Iohn, to prepare al to Christ (as Esay had prophecied of him) baptizeth them to penance, 7 insinuating their reprobation, and the Gentils vocation, 10 teaching also and exhorting ech sort to doe their dutie. 15 That him self is not Christ vvil also iudge his baptized. 19 Iohns imprisonment. 21 Christ being him self also baptized of Iohn, hath testimonie from heauen, 23 as he vvhose generation reduceth vs againe to God.
1Now in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, Pontius Pilate being governor of Judea, and Herod being tetrarch of Galilee, and Philip his brother tetrarch of Iturea and the country of Trachonitis, and Lysanias tetrarch of Abilina:Ma l'anno quintodecimo dell'impero di Tiberio Cesare, essendo proccuratore della Giudea Ponzio Pilato, e tetrarca della Galilea Erode, e Filippo suo fratello tetrarca dell'Iturea, e della Traconitide, e Lisania tetrarca dell'Abilene,AND in the fiftenth yere of the empire of Tiberius Caesar, Pontius Pilate being Gouernour of Ievvrie, and Herod being Tetrarch of Galilee, and Philip his brother Tetrarch of Ituréa and the countrie Trachonîtis, and Lysanias Tetrarch of Abilina,Anno autem quintodecimo imperii Tiberii Cæsaris, procurante Pontio Pilato Judæam, tetrarcha autem Galiææ Herode, Philippo autem fratre ejus tetrarcha Iturææ, et Trachonitidis regionis, et Lysania Abilinæ tetrarcha, 2Under the high priests Annas and Caiphas: the word of the Lord was made unto John, the son of Zachary, in the desert.Sotto i pontefici Anna, e Caifa, il Signore parlò a Giovanni, figliuolo di Zaccaria nel deserto:vnder the high Priests Annas and Caiphas: the vvord of our Lord vvas made vpon Iohn the sonne of Zacharie, in the desert.sub principibus sacerdotum Anna et Caipha: factum est verbum Domini super Joannem, Zachariæ filium, in deserto. 3And he came into all the country about the Jordan, preaching the baptism of penance for the remission of sins.Ed egli andò per tutto il paese intorno al Giordano, predicando il battesimo di penitenza per la remissione de' peccati:And he came into al the countrie of Iordan, preaching the baptisme of penance vnto remission of sinnes: as it is vvritten in the booke of the sayings of Esay the Prophet:Et venit in omnem regionem Jordanis, prædicans baptismum pœnitentiæ in remissionem peccatorum, 4As it was written in the book of the sayings of Isaias the prophet: A voice of one crying in the wilderness: Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make straight his paths.Conforme sta scritto nel libro dei sermoni d'Isaia profeta: Voce di uno, che grida nel deserto: Preparate la via del Signore: raddirizzate i suoi sentieri:A voice of one crying in the desert: prepare the vvay of our Lord, make straight his pathes.sicut scriptum est in libro sermonum Isaiæ prophetæ: Vox clamantis in deserto: / Parate viam Domini; rectas facite semitas ejus: 5Every valley shall be filled and every mountain and hill shall be brought low: and the crooked shall be made straight, and the rough ways plain.Tutte le valli si riempiranno, e tutti i monti, le colline si abbasseranno: e i luoghi tortuosi si raddirizzeranno, e i malagevoli si appianeranno:Euery valley shal be filled: and euery mountaine and hil shal be made lovv, and crooked things shal become straight: and rough vvaies, plaine:omnis vallis implebitur, / et omnis mons, et collis humiliabitur: / et erunt prava in directa, et aspera in vias planas:
6And all flesh shall see the salvation of God.E vedranno tutti gli uomini la salute di Dio.and al flesh shal see the SALVATION of God.et videbit omnis caro salutare Dei. 7He said therefore to the multitudes that went forth to be baptized by him: Ye offspring of vipers, who hath shewed you to flee from the wrath to come?Diceva adunque (Giovanni) alle turbe, che andavano per essere da lui battezzate: Razza di vipere, chi vi ha insegnato a fuggire l'ira, che vi sovrasta?He said therfore to the multitudes that vvent forth to be baptized of him, Ye viper broodes, vvho hath shevved you to flee from the vvrath to come?Dicebat ergo ad turbas quæ exibant ut baptizarentur ab ipso: Genimina viperarum, quis ostendit vobis fugere a ventura ira ? 8Bring forth therefore fruits worthy of penance: and do not begin to say, We have Abraham for our father. For I say unto you that God is able of these stones, to raise up children to Abraham.Fate adunque frutti degni di penitenza, e non vi mettete a dire: Abbiamo Abramo per padre. Imperocché io vi dico, che può Dio da queste pietre suscitar figliuoli ad Abramo.Yeld therfore fruites vvorthie of penance. and doe ye not begin to say, Vve haue Abraham to our father. For I tel you, that God is able of these stones to raise vp children to Abraham.Facite ergo fructus dignos pœnitentiæ, et ne cœperitis dicere: Patrem habemus Abraham. Dico enim vobis quia potens est Deus de lapidibus istis suscitare filios Abrahæ. 9For now the axe is laid to the root of the trees. Every tree therefore that bringeth not forth good fruit shall be cut down and cast into the fire.Imperocché già anche la scure è alla radice degli alberi. Ogni albero adunque, che non porta buon frutto, sarà tagliato, e gettato nel fuoco.And novv the axe is put to the roote of the trees. Euery tree therfore that yeldeth not good fruite, shal be' cut dovvne, and cast into fire.Jam enim securis ad radicem arborum posita est. Omnis ergo arbor non faciens fructum bonum, excidetur, et in ignem mittetur. 10And the people asked him, saying: What then shall we do?E le turbe lo interrogavano, dicendo: Che abbiamo noi dunque a fare?And the multitudes asked him, saying, Vvhat shal vve doe then?Et interrogabant eum turbæ, dicentes: Quid ergo faciemus ? 11And he answering, said to them: He that hath two coats, let him give to him that hath none; and he that hath meat, let him do in like manner.Ed ei rispondeva loro: Chi ha due vesti, ne dia a chi non ne ha: e il simile faccia, chi ha de' commestibili.And he ansvvering, said vnto them: He that hath tvvo coates, let him giue to him that hath not: and he that hath meate, let him doe likevvise.Respondens autem dicebat illis: Qui habet duas tunicas, det non habenti: et qui habet escas, similiter faciat.
12And the publicans also came to be baptized and said to him: Master, what shall we do?E andarono anche de' pubblicani, per essere battezzati, e gli dissero: Maestro, che abbiamo da fare?And the Publicans also came to be baptized, and said to him, Maister, vvhat shal vve doe?Venerunt autem et publicani ut baptizarentur, et dixerunt ad illum: Magister, quid faciemus ? 13But he said to them: Do nothing more than that which is appointed you.Ed egli disse loro: Non esigete più di quello, che vi è stato fissato.But he said to them, Doe nothing more then that vvhich is appointed you.At ille dixit ad eos: Nihil amplius, quam quod constitutum est vobis, faciatis. 14And the soldiers also asked him, saying: And what shall we do? And he said to them: Do violence to no man, neither calumniate any man; and be content with your pay.Lo interrogavano ancora i soldati, dicendo: Che abbiamo da fare anco noi? Ed ei disse loro: Non togliete il suo ad alcuno per forza, né con frode: e contentatevi della vostra paga.And the souldiars also asked him, saying, Vvhat shal vve also doe? And he said to them, Vexe not neither calumniate any man: and be content vvith your stipends.Interrogabant autem eum et milites, dicentes: Quid faciemus et nos ? Et ait illis: Neminem concutiatis, neque calumniam faciatis: et contenti estote stipendiis vestris. 15And as the people were of opinion, and all were thinking in their hearts of John, that perhaps he might be the Christ:Ma stando il popolo in espettazione, e pensando tutti in cuor loro, se mai Giovanni fosse il Cristo:And the people imagining, and al men thinking in their harts of Iohn, lest perhaps he vvere Christ:Existimante autem populo, et cogitantibus omnibus in cordibus suis de Joanne, ne forte ipse esset Christus, 16John answered, saying unto all: I indeed baptize you with water: but there shall come one mightier than I, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to loose. He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire;Giovanni rispose, e disse a tutti: Quanto a me, io vi battezzo con acqua: ma viene uno più possente di me, di cui non son io degno di sciogliere le corregge delle scarpe: egli vi battezzerà, con lo Spirito santo, e col fuoco:Iohn ansvvered, saying vnto al, I in deede baptize you vvith vvater: but there shal come' a mightier then I, vvhose latchet of his shoes I am not vvorthie to vnloose, he shal baptize you in the Holy Ghost and fire.respondit Joannes, dicens omnibus: Ego quidem aqua baptizo vos: veniet autem fortior me, cujus non sum dignus solvere corrigiam calceamentorum ejus: ipse vos baptizabit in Spiritu Sancto et igni:
17Whose fan is in his hand: and he will purge his floor and will gather the wheat into his barn: but the chaff he will burn with unquenchable fire.Egli avrà alla mano la sua pala e pulirà la sua aia, e ragunerà il frumento nel suo granaio; e brugerà la paglia in un fuoco inestinguibile.vvhose fanne is in his hand, and he vvil purge his floore: and vvil gather the vvheate into his barne, but the chaffe he vvil burne vvith vnquencheable fire.cujus ventilabrum in manu ejus, et purgabit aream suam, et congregabit triticum in horreum suum, paleas autem comburet igni inextinguibili. 18And many other things exhorting did he preach to the people.E molte altre cose ancora predicava al popolo, istruendolo.Many other things also exhorting did he euangelize to the people.Multa quidem et alia exhortans evangelizabat populo. 19But Herod the tetrarch, when he was reproved by him for Herodias, his brother’s wife, and for all the evils which Herod had done:Ma Erode il tetrarca, essendo stato ripreso da lui a casa di Erodiade moglie di suo fratello, e a motivo di tutti i mali, che aveva fatti,And Herod the Tetrarch, vvhen he vvas rebuked of him for Herodias his brothers' vvife, and for al the euils vvhich Herod did:Herodes autem tetrarcha cum corriperetur ab illo de Herodiade uxore fratris sui, et de omnibus malis quæ fecit Herodes, 20He added this also above all and shut up John in prison.Aggiunse a tutti anche questo, che rinserrò Giovanni in una prigione.he added this also aboue al, and shut vp Iohn into prison.adjecit et hoc super omnia, et inclusit Joannem in carcere. 21Now it came to pass, when all the people were baptized, that Jesus also being baptized and praying, heaven was opened.Or avvenne, che nel battezzanti tutto il popolo, essendo stato battezzato anche Gesù, e stando egli in orazione, si spalancò il cielo:And it came to passe vvhen al the people vvas baptized, IESVS also being baptized and praying, heauen vvas opened:Factum est autem cum baptizaretur omnis populus, et Jesu baptizato, et orante, apertum est cælum: 22And the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape, as a dove, upon him. And a voice came from heaven: Thou art my beloved Son. In thee I am well pleased.E discese lo Spirito santo sopra di lui in forma corporale come una colomba: e dal cielo venne questa voce: Tu se' il mio Figliuolo diletto; in temi, sono compiaciuto.and the Holy Ghost descended in corporal shape as a doue vpon him: and a voice from heauen vvas made: Thou art my beloued sonne, in thee I am vvel pleased.et descendit Spiritus Sanctus corporali specie sicut columba in ipsum: et vox de cælo facta est: Tu es filius meus dilectus, in te complacui mihi.
