i. e. mortuos ad novam vitam corporalem et immortalem revocaturum esse. Mors est poena peccati; morte id violenter separatur quod secundum Dei voluntatem in creatione primi hominis manifestatam debuit manere coniunctum in perpetuum. lam vero Deus suis promittit veniam peccatorum , proinde ablationem quoque poenae aliquando futuram ; insuper cogitari nequit Deum permittere, ut opus suum quod creatione intendit per invidiam diaboli mortem invehentis in perpetuum et in omnibus pessumdetur. Ita ex prima Dei institutione explicatur immortalitatem animae et corporum resurrectionem intime apud ludaeos esse colligatam atque coniunctam. Aliis etiam modis argumentationem Christi consistere interpretes osteudere student. Et S. Hier. quidem.ait : ad aeternitatem animarum probandam de Moyse ponit exemplum , ut cum probaverit animas permanere post mortem (neque enim poterat fieri ut eorum esset Deus qui nequaquam subsisterent) , consequenter introduceretur et corporum resurrectio quae cum animabus bona malave gesserunt ; eodemque modo etiam arguit Alb. : argument! vis est in hoc quod si Deus est servorum, debet remunerare eos in quo servierunt opere iustitiae; servierunt autem in corpore, remunerabuntur igitur in corpore;... corpus in agendo cum anima est unum compositum cum ea, ideoque plus est quam instrumentum ; oportet igitur ut resurgat ; similiter lans. Calm. Alii arguunt ex inclinatione animae ad corpus; ita S. Thorn. : si anima remanet, ergo et resurrectio, quia naturaliter anima inclinatur ad corpus. Quam rationem alii exaggerant dicentes si haec inclinatio non satiaretur animam fore in statu violento , neque perfectam animae felicitatem consistere posse quamdiu sit a corpore separata (Cai. lans.}, quae tamen ratio certe non est nimium urgenda ne quid falsi inde consequatur. Ex ipsis nominibus Abraham etc. etiam argumentum ducitur, animam enim Abraham non esse proprie loquendo ipsum Abraham sed partem eius, ergo ut Deus sit pleno sensu Deus Abraham viventis, exigi vitam totius compositi *, ergo ibi contineri promissionem resurrectionis (cf. Salmeron, torn. 8 tract. 61). Vim argumenti Maid, in eo reponit quod Deus foeclus percussit cum Abraham etc. et foectus illud servare velit quia illi adhuc vivant et quotidie Deum sollicitent, ut foedus in sua posteritate impleat; solemtis enim foedera non mortuis servare sed vivis, quia non inter mortuos sed inter vivos feriri solent. Video quid responderi possit, si . quis subtilitates quaerat ; sed considerandum est voluisse Christum non omnino necessarium , sed tarn probabile argumentum afferre quam ad coarguendos sadducaeos satis esset. Nam et hae ratione impudentiam eorum et arrogantiam compressit, quod cum Scripturam irridentes adduxissent , quasi Christus se expedire ab ilia quaestione non posset quam proponebant , docuerit eos adeo obtusos et indoctos esse , ut nee ad minimum quidem argumentum ex eodem Moyse ad probandam resurrectionem adductum respondere possent . Ita ille ; quern si nonnemo hie aliquantulum dormitasse dixerit, nonobsistam. Num enim qui non sit obtusus et indoctus ostendere poterit hoc argumentum Christi rem non confiqere et ita ad minimum hoc argumentum respondere? Ex foedere inito etiam Lap. vim argument! deducit et insuper addit eos a Christo resurgente a morte suscitatos et cum, Christo triumphante in coelum traductos. Secundum S. Chrys. Dens dicitur Deus viventium, quia sicut Adam licet viveret qua die manducavit de ligno, sententia prolata mortuus est,. sic isti, .licet mortui essent, ex promissione resurrectionis vivebant ; ipse aliique (Euth. Theoph. Cai. Maid. Salm.} etiam multum insistunt quod dicatur : ego sum Deus Abraham, et non : ego eram. Fortasse vis argument! etiam aliter concipi potest. Finge sadducaeos ad negandam animae immortalitatem et resurrectionem iactasse illud Deum non esse Deum inortuorum , sed Deum viventium i. e. nullibi dici eum curam habere inortuorum, iis providisse bona; verum promissiones minasque legis a Deo semper proponi viventibus ; turn Christus optime uti poterat hac ipsorum assertione, ut eos adducto nomine Dei Abraham et Isaac et lacob ex ipsorum ore ignorantiae et erroris turpis argueret, cum ipsis fatentibus Deus sit Deus viventium. Argumenti vim et perspicuitatem sadducaei percipiunt ; irrisoribus os obstruitur nee habent quod reponant; statim spargitur rumor iis esse silentium impositum a Christo (v. 34) ; docendi et probandi modum turbae quoque magnopere admirantur ; ergo utrisque argumen- ' turn erat irrefragabile ;
22:33
v. 33 et audientes turbae mirabantur in doctrina eius, e^eTyV/fccrovTo obstupescebant , admiratione quasi stupore perculsi. Modo enim adeo facili , perspicuo , efficaci illis os obstruxit et turbis resurrectionis doctrinam ex ipsa Dei notione clare proposuit. CensetJ./^. propterturbas quae aderant Christum solvisse quaestionem, quia aliter sanctum non dedisset canibus nee margaritas sparsisset ante porcos . Sadducaei enim non adierunt eum ut discerent, sed ut eum confunderent si possent frivole doctrinam resurrectionis impugnantes et irridentes. In. eo ijuoque aliorum sunt antecessores quod prius dqctrinam absurdam sibi confmgtmt et turn absupdam doctrinam irrisioni exponunt et convelhmt existimantes se praeclaralir reportasse victoriam. r) Quaestio de mandate magno et Ghristo filio David. 2,34-4S. Quaestione d,e magno in lege mandate proposita pliarisaei denuo teniantlesum capere in sermone; respondet Christus mandate dilectionis Dei et proximi recitato tamquam omnium mandatorum summa et line. Ipse vero interrogation de Christo filio et .domino David adversaries confimdit et ab ulterioribus cavillandi insidiis deterret. Pliarisaei et sadducaei , inter se contrarii, ad tentandum Iesum pari rnente consentiunt; erant illi quidem supra iam in ostensione denarii con f titati et a Jveisae partis factionem videntes subrutam debuerunt exemplo moneri, ne ultra molirentur insidias; sed malevolentia et livor nutrit impudentiam (S. Hier.}. Immo clade sadducaeorum stimulantur ut denuo insidias Christo struant, ut eius apud plebem auctoritatem , quae modo admiratioue plebis v. 33 aucta videbatur, imminuerent;
22:34
v. 34 pharisaei autem audientes quod silentium im- ^posuisset sadducaeiSj s^i^wcevproprie; capistro osobturasset (cf. Deut. 25,4. 1 Cor. 9,9. 1 Tim. 5,18), non quasi iis silentium imperasset, sed quia non habebant quid replicarent, convenerunt in unum, uno loco congregati sunt, ut deliberarent soil, qua ratione et qua forte qiiaestione Christo negotium facesserent. Quid ilia consultatione effec - turn sit, statim docemurT.
22:35
35 et interrogavit eum units ex eis legis doctor, tentans eum, vopt.ix.os semel hoc loco apud S. Matthaeum, saepius apud S. Lucam; vi vocis spectata VOJAWCO? est iuris peritus , doctus in lege; ypa[^aTeu<; scriba, 13b Scripturae peritus; at re ipsa utrumque vocabulum idem hominum genus designat, uti patet , quia idem dicitur el? Toiv ypa^aTewv Marc. 12,28 et quia Luc. 11,53 dicuntur ypa^aTet's qui v. 52 appellati sunt vop.uoi 1 . Idque eo minus mirum videri potest , quia scribae fere unice occupabantur in lege explicanda et applicanda, ita ut eorum studium Scripturae unice. fere lege contineretur et quia nomine legis quandoque Scriptura sacra generatim appellabatur (cf. loan. 10,37; 15,25; etiam 7,49 et 12, 34; 1 Cor. 14,21). Secundum narrationem Marc. 12,32.33 iste legis doctor responsione a Christo accepta laudat Christum et ab ipso quoque audit, quia sapienter responderit : non eslonge a regno Dei. Hoc autem loco dicitur accedere tentans Iesum, ergo, utt videtur, ad captandam occasionem calumniae "(S. Hier. Rab. Pasch.}, animo malo et perverse (Fit.}]' mittitur quippe a pharisaeis. Quare aliqui protestantes de discrepantia et diversitate utriusque narrationis clamores tollunt (of. Weiss). At nisi quis perfracte apud se statuerit evafcgelistas debere inter se dissidere,.haud difficulter apparens dissensio poterit removeri. Quod tentans accessisse dicitur, aliqui explicant , quia cum ipse nihil mali intenderit , a pharisaeis subornatus sit ad quaestionem ponendam ; quam sententiam iam indicat S. Pasch. eamqiie proponunt Sylv. Schanz. Quae tamen ad Treipa^wv vix accommodari potest, quod dici deberet ex mente pharisaeorum , ita ut ipse diceretur tentans quia ad hoc inscius mitteretur ab aliis. Quod durum videtur, quia tentans ad verbum refertur sensu obvio. Unde alii interpretantur sensu bono vel saltern indifferent! : experimentum capiens, explorans, experiri volens sincere scientiam Christi, eo modo quo retina Sabae dicatur venisse raipacat, tentare Salomonem (3 Reg. 10,1; Lamy}\ quam opinionem iam indicat S. Aug. : aut certe ipsam tentationem non accipiamus malam tamquam decipere volentis inimicum , sed cautam potius, tamquam experiri amplius volentis ignotum (decons. evang. 2,73.141). Subtilius Lap. : hie licet fmgeret coram pharisaeis se velle Iesum irretire et capere , tamen in animo suo cupiebat experiri et audire quid Iesus ad quaestionem hanc tarn difficilem , in qua ij>se dubius haerebat, esset responsurus; cupiebat ergo a Iesu docefi . Verum difficile est hoc loco tentans accipere notione bona. Cum enim pharisaei propterea dicantur convenisse et deliberasse , quia audierunt sadducaeos ad silentium esse redactos, eos malo in Christum animo convenisse eique insidias praeparasse manifestum est et v. 15 quoque liquet. Iam vero immediate subiungitur tamquam quod illo in conventu sit statutum et effectum, et interrogavit eum units ex eis tentans eum; tali autem designatione units ex eis et tali nexu non potest tentans accipi sensu bono. Quare cum plerisque dicendum erit, quod habet S. Chrys. : interrogavit tentans a principle , a responsione autem aliquid nactus utilitatis , laudatus est , et quod etiam proponit S. Aug. : fieri enim potest , ut quam vis tentans accesserit, Domini tamen responsione correctus sit (1. c.; similiter Theoph. Euth. Pasch. Thorn. Dion. S aimer on, Sylv.}. Unus dies, dicit auctor op. imp., et multa certamina; recedebant sadducaei et iterum accedebant pharisaei ; frequentabant enim super eum tali forte consilio , ut quis aut comprehendere eum posset , aut si certe eum ratione superare non posset, vel per ipsam frequentationem subverteret sensum ipsius (op. imp.}] sed idem advertit his interrogationibus ludaeos sibi quidem interitum acquisivisse, nobis autem pro- "vidisse salutem, utilia sell, nobis procurasse documenta; v..