23And Jesus himself was beginning about the age of thirty years: being (as it was supposed) the son of Joseph, who was of Heli, who was of Mathat,E lo stesso Gesù cominciava ad avere circa trent'anni, figliuolo, come credeasi, di Giuseppe, il quale fu di Heli, il quale fu di Mathat,And IESVS him self was beginning to be about thirtie yeres old: as it was thought, the sonne of Ioseph, vvho vvas of Heli,Et ipse Jesus erat incipiens quasi annorum triginta, ut putabatur, filius Joseph, qui fuit Heli, qui fuit Mathat, 24Who was of Levi, who was of Melchi, who was of Janne, who was of Joseph,Il quale fu di Levi, il quale fa di Melchi, il quale fu di Janne, il quale fu di Giuseppe,vvho vvas of Matthat, vvho vvas of Leui, vvho vvas of Melchi, vvho vvas of Ianné, vvho vvas of Ioseph,qui fuit Levi, qui fuit Melchi, qui fuit Janne, qui fuit Joseph, 25Who was of Mathathias, who was of Amos, who was of Nahum, who was of Hesli, who was of Nagge,Il quale fu di Mathathia, il quale fu di Amos, il quale fu di Nahum, il quale fu di Hesli, il quale fu di Nagge,vvho vvas of Matthathias, vvho vvas of Amos, vvho vvas of Naum, vvho vvas of Hesli, vvho vvas of Naggé,qui fuit Mathathiæ, qui fuit Amos, qui fuit Nahum, qui fuit Hesli, qui fuit Nagge, 26Who was of Mahath, who was of Mathathias, who was of Semei, who was of Joseph, who was of Juda,Il quale fu di Mahath, il quale fu di Mathathia, il quale fu di Semei, il quale fu di Giuseppe, il quale fu di Giuda,vvho vvas of Mahath, vvho vvas of Matthathias, vvho vvas of Semei, vvho vvas of Ioseph, vvho vvas of Iuda,qui fuit Mahath, qui fuit Mathathiæ, qui fuit Semei, qui fuit Joseph, qui fuit Juda, 27Who was of Joanna, who was of Reza, who was of Zorobabel, who was of Salathiel, who was of Neri,Il quale fu di Giovanna, il quale fu di Resa, il quale fu di Zorobabele, il quale fu di Salathiel, il quale fu di Neri,vvho vvas of Iohanna, vvho vvas of Resa, vvho vvas of Zorobabel, vvho vvas of Salathiel, vvho vvas of Neri,qui fuit Joanna, qui fuit Resa, qui fuit Zorobabel, qui fuit Salatheil, qui fuit Neri, 28Who was of Melchi, who was of Addi, who was of Cosan, who was of Helmadan, who was of Her,Il quale fu di Melchi, il quale fu di Addi, il quale fu di Cosan, il quale fu di Elmadan, il quale fu di Her,vvho vvas of Melchi, vvho vvas of Addi, vvho vvas of Cosam, vvho vvas of Elmadan, vvho vvas of Her,qui fuit Melchi, qui fuit Addi, qui fuit Cosan, qui fuit Elmadan, qui fuit Her, 29Who was of Jesus, who was of Eliezer, who was of Jorim, who was of Mathat, who was of Levi,Il quale fu di Iesu, il quale fu di Eliezer, il quale fu di Iorim, il quale fu di Mathat, il quale fu di Levi,vvho vvas of IesuS, vvho vvas of Eliézer, vvho vvas of Iorim, vvho vvas of Matthat, vvho vvas of Leui,qui fuit Jesu, qui fuit Eliezer, qui fuit Jorim, qui fuit Mathat, qui fuit Levi, 30Who was of Simeon, who was of Judas, who was of Joseph, who was of Jona, who was of Eliakim,Il quale fu di Simeon, il quale fu di Giuda, il quale fu di Giuseppe, il quale fu di Giona, il quale fu di Eliakim,vvho vvas of Simeon, vvho vvas of Iudas, vvho vvas of Ioseph, vvho vvas of Iona, vvho vvas of Eliacim,qui fuit Simeon, qui fuit Juda, qui fuit Joseph, qui fuit Jona, qui fuit Eliakim, 31Who was of Melea, who was of Menna, who was of Mathatha, who was of Nathan, who was of David,Il quale fu di Melea, il quale fu di Menna, il quale fu di Mathatha, il quale fu di Nathan, il quale fu di David,vvho vvas of Melcha, vvho vvas of Menna, vvho vvas of Matthatha, vvho vvas of Nathan, vvho vvas of Dauid,qui fuit Melea, qui fuit Menna, qui fuit Mathatha, qui fuit Natham, qui fuit David, 32Who was of Jesse, who was of Obed, who was of Booz, who was of Salmon, who was of Naasson,Il quale fu di Iesse, il quale fu di Obed, il quale fu di Booz, il quale fu di Salmon, il quale fu di Naasson,vvho vvas of Iessé, vvho vvas of Obed, vvho vvas of Booz, vvho vvas of Salmon, vvho vvas of Naasson,qui fuit Jesse, qui fuit Obed, qui fuit Booz, qui fuit Salmon, qui fuit Naasson, 33Who was of Aminadab, who was of Aram, who was of Esron, who was of Phares, who was of Judas,Il quale fu di Aminadab, il quale fu di Aram, il quale fu di Esron, il quale fu di Phares, il quale fu di Giuda,vvho vvas of Aminadab, vvho vvas of Aram, vvho vvas of Efron, vvho vvas of Phares, vvho vvas of Iudas,qui fuit Aminadab, qui fuit Aram, qui fuit Esron, qui fuit Phares, qui fuit Judæ, 34Who was of Jacob, who was of Isaac, who was of Abraham, who was of Thare, who was of Nachor,Il quale fu di Giacobbe, il quale fu d'Isacco, il quale fu di Abramo, il quale fu di Thare, il quale fu di Nachor,vvho vvas of Iocob, vvho vvas of Isaac, vvho vvas of Abraham, vvho vvas of Tharé, vvho vvas of Nachor,qui fuit Jacob, qui fuit Isaac, qui fuit Abrahæ, qui fuit Thare, qui fuit Nachor, 35Who was of Sarug, who was of Ragau, who was of Phaleg, who was of Heber, who was of Sale,Il quale fu di Sarug, il quale fu di Ragau, il quale fu di Phaleg, il quale fu di Heber, il quale fu di Sale,vvho vvas of Sarug, vvho vvas of Ragau, vvho vvas of Phaleg, vvho vvas of Heber, vvho vvas of Salé,qui fuit Sarug, qui fuit Ragau, qui fuit Phaleg, qui fuit Heber, qui fuit Sale, 36Who was of Cainan, who was of Arphaxad, who was of Sem, who was of Noe, who was of Lamech,Il quale fu di Cainan, il quale fu di Arphaxad, il quale fu di Sem, il quale fu di Noè, il quale fu di Lamech,vvho vvas of Cainan, vvho vvas of Arphaxad, vvho vvas of Sem, vvho vvas of Noë, vvho vvas of Lamech,qui fuit Cainan, qui fuit Arphaxad, qui fuit Sem, qui fuit Noë, qui fuit Lamech, 37Who was of Mathusale, who was of Henoch, who was of Jared, who was of Malaleel, who was of Cainan,Il quale fu di Mathusale, il quale fu di Henoch, il quale fu di Jared, il quale fu di Malaleel, il quale fu di Cainan,vvho vvas of Mathusalé, vvho vvas of Henoch, vvho vvas of Iared, vvho vvas of Malaleel, vvho vvas of Cainan,qui fuit Methusale, qui fuit Henoch, qui fuit Jared, qui fuit Malaleel, qui fuit Cainan, 38Who was of Henos, who was of Seth, who was of Adam, who was of God.Il quale fu di Henos, il quale fu di Seth, il quale fu di Adamo, il quale fu di Dio.vvho vvas of Henos, vvho vvas of Seth, vvho vvas of Adam, vvho vvas of God.qui fuit Henos, qui fuit Seth, qui fuit Adam, qui fuit Dei.
3:1
Witham
Pilate being governor of Judea, literally, procurator; that is with a subordination to the president of Syria. (Witham)
This was Herod Antipas, son of Herod the great, mentioned in Luke 1:5.
3:2
Under the high priests, Annas and Caiphas. There was properly but one high priest at a time; and Caiphas had this office and title all the ten years that Pilate governed Judea. See Josephus, lib. xviii. Antiq. Luke 3:
Witham
In these short notes I shall not pretend to examine the chronological difficulties, as to Christ's birth, death, etc. (Witham)
3:3
St. Gregory
To all who read, it is plain, that St. John [the Baptist] not only preached baptism, but likewise conferred it upon many; yet, he could not give baptism to the remission of sins. (St. Gregory, hom. xx.)
St. Chrysostom
When the victim was not yet immolated, how could they obtain remission of sins? How could St. Luke say, preaching the baptism of penance, for the remission of sins? The ignorant Jews not considering the greatness of their transgressions, St. John came exhorting them to acknowledge their sins, and do penance for them; that being converted, and truly contrite, they might seek after their Redeemer, and thus obtain remission of their offences. (St. Chrysostom, hom. X. in Matt.)
Jansenius
From these words originated an opinion, that the baptism of John remitted sins. Thus Prudentius, in his hymn on St. John: Hortatur ille primus, et Doctor novae Fuit salutis, nam sancto in flumine Veterum pictas lavit errorum notas. The fallacy of this sentiment, now universally exploded, may be detected from two passages of Scripture: 1. Where John himself declares that he does not baptize with the Holy Ghost; and secondly, in the Acts, (Acts 19.) where St. Paul orders those who had only been baptized by John, and had not heard of the Holy Ghost, to be rebaptized. We must then conclude, that St. John's baptism was only a ceremony or initiation, by which they enrolled themselves as his disciples, to do penance, as a preparation for the remission of sins by means of the second baptism, viz. of Jesus Christ. (Jansenius, Evan. Conc.)
3:5
Witham
Every valley, etc. If these words, in one sense, were a prediction of the deliverance of the Israelites from their captivity, (Isaias 40:3.) and an admonition to level the roads for those that were to return, they also signified the redemption of mankind from the slavery of sin; and that all obstacles, which retarded this benefit, should be removed, and also that the proud should be depressed, and the humble receive graces. (Witham)
3:6
This text is given according to the Septuagint.
3:7
St. Chrysostom
This saint of the desert, seeing all the inhabitants of Palestine surrounding and admiring him, was not elated with the honour, but openly and severely rebuked them. (St. Chrysostom, hom. xi. on S. Matt)
3:8
St. Gregory
It is one thing to bring forth fruits of penance, and another to bring forth worthy fruits. We should know that the man who has committed nothing unlawful, may have a right to use the lawful things of the world, and can perform works of piety, without forsaking innocent enjoyments, unless he pleases. But, if he has fallen into great crimes, let him abstain from what is lawful, as much as he has transgressed, by yielding to guilt. Nor is equal penance required of him who has sinned little, and of him who has fallen into many crimes. And let those, whose consciences convict them, labour to lay up a treasure of good works, proportioned to the injury they have done themselves by their sins. (St. Gregory, hom. xx. in Evang.)
St. Chrysostom
It is not sufficient for penitents to forsake their sins, they must also bring forth worthy fruits, according to that of the psalmist, decline from evil, and do good. (Psalm xxxvi.) As it is not enough to extract the dart; and external application is also necessary. He says not fruit, but fruits, to shew the abundance of good works we ought to perform. (St. Chrysostom, hom. X. on S. Matt.)
St. Chrysostom
He does not mean to say that they did not descend from Abraham, but that their descending from Abraham would avail them nothing, unless they kept up the succession of his virtues. (St. Chrysostom, hom. xi. and xii. on S. Matt.)
St. Ambrose
What can those be thought but stones, who have given themselves to the adoration of stones; to which, says the psalmist, they are assimilated, who place their trust in them? By this the Baptist prophesies, that faith shall be infused into the stony hearts of the Gentiles, who by faith shall become the children of Abraham. (St. Ambrose)
Consider, says St. Chrysostom, how St. John draws them from boasting of their pedigree, and trusting to their descent from Abraham, to place their hope of salvation in the practice of penance and a holy life. (hom. xi.)
A lesson this for Catholics, not to expect to find mercy at the last day, for being members of the true religion, unless they live up to the maxims which it prescribes. If I should have all faith, so that I could move mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing. (1 Corinthians 13:2.)
3:9
St. Cyril
By this example is meant that anger of God, which the Jews raised against themselves by their impiety towards their Messias. The axe is laid to the root of the tree, for the branches are already lopt off; but the tree was not rooted up, for a remnant of Israel shall be saved. (St. Cyril, lib. 3. on Isai. xl.)
3:11
Witham
He that hath two coats, etc. St. John exhorts them to works of charity towards the poor, by giving what is superfluous. (Witham)
St. Basil
Here we are taught that whatever we have more than our own wants require, must be bestowed on those who are in need; for the love of that God, of whom we have received all. (St. Basil, in Avar.)
Charity to the poor is frequently recommended in Scripture, as a powerful method of redeeming sin, and reconciling us to divine mercy. This was Daniel's advice to king Nabuchodonosor: "May my counsel please thee, O king, and do thou redeem thy sins with alms and mercy to the poor." (Daniel iv.) Hence St. Chrysostom says: "The poor are physicians, and their hands are an ointment for your wounds." (hom. xiv. in ep. 1. ad Tim.)
Haydock
See the unbounded love of God; he offers us his mercy, provided we will relieve our indigent brethren! (Haydock)
3:12
Ven. Bede
The Baptist exhorts worldlings to abstain from every species of fraud, that by first restraining all desires of the goods of others, they may at length come to communicate some of their own to their neighbours. (Ven. Bede)
3:13
Witham
Do nothing more. You who are military men, exact no more of the people than what is allowed and appointed you. (Witham)
3:14
St. Augustine
The Baptist knew that such as engage in war, are not murderers, but ministers of the law; not avengers of injuries, but defenders of the public weal. Had he thought otherwise, he would have said: "cast away your arms, abandon the service, never strike, maim, or destroy any one:" these are not the things which are blameable in the military, but their cruelty, their revenge, their implacable dispositions, and lust of power. (St. Augustine, lib. 22. cont. Faust.)
3:15
Denis the Carthusian
Many reasons might have induced the people to think that John was the Christ: 1. The wonders that took place at his birth and conception, his mother being very old, and without any prospect of offspring: 2. the excellence of his preaching, his mortified life, and the novelty of his baptism; and thirdly, the report which then generally prevailed among the Jews, that the Messias was already come; on account of the coming of the magi, and the murder of the infants by Herod: both which circumstances were probably fresh in their memory; and several perhaps, who witnessed them, were still living. (Denis the Carthusian)
3:16
St. Basil
See Matthew 3:11. That baptism cannot be valid, in which the name of the Holy Ghost only is invoked. For, the tradition concerning life-giving grace, must be preserved entire. To add or to omit any thing, may exclude from life everlasting. For, as we believe, so also are we baptized, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. (St. Basil, lib. de Spirit. Sanc. ch. XXII.)
Fire. This is a metaphor, to signify the Holy Ghost and his gifts, particularly the fire of divine love to the expiation of sins, and is very common in Scripture. Sometimes also he is represented by water, as in St. John 4:10, et dein. and 7:38.-39; Isaias xliv. etc. etc. Hence, in the hymn to the Holy Ghost, the Church uses both figures. Thou who art call'd the Paraclete, Best gift of God above, The living Spring, the living Fire, Sweet unction and love.
3:17
Ven. Bede
By the barn-floor is here prefigured the Church of Christ, in which many are called, but few are chosen. This perfect cleansing of the floor, as it is in the Greek, is performed both here when the wicked, on account of their open crimes, are excluded from the communion of the faithful by the Church; or, on account of their hidden sins, are after death by infinite justice chastised; but most especially at the end of the world, when the Son of man shall send his angels to gather from his kingdom all scandals. (Ven. Bede)
3:19
Bible de Vence
See in St. Mark 6:17. The wife of his brother (Philip.) The Greek adds the name, and he is also named in St. Mark; but he is a different person from the tetrarch, mentioned in Luke 3:ver. 1. (Bible de Vence)
Ven. Bede
It was not at this time that John [the Baptist] was cast into prison; but, as St. John [the evangelist] relates, after our Saviour had begun to work miracles, and after his baptism. St. Luke anticipates this event, in order to describe more strongly the malice of Herod; who, whilst he saw multitudes flocking to hear the words of John, his own soldiers believing, and all the people receiving baptism, still could despise the Baptist, could imprison him, and put him to death. (Ven. Bede)
3:21
The motive of his baptism, as he himself informs us, was, that he himself might fulfil all justice. What is here meant by justice, but that obligation of doing first ourselves what we wish others to do?
St. Ambrose
Let no one then refuse the laver of grace, since Christ did not refuse the laver of penance. (St. Ambrose)
Ven. Bede
Although all our sins are forgiven in baptism, still the frailty of the flesh is not yet perfectly strengthened. For, after passing this red sea, we rejoice at the destruction of the Egyptians, but still we must fight with assurance of the grace of Christ, against the enemies we shall undoubtedly meet with in the desert of this world, till at length we arrive at our true country. (Ven. Bede)
St. Chrysostom
It is said the heavens were opened, because they had been hitherto shut. The sheepfolds of heaven and earth are now united under the one Shepherd of the sheep: heaven is opened, and man, though formed of the earth, is admitted to the company of angels. (St. Chrysostom)
3:22
St. Ambrose
The reason why the Holy Ghost shewed himself in the shape of a dove, was because he could not be seen in the substance of his divinity. But why a dove? To express that simplicity acquired in the sacrament of baptism. Be ye simple as doves; to signify that peace bestowed by baptism, and prefigured by the olive branch which the dove carried back to the ark, a true figure of the Church, and which was the only security from the destructive deluge. (St. Ambrose)
St. Gregory of Nazianzus
You will object: Christ, though he was God, would not be baptized till the age of 30, and do you order baptism to be received sooner? When you say, though he was God, you solve the difficulty. For, he stood not in need of being purified at all; of course, there could be no danger in deferring his baptism. But you will have much to answer for, if, being born in corruption, you pass out of this world without the garment of incorruption. (St. Gregory of Nazianzus, orat. 40.)
Remarks on the two Genealogies of Jesus Christ. To make some attempt at an elucidation of the present very difficult subject of inquiry, we must carry in our minds, 1. That in the Scripture language the word begat, applies to the remote, as well as the immediate, descendant of the ancestor; so that if Marcus were the son, Titus the grandson, and Caius the great-grandson of Sempronius, it might, in the language of Scripture, be said, that Sempronius begat Caius. This accounts for the omission of several descents in St. Matthew. 2. The word begat, applies not only to the natural offspring, but to the offspring assigned to the ancestor by law. 3. If a man married the daughter and only child of another, he became in the view of the Hebrew law the son of that person, and thus was a son assigned to him by law. The two last positions shew in what sense Zorobabel was the son both of Neri and Salathiel, and Joseph the son both of Jacob and of Heli, or Joachim.
"St. Matthew, in descending from Abraham to Joseph, the spouse of the blessed Virgin, speaks of a son properly so called, and by way of generation, Abraham begot Isaac, etc. But St. Luke in ascending from Jesus to God himself, speaks of a son properly or improperly so called. On this account he make use of an indeterminate expression, in saying, the son of Joseph, who was of Heli. That St. Luke does not always speak of a son properly called, and by way of generation, appears from the first and last he names; for Jesus was only the putative son of Joseph, because Joseph was the spouse of Mary, the mother of Christ; and Adam was only the son of God by creation. This being observed, we must acknowledge in the genealogy in St. Luke, two sons improperly so called, that is, two sons-in-law, instead of sons. As among the Hebrews, the women entered not into the genealogy, when a house finished by a daughter, instead of naming the daughter in the genealogy, they named the son-in-law, who had for father-in-law the father of his wife. The two sons-in-law mentioned in St. Luke are Joseph, the son-in-law of Heli, and Salathiel, the son-in-law of Neri. This remarks clears up the difficulty. Joseph, the son of Jacob, in St. Matthew, was the son-in-law of Heli, in St. Luke; and Salathiel, the son of Jechonias, in St. Matthew, was the son-in-law of Neri, in St. Luke. Mary was the daughter of Heli, Eliacim, or Joacim, or Joachim. Joseph, the son of Jacob, and Mary, the daughter of Heli, had a common origin; both descending from Zorobabel, Joseph by Abiud the eldest, and Mary by Resa, the younger brother. Joseph descended from the royal branch of David, of which Solomon was the chief; and Mary from the other branch, of which Nathan was the chief. by Salathiel, the father of Zorobabel, and son of Jechonias, Joseph and Mary descended from Solomon, the son and heir of David. And by the wife of Salathiel, the mother of Zorobabel, and daughter of Neri, of which Neri Salathiel was the son-in-law, Joseph and Mary descended from Nathan, the other son of David, so that Joseph and Mary re-united in themselves all the blood of David. St. Matthew carries up the genealogy of Jesus to Abraham; this was the promise of the Messias, made to the Jews; St. Luke carries it up to Adam, the promise of the Messias, made to all men." Whatever the difficulties attending the genealogies may be, it is evident that they arise from our imperfect knowledge of the laws, usages, and idiom of the Jews, from our ignorance of the true method of reconciling the seeming inconsistencies, or from some corruptions that in process of time may possibly have crept into the text. The silence of the enemies of the gospel, both heathen and Jewish, during even the first century, is itself a sufficient proof, that neither inconsistency nor corruption could be then alleged against this part of the evangelical history. If the lineal descent of Jesus from David were not indisputable, he could not possess the character essential to the Messias, nor any right to the Jewish throne. We may confidently then assert, that his regular lineal descent from David could not be disproved, since it was not even disputed at a time when alone it could have been done so successfully; and by those persons who were so deeply interested in falsifying the first Christian authorities.
3:36
Witham
Who was of Cainan. Notwithstanding the veneration due to the Latin Vulgate, which is to be esteemed authentic, Cornelius a Lapide calls it a chronological problem, whether the word Cainan be the true reading, or whether it hath slipt into the text. It is true Cainan is found in the Septuagint Genesis 10:24., Genesis 11:44., and 1 Paralipomenon 1:18; though, in this last place, Cornelius a Lapide says, it is wanting in one edition of the Septuagint by Sixtus V.; at least it is not read in all those places, neither in the Hebrew, nor Latin Vulgate. Some say that here in St. Luke's text, is found Cainan, because his citations are conformable to the Septuagint. Others conjecture that Cainan and Sale were only different names of one and the same person, so that the sense may be, who was of Sale, who is also Cainan. Qui fuit Sale, qui et Cainan. (Witham)
3:38
St. Ambrose
What could be more beautiful, than that this holy race should begin from the Son of God, and be continued up to the Son of God; that the creature might go before in figure, and the Son of God might follow after in reality; that he who was made after the image of God, might first appear, that the true image of his eternal Father may descend from his glory. Thus did St. Luke mean to refer the origin of Christ to God, of whom he was the true and eternal Son. To shew this still more evidently, the evangelist had before introduced the Almighty speaking from heaven: This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. (St. Ambrose)
3:23
Who was of Heli.... St. Joseph, who by nature was the son of Jacob, (St. Matt. 1. 16,) in the account of the law, was son of Heli. For Heli and Jacob were brothers, by the same mother; and Heli, who was the elder, dying without issue, Jacob, as the law directed, married his widow: in consequence of such marriage, his son Joseph was reputed in the law the son of Heli.
3:1
Liturgia The Gospel vpō Imber Saturday in Aduent. And on the 4 Sunday in Aduent.
3:2
Concordanza Mt. 3, 1.
3:3
Concordanza Mr. 1, 1.
Penance prepareth the way to Christ.
Concordanza Esa. 40, 3.
3:7
Concordanza Mt. 3, 7.
3:8
Fruites of penance be workes satisfactorie.
3:9
A man vvithout good workes is vnfruitful, and shal be cast into euerlasting fire.
is
3:11
Almes counseled or enioyned for sinnes and to auoid damnation.
3:15
Iohn was so holy that many might by errour easily thinke he was Christ.
Concordanza Mt. 3, 11.
3:16
Concordanza Mr. 1, 8,
How say then the Heretikes that the Baptisme of Christ is of no greater vertue then Iohns?
cōmeth Io. 1, 26.
Concordanza Act. 1, 5. 11, 16. 19 4.
3:19
Concordanza Mat. 14, 3
brother Philips
Concordanza Mar. 6, 17.
3:20
20. He added this aboue al.] The fault of Princes and other great men, that can not only not abide to heare their faults, but also punish by death or emprisonment such as reprehend them for the same (specially if they warne them, as Prophets and Priests doe, from God) is exceding great.
3:21
Concordanza Mt. 3, 13.
Concordanza Mr. 1, 9.
Concordanza Io. 1, 32.
3:23
23. Of Heli.] Vvhereas in S. Matthevv, The reconciliation of Matthew and Luke in our Sauiours petigree. Iacob is father to Ioseph, and here Heli, the case vvas thus, Mathan (named in S. Matthevv) of his vvife called Escha begat Iacob: and after his death, Melchi (named here in S. Luke) of the same vvoman begat Heli: so that Iacob and Heli vvere brethren of one mother. This Heli therfore marrying and dying vvithout issue: Iacob his brother, according to the Lavv married his vvife, and begat Ioseph, and so raised vp seede to his brother Heli. whereby it came to passe, that Iacob was the natural father of Ioseph, which as (S. Matthew saith) begat him: and Heli was his legal father according to the Law, as S. Luke signifieth. Euseb. li. 1 Ec. Hist. c. 7. Hiero. in 6. 1 Mat. Aug. li. 2. c. 2. 3 de cons. Euang.
3:36
Beza boldly wipeth out of this Gospel, these wordes, vvho vvas of Cainan: though al the Greeke copies both of the old Testament & of the new, haue the wordes with ful cōsent. whereby vve learne the intolerable saucines of the Caluinists, and their cōtempt of holy Scripture, that dare so deale with the very Gospel it self.
3:1
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 3
… And he came into all the region which is about Jordan, proclaiming the [40] baptism of repentance unto the forgiveness of sins. And he was preaching in the [41] wilderness of Judæa, and saying, Repent ye; the kingdom of heaven is come near. [42] This is he that was spoken of in Isaiah the prophet,
Tertulliano † 220 d.C. The Five Books Against Marcion 4.7
In the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius
Tertulliano † 220 d.C. The Five Books Against Marcion 4.44.1
1. The former contained nothing more than a mutilated, and sometimes interpolated, edition of St. Luke ; the name of that evangelist, however, he expunged from the beginning of his copy. Chaps. i. and ii . he rejected entirely, and began at
Tertulliano † 220 d.C. The Five Books Against Marcion 4.44.2
2. According to Irenæus, Epiphanius, and Theodoret, he rejected the genealogy and baptism of Christ; whilst from Tertullian’s statement (chap. vii.) it seems likely that he connected what part of chap. iii.—
Tertulliano † 220 d.C. Five Books in Reply to Marcion 1
115 Came suddenly to earth, but was not made,
Eusebio di Cesarea † 339 d.C. The Church History of Eusebius 1.9.1
… The historian already mentioned agrees with the evangelist in regard to the fact that Archelaus succeeded to the government after Herod. He records the manner in which he received the kingdom of the Jews by the will of his father Herod and by the decree of Cæsar Augustus, and how, after he had reigned ten years, he lost his kingdom, and his brothers Philip
Eusebio di Cesarea † 339 d.C. The Church History of Eusebius 1.10.1
1. It was in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius,
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. The Harmony of the Gospels 2.6
… the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Cæsar, Pontius Pilate being governor of Judæa, and Herod being tetrarch of Galilee, and his brother Philip tetrarch of Ituræa and of the region of Trachonitis, and Lysanias the tetrarch of Abilene, Annas and Caiaphas being the high priests, the word of God came unto John, the son of Zacharias, in the wilderness,
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. The Harmony of the Gospels 2.7
20. But with respect to the mention of Herod, it is well understood that some are apt to be in fluenced by the circumstance that Luke has told us how, in the days of John’s baptizing, and at the time when the Lord, being then a grown man, was also baptized, Herod was tetrarch of Galilee;
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Expositions on the Book of Psalms 76.1
… Because therefore in prophecy hath been said, “there shall not fail a prince out of Judah,” etc.: former times are examined, and we find that the Jews always had their kings of the tribe of Judah, and had no foreign king before that Herod who was king when the Lord was born. Thence began foreign kings, from Herod.
Teodoreto di Cirro † 458 d.C. The Ecclesiastical History of Theodoret 1.14
… in order that all the churches which still exist may be repaired or enlarged, and that new ones may be built wherever they are required. You, and others through your intervention, can apply to magistrates
3:2
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 3
[37] And in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Cæsar, when Pontius Pilate was governor in Judæa, and one of the four rulers, Herod, in Galilee; and Philip his brother, one of the four rulers, in Ituræa and in the district of Trachonitis; and [38] Lysanias, one of the four rulers, in Abilene;
Origene † 254 d.C. Origen's Commentary on the Gospel of John 6.14
… Luke, like Mark, remembers the passage, “The voice of one crying in the wilderness,” but he for his part treats it as follows:
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 10
2. Now that on this account Christ came to His baptism, is from this evident. But wherefore was this baptism devised for Him? For that not of himself did the son of Zacharias proceed to this, but of God who moved him,—this Luke also declares, when he saith, “The word of the Lord came unto him,”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. The Harmony of the Gospels 3.6
… And Annas sent Him bound to Caiaphas the high priest.” This certainly shows us that Annas was high priest. For Jesus had not been sent to Caiaphas as yet, when the question was thus put to Him, “Answerest thou the high priest so?” Mention is also made of Annas and Caiaphas as high priests by Luke at the beginning of his Gospel.
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 113.5
… and these were at that time Annas and Caiaphas, as recorded by the evangelist Luke, when telling of the time when John, the Lord’s forerunner, began to preach the kingdom of heaven and to gather disciples. For he speaks thus: “Under the high priests Annas and Caiaphas, the word of the Lord came upon John, the son of Zacharias, in the wilderness,”
3:3
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 3
… and Philip his brother, one of the four rulers, in Ituræa and in the district of Trachonitis; and [38] Lysanias, one of the four rulers, in Abilene; in the chief-priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, the command of God went forth to John the son of Zacharias in the [39] desert.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 10
And if this was the only cause, how saith Luke, that “he came into the country about Jordan, preaching the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins?”