22:36
36 magister, quod est mandatum magnum in lege? ex iis, quae ex targumim et talmud aliisque afferuntur a Schoettgen, Wetstein, Wimsche, apparet rabbinos distinxisse praecepta magna et parva"(c/. Wetstein etiam ad 5,19); numerabant enim sexcenta et tredecim mandata (cf . Surenhusitis, p. IV pag. 291) quae dividebantur in praecepta 248 et in 365 prohibitiones (ilia aequare volebant ossa in corpore humano, has vero anni dies); iam .ut decernerent quae sint magna et gravia (niTian), quae parva et levia (niSp),. alii alias statuebant normas. Quaestio proposita duplici modo potest intelligi; rcota svioV/i quale mandatum magnum in lege, vel : quales conditiones, qualia adiuncta necessaria sunt, ut aliquod mandatum in lege reputetur magnum et grave (Am. Scheggr, Bisp., Schanz, Meyer, Weiss) vel : quale mandatum est prae ceteris magnum, i. e. maximum et priihum in lege; nam TCOMC, uti ex 19,18 patet, non necessario ita oportet urgere, uti fit in priore acceptioiie. Iam ex responsione Christ! et ex Marc. 12,28 Trota ecrflv evroXvi TrptoTvi TT^VTWV, oportet concludi vel utramque quaestionem esse positam, ita ut S. Matthaeus rem solum innuat magis quam explicite narret, vel verba legis doctoris esse explicanda altero niodo quo apnd S. Marctim quoque quaestio refertur. Utrocumque sensu verba conceperis, tentatio in eo est, ut Ghristus qnidqnid respondeat necessario videatur debere oppugnare imam alteramve ex variis rabbinorum opinionibus ac sententiis; unde facile cavillationibus aperiretur porta. Si enim quaeritur quae conditiones requirantur ut aliquod mandatum censeatur magnum , varia possunt in considerationem venire, vel antiquitas, ita ut sabbatum antecedat circumcisionem , vel modus promulgationis, qui quo sollemnior sit eo magis mandati excellentiam suadeat, vel res ipsa praecepta (Schegg] vel sanctio et poena transgressoribus posita mercesque obedientibus promissa etc. Ex exemplis quae afferuntur facile coniici potest quaestionem illam fuisse captiosam et potuisse exspectari quodcumque demum respondeatur posse sine ullo negotio impugnari. Nam v. g. magnum est praeceptumde zizith (de fimbriis vestium) ; manus pedesque mundissime habeto , nam certe hoc praeceptum parvum non est; procreatio prolis est praeceptum magnum ( Wetstein ad 5,19). Iesus vero pro sua sapientia ita respondet ut cuique manifestuin sit responsionem nulla ratione posse oppugnari et ut quisqne fateri cogatur id esse revera mandatum omnium maximum et dignitate primum;
22:37
v. 37 ait illi Iesus : diliges Dominum (in hebr. lahve) Deum tuum ex toto corde tuo, hebr. et graece in toto corde tuo, et in tota anima tua et in tota mente tua, Deut. 6,5 tertium membrum : in iota fortitudine tua. lam Alb. monek diligere distingui a verbo amandi, quod dicat affectum etiam ceteris animalibus communem ; ita ayarcav est magni facere , cpO^tv affectum amoris corde et sensu percipere ; quare illud de amore spiritual! potissimum usurpatur. Cor Hebraeis dicit affectum et intellectum , ut bene notat lans.; anima ursj, quae sedem suam in sanguine habere concipitur, baud raro notat concu-, piscentiam; tertium ^tavoia totam cogitandi sentiendique rationem complectitur, ita ut si minus vi vocis, at reipsa respondeat tertio membro Deut. 6,5, ut scil. Deus diligatur, omni fortitudine. Vix optis est tria haec subtilius distinguere; sed in singularum partium enii- 1 meratione magna quaedam inest 7is ac significatio , qua affectus summus et integerrimus exprimitur. Nullam vitae nostrae partem reliquit, ' ait S. Aug. (de doctr. christ. 1,22; M. 34,27), quae vacare debeatet quasi locum dare ut alia re velit frui; sed quidquid aliud diligendumj venerit in animum , illuc rapiatur quo totus dilectionis impetus currit; vel ut Victor antiochenus notat ad Marc. 12,30, verbis iis common-, strari hominem tanto Dei amore flagrare debere , ut nihil prorsus in ullam animae facultatem irrepere sinat quod suam erga Deum dilectionem excludat aut diminuat aut alio transferat (cf. Arn.} vel, ut auctor op. imp. ait, ut cor tuum non sit inclinatum ad ullius rei' dilectionem amplius quam ad Dei, nee delecteris in aliqua specie mundi amplius quam in Deo. Illis partibus enumeratis unum illud inculcari censet Salmeron, ut nihil contra Deum, nihil supra Deum, nihil aeque ac Deum , sed sub Deo et infra Deum et propter Deum reliqua diligamus. Sic itaque in Deum tamquam summum bonum; affectu et voluntate ferri debemus, ut eum praeponamus omnibus rebus commutabilibus eumque pro supremo vitae fine eligamus qui-! biislibet carere malentes quam Deo (lans.}. omnium tuarum cogitationum, actionum, amorum, ipsumque ut summum bonum finemque ultimum rebus omnibus praeferas et anteponas, et consequenter appretiative , ut nihil ita aestimes tantoque loco ac pretio habeas quanto habes Deum, ac proinde ut totum cor, i. e. voluntatem applices, ut tota et omnia eius praeeepta impleas eique per omnia obedias , etiamsi propterea opes , honores , famam , amicitiam vitamque ipsam perdere debeas , Varia de hoc mandate, sitne speciale vel generate, et de eius impletione etiam pertractat lans. in cap. 81 comment, in concord, evang. Legisperitum , si omnino interrogavit quae conditiones requirantur ut mandatum censeatur magnum , id non unice interrogasse , verum quale mandatum sit inter omnia magnum, elucet uti ex Marc. 12, 28, ita ex verbis Ghristi
22:38
v. 38 hoc est maximum, graece magnum, iure seH. praecipuo , quodprae aliisillud magnum y [j^y.\n appellari debet , . et primum mandatum dignitate et amplitudine qua hominis in Deum officia comprehenduntur;
22:39
v. 39 secundum autem dignitate et gravitate officiorum simile est hide : diliges proximiim tuum sicut te ipsum; haec verba petuntur ex Lev. 19,18; vide quae dicta sunt ad 5,43. Dicitur simile priori, quoniam est dilectio hominis qui factus est secundum imaginem Dei (Orig. op. imp. Alb. Thorn. Fab. Dion.}. Homo itaque factus secundum similitudinem Dei propter Deum diligi debet ; dilig-enda est in eo imag-o ac similitudo Dei quam animus habet naturaliter et ad quam altiore et eminentiore gradu supernaturaliter habendam a Deo vocatur. Dicitur porro simile, non aequale, quia post Deum jnter omnes res creatas prae omnibus diligendus est proximus affectu, actibus, officiis; dein quia utrumque est de dilectione et actus uter.que procedit ab eodem habitu et tendit in idem obiectum, soil. Deum;nam quia Deus diligitur, diligitur etiam proximus, ut Dei opus (cf. Tost. qu. 278 in cap. 22; Sylv.}. Proximum autem diliges sicut teipsum i. e. ut proximo omnia quae optamus nobis optemus, .ut etim propter Deum dilig-amus, ut nos ipsos, et eo affectu quo nos diligimus (Maid.}. Hanc dilectionis regulam iam exposuit Christus 7,12 : omnia quaecumque vultis ut faciant vobis homines et vos facite illis; et S. Aug. illud sicut explanans scribit : ea autem est regula dilectionis , ut quae sibi vult bona provenire et illi velit, et quae accidere sibi mala non vult et illi nolit; hanc voluntatem erga omnes homines servat (de vera religione, 46, 87; M. 34,161). Ostenditur quare sint maxima mandata (Alb.}
22:40
v. 40 in his duobus mandatis -universa lex pendet et prophetae; vide ad 7, 12; nam duo haec mandata ita inter se cohaerent et copulantur et continent omnia alia mandata (Theoph.)] finis enim praecepti est caritas (1 Tim. 1,5); plenitude legis est dilectio (Rom. 13,10) et si quod est mandatum, in hoc verbp instauratur i. e. summatim comprehenditur et quasi in compendio proponitur : diliges proximum tuum sicut teipsum (Rom. 13,9). Lex et prophetae hie dicuntur quatenus praecepta ad mores pertinentia continent; pendent, ad quam imaginem vide Is. 22,23-25; omnia reliqua mandata hisce innituntur et hisce fulciuntur et in tuto sunt et firmiter consistunt, quamdiu duo ilia loco non moventur. Ad haec duo eriim totus pertinet decalogus (Rab.}; qui enim peccat, ut S.'Br. dicit, aut in Deum peccat, aut in seipsum aut in proximum ; qui vero praedicto dilectionis rnodo Deum et proximum diligit, quomodo eos offendat quos tantopere diligit? nam et in se peccare timet, ne in hoc quoque Deum offendat. Si igitur in his duobus mandatis caritas adimpletur et omnia peccata tolluntur, manifestum est in eis universam legem pendere et prophetas. Pendent autem reliqua omnia ex iis docente Alb. sicut ex movente et forma et fine ; ilia quippe dilectio movet ad alia observanda, omnibus operibus tribuit sacram quandam form am, meritum, consecration em, et cuncta alia ad idtendunt, utilla dilectio acquiratur et retineatur (cf. S. Thorn. Cai.). Omnia ad ilia duo ordinantur et in eis continentur. Quemadmodum ergo conclusiones virtualiter continentur in primis principiis, sic omnia praecepta virtualiter continentur in praeceptis caritatis ; nam sicut se habent prima principia in speculativis , ita se habent praecepta caritatis in lege (Dion. Lap.}. Si itaque haec duo salva consistunt, omnia bene ordinata sunt et homo talis est qiialis ex voluntate Dei reyelata esse debet. Qui enim Deum eo modo diligit , omnia observabit quae a Deo praecepta esse cognoverit. Ergo ea dilectione cuncta alia fulciuntur ; si earn sustuleris, iam reliqua quoque mandata seponuntur,, parvi penduntur, corruunt. Cum hie legis doctor a pharisaeis suboniatus esset ad iesum tentandum, ipsi pharisaei, dum rem suam Christo proponeret, eliam accesserunt ut viderent quern exitum res habitura esset et certe sperantes fore ut Iesus quidquam responderet quod carpere possent. At plane aliter evenit; qui ad tentandum Iesum fuerant congregati et veritatem fraudulenta interrogation e capere nitebantur, occasionem praebuerunt confusionis suae (S. Hier. Rab. Thorn.}. Cum itaque interea, dum ilia pertractarentur v. 36-40, pharisaei accesserint, pergitur
22:41
v. 41 co'ngregatis autem pharisaeis interrogavit eos Iesus
22:42
v. 42 dicens : quid vobis videtur de Christo , cuius filius est? dicunt ei : David j Messiam enim ex stirpe et familia David clebere venire , plurima prophetarum testimonia et ipsa verba Davidis (2 Reg. 23,3-5 hebr.) clare enuntiant et erat exspectatio ac sententia omnino pervulgata (loan. 7,42). Verum, ut docemur etiam psalmo 17 salomonico, exspectabatur filius David ^ qui fhronum David iterum erig'eret et dominatores iniustos (Romanos) contereret, urbem sanclam'pnrgaret a gentibus et gentes subiicerei (vide in proleg. vol. I p. 15). Christus autem hac sua quaestione pharisaeos convincit quod parum sciant de Messia; ita eos confundit quidem, at simul iis offertur opportunitas si vellent perveniendi ad me~ liorem oraculi prophetic! intelligentiam ;. quare v. 43 ait ittis : quomodo ergo David in spiritu i. e. cum Dei spiritu plenus esset, cum non suo qui falli mentirique posset, sed Dei spiritu qui nee falli nee mentiri poterat , loqueretnr (Maid.}, David itaque tamquam propheta, spiritu prophetico dixit; ev 7cveu(/.aTt cf. 2 Petr. 1,21 : spiritu sancto inspirati ((pspojjievoi) locuti sunt sancti Dei homines ; vocat eum Dominum dicens :
22:44
v. 44 dixit Dominus (lahve) Domino meo i^vh : sede a dextris meis, donee ponam inimicos tuos scabellum (LXX UTUOTO^OV ; cf. lect. var.) pedum tuonim? ex qua quaestione duo constant, psalmum habitum fuisse messiamim et David eius psalmi auctorem. Si enim de alterutro vel le-vissima dubii umbra exstitisset, pharisaei certe non obmutuissent ; praesertim si Davidem auctorem psalmi esse in dubmm potuissent ullo modo revocare, facillime laqueum a Iesu iis paratum effug-issent. Censerit aliqui his destrui originem Messiae davidicam! Ghristns enim arguit
22:45
v. 45 si ergo David vocat eum Dominum, quomodo filius eius est? et David ita dicit in spiritu, ergo impulsu divino , cum ipse spiritu Dei plenus maioreni habeat dignitatem et excellentiam, quam ulla dignitas regia conferre posset, eum vocat suum dominum; David igitur cum ipse sit exaltatus ultra omnem eminentiam humanam, Messiae tantum tribuit honoris, ut eum agnoscat et proilteatur suum dominum : quomodo ergo filius eius est? talis soil, filius solummodo qualem eum fingunt, quint filius mere humanus thronum patris pccupet et regnum davidicum denuo suscitet. Christus autem prae aliis locis messianis hunc psalmum selegit , quia in eo Messias ut sacerdos describitur; proinde alia omnino notio Messiae eiusque operis messiani docetur, notio soil, expiationis peccatorum et reconciliationis cum Deo. Exhibetur sedens ad dexteram Dei in gloria, dum hisce in terris inimici eius eum oppugnant, donee tandem a Deo prorsus subiiciuntur. Hisce itaque notio Messiae conditoris regni temporalis destruitur. Christus autem earn ponens quaestionem , ut pharisaeos coram turbis confundit , ita certe etiam se ostendit paratum ad eos docendos , si vellent doctrinam ab eo accipere quern magna simulatione per discipulos suos magistrum veracem (v. 16) salutabant. Id contextu innui Weiss utique negat! At miiiime a Iesu quidquam accipere et discere volunt
22:46
v. 46 et nemo poterat c'i respondere verbum; existimat Schegg eos potuisse quidem respondere, Messiam maiorem esse Davicle, maiorem quam Abraham, et idcirco a David vocari dominum; intellexisse eos etiam Iesum noluisse ut responderent de filio David, verum Iesum cogitasse de Messia filio Dei et pharisaeos facile potuisse respondere Messiam esse filium Dei, sed noluisse ita respondere, quia si Messiam filium Dei profiterentur, se ipsos illaqueassent ; eositaque maluisse respondere eum esse filium David , quia Iesus minime id fecisset eousque quod a filio David communi exspectatione'sperabatur. Sed cum explicite dicatur nemo poterat, audacius videtur id ab interprets mutari in : nemo voluit quamquam facile potuit respondere. Verum miseri ludaei ,. ut S. Aug. dicit (inPs. 109 n, 6), malueruntinflata taciturnitate disrumpi, quam humili confessione edoceri. Exinde tacuerunt et tarn gravem excepere plagam, ut npn ultra eadem aggredi auderent (S. Ghrys.}', neque ausus fuit quisquam ex ilia die eum amplius interrogdre ; Christus sua sapientiaillorum impudentiam vicit et prostravit. Expert! enim erant satis superque, quomodo dum eum capere vellent in sermone, ipsi caperentur et coram turbis confunderentiir.crescente populi admiratione de doctrina et sapientia Iesu. Ergo plane contrarium evenire cernebant eius quod moliebantur. Unde desistunt; idvero turbis non parum utile erat; ideoque ad multitudinem deinceps sermonem Iesus convertit amotis lupis et eorum insidiis reiectis (S. Gkrys.}; nam qui mari terminum posuit, ipse audaciae diaboli adversus se agentis', quando voluit, tune finerti posuit ( (o/?. imp.}. Narrat S. Hier. Itidaeos posteriores ad deludendam interrogationis veritatem frivola multa confinxisse; psalmum scriptum esse ex persona servi Abraham, ita ut servus Abraham post caedem quinque regum (Gen. 14,15 seq.) dixerit : dixit lahve domino meo (Abraham) : sede etc. ; quam explicationem S. Hier. ex reliquis quae in psalmo dicuntur exagitat. Etiam Terlullianus mentionem facit ludaeos psalmum hunc de Ezechia rege explicare , de quo dictum sit : sede a dextris meis , quia ad dexteram templi habitaverit (c. Marc. 5,9; M. 2,492) atque S. lustinus quoque ait psalmum hunc de Ezechia a ludaeis exponi (c. Tryph. n. 33; M. 6,545). Alias ludaeorum acceptiones referunt Agellius in Ps. 109, Maid., quas recensere nihil iuvat. Neque tamen desunt alia testimonia quibus constat hunc psalmum etiam tempore post Christum a ludaeis de Messia esse expositumi plura affert Ed. II p. 721 ex targum, ex midrasch ad Ps. 2. 18, ex hereschith rabba, ialcut etc. ; alia quoque leguntur apud Galatinum, de arcanis catholicae veritatis, Basileae 1550 p. 117. 146. 549. 610. 661; vide quoque Weber, System der altsynag. palaest. Theologie p. 351. 354.
22:1
Expliquons d’abord le texte. Cette parabole vient si bien après les autres qu'on ns s'étonne pas qu’elle leur soit jointe, mais plutôt qu'elle en soit séparée par xx, 45, 46. On dirait d’après ces deux versets, qu'après avoir parlé en 2 ὩὭμοιώθη ἡ βασιλεία τῶν οὐρανῶν ἀνθρώπῳ τοὺς δούλους αὐτοῦ χαλέσαι ἀπέστειλεν γάμους τῷ υἱῷ αὐτοῦ. 8 χαὶ ds γάμους; Kai οὖκ ἤθελον ἐλθεῖν. τοὺς χεχλημένους εἰς τὸ Εϊπατε τοῖς χεχλημένοις ᾿Ιδοὺ τὸ ἄριστόν τεύλεν ἄλλους δούλους λέγων καὶ τὰ σιτιστὰ τεθυμένα, nai πάντα ἕτοιμα" μου ἡτοίμακα, οἵ ταῦροί μου δὲ ἀμελήσαντες ἀπῆλθον, ὃς μὲν εἰς τὸν δεῦτε εἰς τοὺς γάψους. ὃ οἱ Got δὲ λοιποὶ χρατήσαντες ἴδιον ἀγρόν, ὃς δὲ ἐπὶ τὴν ἐμπορίαν αὐτοῦ" adversaires ont compris, Jésus va leur parler paraboles, maintenant que ses cela que nous avons attribué ces versets au entre quatre z'yeux. C’est pour lacés après la troisième parabole, c'est qu’elle traducteur de Ma. S'il ne les ἃ pas p on historique d'Israël. Notre v. 1 eùt pu 5e dépassait l'horizon de la réprobati — ἐν παραδολαῖς au pluriel est peut-être un souder dans Ma. à xxt, 43 ou [TR s ce quisuit deux paraboles, son dessein étant indice.que l’auteur distinguait dan aguement au pluriel comme Mc. de les fondre en une seule. Ou bien il parle v n, 24 et surtout xvIL, 23, avec l'homme- 2) Formule de comparaison comme ΣΙ et son Fils, le Messie. — ἐποίησεν, il fit, roi. On comprend que ce roi est Dieu, passa comme on va le dire. Les γάμοι un certain jour, c'est-à-dire que tout se accompagnent. Aussi n'est-il pas désignent moins l'union que les fêtes qui 1 question de l’épousée. est le repas nuptial, auquel on invitail : ἐρωτᾷ σε 3) La principale de ces fêtes αὐτῆς (P. Oxy.r, 111,2; ταῦ 5. A. D.), en abrégé Ἡραὶς δειπνῆσαι εἷς γάμους τέκνων 927, 3, même époque, dans MM). χαλῖσαι Ἔρως εἰς γάμους (id. VI, loyé (de préférence au pluriel) pour dési- Depuis longtemps γάμος était emp Eur. Iph. Aul. 707 ἔδαισαν Πηλέως γάμους, Her. fur. 483 gner le repas de noces eut traduire « inviter au repas de noces ἑστιᾷ γάμους. De sorte qu'ici on p s par Dieu était déjà comparé à un festin dans Is. Le glorieux avenir promi tait fréquente dans le judaïsme ; d'après MeNeile ce xxv, 6, et la comparaison ὁ Cependant le ps. ΣΕ représentait bien le Messie n’est jamais un festin nuptial. comme un fiancé, et le Targum l'a entendu ainsi, 1; et dans le Cantique (Ch. vin), le Targum beauté étant la communauté d'Israë ἢ festin qui doit bien être nuptial. Il est montre le Messie et la communauté à u gardé la comparaison des noces pour exprimer vrai cependant que les Juifs ont pation élue. Les chrétiens l'ont entendue après les rapports de Dieu avec sa Paul de l'union du Christ avec l'Église (Eph. v, 25 ss.) et l'Apoc. parle des noces me notre passage μαχάριοι οἱ εἰς τὸ δείπνον τοῦ ἀρνίου κεκλημένοι de l'agneau com donc ses origines dans l'Ancien Testament, mais (ax, 9). Ce mysticisme avait Christ a été proposée par lui-même. Mt. le suggère l'application à la personne du de penser qu'il a eu cette intuition ou qu'il l'ait et il n'y ἃ aucune raison empruntée à Paul.