3:4
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 3
[43] Prepare ye the way of the Lord,
Tertulliano † 220 d.C. The Five Books Against Marcion 5.3
… therefore, did he refuse to “build up again (the structure of the law) which he had overthrown.” The law, indeed, had to be overthrown, from the moment when John “cried in the wilderness, Prepare ye the ways of the Lord,” that valleys and hills and mountains may be filled up and levelled, and the crooked and the rough ways be made straight and smooth
Origene † 254 d.C. Origen's Commentary on the Gospel of John 6.10
… He, then, understanding in this way the prophecy about himself spoken by Isaiah the prophet, says he is a voice, not crying in the wilderness, but “of one crying in the wilderness,” of Him, namely, who stood and cried, “If any man thirst, let him come unto Me and drink.” He it was, too, who said,
san Gregorio Nazianzeno † 389 d.C. Select Orations of Saint Gregory Nazianzen 43.75
75. I now turn to the New Testament, and comparing his life with those who are here illustrious, I shall find in the teachers a source of honour for their disciple. Who was the forerunner of Jesus? John, the voice of the Word,
3:5
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 3
[44] All the valleys shall become filled,
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 10
But Luke expresses somewhat further: not repeating the exordium, and so passing on, but setting down likewise all the prophecy. “For every valley,” saith he, “shall be filled; and every mountain and hill shall be brought low; and the crooked shall be made straight, and the rough ways smooth; and all flesh shall see the salvation of God.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. The Confessions 9.4
… For my memory calls upon me, and pleasant it is to me, O Lord, to confess unto Thee, by what inward goads Thou didst subdue me, and how Thou didst make me low, bringing down the mountains and hills of my imaginations, and didst straighten my crookedness, and smooth my rough ways;
3:6
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 3
[45] And all flesh shall see the salvation of God.
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. City of God 22.29
The expression of Scripture, “And all flesh shall see the salvation of God,”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. On the Holy Trinity 2.6
… For the word in the flesh is one thing, and the Word made flesh is another; i.e. the word in man is one thing, the Word that is man is another. For flesh is put for man, where it is said, “The Word was made flesh;” and again, “And all flesh shall see the salvation of God.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. On Continence 11
… at any rate it is the belief of all of us, to whom to live is Christ, that Man was taken unto Himself by the Word of God, not surely without a rational soul, as certain heretics will have it; and yet we read, “The Word was made flesh.” What is to be here understood by “flesh,” but Man? “And all flesh shall see the salvation of God.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. A Treatise on the Soul and its Origin 1.31
… flesh.” For if, say they, there was a soul in Him also, it ought to have been said, “The Word was made man.” But the reason why the great truth is stated in the terms in question really is, that under the designation flesh, Holy Scripture is accustomed to describe the entire human being, as in the passage, “And all flesh shall see the salvation of God.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Expositions on the Book of Psalms 98.2
2. “The Lord hath made known His salvation” ( ver. 2 ). This very right hand, this very arm, this very salvation, is our Lord Jesus Christ of whom it is said, “And all flesh shall see the salvation of God;”
Giovanni Cassiano † 435 d.C. The Conferences of John Cassian 4.10
We find that the word flesh is used in holy Scripture with many different meanings: for sometimes it stands for the whole man, i.e., for that which consists of body and soul, as here “And the Word was made flesh,” and “All flesh shall see the salvation of our God.”
3:7
sant'Atanasio di Alessandria † 373 d.C. Festal and Personal Letters of Athanasius 2
… But they are compared to their disgrace to beasts without understanding, and becoming like them in unlawful pleasures, they are spoken of as wanton horses ; also, for their craftiness, and errors, and sin laden with death, they are called a ‘generation of vipers,’ as John saith
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 10.12
… Bring forth therefore fruits worthy of repentance; And say not we have Abraham to our father; for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham. For now is the axe laid unto the root of the trees. Every tree therefore that bringeth not forth good fruit shall be cut down, and cast into the fire.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 71.3
… “Who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come? Bring forth therefore fruits worthy of repentance. And say not in your hearts, We have Abraham to our father. For God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham.”
3:8
sant'Ireneo di Lione † 202 d.C. Against Heresies 5.32
… For his seed is the Church, which receives the adoption to God through the Lord, as John the Baptist said: “For God is able from the stones to raise up children to Abraham.”
Tertulliano † 220 d.C. On Modesty 10
… except that he suffered a typical example of the Lord’s passion, which was to redeem heathens as well (as others) on their repentance. It is enough for me that even John, when “strewing the Lord’s ways,” was the herald of repentance no less to such as were on military service and to publicans, than to the sons of Abraham.
san Basilio † 379 d.C. The Letters 22.3
… Every one ought, as far as he is able, to conciliate one who has ground of complaint against him. No one ought to cherish a grudge against the sinner who repents, but heartily to forgive him. He who says that he has repented of a sin ought not only to be pricked with compunction for his sin, but also to bring forth fruits worthy of repentance.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Instructions to Catechumens 2.3
… For that we must repent beforehand, and desist from our former evil, and so come forward for grace, hear what John says, and what the leader of the apostles says to those who are about to be baptized. For the one says, “Bring forth fruit worthy of repentance, and begin not to say within yourselves, we have Abraham to our Father;”
3:9
Origene † 254 d.C. Origen's Commentary on the Gospel of John 6.14
… And observe how it is said to the Pharisees, according to the word of the prophet, “Ye have eaten false fruit,” and they have false fruit,—“Every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down and cast into the fire,” while to the multitudes which do not bear fruit at all,
papa san Gregorio I Magno † 604 d.C. The Book of Pastoral Rule 3.21
… He will not give his propitiation to God , nor the price of the redemption of his soul ( Psal. xlviii. 9 ). For to give the price of redemption is to return good deeds for preventing grace. Hence John cries aloud saying, Now the axe is laid unto the root of the tree. Every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit shall be hewn down and cast into the fire (
3:10
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 4
… and think and say not within yourselves, We have a father, even Abraham; for I say unto you, that God is able to [18] raise up of these stones children unto Abraham. Behold, the axe hath been laid at the roots of the trees, and so every tree that beareth not good fruit shall be taken and [19] cast into the fire.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 24
… So great is the force of virtue, that even after death it is more powerful than the living. For this same cause again, when he was living, they that possessed much wealth came unto him, and said, “What shall we do?”
3:11
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 4
… for I say unto you, that God is able to [18] raise up of these stones children unto Abraham. Behold, the axe hath been laid at the roots of the trees, and so every tree that beareth not good fruit shall be taken and [19] cast into the fire. And the multitudes were asking him and saying, What shall we do? [20]
sant'Ireneo di Lione † 202 d.C. Against Heresies 4.30.3
… For, because He knew that we would make a good use of our substance which we should possess by receiving it from another, He says, “He that hath two coats, let him impart to him that hath none; and he that hath meat, let him do likewise.”
Tertulliano † 220 d.C. On Patience 7
… for who that endures not at all to be cut by another, himself draws the sword on his own body? Patience in losses is an exercise in bestowing and communicating. Who fears not to lose, finds it not irksome to give. Else how will one, when he has two coats, give the one of them to the naked,
san Basilio † 379 d.C. The Letters 150.3
… it went far beyond the limits of a letter. In sum, however, what he said about poverty was this, that the rule ought to be that every one should limit his possessions to one garment. For one proof of this he quoted the words of John the Baptist “he that hath two coats let him impart to him that hath none;”
san Cirillo di Gerusalemme † 386 d.C. The Catechetical Lectures of S. Cyril 3.8
8. What then must you do? And what are the fruits of repentance? Let him that hath two coats give to him that hath none
san Girolamo † 420 d.C. The Letters of St. Jerome 108.15
… “I mean not that other men be eased and ye burthened; but by an equality that now at this time your abundance may be a supply for their want, that their abundance also may be a supply for your want.” I quoted from the gospel the Saviour’s words: “he that hath two coats, let him impart one of them to him that hath none”;
3:12
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 4
… Behold, the axe hath been laid at the roots of the trees, and so every tree that beareth not good fruit shall be taken and [19] cast into the fire. And the multitudes were asking him and saying, What shall we do? [20] He answered and said unto them, He that hath two tunics shall give to him that [21] hath not; and he that hath food shall do likewise.
Tertulliano † 220 d.C. On Idolatry 19
… and the People warred: if it pleases you to sport with the subject. But how will a Christian man war, nay, how will he serve even in peace, without a sword, which the Lord has taken away? For albeit soldiers had come unto John, and had received the formula of their rule;
3:13
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 4
… And the multitudes were asking him and saying, What shall we do? [20] He answered and said unto them, He that hath two tunics shall give to him that [21] hath not; and he that hath food shall do likewise. And the publicans also came [22] to be baptized, and they said unto him, Teacher, what shall we do?
3:14
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 4
… [20] He answered and said unto them, He that hath two tunics shall give to him that [21] hath not; and he that hath food shall do likewise. And the publicans also came [22] to be baptized, and they said unto him, Teacher, what shall we do? He said unto [23] them, Seek not more than what ye are commanded to seek.
sant'Ippolito † 235 d.C. A discourse by the most blessed Hippolytus, bishop and martyr, on the end of the world, and on Antichrist, and on the second coming of our lord Jesus Christ 38
… And before the judgment-seat of Christ shall stand those who once were kings and rulers, chief priests and priests; and they shall give an account of their administration, and of the fold, whoever of them through their negligence have lost one sheep out of the flock. And then shall be brought forward soldiers who were not content with their provision,
Origene † 254 d.C. Origen's Commentary on the Gospel of John 6.30
… And from this outward similarity it came that with those who did not distinguish between the image itself and that which was according to the image, John was thought to be Christ
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 21
6. For the present therefore let us lay aside our excessive sumptuousness, and let us endure moderation, and learn to acquire by honest labor all that we are to have: since even the blessed John, when he was discoursing with those that were employed upon the tribute, and with the soldiery, enjoined them “to be content with their wages.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Letters of St. Augustin 138.15
15. For if the Christian religion condemned wars of every kind, the command given in the gospel to soldiers asking counsel as to salvation would rather be to cast away their arms, and withdraw themselves wholly from military service; whereas the word spoken to such was, “Do violence to no man, neither accuse any falsely, and be content with your wages,”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Letters of St. Augustin 189.4
… “Among them that are born of women there hath not arisen a greater than John the Baptist,” —and had inquired of him what they should do, received the answer, “Do violence to no man, neither accuse any falsely; and be content with your wages.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Reply to Faustus the Manichæan 22.74
… give up the service; never strike, or wound, or disable any one. But knowing that such actions in battle were not murderous but authorized by law, and that the soldiers did not thus avenge themselves, but defend the public safety, he replied, "Do violence to no man, accuse no man falsely, and be content with your wages."
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Expositions on the Book of Psalms 119.21
… Did not His forerunner, when the soldiers of this kingdom were seeking what they ought to do for their everlasting salvation, instead of replying, Loose your belts, throw away your arms, desert your king, that ye may wage war for the Lord, answer, “Do violence to no man: neither accuse any falsely: and be content with your wages”?
3:15
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 4
… there cometh one after me who is stronger than I, the latchets of whose shoes I am not worthy to loosen; he will baptize you with the [26] Holy Spirit and fire: who taketh the fan in his hand to cleanse his threshing-floors, [Arabic, p. 16] and the wheat he gathereth into his garners, while the straw he shall burn in fire which can not be put out.
Origene † 254 d.C. Origen's Commentary on the Gospel of John 6.8
… and in the case of each of the prophets, the people of Israel recognized that he was not the person of whom Moses spoke. As, then, they doubted about John, whether he were not the Christ,
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. The Harmony of the Gospels 2.44
… Yet, that the incident referred to here did not, as matter of fact, occur in the order in which it is here recorded, we have already shown elsewhere; and, indeed, Luke himself puts the proof into our hands.
papa san Leone I Magno † 461 d.C. Letters 16
… that He, who had been “made of a woman ,” as the Apostle says, might become also “under the law” which He had come, “not to destroy but to fulfil ,” and by fulfilling to end, as the blessed Apostle proclaims, saying: “but Christ is the end of the law unto righteousness to every one that believeth .” But the sacrament of baptism He founded in His own person
3:16
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 4
[24] And when the people were conjecturing about John, and all of them thinking [25] in their hearts whether he were haply the Messiah,
Origene † 254 d.C. Origen's Commentary on the Gospel of John 6.16
… Mark, again, says, “John preached, saying, There cometh after me He that is mightier than I, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to stoop down and unloose. I baptized you with water, but He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost.” And Luke says
san Gregorio Taumaturgo † 270 d.C. Four Homilies 4
… Even though Thou art compassed with the pure cloud of the body, I can still recognise Thy lordship. I acknowledge my own servitude, I proclaim Thy glorious greatness, I recognise Thy perfect lordship, I recognise my own perfect insignificance, I am not worthy to unloose the latchets of Thy shoes;
san Basilio † 379 d.C. De Spiritu Sancto 12
“For into one Spirit,” it says, “we were all baptized in one body.” And in harmony with this are the passages: “You shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost,” and “He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost.”