22:3
Jérôme : Et misit servum suum.… Si autem servos legerimus, ut pleraque. habent exemplaria… Le singulier ne s'est trouvé nuile part. C'était sans doute une leçon empruntée à Le., qui n’a qu’un seul serviteur. Ici ce serait Moïse (Jér.). Les serviteurs, au pluriel, sont envoyés deux fois, exactement comme dans la parabole des vignerons, mais ce n’est pas une preuve qu’ils représentent exactement les mêmes époques. Les premiers serviteurs, de l’aveu de tous, sont les prophètes. Les convives ont déjà été invités à une époque antérieure, sans qu'on sache s'ils se sont engagés ou non. Dieu n’a jamais laissé l'humanité à elle-même, sans lui faire espérer le salut. Mais ce qui est antérieur à l’histoire d'Israël n'entre pas dans la perspective. Ces premiers serviteurs ne disent pas que tout est prêt; il semble qu'on ait encore du temps ; mais il fallait s'assurer de la disposition des convives. Ils refusent.
22:4
Le second groupe de serviteurs ne peut représenter que les Apôtres (Jér. etc.) déjà envoyés en mission par Jésus (x, 5 ss.), pour annoncer l'avènement prochain du règne de Dieu. Il n’y a pas à insister sur le détail des préparatifs qui ne sont allégoriques que comme une vague allusion aux biens messianiques — ἄριστον est opposé à δεῖπνον dans Le. x1v, 12, comme notre déjeuner au diner; ef. Le. x1. 38. Comme il s'agit d’un roi et d’un festin nuptial, les préparatifs sont considérables. σιτιστός est employé comme épithète dans Josèphe (Ant. VITE, n, 4) à propos des repas de Salomon. Les grands repas chez les Grecs et les Romains se faisaient le soir; peut-être Mt. a-t-il indiqué un déjeuner pour laisser plus de temps à l'appel d’autres invités.
22:5
Combien plus précis et plus animés les excuses et les prétextes mis en avant dans Le.! Ils sont d’ailleurs plus à leur place dans sa parabole où le rang social des convives est beaucoup plus accusé. Mt. veut seulement mettre en relief deux sentiments qui s'opposent à l'appel de Dieu. Le premier est un trop grand attachement aux biens temporels, qui fait négliger l'invitation.
22:6
Le second sentiment est la révolte ouverte. Assurémemt ce n’est point l'usage de répondre à une invitation à diner par l'insulle et le meurtre, comme ce n'est pas l'usage de payer le fermage en tuant l'héritier. Ces traits peu vraisemblables ne font que mieux ressortir dans l’allégorie l'ingratitude des invités. On prétend que Mt. avait en vue la mort d'Élienne, de Jacques, d’autres encore. Mais Jésus avait prédit à ses disciples les persécutions (x, 26 ss.). Cette fois il n’est pas question de la mort du Fils. C’est sans doute parce qu'il figure comme époux. Mais Mt., s’il avait écrit d'après l'événement, n’aurait-il pas parlé de sa résurrection? 10. ους (H) plutôt que ὁσοὺς (TSV) — νυμφων (THS) et non γαμος (Ὁ).
22:7
Autre trait qui serait étrange dans une parabole démonstrative. ‘Les invités rebelles sont censés habiter:la même wille, assez éloignée della capitale du royaume. 6 trait n’est là que pour sa portée allégorique. ‘Les Pères + ont çuame altusion:à la ruine de Jérusalem, brûlée par les armées de Vespasien. Mais ators Vespasien serait le roi de la parabole? Jésus parle sans spécifier de la ‘colère de Dieu quia pesé non seulement sur la ville, mais'sur'tout le peuple, entraîné dans la ruine par ses chefs. « Il brüla la ville dans le feu» est une phrase toute faite qui revient plus de trente fois dans la Bible, dans le Pentateuque, Jérémie et Ézéchiel et même dans 1 Macch. 1, 31 à propos de Jérusalem. Et l'on avance que cette prédiction n'a pu être écrite par ΜΙ. qu'après lan 70! Rien de plus certain d'ailleurs que la prophétie de Jésus sur la ruine de la ville et du Temple. — Des critiques modérés, comme-MeNeile et Plummer «estiment que les versets 6 à 7 sont une addition qui ‘dérange l'économie du récit. — Cela serait vrai de la parabole de Le., mais non de l’allégorie de Mt., à un moment où Jésus voulait prévenir les Sanhédrites du péril où ils couraient (xxr, 43; xx, 49 55:). .
22:8
τότε est du style de Mt.; il ἃ cependant une portée au moins relative. Ainsi c’est après la ruine des Juifs que le roi envoie encore des serviteurs. 'M.'Loisy « Et lesroi.a-t-il toujours autant de serviteurs, bien qu'on les lui ait tués? » « Et que devient le repas..? » etc. (11, 325). La situation est trop grave pour ‘qu'on s'arrête à ces froides :plaisanteries. La difficulté véritable serait celle que créent les critiques en voyant ici une invention de Mt. — Ceux qu'on va appeler représentent les gentils (Chrys. Jér. etc.). Pouvait-on, si l'on s'inspirait de L'histoire, reculer l'appel des gentils après la ruine du Temple, c'est-à-dire après la mort de Paul, l'apôtre des gentils? Tout est naturel dans la ‘perspective de Jésus, la ruine du Temple ayant marqué le moment où les gentils prirent la place d'Israël. Autre est la perspective prophétique qui procède par tableaux successifs, autre l'exécution historique. Le dessein du roi ne peut être frustré. Dieu a toujours des serviteurs, et son festin peut attendre: ‘il ‘est toujours prêt. Les invités ne se sont pas montrés dignes de l'honneur qu'on leur faisait. Manifestement, s'ils ne sont pas élus, c’est bien leur faute. Le mot οὐχ ἄξιοι serait trop doux pour les rebelles seuls, maisil s’applique aussi aux «9 s.) H faut bien:noter (avec Jülicher) que Mt. ne parde ni des:pauvres;ni des-estropiés. Il n’y a-pas ici comme dans Lc.un ‘contraste d'ordre: social. Au lieu et-place «de ceux qui se croyaient seuls justes, seuls amis:de Dieu, en appélle maintenant tout le monde, bons et mauvais. D'ailleurs il n°y a pas trace de violence; ceux qui viennent acceptent donc l’invitatian. Nous sommes sur le “terrain de la parabole de l'ivraie (x, 24-30; 36-43) ou du coup de filet (πα, 47 ss). La conclusion qui va suivre est ainsi préparée. — νομφών, variante importante. Elle est soutenue par mBL 892 deux cursifs de Soden, Gyr-Al. syreur. et sin.,sah. Elle doit être préférée précisément parceque le mot est rare οἱ méme-un peu impropre, ear vpedvensgrec et dans:la Bible grecque (Tobie, vi, 13.46) signifie ordinairement la chambre nuptiale. γάμος (tous les autres) est une correction facile-et banale. Mais si νυμφών ‘est la lecon :authentique, elle n’a de raison d’être que comme traduction:par à peu près ‘de: Laram. nnnws na. En hébr. nnw signifiait un festin, originairement une beuverie, mais comme le festin pour les gens de la campagne n'avait lieu que lors des mariages (Jud. σιν, 10. 12.7), ce-mot avait fini par signifier en araméen. (nu) festin de“mariage. C'est-exactement le cas ici. La dérivation s’est doncproduite en sens inverse du grec, où γάμος est devenu « festin nuptial
22:11
ἔνδυμα γάμου, serait la foi luthérienne, d'après les anciens protestants, celle qui justifie sans les œuvres. Jülicher et J. Weiss ont fait justice de cette fantaisie, ou plutôt de ce contresens caractérisé. Tous ceux qui sont entrés ont accepté l'invitation. Ils ont done la foi; maïs l’un d'eux n'a pas les œuvres de la justice (cf. v, 20; vn, 23 etc.), comme disait déjà Irénée (1v, 36, 6) et iustitine operibus adornari. — oùx (et non μή) avec le participe est de bon style (Deb. 8. 430, 1). Noter le caractère sémitique de l'expression ἐνδεδυμένον ἔνδυμα, cf. Soph. 1, 8 πάντας τοὺς ἐνδεδυμένους ἔνδυματα ἀλλότρια, En grec on dirait ἐνδεδυμένον avec un mot d'une autre racine. C’est toujours le même procédé que καλέσαι τοὺς χεχλημένους.
Ba-scène change. Précédemment le mélange: des bons etiides mauvais était toléré; c'est dire qu’on était dans les temps messianiques tels que les prévoyait la parabole de l'ivraie, le règne ‘du Fils (xmr, 41). A l’arrivée du roi, il n’en estiplus ainsi; si quelqu'un n’est pas digne de prendre part au festin, il sera exclu. Le roi vient donc pour juger, et le festin qui.suit le jugement est latbéatitude. Cela estsuffisamment clair, et c'est: par là que la parabole de Mt. se-distingue-de celle de Le. Outre l'appel des gentils à la place ‘des Juifs, M. aborde le thème du discernement dans ce qu'il faut bien appeler l'Église. On lui reproche d’avoir parlé d'après l'expérience chrétienne, Ge n'est pas une question pour mous que Jésus ait connu d'avance cette situation. «Mais sans renoncer à sa science parfaite,:nous pouvons faire remarquer aux critiques que rien ne dépasse ἰοἱ 165 pressentiments du bon sens. Les eschatologisies eux-mêmes me peuvent se montrer difficiles, tant la perspective des noces: parfaites est rapprochée du temps de la dernière invitation. Plulôt que de voir ici un reflet dela situation de l'Église quarante ans ou plus après la mort du Christ, 13. δησαντες ... ἐεχθαλετε (THV) et non ἀρατε αὐτὸν ποδὼν χαὶ χειρῶν χαὶι βαλετε (85). il faudrait rappeler que cette perspective ne doit pas faire oublier la doctrine de Jésus sur le développement du règne de Dieu. La vraie difficulté est de l'ordre littéraire. Comment le roi peut-il reprocher à l’homme d'être venu sans robe nuptiale, puisqu'on a ramassé tout le monde dans la rue? Avait-il le temps de se préparer? On dirait que les vv. 11-13 ne sont que la conclusion d’une autre parabole, dans le genre de celle qui figure dans Chabbat, 1085, attribuée à lokhanan ben Zakkaï (vers 100 ap. J.-C.) et dans le Midrach du Qobhéleih, sur 1x, 8, attribuée à Rabbi lehouda le saint (vers 200 ap. J.-C.). Un roi invite à un festin, et recommande aux invités de venir avec des habits propres. Comme il n'avait pas indiqué l'heure, les uns vont à leurs affaires, les plus prudents seulement se tiennent en toilette à la porte du palais. Au moment voulu, les uns sont admis, les autres exclus, parce qu’ils souillent le palais. La lecon de cette parabole est qu'il faut être prêt dans la tenue convenable. La négligence de ceux qui vont à leurs affaires n’est en aucune facon un refus de l'invitation. La parabole juive ne peut donc pas servir à réduire à l'unité l'apparente dualité de celle de Mt. Elle suggère au contraire que l'exclusion de l'invité mal vêtu s’expliquerait mieux après une recommandation qui eût laissé le temps nécessaire. Cela est incontestable. Mais si la parabole est trop concise dans Mt., il suppose néanmoins que les convives, sauf un, ont la robe nuptiale. Et cependant ce sont tous gens qui cireulaient dans les rues. Ils ont donc eu le temps de se changer. Nous rencontrons toujours ce même dédain d'éviter les invraisemblances, qui n'empêche pas de tirer d'une parabole. la leçon voulue. D'ailleurs Mt. néglige le détail. Nous reconnaissons bien sa main dans la rédaction, mais plutôt à ce qu'il omet qu'à ce qu'il aurait ajouté.
22:12
D'anciens commentateurs expliquaient le reproche du Roi à un homme ramassé dans la rue par l'usage de donner des habits d'honneur aux invités d'une noce. Il eût été bien sot de refuser! Mais outre que cet usage n’est point assez prouvé, il n’y est fait ici'aucune allusion. Les paroles ne sont point trop sévères, mais le ion est péremptoire (ef. xx, 10); il faut s'expliquer. Aucune échappatoire n'est valable à ce moment. .
22:13
Conclusion comme dans la parabole de l'ivraie (xur, #1), sans qu'il soit question de la fournaise; mais c’est bien la réprobation. Si le bonheur des justes n’est pas décrit, c'est qu'ils sont déjà installés dans la salle du festin.
22:14
Parmi tous ceux bons et mauvais, qui ont répondu à l'invitation, un seul est réprouvé. On n'oserait en tirer des conclusions théologiques trop favorables, car cet individu est représentatif d'une catégorie. Néanmoins le v. 44 est plus sévère, et ne paraît pas répondre très strictement à ce qui vient d’être dit. D'autre part on ne peut, sans violence, l'appliquer seulement à la première partie de la parabole. Il résume donc toute la situation. C’est l'expression d’une vérité générale, dont la stricte portée théologique ne peut être déterminée, ni pour ceux qui sont en dehors, ni pour ceux qui sont dans l'Église. De toute façon, le Seigneur exprime fortement l'appel de Dieu, car on peut dire que d’après le sens de of πολλοί (cf. Comm. Mc. x, 45) il invite toute la communauté humaine. Il n’est pas dit non plus que peu sont prédestinés, pour ne pas effrayer, mais seulement que peu sont élus, ce qui résulte, d'après la parabole, de la mauvaise volonté des récalcitrants. La sentence, si redoutable qu'elle soit, est donc plus douce que d’autres formules admises dans le judaïsme : hoc saeculum fecit altissimus propter multos, futurum autem propter-paucos… multi quidem creati sunt, pauci autem salvabuntur (IV Esd. ναι, 1-3); plures sunt qui pereunt quam qui salvabuntur, sicut multiplicat fluctus super guttam (id. 1x, 15); cf. Apoc. Bar. xLIV, 12 58. Nous pouvons maintenant essayer de résoudre les questions posées au début. La première partie de la parabole de Mt. est la même que celle de Le. Mais c'est Le. qui lui a donné une portée plus générale, en ne tenant pas compte de la circonstance de la noce, qui est parfaitement dans le mode sémilique, ni du châtiment des premiers invités qui ne devait atteindre que les Juifs. La parabole de Mt. apparaît donc comme tout à fait authentique et primitive, mais probablement écourtée par le retranchement des détails. Si le traducteur a soigné le grec en mettant des μέν et des δέ (v. 8 et 9), il a καλέσαι τοὺς κεχλημένους (v. 4) et encore χαλεῖν (v. 9), ce que Le. a évité. IL est d'ailleurs très vraisemblable que le texte ou la tradition que suivait Le. avait déjà entendu le festin nuptial d'un festin ordinaire. Assurément N.-$. a pu prononcer celte parahole deux fois, mais nous n’en avons d'autre indice que la place différente dans.Le. et des variantes qui peuvent s'expliquer par les modalités de la tradition. Il nous semble de plus que la deuxième partie de la parabole de Mt. est littérairement la fin d'une autre parabole, soudée à la première. Mais elle. n’en est pas moins authentique en elle-même, avec le même caractère sémitisant (Éved. ἔνδυμα, v. 41); la soudure a été bien préparée. Est-ce. Jésus lui-même qui à fait ce rapprochement? On serait tenté de le nier à cause dela difficulté de Ja transition, mais la beauté de la perspective totale inclinerait à le penser. Une fois transformée ainsi, la parabole était parfaitement à 88. place après les deux précédentes, montrant aux chefs d'Israël qu'ils allaient à la ruine en refusant l'invitation du Sauveur, et prévenant ceux qui l'accepteraient des.conditions exigées. pour participer à son règne.
22:15
Dans Mc. les sanhédrites : princes des prêtres, scribes et anciens (xr, 27), renonçant à une lutte ouverte (xx, 12), envoient des émissaires, Pharisiens et Hérodiens. Dans Mt., ce sont les Pharisiens, associés aux princes des prêtres (ext, 45), qui tiennent un conseil, et comme il s’agit de tendre un piège, ils ne reviennent pas en personne. — παγιδεύσωσιν est une expression plus précise et plus juste que ἀγρεύσωσιν (Mc.), car il s’agit bien d'un piège tendu, plus que d'une poursuite ouverte; cf. 1 Regn. xxvin, 9 ἵνα τί σὺ παγιδεύεις τὴν ψυχήν" μου θανατῶσαι αὐτήν: — λόγῳ (Mc.) indique plutôt la question que la réponse: de même ἐν λόγῳ, puisque c’est Le filet dans lequel une réponse suspecte jettera leur proie.
22:16
λεγοντες (SV) plutôt que λεγοντας (TH).
Pour plus de prudence, les Pharisiens demeurent dans la coulisse et envoient leurs disciples, moins connus, avec les Hérodiens, que Mi. ne nomme qu'ici. Les Pharisiens n'étaient pas absolument hostiles à Rome; ils se réservaient. Si Jésus avait refusé le tribut, les Hérodiens n'auraient pas manqué de le dénoncer à l'autorité romaine, avec laquelle ils étaient en coquetterie Payer le tribut, c'était, dans l'opinion générale, renoncer au rôle messianique. — La: terminaison — tavos vient du latin; cf. Pompejani, Caesariani; elle est devenue fréquente pour les noms-de sectes (Deb. 8 5, 2). Jérôme semble y voir un sobriquet : iludentes Pharisaei… Herodianos vocabant. Josèphe (Bell. I, xvr, 6) parle des Ἡρωδεῖοι et des ᾿Αντιγονεῖοι. Le nom venait donc des guerres enire les Asmonéens et Hérode. —.Le petit discours persuasif. Dans‘Mc. ‘tes deux propositions négatives sont encadrées dans les positives; dans Mf. les positives viennent d'abord, puis les négatives. Parallélisme enchevétré ou régulier, on ne saurait dire quelle tournure est plus sémitique. Mais le texte de Me. est certainement plus habile, se terminant par une sorte d'adjuration à ne pas abandonner la voie de Dieu. Origène n'avait pas tort de dire que les Pharisiens parlaient en agents provocateurs pour livrer Jésus aux Hérodiens. ἐν ἀληθείᾳ est la forme sémitique, avec 2, que les Syriens ont dû employer même pour ἐπ᾽ ἀληθείας de Mc. et Le.
22:17
Mt. prépare la question décisive ; τί σοι δοκεῖ est de son style; cf. xx, 38 etc. mais il n’a pas le dilemme pratique : Donnerons-nous, ou ne donnerons-nous
22:18
πονηρία remplace ὑπόχρισις qui revient dans le style direct; c'est dans Mi. quekésus parle 16 plus sévèrement aux Pharisiens.