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. A Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles 1
… seeing they too are to baptize with the Spirit. Again, He did not say, I baptize you with the Holy Ghost, but, “Ye shall be baptized:” teaching us humility. For this was plain enough from the testimonyof John, that it was Christ Himself Who should baptize: “He it is that shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire” (
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 13
… “Do not,” he saith, “because I came preaching first from this, suppose that I am greater than He; I am much inferior, so much inferior that I am not worthy to be counted in the rank of a servant.” This is the sense of “is before me,” which Matthew showing in a different manner, saith, “The latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to unloose.” (
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 16
Observe the wisdom of the Evangelist. He mentions this for the third time, to set forth the excellency of the Baptist, and their wickedness and folly. And Luke also says, that when the multitudes supposed him to be the Christ, he again removes their suspicion.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 75
… xx. 22 ); but in this place He telleth them that He asketh the Father, so as to render His discourse credible to them. Since John saith of Him, “Of His fullness have all we received” ( c. i. 16 ); but what He had, how receiveth He from another? And again, “He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire.” (
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 51.7
… In it therefore let us stand, let us loose our shoes, let us, that is, renounce dead works. For as touching these shoes, wherewith we walk, the same my Lord again assures me. For if He had not been shod Himself, John would not have said of Him, “I am not worthy to unloose the latchet of His shoes.”
Anonymous A Treatise on Re-Baptism by an Anonymous Writer 19
19. I think that we have fully followed out the announcement of John the Baptist, whence we began our discourse, when he said to the Jews, “I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance; but He who cometh after me is greater than I, whose shoe’s latchet I am not worthy to unloose: He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire.”
3:17
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 4
[24] And when the people were conjecturing about John, and all of them thinking [25] in their hearts whether he were haply the Messiah, John answered and said unto them, I baptize you with water; there cometh one after me who is stronger than I, the latchets of whose shoes I am not worthy to loosen; he will baptize you with the [26] Holy Spirit and fire:
sant'Ireneo di Lione † 202 d.C. Against Heresies 1.3.5
… but the chaff He will burn with fire unquenchable.”
sant'Ireneo di Lione † 202 d.C. Against Heresies 4.33.1
… but the second in which He will come on the clouds, bringing on the day which burns as a furnace, and smiting the earth with the word of His mouth, and slaying the impious with the breath of His lips, and having a fan in His hands, and cleansing His floor, and gathering the wheat indeed into His barn, but burning the chaff with unquenchable fire.
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 61
… but the time is coming, that it shall be winnowed. But few then are saved in comparison of the many that shall perish. For these same “few” will constitute in themselves a great mass. When the Winnower shall come with His fan in His Hand, “He will cleanse His floor, and lay up the wheat into the garner; but the chaff He will burn with unquenchable fire.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Expositions on the Book of Psalms 8.1
… although they have converse together in the Churches, as far as respects bodily presence. But another time will come, the corn will be stored up apart in the granaries, and the wine in the cellars. “The wheat,” saith he, “He will lay up in garners; but the chaff He will burn with fire unquenchable.”
3:18
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 4
[27] And other things he taught and preached among the people.
3:19
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 6
[23] And Herod the governor, because he used to be rebuked by John because of Herodias the wife of Philip his brother, and for all the sins which he was committing, [24] added to all that also this, that he shut up John in prison.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Epistle to the Hebrews 27
Here I think he alludes both to John and to James. For beheading is called “torturing.” It was in their power still to behold the sun. It was in their power to abstain from reproving
3:20
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 6
[23] And Herod the governor, because he used to be rebuked by John because of Herodias the wife of Philip his brother, and for all the sins which he was committing, [24] added to all that also this,
Eusebio di Cesarea † 339 d.C. The Church History of Eusebius 3.24.10
10. Mark likewise says: “Now after that John was delivered up Jesus came into Galilee.” And Luke, before commencing his account of the deeds of Jesus, similarly marks the time, when he says that Herod, “adding to all the evil deeds which he had done, shut up John in prison.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. The Harmony of the Gospels 2.45
… and that, when the hour was now advancing, it came to pass that all who were present were made to eat of the five loaves and the two fishes. This miracle has been recorded by all the four evangelists. For in like manner, Luke, who has given an account of the death of John at a much earlier stage in his narrative,
3:21
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 4
… And I knew him not; but that he should be made manifest to Israel, [33] for this cause came I to baptize with water. And John was hindering him and [34] saying, I have need of being baptized by thee, and comest thou to me? Jesus answered him and said, Suffer this now: thus it is our duty to fulfill all righteousness. [35] Then he suffered him.
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. On the Holy Trinity 15.26
… Therefore it is that we confess Him to have been born of the Holy Spirit and of the Virgin Mary. For it is most absurd to believe Him to have received the Holy Spirit when He was near thirty years old: for at that age He was baptized by John;
3:22
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 4
… Jesus answered him and said, Suffer this now: thus it is our duty to fulfill all righteousness. [35] Then he suffered him. And when all the people were baptized, Jesus also [36] was baptized. And immediately he went up out of the water, and heaven opened [37] [Arabic, p. 17] to him,
Clemente Alessandrino † 215 d.C. The Stromata, or Miscellanies fragments-of-clemens-alexandri
Luke iii. 22 . God here assumed the “likeness” not of a man, but “of a dove,” because He wished, by a new apparition of the Spirit in the likeness of a dove, to declare His simplicity and majesty.
sant'Ilario di Poitiers † 367 d.C. De Trinitate or On the Trinity 11.18
… Jesus was anointed, therefore, that the mystery of the regeneration of flesh might be accomplished. Nor are we left in doubt how He was thus anointed with the Spirit of God and with power, when we listen to the Father’s voice, as it spoke when He came up out of the Jordan, Thou art My Son, this day have I begotten Thee
san Cirillo di Gerusalemme † 386 d.C. The Catechetical Lectures of S. Cyril 3.14
14. Jesus Christ was the Son of God, yet He preached not the Gospel before His Baptism. If the Master Himself followed the right time in due order, ought we, His servants, to venture out of order? From that time Jesus began to preach , when the Holy Spirit had descended upon Him in a bodily shape, like a dove
sant'Ambrogio † 397 d.C. On the Holy Spirit 3.14
96. Who, then, do you think is here named Lord, except the Spirit? And has not God the Father been able to teach you, Who says: “Upon Whomsoever thou shalt see the Spirit descending and abiding upon Him, this is He Who baptizeth in the Holy Spirit”? For the Spirit descended in the likeness of a dove,
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Letters of St. Augustin 169.5
… for example, [at the baptism of Christ] the Father is heard in the voice which said, “Thou art my Son;” the Son is seen in the human nature which, in being born of the Virgin, He assumed; the Holy Spirit is seen in the bodily form of a dove,
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Reply to Faustus the Manichæan 23.2
… He tells us that the person of whom he spoke at the outset as the son of David was baptized by John, and became the Son of God on this particular occasion, when about thirty years old, according to Luke, when also the voice was heard saying to Him, "Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten Thee."
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. A Treatise on the Grace of Christ, and on Original Sin 1.48
I wish, indeed, that he would listen to the venerable bishop when, in the second book of his Exposition of the Gospel according to Luke,
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. The Harmony of the Gospels 2.4
… and as reconciliation is also effected for us with God, with whose name the reckoning of this number is here brought to its conclusion by the Holy Spirit, who appeared in the form of a dove on the occasion of that baptism in connection with which the number in question is mentioned.
3:23
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 4
[28] Then came Jesus from Galilee to the Jordan to John, to be baptized of him. [29]
sant'Ireneo di Lione † 202 d.C. Against Heresies 1.1.3
… Moreover, they declare that this invisible and spiritual Pleroma of theirs is tripartite, being divided into an Ogdoad, a Decad, and a Duodecad. And for this reason they affirm it was that the “Saviour”— for they do not please to call Him “Lord”—did no work in public during the space of thirty years,
sant'Ireneo di Lione † 202 d.C. Against Heresies 2.22.5
… And how could He have taught, unless He had reached the age of a Master? For when He came to be baptized, He had not yet completed His thirtieth year, but was beginning to be about thirty years of age (for thus Luke, who has mentioned His years, has expressed it: “Now Jesus was, as it were, beginning to be thirty years old,”
Sesto Giulio Africano † 240 d.C. Julius Africanus 1.3
… If we reckon the generations from David through Solomon, Matthan is found to be the third from the end, who begat Jacob the father of Joseph. But if, with Luke, we reckon them from Nathan the son of David, in like manner the third from the end is Melchi, whose son was Heli the father of Joseph. For Joseph was the son of Heli, the son of Melchi.
Eusebio di Cesarea † 339 d.C. The Church History of Eusebius 1.7.9
… Of these the one, Jacob, when his brother Eli had died childless, took the latter’s wife and begat by her a son Joseph, his own son by nature and in accordance with reason. Wherefore also it is written: ‘Jacob begat Joseph.’ But according to law
san Cirillo di Gerusalemme † 386 d.C. The Catechetical Lectures of S. Cyril 6.17
… for he asserts that of this Bythus were begotten eight Æons; and of them, ten; and of them, other twelve, male and female. But whence is the proof of these things? See their silliness from their fabrications. Whence hast thou the proof of the thirty Æons? Because, saith he, it is written, that Jesus was baptized , being thirty years old
san Gregorio Nazianzeno † 389 d.C. Select Orations of Saint Gregory Nazianzen 40
XXIX. But, one says, Christ was thirty years old when He was baptized,
san Gregorio di Nissa † 395 d.C. Answer to Eunomius' Second Book 1
… Our Master, in introducing us in his own treatise to the true meaning of ungenerate, suggested a way to arrive at a real knowledge of the term in dispute somewhat as follows, pointing out at the same time that it had a meaning very far removed from any idea of essence. He says that the Evangelist
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. On Christian Doctrine 2.28
… Now we know on the authority of the evangelist that He was about thirty years of age when He was baptized;
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. On Marriage and Concupiscence 1.12
… Now, since she bore Him without his engendering, they could not surely have both been His parents, of that form of a servant, if they had not been conjugally united, though without carnal connection. Accordingly the genealogical series (although both parents of Christ are mentioned together in the succession) had to be extended, as it is in fact,
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. The Harmony of the Gospels 2.1
3. Christ, it is true, was also supposed to be the son of Joseph in another way, as if He had been born simply of that man’s seed. But this supposition was entertained by persons whose notice the virginity of Mary escaped. For Luke says: “And Jesus Himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. The Harmony of the Gospels 2.3
5. Furthermore, as to those critics who find a difficulty in the circumstance that Matthew enumerates one series of ancestors, beginning with David and travelling downwards to Joseph, while Luke specifies a different succession, tracing it from Joseph upwards as far as to David,
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 1.30
… Because he is the more undeniably a father in proportion as he is more chastely so. He was thought, it is true, to be the father of our Lord Jesus Christ in another way: that is, as other parents are according to a fleshly birth, and not through the fruitfulness of a wholly spiritual love. For Luke said, “Who was supposed to be the father of Jesus.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 33.5
… and so he began to reckon when Christ was born in a descending order. Whereas, because Luke begins to reckon when Christ was baptized; in this is the beginning of ascension, he begins to reckon in an ascending order, and in his reckoning he has completed seventy-seven generations.
Teodoreto di Cirro † 458 d.C. Dialogues. The “Eranistes” or “Polymorphus” of the Blessed Theodoretus, Bishop of Cyrus 2
… He was in the beginning with God. All things were made by Him, and without Him was not anything made” and so on. Hear too Matthew, “The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, Son of David,—Son of Abraham,”—and so on. Luke too traced His genealogy to Abraham and David.
Teodoreto di Cirro † 458 d.C. Letters of the Blessed Theodoret, Bishop of Cyprus 152
… for as man He was born of a mother alone. And He is without mother as God, for He was begotten from everlasting of the Father alone. And again He is without descent as God while as man He has descent. For it is written “The book of the generation of Jesus Christ the son of David, the son of Abraham.” His descent is also given by the divine Luke.
3:24
Eusebio di Cesarea † 339 d.C. The Church History of Eusebius 1.7.5
… If we reckon the generations from David through Solomon, the third from the end is found to be Matthan, who begat Jacob the father of Joseph. But if, with Luke, we reckon them from Nathan the son of David, in like manner the third from the end is Melchi,
san Giovanni Damasceno † 749 d.C. An Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith 4.14
Born then of the line of Nathan, the son of David, Levi begat Melchi and Panther: Panther begat Barpanther, so called. This Barpanther begat Joachim: Joachim begat the holy Mother of God
3:31
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. The Harmony of the Gospels 1.2
… On the other hand, Luke appears to have occupied himself rather with the priestly lineage and character of the Lord. For although in his own way he carries the descent back to David, what he has followed is not the royal pedigree, but the line of those who were not kings. That genealogy, too, he has brought to a point in Nathan the son of David,
3:34
san Gregorio Nazianzeno † 389 d.C. Select Orations of Saint Gregory Nazianzen 41
… For the Hebdomad thrice repeated brings out this number. And one who is very bold might venture even to come to the New Adam, my God and Lord Jesus Christ, Who is counted the Seventy-seventh from the old Adam who fell under sin, in the backward genealogy according to Luke.
3:38
Teodoreto di Cirro † 458 d.C. Dialogues. The “Eranistes” or “Polymorphus” of the Blessed Theodoretus, Bishop of Cyrus 1
“So the body taken of Mary was human according to the scriptures, and real in that it was the same as our own. For Mary was our sister, since we are all of Adam, a fact which no one could doubt who remembers the words of Luke.”
3:1
san Gregorio Magno † 604 d.C. Hom. 20. in Ev.
The time at which the forerunner of the Saviour received the word of preaching, is marked by the names of the Roman sovereign and of the princes of Judæa, as it follows: Now in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Cæsar, Pontius Pilate being governor of Judæa, and Herod being tetrarch of Galilee, &c. For because John came to preach Him who was to redeem some from among the Jews, and many among the Gentiles, therefore the time of his preaching is marked out by making mention of the king of the Gentiles and the rulers of the Jews. But because all nations were to be gathered together in one, one man is described as ruling over the Roman state, as it is said, The reign of Tiberius Cæsar.
Un espositore greco Metaphrastes
For the emperor Augustus being dead, from whom the Roman sovereigns obtained the name of “Augustus,” Tiberius being his successor in the monarchy, was now in the 15th year of his receiving the reins of government.
Origene † 253 d.C.