22:19
τὸ νόμισμα τοῦ κήνσου est trés logiquement le point de la question, et précisément ce qu’il fallait dire. Nommer le denier, mot latin, c'était déjà la résoudre. Mc. va donc au plus court, suivi par Le., tandis que Mt. suit sa voie. Ce sont les adversaires qui s’enferrent en apportant un denier. Si c’est une correction de Mt., elle est des plus fines. — προσήνεγκαν (au lieu de ἤνεγκαν seul), verbe du style de Mt. — Le délicieux ἵνα ἴδω, si finement ironique, a peut-être été omis à dessein par Le. et par Mt. qui ne s'arrêtent pas au détail de la physionomie humaine du Seigneur. 22 s.) Gomme Me. ; τότε du style de Mt.; οὖν met la réponse en forme. 99) καὶ ἀφέντες αὐτὸν ἀπῆλθον est dans Me. zur, 42; mais cf. xxi, ἀῦ 5. ἢ serail 30. om. θεου p. αγγελοι (H) plutôt que add. (TS[V tou θεον]). étrange que Mt. ait transposé à dessein cette petite phrase si simple. Mt. fait partir ces adversaires pour laisser la place aux Sadducéens.
22:21
αὐτῷ (SV) plutôt que om. (TH).
22:23
Mt. seul indique que le fait se passa le même jour; mais il y ἃ aussi continuité dans les deux autres. — λέγοντες, sans article, pourrait signifier que les Sadducéens avancèrent leur opinion à ce moment même (verss. syriennes), si le même mot n'était répété (v. 24) pour dire comment ils parlèrent. Le sens est donc bien qui dicunt, ce que la recension d’Antioche a assuré en ajoutant l'article. Il y ἃ donc dans ΜΙ. une indigence sémitique un peu corrigée par Mc. et davantage par Le.
22:24
Mt. n'avait aucune raison de changer ἔγραψεν (Me. Le.) en εἶπεν. Mais ce mot est conforme à sa manière : «il a été dit » v, 21 etc., « Dieu a dit » (xv, 4 — Me. x, 10). Dans l'exposé du cas, où Le. suit la construction un peu embrouillée de Mc., Mt. procède directement, τίς au lieu de τινὸς ἀδελφός, ne parlant qu'une fois de la femme. — ἐπιγαμόρεύσει (futur législatif, vg. uf ducat) est la traduction directe de 22° (terme technique) dans Deut. xxv, 5, au lieu de λάδῃ (LXX Me. Le.); cf. Gen. xxxvin, 8, γάμδρευσαι αὐτήν, καὶ ἀνάστησον σπέρμα τῷ ἀδελφῷ σον. Donc Le., pour un usage juif, se tient très près du texte de Μο., tandis que Mt. suit son chemin. Mais il est remarquable que les trois, au lieu de ἀναστῆσαι τὸ ὄνομα (Dt. xxv, 7), ont σπέρμα. C'est la locution de Gen. xxxvn, 8, qui semble avoir inspiré Mt. — Le lévirat était contraire à une interdiction de mariage pour affinité. Les raisons qui avaient fait naître cet usage n'exerçaient plus le même empire. Il est probable que les Sadducéens n'en étaient pas partisans, et qu'en choisissant ce cas ils ont voulu deux fois se moquer de la doctrine des Pharisiens. Du moins les Karaïtes, leurs héritiers, le rejetèrent et les Rabbanites le limitèrent le plus possible. — Quoique les Sadducéens aient été avant tout le parti politique du haut Sacerdoce, ce parti devait avoir ses théoriciens, moins engagés dans les affaires, plus absorbés par les questions de doctrine. C'est grâce à eux que Josèphe a pu parler de philosophie (Bell. II, vnr, 2); ce sont ceux-là qui argumentent ici, tandis que les princes des prêtres ont recours à d’autres moyens.
22:25
παρ᾽ ἡμῖν, propre à Mt.; le casus n’est donc pas imaginaire, et on ne pouvait répondre : nego suppositum. Il n'était point aisé de le rédiger sans trop se répéter, tout en disant le nécessaire. Mec. ne dit pas que tous les frères épousèrent la femme, et Le. ne l'a pas amélioré en bloquant le second et le troisième. La solution de Mt. est la plus heureuse. Le premier laisse sa femme au suivant. ἢ suffit donc de dire que les autres en firent autant.
22:26
Le dernier aussi laisse sa femme sans enfant; mais il n’y a plus de frère pour l'épouser. .
22:27
ὕστερον, sept fois dans Mt. qui (non plus que Lc.) n’emploie jamais ἔσχατον adv., lequel est dans Me. x, 22 et 1 Cor. xv, 8 : ἔσχατον δὲ πάντων.
22:28
Mt. ajoute οὖν, selon sa manière argumentative (xx, 21), mais n'a pas mis ὅταν ἀναστῶσιν qui appuie sur la difficulté concrète du cas.
22:30
ἐν τῇ ἀναστάσει (Mc. ὅταν Ex νεκρῶν ἀναστῶσιν) conserve le schéma de l’objection. Comment Mt. qui écrit ordinairement οἱ οὐρανοί, aurait-il mis le singulier pour changer le pluriel de Me.? — θεοῦ p. ἄγγελοι (T 5 Hetz. Vog.) est omis par H, d'après B D @ 3 min. sah. af τύ syrcur.
22:31
Un substantif au lieu d'un verbe (ὅτι ἐγείρονται), mais surtout (comme 32. om. θεὸς p. θεος 4° (TH) et non add. (SV). 87. om. τὴ @. καρδιὰ (H) plutôt que add. (TSV). xv, 4) l'Écriture est citée comme une parole prononcée par Dieu, au lieu d’une section du livre de Moïse. Le. qui ἃ reproduit Mc. aurait pu employer pour les gentils la formule de Mt., mais quelle raison Mt. aurait-il eue de changer Me., lui écrivant contre les Juifs, et aimant à citer l'Écriture? — buiv propre à Mt.; la parole de Dieu est toujours vivante et s’adresse aux adversaires aussi bien qu'à leurs pères,
22:32
Comme Mc.; en moins πολὺ πλανᾶσθε, Pour le fond de l'argumentation, cf. Comm. Mt.
22:33
Propre à ΜΙ. ici; mais semblable à Me. x1, 18b. « La doctrine.» après ces nombreuses. discussions. est plus topique que. dans Mc. où l’étonnement porte au moins. autant sur une action de Jésus. 34-40, LE GRAND COMMANDEMENT (Me. χα, 28-31). La queslion est traitée par Le. dans un autre contexte (x, 25-29). Les différences entre Mc. el Mt., qui ont été et sont encore une difficulté pour les exégètes catholiques, devraient prouver du moins que Mt. ne dépend pas de Me. Cest. une controverse succincte, duthème de Ma...
22:34
ἐπ΄ œuroy plutôt que ἐπὶ τὸ αὐτὸ (THSV).
Propre à Mt. Nous lisons ἐπ’ αὐτόν avec D Θ af'it syrsin.-cur. et non ἐπὶ τὸ αὐτό avec tous les autres témoins et les éditions. Raison de cette dérogation à notre: critère habituel : le ps. 11, 2 : συνήχθησαν ἐπὶ τὸ αὐτό a. été entendu très justement par les premiers chrétiens de la conjuration des ennemis du Christ (Act. 1v, 26 s.). Il était donc inévitable que des copistes habitués à réciter le psautier introduiraient ici cette leçon. De même ceux qui lisaient en: grec ἐπ᾿ αὐτόν devaient naturellement traduire « contre lui »; cf. «dversus. eum Q: (de la vg.)bcde ff? h; et de même Hilaire. Mais syrsin. et cur. ὁ ἃ f ont compris que ἐπ᾿ αὐτόν signifiait près de lui, ad: eum, exactement comme dans Mt. v, 24, et cette leçon sans signification accentuée nous parait de beaucoup la meilleure pour le sens, comme celle qui avait 18 moins de chances de résister à la poussée de l'opinion des copistes sur l'hostilité fatale des Pharisiens. Car ce n'est pas le cas ici. Les Pharisiens de doctrine ne pouvaient qu'être satisfaits de voir les Sadducéens réduits au silence (litt. muselés}, et par conséquentils devaient être tentés de mettre Jésus de leur côté. La question n'avait pas, comme les précédentes, le caractère d'un piège. Les évangélistes ne s'arrêtent pas à noter des nuances qui cependant ont dù exister. Les Pharisiens qui proposent une question spéculative peuvent être très. distincts de ceux qui, unis aux Hérodiens, avaient abordé un point brûlant de la politique; ils se réunissent,, non pas pour comploter, mais pour écouter. Les copistes-ont naturellement préféré.en masse le texte du Ps., rappelé par les Actes.
22:35
Le scribe de Mc. paraît interroger de bonne foi, et Jésus reconnaît ses bonnes intentions. Dire qu’un interrogateur perfide est devenu si vite un disciple docile, ce serait une échappatoire mal avisée. Mais sur quoi s'appuie ici l'accusation de perfidie, tellement poussée au noir par Jérôme”? Sur πειράζων de Mt. Or ce mot peut avoir un sens plus anodin : sonder, éprouver, pour savoir, et non toujours en mauvaise part. On le reconnaîtrait (Plum.), n'était que l’homme se présente au nom des Pharisiens. Mais ce Pharisien est peut-être pour le moment bien impressiommé. D'après Mé. il ne vient pas pour réparer la déroute d'ailiés, mais pour trouver un allié éventuel contre d'anciens adversaires. On n’a donc pas le droit de dire que Mt., en haine des Pharisiens, a transformé le bénévole scribe de Me. en tentateur sournois. IE est d'äiléurs étrange que Mt. dise iei seulement votés (Le. au moins six fois), mot’ de Le:, qui l’emploie précisément avec ἐχπειράζων dans le récit analogue (x, 25); comme εἷς (pour τίς) ἐξ αὐτῶν est une désignation suffisante, on peut croire que les deux autres mots sont venus de Le. et dus à des copistes; νομικός estom. par fam 1, af syrsin. De toute facon, Me., selon son génie, a-pénétré et rendu les dispositions individuelles conerètes du docteur, tandis que dans Mt. il n’est guère qu’un Pharisien quelconque.
22:36
Mt. ἃ 6 plus διδάσπαλε et: ἐν τῷ νόμῳ, qui donnent bien à la question le cachet d'un problème d'école. — μεγάλη, positif pour le superlatif, beaucoup plus sémitique (21) que πρώτη πάντων, cf. II Chr. xx1v, 11 où le prêtre tête est le grand-prêtre.
22:37
Comme Mt. mais avec ἐν (au lieu de ἐξ, trois fois), ce qui est plus près dé Yhébreu (Dé. νι, δ) et sans ἐξ ὅλης τῆς ἰσχύος σου. Il est clair en effet que ces mots ne font pas partie du texte authentique de Mt. Mais au lieu de διανοίᾳ on trouve ἰσχύϊ dans Clénr. Paed. IL, χη, 88 (304) dans Orig. ur, 30 οἵ 1v, 618 soit 2 fois contre 2, dans Zénon de Vérone (P.L. XI, c. 274), syrsin. et cur., et le ms. ὁ, Cette lecon est conforme à l’hébreu : « dans tout ton cœur, dans loute ton âme, 39. om. de p. δευτερα (TH) plutôt que add. (SV) --- αὐτῇ (TSV) on om. avec B plutôt que αὕτη (H). 43. om. o Insouc p. αντοις (THV) et non add. (8). 44, om. o a. Κυριος (TH) plutôt que add. (SV). dans toute ta force », mais si l’on a pu corriger Mt. d’après l’hébreu, il est tout aussi probable qu'on l'ait retouché d'après Mc. De toute façon ἐν au lieu de ἐξ indique un recours à l’hébreu (LXX ἐξὶ qui a peut-être réagi sur Lc. x, 27. Si le traducteur Mt. ἃ vraiment écrit Stavolx, on peut croire que ne voulant conserver que trois termes avec l’hébreu (au lieu de quatre dans Mc. et dans Le.) il a préféré « l'esprit » qui correspondait mieux à l'âme et au cœur que la force qui est un mode.
22:38
Propre à ML, car il n'aura pas été emprunter πρώτη à Mc. χη, 28.
22:39
Comme Mc., mais ὁμοία αὐτῇ (Mc. αὔτη) montre que le second commandemént est fondé sur le premier. La ressemblance est dans la charité qui ne se porte sur le prochain qu'à cause de Dieu.
22:40
Au lieu de μείζων τούτων ἄλλη ἐντολὴ οὐχ ἔστιν (Mc.), contenu virtuellement dans le titre de premier commandement auquel le second est assimilé, Mt. a une vue originale qui se relie au point fondamental du discours inaugural (v, 17) sur la Loi et les prophètes. On comprend maintenant quel était cet ordre divin que Jésus n'était pas venu détruire, mais perfectionner; c'était essentiellement la loi de la charité, et cela est dit dans des termes qui rappellent un programme qu’on prétend être judéo-chrétien (v. 17)! La doctrine de Paul (Gal. v, 14) vient de celle de Jésus. — Quant ὁ à l'image :on peut être pendu contre un mur, appui solide du clou (15. xxn, 24), en étant suspendu à un clou : le grec emploie ἐξ (Gen. xxiv, 30; Judith, vu, 24); ἐν est donc un sémitisme pour 2. Or on trouve précisément cette tournure dans le Talmud « Quel estle petit commandement auquel est suspendu tout le corps de Ia Loi» (na von ana ‘ou 92w)? Et il cite Prov. nr, 6 : « Pense à Lui dans toutes tes voies, et il aplanira tes sentiers. » Ge mot — qui ne fait aucune allusion au *iLe Seigneur a dit à mon Seigneur; Assieds-toi à ma droite, jusqu'à ce que je mette tes ennemis sous tes pieds ? prochain — est attribué à Bar Qappara, après l'an 200 (Berakoth 63 3). — On voit que Jésus répond au docteur avec bonté, pour l'éclairer, et Mt, n'indique pas le moins du monde que le docteur ait été pris dans son piège ou seulement embarrassé comme celui de Le. S'il n'a pas la conclusion tout à fait sympathique de Mc., c’est sans doute qu’il ne dépendait pas de lui.
22:41
συνηγμένων s'accorde bien avec le v. 34 tel que nous l'avons compris. Les Pharisiens étaient groupés, non pour comploter, mais pour savoir à quoi s’en tenir sur Jésus. L'un d'eux avait posé une question sur la Loi, Jésus va en poser une sur le Messie. Cet arrangement très naturel ne peut être tiré de Mc. qui ἃ ici un début à nouveau. Dans Mc. et Le. Jésus exprime son étonnement sur l'opinion des Scribes. Le but serait donc seulement de mettre la foule en doute sur la valeur de leur enseignement à tout le moins incomplet, d'éveiller son attention, car elle ne pouvait guère résoudre un point si délicat.
22:42
Dans Mt. la question est posée aux Pharisiens, dans son style habituel, τί ὑμῖν δοκεῖ, cf. χχι, 28 elc. — ἐστίν, présent juridique (ef. xx1v, 43); « de qui doit-il être le fils », plutôt que style des oracles, le présent pour le futur (Küh.-G. 11, 1, p.138). Dans la bouche du Christ ce présent est plus impressionnant. La réponse était à prévoir; c'était aussi la foi du peuple qui avait acclamé Jésus, mais elle ne disait pas tout. .
22:43
οὖν, style argumentatif de ML, cf. v. 21; interrogation pour continuer le même rythme. — ἐν πνεύματι ne peut pas être secondaire par rapport à ἐν τῷ πνεύpast τῷ ἁγίῳ (Mc.). La question est posée plus nettement pour aboutir à l'ergo implicite du v. 45, où il y ἃ inclusio avec πῶς. 4%) Le texte de Mi. est certainement ὑποκάτω, peut-être réminiscence du Ps. vur, 7. Mais peut-être était-ce un équivalent araméen de Ma., traduit liftéralement par Mt. — κύριος sans art. quoiqu'il soit dans les LXX, pour désigner le Seigneur comme unique et déterminé par lui-même; cf. 1, 20. 22 ; τι, 3. Dans Mc. et Le. plus probablement ὃ Βύριος.
22:46
Propre à Mt, pour clore toutes ces discussions. Personne ne pouvait répondre, s'entend surtout des Sanhédrites (xx, 23-21) et des Pharisiens (xxIr, 15-22: 41-46), auxquels leurs questions avaient procuré des interrogations embarrassantes. Mais ceux qui n’avaient rien su répliquer, comme les Sadducéens et le docteur, sans être aussi humiliés, n’en revenaient pas moins bredouilles.
22:1
… κάμινον τοῦ πυρός); ibi erit fletus et stridor dentium" (Mt. 13, 40-42); in the haul of fish, the wicked will be thrown away (Mt. 13, 47-50); at the wedding banquet, whoever does not wear the wedding garment will be cast "in tenebras exteriores" (Mt. 22, 1-14); the foolish virgins will remain outside the door (Mt. 25, 1-13); the slothful servant will be driven from the master's house (Mt. 25, 14, 30; Lk. 19, 1-28).
… 13:24-33), which happens slowly and without anyone noticing (Mt. 13:31-33; Mk. 4:26-29; Lk. 17:20; Is. 18:36); present, or in gestation, the kingdom is nevertheless future, especially as eternal reward for individual faithful at their death (Mt. 22:1-44; Lk. 14:15-24; 16:19-31). And, in connection with the mysterious advent of the Kingdom, Jesus announces his future p., determinable neither in time nor in space (Mt. 24:25-36); …
22:2
… already inaugurated (Matt. 11:12-15; 12:28; Luke 16:16; 17:20 f.; 1 Cor. 15:25); it must grow (Matt. 13:31 f.), throughout the whole world (Mark 3:13-19; 6:7-13; 13:9 f.; 16:15 f., 20; Acts 1:8; etc.), pass to the gentiles (Matt. 8:10 ff.; 21:33-46; 22:2-10 etc.); it is identified with the Church, with Peter at its head (Matt. 16:13-20; John 21:15 ff.; 1 Cor. 12; Rom. 12:3-8 etc.); it includes good and bad (Matt. 13:24-30, 36-43, 47-50; …
… Jesus' teaching bears particularly on humility, which forbids exalting oneself above others and makes relations with one's neighbor easy and loving (Mt. 22:2-12; Lk. 14:7-11). Humility attracts the benevolent gaze of the Lord (Lk. 18:9-14) and makes one avoid ostentation in the fulfillment of the duties of prayer, penance and almsgiving (Mt. …
22:4
… Is. 9, 6 f.; Mic. 5, 5; Ez. 34, 25 f.; etc.; the abundance of spiritual goods, expressed symbolically with the most vivid images of an extraordinary fertility: Is. 7, 21 f.; 9, 3, 6; 32, 1-5.15-18; Ez. 47, 1-12; etc. (cf. the image of the table set: Mt. 22, 4; Lk. 14, 15-24). To the reborn Israel, the assistance of Yahweh (Is. 40-66) assures the triumph over present enemies (Ez. 35-36) and future ones (Ez. 38-39; Dan. 7-12) and every prosperity …
22:7
Matthew, Apostle, Evangelist, Saint
… Certain rationalists, claiming that the allusion to the destruction of Jerusalem contained in Mt. 22, 7 and 24 is a post eventum prophecy,
22:13
… Pt. 2:4); so too Enoch 10:12; 18:11-19:1; 88:1; there Satan is imprisoned for 1000 years (Rev. 20:7). The hell (v.) of the damned is called gehenna (v.); Jesus insists on the eternal torment of the reprobate in the "outer darkness" (Mt. 8:12; 22:13; 25:30) where there is "weeping and gnashing of teeth" (Mt. 13:42, 50; 24:51) because they are excluded from the Kingdom of God (Lk. 13:28) for having rejected the invitation of …
22:14
… On other occasions Jesus alluded to predestination (cf. Mt. 20:23; 22:14; 24:22-24).