In the word of prophecy, spoken to the Jews alone, the Jewish kingdom only is mentioned, as, The vision of Esaias, in the days of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, kings of Judah. (Is. 1:1.) But in the Gospel which was to be proclaimed to the whole world, the empire of Tiberius Cæsar is mentioned, who seemed the lord of the whole world. But if the Gentiles only were to be saved, it were sufficient to make mention only of Tiberius, but because the Jews also must believe, the Jewish kingdom therefore, or Tetrarchies, are also introduced, as it follows, Pontius Pilate being governor of Judæa, and Herod tetrarch, &c.
san Gregorio Magno † 604 d.C. ubi sup.
Because the Jews were to be scattered for their crime of treachery, the Jewish kingdom was shut up into parts under several governors. According to that saying, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation. (Luke 11:17.)
san Beda † 735 d.C.
Pilate was sent in the twelfth year of Tiberius to take the government of the Jewish nation, and remained there for ten successive years, almost until the death of Tiberius. But Herod, and Philip, and Lysanias, were the sons of that Herod in whose reign our Lord was born. Between these and Herod himself Archelaus their brother reigned ten years. He was accused by the Jews before Augustus, and perished in exile at Vienne. But in order to reduce the Jewish kingdom to greater weakness, August us divided it into Tetrarchies.
san Gregorio Magno † 604 d.C.
Because John preached Him who was to be at the same time both King and Priest, Luke the Evangelist has marked the time of that preaching by the mention not only of Kings, but also of Priests. As it follows, Under the High Priests Annas and Caiaphas.
san Beda † 735 d.C.
Both Annas and Caiaphas, when John began his preaching, were the High Priests, but Annas held the office that year, Caiaphas the same year in which our Lord suffered on the cross. Three others had held the office in the intervening time, but these two, as having particular reference to our Lord’s Passion, are mentioned by the Evangelist. For at that time of violence and intrigue, the commands of the Law being no longer in force, the honour of the High Priest’s office was never given to merit or high birth, but the whole affairs of the Priesthood were managed by the Roman power. For Josephus relates, that Valerius Gratus, when Annas was thrust out of the Priesthood, appointed Ismael High Priest, the son of Baphas; but not long after casting him off, he put in his place Eleazar the son of the High Priest Ananias. After the space of one year, he expelled him also from the office, and delivered the government of the High Priesthood to a certain Simon, son of Caiaphas, who holding it not longer than a year, had Joseph, whose name also was Caiaphas, for his successor; so that the whole time during which our Lord is related to have taught is included in the space of four years.
sant'Ambrogio † 397 d.C.
The Son of God being about to gather together the Church, commences His work in His servant. And so it is well said, The word of the Lord came to John, that the Church should begin not from man, but from the Word. But Luke, in order to declare that John was a prophet, rightly used these few words, The word of the Lord came to him. He adds nothing else, for they need not their own judgment who are filled with the Word of God. By saying this one thing, he has therefore declared all. But Matthew and Mark desired to shew him to be a prophet, by his raiment, his girdle, and his food.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. in Matt. Hom. 10.
The word of God here mentioned was a commandment, for the son of Zacharias came not of himself, but God moved him.
Teofilatto † 1107
Through the whole of the time until his shewing himself he was hid in the wilderness, that no suspicion might arise in men’s minds, that from his relation to Christ, and from his intercourse with Him from a child, he would testify such things of Him; and hence he said, I knew him not. (John 1:33.)
san Gregorio di Nissa † 395 d.C. de Virg. c. 6.
Who also entered this life at once in the spirit and power of Elias, removed from the society of men, in uninterrupted contemplation of invisible things, that he might not, by becoming accustomed to the false notions forced upon us by our senses, fall into mistakes and errors in the discernment of good men. And to such a height of divine grace was he raised, that more favour was bestowed upon him than the Prophets, for from the beginning even to the end, he ever presented his heart before God pure and free from every natural passion.
sant'Ambrogio † 397 d.C.
Again, the wilderness is the Church itself, for the barren has more children than she who has an husband. The word of the Lord came, that the earth which was before barren might bring forth fruit unto us.
Il testo latino
Gregorius in Evang
Redemptoris praecursor quo tempore verbum praedicationis accepit, memorato Romanae reipublicae principe et Iudaeae regibus designatur, cum dicitur anno autem quintodecimo imperii Tiberii Caesaris. Quia enim illum praedicare veniebat qui ex Iudaea quosdam, et multos ex gentibus redempturus erat; per regem gentium et principes Iudaeorum praedicationis eius tempora designantur. Quia autem gentilitas colligenda erat in Romana republica, unus praefuisse describitur, cum dicitur imperii Tiberii Caesaris
Graecus
Mortuo enim Augusto monarcha, a quo Romani principes nomen Augusti adepti sunt, Tiberius post illum ad iura monarchiae succedens, decimumquintum annum suscepti principatus agebat
Origenes in Lucam
Et in prophetico quidem sermone solis Iudaeis praedicato, solum Iudaeorum regnum describitur: visio Isaiae in diebus Oziae, Ioathan et Achaz regum Iuda; at in Evangelio, quod erat praedicandum universo mundo, dominium describitur Tiberii Caesaris, qui totius orbis dominus videbatur. Verum si solum hi qui sunt de gentibus essent salvandi, satis erat solius Tiberii facere mentionem; sed quia oportebat et Iudaeos credere, ob hoc etiam Iudaeorum regna describuntur, seu tetrarchiae, cum subditur procurante Pontio Pilato Iudaeam, tetrarcha autem Galilaeae Herode: Philippo autem fratre eius tetrarcha Ituraeae et Trachonitidis regionis, et Lysania Abilinae tetrarcha
Gregorius
Quia enim Iudaea erat pro culpa perfidiae dispergenda, in Iudaeae regno per partem et partem plurimi principabantur, secundum illud: omne regnum in seipsum divisum desolabitur
Beda
Pilatus quidem duodecimo anno Tiberii Caesaris in Iudaeam missus, procurationem gentis suscepit; atque ibi per decem continuos annos usque ad ipsum pene finem Tiberii perduravit. Herodes autem et Philippus et Lysanias filii sunt Herodis illius sub quo dominus natus est, inter quos et ipse Herodes Archelaus frater eorum decem annis regnavit, qui a Iudaeis apud Augustum criminatus, apud Viennam exilio periit. Regnum autem Iudaeae quo minus validum fieret, idem Augustus per tetrarchias dividere curavit
Gregorius
Et quia Ioannes illum praedicavit qui simul rex et sacerdos existeret; Lucas Evangelista praedicationis eius tempora non solum per regnum, sed etiam per sacerdotium designavit; unde subditur sub principibus sacerdotum Anna et Caipha
Beda
Ambo quidem incipiente praedicatione Ioannis, idest Annas et Caiphas, principes fuere sacerdotum; sed Annas illum annum, Caiphas vero eum quo crucem dominus ascendit, administrabat, tribus aliis in medio pontificatu perfunctis: verum hi maxime qui ad domini passionem pertinent, ab Evangelista commemorantur. Legalibus namque tunc praeceptis vi et ambitione cessantibus, nulli pontificatus honor vitae vel generis merito reddebatur; sed Romana potestate summa sacerdotii praestabatur. Iosephus enim refert, quod Valerius Graccus Anna a sacerdotio deturbato, Ismaelem pontificem designavit filium Baphi; sed etiam hunc non multo post abiiciens, Eleazarum Ananiae pontificis filium surrogavit: post annum vero et hunc arcet officio, et Simoni cuidam Caiphae filio pontificatus tradidit ministerium; quo non amplius ipse quam unius anni spatio perfunctus, Iosephum, cui et Caiphas nomen fuit, accepit successorem: itaque omne hoc tempus quo dominus noster docuisse describitur, intra quadriennii spatia coarctatur
Ambrosius
Congregaturus autem Ecclesiam Dei filius, ante operatur in servulo; et ideo bene dicitur factum est verbum domini super Ioannem Zachariae filium: ut Ecclesia non ab homine coeperit, sed a verbo. Bene autem Lucas compendio usus est, ut Ioannem declararet prophetam, dicens factum est super eum verbum Dei, alia non addens: nullus enim eget iudicio sui qui verbo Dei abundat. Unum itaque dicens, omnia declaravit; at vero Matthaeus et Marcus et vestitu et cinctu et cibo prophetam declarare voluerunt
Chrysostomus
Verbum autem Dei hic mandatum esse dicitur: quia non a se venit Zachariae filius, sed Deo ipsum movente
Theophylactus
Per totum autem tempus praeteritum usque ad sui ostensionem occultus fuit in deserto; et hoc est quod subditur in deserto: ut nulla suspicio innascatur hominibus, ut gratia affinitatis ad Christum, vel conversationis a teneris annis, talia de ipso testaretur: unde ipse testificans dicebat: ego nesciebam illum
Gregorius Nyssenus
Simul etiam qui in spiritu et virtute Eliae hanc vitam ingressus est, amotus a conversatione humana, invisibilium speculationi vacans, ne huiusmodi fallaciis quae per sensus ingeruntur assuetus, quamdam confusionem ac errorem incurreret erga viri boni discretionem. Et ideo ad tantum divinarum gratiarum elevatus est apicem, ut plusquam prophetis sibi gratia infunderetur: quia mundum et expers cuiuslibet naturalis passionis desiderium suum a principio usque ad finem divinis aspectibus obtulit
Ambrosius
Desertum etiam est ipsa Ecclesia: quia plures filii desertae, magis quam eius quae habet virum. Factum est ergo verbum domini, ut quae erat ante deserta fructum nobis terra generaret
3:3
sant'Ambrogio † 397 d.C.
The Word came, and the voice followed. For the Word first works inward, then follows the office of the voice, as it is said, And he went into all the country about Jordan.
Origene † 253 d.C.
Jordan is the same as descending, for there descends from God a river of healing water. But what parts would John be traversing but the country lying about Jordan, that the penitent sinner might soon arrive at the flowing stream, humbling himself to receive the baptism of repentance. For it is added, preaching the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins.
san Gregorio Magno † 604 d.C. ubi sup.
It is plain to every reader that John not only preached the baptism of repentance, but to some also he gave it, yet his own baptism he could not give for the remission of sins.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. ubi sup.
For as the sacrifice had not yet been offered up, nor had the holy Spirit descended, how could remission of sins be given? What is it then that St. Luke means by the words, for the remission of sins? Seeing the Jews were ignorant, and knew not the weight of their sins, and because this was the cause of their evils, in order that they might be convinced of their sins and seek a Redeemer, John came exhorting them to repentance, that being thereby made better and sorrowful for their sins, they might be ready to receive pardon. Rightly then after saying, that he came preaching the baptism of repentance, he adds, for the remission of sins. As if he should say, The reason by which he persuaded them to repent was, that thereby they would the more easily obtain subsequent pardon, believing on Christ. For if they were not led by repentance, in vain could they ask for grace, other than as a preparation for faith in Christ.
san Gregorio Magno † 604 d.C. ubi sup.
Or John is said to preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins, because the baptism which was to take away sin, as he could not give, he preached; just as the Incarnate Word of the Father preceded the word of preaching, so the baptism of repentance, which was able to take away sin, was preceded by John’s baptism, which could not take away sin.
sant'Ambrogio † 397 d.C.
And therefore many say that St. John is a type of the Law, because the Law could denounce sin, but could not pardon it.
san Gregorio Nazianzeno † 390 d.C. Orat. 39.
To speak now of the difference of baptisms. Moses indeed baptized, but in the water, the cloud, and the sea, but this was done figuratively. John also baptized, not indeed according to the Jewish rite, (for he baptized not only with water,) but also for the remission of sins, yet not altogether spiritually, (for he adds not, in the Spirit.) Jesus baptizes but with the Spirit, and this is perfect baptism. There is also a fourth baptism, namely by martyrdom and blood, by which also Christ Himself was baptized, and which is so far more glorious than the others, as it is not sullied by repeated acts of defilement. There is also a fifth, the most weary, according to which David every night washed his bed and his couch with tears. It follows, As it is written in the book of Esaias the Prophet, The voice of one crying in the wilderness. (Is. 40:3.)
sant'Ambrogio † 397 d.C.
John the forerunner of the Word is rightly called the voice, because the voice being inferior precedes, the Word, which is more excellent, follows.
san Gregorio Magno † 604 d.C. 7, 20. in Ev.
John cries in the desert because he brings the glad tidings of redemption to deserted and forsaken Judæa, but what he cries is explained in the words, Prepare ye the way of the Lord. For they who preach true faith and good works, what else do they than prepare the way for the Lord’s coming into the hearts of the hearers, that they might make the paths of God straight, forming pure thoughts in the mind by the word of good preaching.
Origene † 253 d.C.
Or, a way must be prepared in our heart for the Lord, for the heart of man is large and spacious if it has become clean. For imagine not that in the size of the body, but in the virtue of the understanding, consists that greatness which must receive the knowledge of the truth. Prepare then in thy heart by good conversation a way for the Lord, and by perfect works pursue the path of life, that so the word of God may have free course in thee.
san Basilio Magno † 379 d.C. non occ.
And because a path is a way trodden down by those that have gone before, and which former men have worn away, the word bids those who depart from the zeal of their predecessors repeatedly pursue it.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. ubi sup.
But to cry, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, was not the office of the king, but of the forerunner. And so they called John the voice, because he was the forerunner of the Word.
san Cirillo di Alessandria † 444 d.C. in Esai. 40. lib. 3.
But suppose some one should answer, saying, How shall we prepare the way of the Lord, or how shall we make His paths straight? since so many are the hindrances to those who wish to lead an honest life. To this the word of prophecy replies, There are some ways and paths by no means easy to travel, being in some places hilly and rugged, in others steep and precipitous; to remove which it says, Every valley shall be filled, every mountain and hill shall he brought low. Some roads are most unequally constructed, and while in one part rising, in another sloping downwards, are very difficult to pass. And here he adds, And the crooked ways shall be made straight, and the rough ways shall be made smooth. But this was in a spiritual manner brought to pass by the power of our Saviour. For formerly to pursue an Evangelical course of life was a difficult task, for men’s minds were so immersed in worldly pleasures. But now that God being made Man, has condemned sin in the flesh, all things are made plain, and the way of going has become easy, and neither hill nor valley is an obstacle to those who wish to advance.