… In this last sense the phrase "many are called, but few are chosen" (Mt. 20:16, 22:14) was understood in the past, but today it is preferred to explain the word "elect" in the broader meaning of chosen souls who serve God with ardor. …
22:15
Scribe (Heb. Sôphêr, pl. Sôphêrîm; Gr. Γραμματεύς)
Their hostility toward Jesus, at first as "scandal" at his familiarity with publicans and sinners (Lk. 5:31; 15:2), blind envy at his miracles and jealousy of his popularity (Mt. 22:15), becomes ever more determined hatred: the scribes accuse him, stir the crowd against him, prepare the individual moments of his Passion. …
22:16
HERODIANS ('Ἡρωδιανοί'). - Mentioned together with the Pharisees in Mt. 22:16 and in Mk. 3:6; 12:13. They were not a religious sect: Flavius Josephus regards only the Pharisees, Sadducees, Essenes and Zealots as such; he uses a similar name, 'Ἡρωδεῖοι', to indicate …
22:17
… over the whole land of Israel, part of the country was entrusted to tetrarchs and Judea was placed under the government of a Roman procurator (v. PALESTINA, I). Rome is not named in the Gospels, but they speak repeatedly of her emperors (Lk. 2:1; 3:1; Mt. 22:17-21; Mk. 12:14-17; Lk. 20:22-25; 23:3; Jn. 19:12, 15; etc.) and of their representatives: the legate of Syria (Lk. 2:2), the procurator of Judea Pilate (Lk. 3:1; etc.). …
TIBERIUS, CLAUDIUS NERO (Tiberius Claudius Nero; after his adoption by Augustus, Tiberius Iulius Caesar), ROMAN EMPEROR. - B. 16 Nov. 42 B.C., d. at the villa of Misenum on 16 March 37 A.D. In the New Testament he is named expressly only in Lk. 3:1; he is alluded to in Mt. 22:17, 21 and parallels (when Jesus is questioned about the lawfulness of the tribute to Caesar), Lk. 23:2 and Jn. 19:12, 15 (at the trial of Jesus before Pilate). …
22:19
… A d. was presented to him (Mt. 22:19 ff.; Mk. 12:15 ff.; Lk. 20:24), and the Master pointed out the presence of the imperial image and the inscription on it. It was regarded as the daily wage of a laborer (Mt. 20:2, 10). Angelo Penna
It is quite probable that the tribute money shown to Jesus (Mt. 22:19 ff. and parallels) was that of T.; in that case it was of silver and bore on the obverse the image of the Emperor crowned, surrounded by the inscription: Tiberias Caesar Divi Augusti …
22:21
… Moreover, alongside civil society there exists a more perfect society, the Church, to which exclusively, according to the teaching of Christ, "Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's" (Mt. 22, 21), belongs the power in the supernatural order.
… Finally, the superiority of the Church does not diminish the sovereignty of the State, as the divine founder of the Church expressly indicated with those words: "render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's" (Mt. 22:21). This the Church affirms in the hymn of the feast of the Epiphany: "non eripit mortalia qui regna dat caelestia," and the supreme pontiffs have declared it in many documents. …
… Jesus, while asserting that one should give to Caesar what is his due (Mt. 22, 21), while acknowledging in Pilate as judge the power to judge (Is. 19, 11), speaks at the same time of a duty of resistance (Mt. 10, 17 ff.) and of abuse of power. …
Religions, Comparative Study of
Christ for his part ordered his disciples, "render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's" (Mt. 22, 21; cf. Rom. 13, 1-7). His ministers, it is true, have several times favored the game of the Caesars in exchange for the support demanded from them; emperors and kings have meddled …
2. From the beginning of the Christian era to the Middle Ages. - In the Christian teaching of the first centuries and among the Fathers, there prevailed the exhortations to obedience toward public authority, contained in germ in the Gospel (Mt. 20, 25; 22, 21) and more explicitly expressed by St. Paul (Rom., 1, 3, 2) and by St. Peter, who in his first letter (I Pt., 2, 13, 18) counsels submission even toward wicked princes, etiam discolis. …
22:23
The levirate was still in use at the time of Jesus (Mt. 22:23-27; Mk. 12:18-23; Lk. 20:27-32). In the Miṣnāh, the treatise Jēbhāmāth deals with the levirate. …
… Aglaophon begins by interpreting the garment of skins of Gen. 3, 21 given to man after the sin as the body, and by proving resurrection without a body with Mt. 22, 23. Origen is then cited, according to whom in the spiritual bodies of the heirs of the Kingdom of God only the form of the earthly body remained. …
This doctrine, accepted only by the more elevated souls of Israel and rejected by the entire Sadducean sect (cf. Mt. 22:23; Lk. 22:27; Acts 4:1-2; 23:8), became universal teaching in Christianity. …
1. The faith in the resurrection, which Christianity defended against the assault of general unbelief (cf. Mt. 22, 23; Lc. 22, 27; Act. 17, 32; St. Augustine: «In nulla re sic contradicitur fidei christianae, quam in resurrectione carnis» Enarr. in Ps. 88, 2: PL 37, 1134). Over the remains of …
22:24
… To prescriptions of the Pentateuch as of Moses the contemporaries of Christ likewise appeal: the Pharisees (Matt. 19:7; John 8:5; Acts 6:14), the Sadducees (Matt. 22:24), the disciples (John 1:45). The conviction passes to the Apostles (Acts 3:22; Rom. 10:5, 19; 1 Cor. 9:9 etc.) and to the first believers (Acts 7:37; 28:23).
22:29
… Jud., II, 8, 14). Also from the "case" of the woman who had successively married seven husbands, put by the S. to Jesus (Mt. 22, 29-33 and parallels), it seems that they denied not only the resurrection of bodies, but also the immortality of souls. …
22:30
… the perfect spirituality of the angels (cf. G. E. Closen, Die Sünde der Söhne Gottes, Rome 1937). In the New Testament the angels are presented instead more clearly as spirits (Hebr. 1:14), invisible (Col. 1:16), who have no carnal relations (Mt. 22:30), and there is explicit mention of their fall (Iud. 6; II Pt. 2:4).
… 177-180); in the New Testament, on the other hand, its full enunciation is found: "Blessed are the clean of heart, for they shall see God" (Mt. 5:8). "Their angels in heaven always see the face of my Father who is in heaven" (Mt. 18:10), since subsequently (Mt. 22:30) Jesus, affirming that at the moment of the resurrection the elect will be like the angels, implicitly asserts their elevation to the intuitive knowledge of God.
… Virginity already here anticipates the erunt sicut angeli of Mt. 22, 30 (II, 7). The third discourse gives an allegorical exegesis of Gen. 2, 23/4 based on Ephes. 5, 32 and develops the typological relation between Adam and Christ which becomes almost …
III. EVALUATION. — Carnal millenarianism, being diametrically opposed to the Christian spirit (cf. Mt. 22:30; Rom. 14:17; I Cor. 15:50), was rejected from its very birth as a heresy. …
22:31
… Jesus Christ (for example, Mt. 22, 31 ff.), St. Paul (for example, I Cor. 9, 7-11), the Fathers of the Church and the scholastics made use of such scriptural deductions and applications, and without doubt the consequent sense …
2. Hebrew revelation. — The existence of a divine revelation to the Hebrew people is one of the fundamental teachings of Christianity; to it Jesus and the Apostles explicitly appeal (Mt. 5:18, 21 ff.; 22:31; Acts 1:16; 28:25; Rom. 1:2; Heb. 1:1; 3:7). Christian revelation itself
22:35
… Theol., 2ᵃ-2ᵃᵉ, q. 184, a. 1). Such is the teaching of Christ (Mt. 22:35; Mk. 12:31), who said that by supernatural charity his true disciples will be recognized (Jn. 17:21). Charity indeed holds the primacy in the spiritual life (I Cor. 12:31; I …
… Aser. 2:10. The religious teacher is called, at the time of Jesus, "man of the t., teacher of the t." (νομικός; Matt. 22:35; Luke 7:30, etc.; νομοδιδάσκαλος; Luke 5:17; Acts 5:34). For the rabbis of the 1st century, wisdom consists in the science of the T. ('Abōth, III, 9); hence the rabbi is today called "wise" (ḥākhām). …
22:37
… It is also the fulfillment of the first commandment, since it prescribes not only to love God with all one's heart, but also « with all one's soul and with all one's spirit » (Mt 22:37). Like his Sera-
greatest commandment" (Mt. 22:37). The neighbor is the secondary object of charity: "The second commandment is like it: you shall love your neighbor as yourself" (ibid.).
Stoicism) finds its foundation in the concept that all men are children of God and equal before Him. Hence the first commandment of evangelical morality, which joins together the love of God and the love of neighbor, to which the greatest emphasis is given (Mt. 22:37; Mk. 12:29). Moral perfection is not the prerogative of a group (Pharisees) or of a class, but is open to all, even to the poor, indeed especially to the poor, to the persecuted, to …
… Father in heaven is perfect" (Mt. 5, 48), deducing from this that every possible perfection is prescribed for us. But the perfection (v.) here commanded consists in loving one's enemies (Mt. 5, 44), as St. Luke explains in a parallel passage (6, 36). In Mt. 22, 37 perfect charity is commanded, in which perfection consists; but such an obligation concerns charity (v.) appetitive summa. …
… change of spirit (μετάνους: Mt. 4, 17; Mk. 1, 4) brought about through Baptism (Mk. 1, 15 and 16, 16; cf. Io. 3, 5), interior holiness in antithesis to Pharisaic formalism (Mt. 5, 20; 23, 23), above all supreme charity toward God and toward neighbor (Mt. 22, 37).
… turn away from 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.). …
22:39
… 7. b) By the theologians and Doctors, of whom we limit ourselves to citing the greatest exponent, St. Thomas Aquinas, who in the op. cit., q. 32, a. 5, after having recalled that love of neighbor is a precept, "Diliges proximum tuum sicut te ipsum" (Mt. 22:39), adds that therefore it is necessary that everything without which it cannot be preserved fall under the same precept: now to the love of neighbor belongs not only wishing him well, …
22:40
… he spoke prophetically of the Resurrection of Christ that he was not abandoned in fē'ōl, nor did his flesh see corruption" (Act. 2, 24-31). In other passages of the New Testament as well there is an allusion to the dwelling of Christ's soul in limbo (Mt. 22, 40; Rom. 10, 6-7; probably in I Pt. 3, 19-20).
22:41
… Son (Ps. 2:7; Heb. 1:5) and equal of Yahweh (Ps. 99 [100]:1: Yahweh invites him to sit at his right hand = Heb. 1:13; Mt. 22:41-46), sovereign of Israel and of the peoples (Ps. 2:6, 8; 71:8-11); priest forever (Ps. 109:4 = Heb. 5:6; 7) = exemplar of righteousness (Ps. 71:7), he will perfectly realize the kingdom …
22:42
… writings (Lc. 2:26; 9:20 [cf. Mt. 16:16]; Act. 3:18; 4:26), there appears in the Gospels (as already in Ps. Salom. 17:32; cf. Eccl. Gr. 46:19) Χριστός Κύριος (Lc. 2:11), a title in which messiahship culminates in the divinity that Jesus claimed (Mt. 22:42-45), and of which St. Paul was the herald. …
22:43
… For example, in Mt. 1:22 God "through" (βίᾳ) the prophet Isaiah (8:8; cf. Mt. 2:15) foretells of the Virgin who will give birth; in Lk. 1:70 He speaks "through the mouth (βίᾳ στόματος) of the holy prophets"; in Mt. 22:43, David "in the Spirit" (ἐν πνεύματι) composed Ps. 110:1; in Acts 1:16 the Holy Spirit foretold "through the mouth" (βίᾳ στόματος) of David the "Scripture" of Ps. 41:10; in Acts 4:25, …
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.