Origene † 253 d.C.
For when Jesus had come and sent His Spirit, every valley was filled with good works, and the fruits of the Holy Spirit, which if thou hast, thou wilt not only cease to become a valley, but will begin also to be a mountain of God.
san Gregorio di Nissa † 395 d.C. ubi sup.
Or by the valleys he means a quiet habitual practice of virtue, as in the Psalms, The valleys shall be filled with corn. (Ps. 65:13.)
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. ubi sup.
He denounces the haughty and arrogant by the name of mountains, whom Christ has brought low. But by the hills He implies the wreckless, not only because of the pride of their hearts, but because of the barrenness of despair. For the hill produces no fruit.
Origene † 253 d.C.
Or you may understand the mountains and hills to be the hostile powers, which have been overthrown by the coming of Christ.
san Basilio Magno † 379 d.C. non occ.
But as the hills differ from mountains in respect of height, in other things are the same, so also the adverse powers agree indeed in purpose, but are distinguished from one another in the enormity of their offences.
san Gregorio Magno † 604 d.C. 20. in Ev.
Or, the valley when filled increases, but the mountains and hills when brought low decrease, because the Gentiles by faith in Christ receive fulness of grace, but the Jews by their sin of treachery have lost that wherein they boasted. For the humble receive a gift because the hearts of the proud they keep afar off.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. in Matt. Hom. 10.
Or by these words he declares the difficulties of the law to be turned into the easiness of faith; as if he said, No more toils and labours await us, but grace and remission of sins make an easy way to salvation.
san Gregorio di Nissa † 395 d.C. ubi sup.
Or, He orders the valleys to be filled, the mountains and hills to be cast down, to shew that the rule of virtue neither fails from want of good, nor transgresses from excess.
san Gregorio Magno † 604 d.C. ubi sup.
But the crooked places are become straight, when the hearts of the wicked, perverted by a course of injustice, are directed to the rule of justice. But the rough ways are changed to smooth, when fierce and savage dispositions by the influence of Divine grace return to gentleness and meckness.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. ubi sup.
He then adds the cause of these things, saying, And all flesh shall see, &c. shewing that the virtue and knowledge of the Gospel shall be extended even to the end of the world, turning mankind from savage manners and perverse wills to meekness and gentleness. Not only Jewish converts but all mankind shall see the salvation of God.
san Cirillo di Alessandria † 444 d.C. ubi sup.
That is, of the Father, who sent His Son as our Saviour. But the flesh is here taken for the whole man.
san Gregorio Magno † 604 d.C. ubi sup.
Or else, All flesh, i. e. Every man can not see the salvation of God in Christ in this life. The Prophet therefore stretches his eye beyond to the last day of judgment, when all men both the elect and the reprobate shall equally see Him.
Il testo latino
Ambrosius
Factum verbum vox secuta est: verbum enim prius intus operatur, sequitur vocis officium; unde dicitur et venit in omnem regionem Iordanis
Origenes in Lucam
Iordanis idem est quod descendens: descendit enim Dei fluvius aquae salubris. Quae autem loca decebat perambulare Baptistam, nisi Iordani circumadiacentia? Ut si quem poenitere contingeret, protinus occurreret fluenti humiditas ad recipiendum poenitentiae Baptismum; subditur enim praedicans Baptismum poenitentiae in remissionem peccatorum
Gregorius in Evang
Cunctis legentibus liquet quia Ioannes Baptismum poenitentiae non solum praedicavit, verum etiam quibusdam dedit; tamen Baptismum suum in remissionem peccatorum dare non potuit
Chrysostomus super Ioannem
Cum enim nondum oblata esset hostia, nec descendisset spiritus, qualiter erat fienda remissio? Quid est ergo quod Lucas dicit in remissionem peccatorum? Erant siquidem Iudaei ignari, nec culpas proprias perpendebant. Quoniam igitur haec erat causa malorum; ut peccata agnoscerent ad redemptorem quaerendum, venit Ioannes hortans illos poenitentiam agere, ut per poenitentiam effecti meliores atque contriti ad recipiendam veniam satagant. Apte ergo, cum dixisset quod venit praedicans Baptismum poenitentiae, addidit in remissionem peccatorum; quasi dicat: idcirco suadebat illis poenitere, ut subsequentem veniam facilius impetrarent, credentes in Christum, nam nisi poenitentia ducerentur, nequaquam exposcerent gratiam: unde Baptisma illud nullam aliam habet causam, nisi quod praeparatorium erat ad fidem Christi
Gregorius
Vel Ioannes dicitur praedicans Baptismum poenitentiae in remissionem peccatorum; quoniam Baptismum quod peccata solveret, quia dare non poterat, praedicabat: ut sicut incarnatum verbum patris praecurrebat verbo praedicationis, ita Baptismum poenitentiae, quo peccata solvuntur, praecurret suo Baptismate, quo peccata solvi non possunt
Ambrosius
Et ideo plerique sancto Ioanni typum legis imponunt, eo quod lex peccatum denuntiare potuit, donare non potuit
Gregorius Nazianzenus
Et ut aliquatenus de Baptismatum differentia disseramus, baptizavit Moyses, sed in aqua, nube et mari; hoc autem figuraliter agebatur. Baptizavit quoque Ioannes non utique ritu Iudaeorum, non enim solum in aqua, sed etiam in remissionem peccatorum: non tamen omnino spiritualiter: neque enim addit, in spiritu. Baptizat Iesus, sed in spiritu: et hic est perfectio. Est quoque quartum Baptisma, quod fit per martyrium et sanguinem, quo etiam ipse Christus est baptizatus; quod ceteris est venerabilius nimis, eatenus, quatenus iteratis contagiis non foedatur. Est etiam quintum ex lacrymis, laboriosius tamen; iuxta quod quidam singulis noctibus suum rigat cubile et stratum in lacrymis. Sequitur sicut scriptum est in libro Isaiae prophetae: vox clamantis in deserto
Ambrosius
Bene vox dicitur Ioannes verbi praenuntius: quia vox praecedit inferior, verbum sequitur quod praecellit
Gregorius in Evang
Qui etiam in deserto clamat, quia derelictae ac destitutae Iudaeae solatium redemptionis annuntiat. Quid autem clamaret, aperitur, cum dicitur parate viam domini, rectas facite semitas eius. Omnis enim qui fidem rectam et bona opera praedicat, quid aliud quam venienti domino ad corda audientium viam parat, ut rectas Deo semitas faciat, dum mundas in animo cogitationes per sermonem bonae praedicationis format?
Origenes in Lucam
Vel in corde nostro via praeparanda est domino: magnum enim est cor hominis et spatiosum; si tamen fuerit mundum. Neque in corporis quantitate, sed in virtute sensuum, magnitudinem eius intellige, quae tantam scientiam capiat veritatis. Praepara ergo in tuo corde viam domino per conversationem bonam, et egregiis vel perfectis operibus dirige semitam vitae, ut in te sermo Dei absque offensa perambulet
Basilius
Et quia semita est via quam praecedentes calcaverant, et quam priores homines corruperant, eam iterato dirigere iubet sermo illis qui a praecedentium zelo recedunt
Chrysostomus
Clamare autem parate viam domini, non regis erat, sed praecursoris officium: et ideo eum vocaverat vocem, quia verbi erat praecursor
Cyrillus
Sed quasi quis responderet, et diceret: qualiter viam praeparabimus domino, vel qualiter eius semitas rectas faciemus, cum plura sint impedimenta honestam vitam volentibus ducere? Ad hoc propheticus sermo respondet. Sunt enim viae quaedam et semitae nequaquam ad eundum habiles; adeo ut alicubi ad tumulos et iuga tollantur, alicubi declives sint; et ad hoc removendum dicit omnis vallis implebitur, et omnis mons et collis humiliabitur. Quaedam viarum inaequaliter dispositae sunt; et dum nunc sursum erigunt, nunc vergunt deorsum, valde sunt ad eundum difficiles; et quantum ad hoc subdit et erunt prava in directa et aspera in vias planas. Hoc autem intelligitur actum esse per nostri salvatoris potentiam: quondam enim evangelicae conversationis et vitae iter erat ad eundum difficile, ex eo quod et mentes singulorum mundanae voluptates oppresserant; ut autem Deus factus homo peccatum damnavit in carne, explanata sunt omnia, et reddita sunt ad eundum facilia; et nec collis, nec vallis proficere volentibus obviat
Origenes
Quando enim venit Iesus, et spiritum suum misit, omnis vallis repleta est operibus bonis et fructibus spiritus sancti; quos si habueris, non solum vallis esse desistis, sed etiam mons Dei esse incipies
Gregorius Nyssenus
Vel quietam in virtutibus conversationem significat per convalles, secundum illud: valles abundabunt frumento
Chrysostomus
Elatos autem superbos nomine montis denuntiat, quos Christus humiliavit. Colles autem desperatos appellat, non solum ob superbiam mentis suae, sed propter desperationis sterilitatem: collis enim nullos fructus producit
Origenes in Lucam
Vel intelligas quoniam montes et colles, qui sunt adversariae potestates, per adventum Christi prostrati sunt
Basilius
Sicut autem colles respectu montium magnitudine differunt, in aliis sunt idem; sic et adversae potestates proposito quidem conformes sunt, immanitate tamen offensionum secernuntur
Gregorius
Vel vallis impleta crescit, mons autem et collis humiliatus decrescit: quia in fide Christi et gentilitas plenitudinem gratiae accepit, et Iudaea per errorem perfidiae hoc unde tumebat perdidit. Humiles enim donum accipiunt, quod a se corda superbientium repellunt
Chrysostomus in Matthaeum
Vel per hoc declarat legis difficultatem in fidei facilitatem conversam; ac si dicat: non ulterius sudores et dolores imminent; sed gratia et remissio peccatorum facilem viam pariunt ad salutem
Gregorius Nyssenus
Vel iubet valles impleri, deiici vero colles et montes; volens ostendere quod nec ob defectum virtutis ordo sit concavus, nec discrepet ob excessum
Gregorius
Prava autem directa fiunt, cum malorum corda per iniustitiam detorta, ad iustitiae regulam diriguntur. Aspera autem in vias planas immutantur, cum immites atque iracundae mentes per infusionem supernae gratiae ad lenitatem mansuetudinis redeunt
Chrysostomus
Deinde horum subicit causam, dicens et videbit omnis caro salutare Dei: ostendens quoniam usque ad fines mundi diffundetur Evangelii virtus atque cognitio, ex more ferino et obstinata voluntate ad mansuetudinem et lenitatem humanum genus convertens. Non autem solum Iudaei et proselyti, immo tota humana natura salutare Dei videbit
Chrysostomus
Idest, patris qui filium misit ut nostrum salvatorem. Caro autem praesens accipitur pro toto homine
Gregorius in Evang
Vel aliter. Omnis caro, idest omnis homo, salutare Dei, videlicet Christum, in hac vita videre non potuit. Propheta ergo oculum ad extremum iudicii diem tendit, quando hunc omnes et electi et reprobi pariter videbunt
3:7
Origene † 253 d.C.
No one that remains in his old state, and forsakes not his old habits and practices, can rightly come to be baptized; whoever then wishes to be baptized, let him go forth. Hence are those words significantly spoken, And he said unto the multitude that went forth to be baptized of him. To the multitudes then who are going forth to the laver of baptism, He speaks the following words, for if they had already gone forth, He would not have said, O generation of vipers.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Hom. in Matt. 10.
The dweller in the wilderness, when he saw all the people of Palestine standing round him and wondering, bent not beneath the weight of such respect, but rose up against them and reproved them. (Hom. in Gen. 12.) The holy Scripture often gives the names of wild beasts to men, according to the passions which excite them, calling them sometimes dogs because of their impudence, horses on account of their lust, asses for their folly, lions and panthers for their ravening and wantonness, asps for their guile, serpents and vipers for their poison and cunning; and so in this place John calls the Jews a generation of vipers.
san Basilio Magno † 379 d.C. cont. Eunom. lib. 2.
Now it may be observed, that the following words natus and filius are spoken of animals, but genimen may be said of the fœtus before it is formed in the womb; the fruit of the palm trees is also called genimina, but that word is very seldom used with respect to animals, and when it is, always in a bad sense.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Hom. in Matt. 11.
Now they say that the female viper kills the male in copulation, and the fœtus as it increases in the womb kills the mother, and so comes forth into life, bursting open the womb in revenge as it were of its father’s death; the viper progeny therefore are parricides. Such also were the Jews, who killed their spiritual fathers and teachers. But what if he found them not sinning, but beginning to be converted? He ought not surely to rebuke them, but to comfort them. We answer, that he gave not heed to those things which are outward, for he knew the secrets of their hearts, the Lord revealing them to him; for they vaunted themselves too much in their forefathers. Cutting therefore at this root, he calls them a generation of vipers, not indeed that he blamed the Patriarchs, or called them vipers.
san Gregorio Magno † 604 d.C. in Hom. 20, in Ev.
Because the Jews hated good men, and persecuted them, following the steps of their carnal parents, they are by birth the poisonous sons, as it were, of poisonous or sorcerous parents. But because the preceding verse declares that at the last judgment Christ shall be seen by all flesh, it is rightly added, Who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come? The wrath to come being the awarding of final punishment.
sant'Ambrogio † 397 d.C.
We see these men through the compassion of God, inspired with prudence to seek repentance of their crimes, dreading with wise devotion the terror of the judgment to come. Or perhaps, according to the precept, Be ye wise as serpents, (Matt. 10:16.) they are shewn to have a natural prudence, who perceive what is coming, and earnestly desire help, though they still forsake not what is hurtful.
san Gregorio Magno † 604 d.C. ubi sup.
But because he cannot then flee from the wrath of God, who now has not recourse to the sorrows of repentance, it is added, Bring forth therefore fruits.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. ubi sup.
For it is not sufficient for the penitent to leave off his sins, he must also bring forth the fruits of repentance, as it is in the Psalms, depart from evil and do good, (Ps. 34:14.) just as in order to heal, it will not do to pluck out the arrow only, but we must also apply a salve to the wound. But he says not fruit, but fruits, signifying abundance.
san Gregorio Magno † 604 d.C. ubi sup.
He warns them that they must bring forth not only the fruits of repentance, but fruits worthy of repentance. For he that has violated no law, to him it is permitted to use what is lawful, but if a man has fallen into sin, he ought so to cut himself off from what is lawful, as he remembers to have committed what is unlawful. For the fruit of good works ought not to be equal in the man who has sinned less, and the man who has sinned more, nor in him who has fallen into no crimes, and him who has fallen into some. In this way it is adapted to the conscience of each man, that they should seek for so much the greater blessing on good works through repentance, as they have by guilt brought on themselves the heavier penalties.
san Massimo † 662 d.C. lib. Ascet.
The fruit of repentance is an equanimity of soul, which we do not fully obtain, as long as we are at times affected by our passions, for not as yet have we performed the fruits worthy of repentance. Let us then repent truly, that being delivered from our passions we may obtain the pardon of their sins.
san Gregorio Magno † 604 d.C. ubi sup.
But the Jews glorying in their noble birth were unwilling to acknowledge themselves sinners, because they were descended from the stock of Abraham. So then it is rightly said, And begin not to say within yourselves, we have Abraham for our father.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. ubi sup.
Not meaning thereby that they had not descended in their natural course from Abraham, but that it avails them nothing to have Abraham for their father, unless they observed the relationship in respect of virtue. For Scripture is accustomed to entitle laws of relationship, such as do not exist by nature, but are derived from virtue or vice. To whichsoever of these two a man conforms himself, he is called its son or brother.
san Cirillo di Alessandria † 444 d.C.
For what profits the nobleness we inherit through the flesh, unless it be supported by kindred feelings in us? It is folly then to boast of our worthy ancestors, and fall away from their virtues.
san Basilio Magno † 379 d.C. non occ.
For neither does the speed of its sire make the horse swift; but as the goodness of other animals is looked for in individuals, so also that is reckoned to be man’s legitimate praise which is decided by the test of his present worth. For it is a disgraceful thing for a man to be adorned with the honours of another, when he has no virtue of his own to commend him.
san Gregorio di Nissa † 395 d.C. non occ.
So then having foretold the casting away of the Jews, He goes on to allude to the calling of the Gentiles, whom He calls stones. Hence it follows, For I say unto you, &c.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. ubi sup.
As if He said, Think not that if you perish the Patriarch will be deprived of sons, for God even from stones can produce men unto him, and prolong the line of his descendants. For so has it been from the beginning, seeing that for men to be made from stones unto Abraham is but equivalent to the coming forth of a son from the dead womb of Sarah.
sant'Ambrogio † 397 d.C.
But although God can alter and change the most diverse natures, yet in my mind a mystery is of more avail than a miracle. For what else than stones were they who bowed down to stones, like indeed to them who made them. It is prophesied therefore that faith shall be poured into the stony hearts of the Gentiles, and through faith the oracles promise that Abraham shall have sons. But that you may know who are the men compared to stones, he has also compared men to trees, adding, For now the axe is laid to the root of the tree. This change of figure was made, that by means of comparison might be understood to have now commenced a more kindly growth of manhood.
Origene † 253 d.C.
If the completion of all things had been then already begun, and the end of time close at hand, I should have no question but that the prophecy was given, because at that time it was to be fulfilled. But now that many ages have elapsed since the Spirit spoke this, I think it was prophesied to the people of Israel, because their cutting off was approaching. For to those that went out to him that they should be baptized, he gave this warning among others.
san Cirillo di Alessandria † 444 d.C.
By the axe then he declares the deadly wrath of God, which fell upon the Jews on account of the impieties they practised against Christ; he does not pronounce the axe to be yet fixed to the root, (ad radicem) but that it was laid, i. e. near the root. For though the branches were cut down, the tree itself was not yet entirely destroyed. For a remnant of Israel shall be saved.
san Gregorio Magno † 604 d.C. ubi sup.
Or we may take it in this way; The tree represents the whole human race in this world, but the axe is our redeemer, who by the handle and iron, as it were, is held indeed in the hand of man, but strikes by the power of God. Which axe indeed is now laid at the root of the tree; for although it waits patiently, yet it is plain what it is about to do. And we must observe that the said axe is to be laid not at the branches, but at the root. For when the children of the wicked are taken away, what is this but the cutting off of the branches of an unfruitful tree. But when the whole family together with the parent is removed, the unfruitful tree is cut off from the very root. But every hardened sinner finds the fire of hell the quicker prepared for him, as he disdains to bring forth the fruits of good works. Hence it follows, Every one then.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C.
It is elegantly said, that beareth not fruit, and it is added, good. For God created man an animal fond of employment, and constant activity is natural to him, but idleness is unnatural. For idleness is hurtful to every member of the body, but much more to the soul. For the soul being by nature in constant motion does not admit of being slothful. But as idleness is an evil, so also is an unworthy activity. But having before spoken of repentance, he now declares that the axe lies near, not indeed actually cutting, but only striking terror.
sant'Ambrogio † 397 d.C.
Let him then that is able bring forth fruit unto grace, him who ought, unto repentance. The Lord is at hand seeking for His fruit, who shall cherish the fruitful, but rebuke the barren.
Il testo latino
Chrysostomus
Manens aliquis in pristino statu, et mores suos et consuetudinem non relinquens, nequaquam rite ad Baptismum venit. Si quis ergo velit baptizari, egrediatur: unde signanter dicitur et dicebat ad turbas quae exibant, ut baptizarentur ab ipso. Egredientibus itaque ad lavacrum turbis, loquitur quae sequuntur; si enim iam egressi essent, nequaquam ad eos diceret genimina viperarum
Chrysostomus
Ille itaque cultor deserti videns omnes incolas Palaestinae circumstantes ipsum et admirantes, non flectebatur pro tanta reverentia, sed insurgens in ipsos arguebat eos. Sacra autem Scriptura, secundum stimulantes passiones, plerumque ferarum nomina imponit hominibus; interdum canes eos nominans causa procacitatis, equos ob luxum, asinos propter dementiam, et leones et pardos causa rapacitatis et petulantiae, aspides causa doli, serpentes et viperas causa veneni et calliditatis. Unde et nunc Ioannes Iudaeos audacter genimina viperarum vocat
Basilius contra Eunom
Oportet autem scire, quod haec nomina natus et filius de animalibus dicuntur; genimen vero potest dici fetus antequam effingatur; fructus etiam palmarum genimina dicuntur; raro autem in animalibus accipiuntur, et semper in malo
Chrysostomus in Matthaeum
Ferunt autem viperam matrem coeundo necare, cuius semen excrescens perimit matrem; et sic prodit in lucem scisso parentis utero, in vindictam quodammodo parentis genitoris; itaque parricida est proles viperea. Tales erant Iudaei, qui patres spiritales eorum atque doctores occidebant. Quid autem si non invenit eos peccantes, sed incipientes converti? Non debebat eis conviciari, sed permulcere. Dicendum, quod non adhibebat mentem his quae fiebant exterius; mentis enim eorum arcana cognoverat domino revelante: nimis enim se iactabant in progenitoribus. Hanc ergo radicem scindens nominat illos genimina viperarum, non quidem vituperans patriarchas, aut eos viperas nominans
Gregorius in Evang
Sed quia per hoc quod bonis invident eosque persequuntur, patrum suorum carnalium vias sequentes, quasi venenati filii de veneficis parentibus nati sunt. Quia vero supradicta sententia intendit quod extremo Christus examine ab omni carne videbitur, recte subditur quis ostendit vobis fugere a ventura ira? Ventura ira est animadversio ultionis extremae
Ambrosius
Ostenditur autem his Dei miseratione infusa prudentia, ut gerant suorum poenitentiam delictorum, futuri terrorem iudicii provida devotione metuentes: aut fortasse, iuxta quod scriptum est: estote prudentes sicut serpentes, ostenduntur habere prudentiam naturalem, qui profutura videant et sponte deposcant, sed adhuc noxia non relinquant
Gregorius
Quia vero tunc fugere ab ira peccatorum non valet qui nunc ad lamenta poenitentiae non recurrit, subditur facite ergo fructus dignos poenitentiae
Chrysostomus
Non enim satis est poenitentibus peccata dimittere, sed opus est eius fructus ferre, secundum illud: declina a malo, et fac bonum; sicut non sufficit ad sanationem sagittam evellere, sed oportet ulceri medicamentum apponere. Non autem dicit fructum, sed fructus, copiam designans
Gregorius
Nec solum fructus poenitentiae, sed dignos poenitentiae admonet esse faciendos. Quisquis enim illicita nulla commisit, huic conceditur ut licitis utatur; at si quis in culpam lapsus est, tanto a se licita debet abscindere, quanto meminit se perpetrasse illicita. Neque enim par fructus esse boni operis debet eius qui minus, et qui amplius deliquit: aut eius qui in nullis, et eius qui in quibusdam facinoribus cecidit. Per hoc ergo cuiuslibet conscientia convenitur, ut tanto maiora quaerat bonorum lucra per poenitentiam, quanto graviora sibi intulit damna per culpam
san Massimo
Poenitentiae fructus est impassibilitas animae, qua plenarie non fruimur, dum interdum passionibus instigamur: nondum enim fructus poenitentiae dignos peregimus. Poeniteamus ergo veraciter, ut a passionibus expediti, peccatorum veniam consequamur
Gregorius
Sed Iudaei de generis nobilitate gloriantes, idcirco se agnoscere peccatores nolebant, quia de Abrahae stirpe descenderant: quibus recte dicitur et ne coeperitis dicere: patrem habemus Abraham
Chrysostomus
Non hoc indicans quod ab Abraham naturali origine non descenderent; sed quia nihil prodest ab Abraham descendisse, nisi secundum virtutem cognationem observent. Cognationis namque leges consuevit Scriptura vocare non eas quae secundum naturam consistunt, sed quae derivantur a virtute vel vitio; quibus namque se quisque conformem statuit, horum filius, vel frater vocatur
Cyrillus
Quid enim confert carnalis generositas, nisi consimilibus studiis fulciatur? Vanum est igitur extolli de bonis praedecessoribus, et deficere ab eorum virtutibus
Basilius
Neque enim equum velocem esse facit patris erga cursum strenuitas; sed veluti ceterorum animalium probitas consideratur in singulis, sic quoque laus propria viri discernitur quam praesentium bonorum in se comprobat argumentum. Turpe namque est alienis ornari decoribus quem virtus propria non venustat
Gregorius Nyssenus
Sic igitur Iudaeorum promulgato exilio, consequenter ingerit convocationem gentilium, quos lapides appellat: unde sequitur dico enim vobis, quia potest Deus de lapidibus istis suscitare filios Abrahae
Chrysostomus in Matthaeum
Quasi dicat: ne putetis quod, si vos perieritis, filiis privetur patriarcha: potest enim Deus etiam ex lapidibus homines illi praebere, et ad illum perducere sanguinem: nam et ab ipso principio sic evenit: ei namque quod est ex lapidibus homines fieri, aequipollet exitus filii ab illo emortuo utero Sarae
Ambrosius
Sed licet Deus possit diversas convertere et mutare naturas, tamen mihi plus mysterium quam miraculum prodest. Quid enim aliud quam lapides habebantur qui lapidibus serviebant, similes utique his qui fecerant eos? Prophetatur igitur saxosis gentilium fides infundenda pectoribus, et futuros per fidem Abrahae filios oraculo pollicetur. Ut autem scias quia lapidibus comparati sunt homines, arboribus quoque homines comparavit, cum subdit iam enim securis posita est ad radicem arboris. Exempli autem ideo facta est mutatio, ut illo comparationis processu quidam intelligatur homini clementior iam profectus
Origenes in Lucam
Et quidem si iam ingrueret consummatio et temporum finis instaret, nulla mihi quaestio nasceretur: dicerem enim propterea hoc prophetatum esse, quia illo tempore complebitur. Cum autem tanta post saecula fluxerint ex quo spiritus sanctus hoc dixit, ego puto Israelitico populo prophetari, quod praecisio eius vicina sit. His enim qui egrediebantur ad eum ut baptizarentur, haec inter cetera loquebatur
Cyrillus
Securim ergo in praesenti nominat mortiferam iram, quae divinitus irruit in Iudaeos propter exercitam impietatem in Christum. Non tamen haesisse radici securim praenuntiat, sed ad radicem, idest iuxta radicem positam: decisi namque fuerunt rami, nec radicitus extirpata est planta; reliquiae enim Israel salvae fient
Gregorius
Vel aliter. Arbor huius mundi est universum genus humanum: securis vero est redemptor noster, qui velut ex manubrio et ferro, tenetur ex humanitate, sed incidit ex divinitate: quae videlicet securis iam ad radicem arboris posita est, quia etsi per patientiam expectata, videtur tamen quid factura est. Et notandum, quod non iuxta ramos securim positam, sed ad radicem dicit: cum enim malorum filii tolluntur, quid aliud quam rami infructuosae arboris abscinduntur? Cum vero tota simul progenies cum parente tollitur, infructuosa arbor a radice abscissa est. Unusquisque autem perversus paratam citius Gehennae concremationem invenit, qui fructum boni operis contemnit; unde sequitur omnis ergo arbor quae non facit fructum bonum excidetur, et in ignem mittetur
Chrysostomus
Eleganter dictum est non faciens fructum, et adicitur bonum: officiosum enim hoc animal Deus creavit, et naturalis est sibi exercitiorum instantia, otium vero innaturale. Obest enim inertia etiam cunctis corporis membris, nulli autem ut animae: ea namque cum continuo sit naturaliter mobilis, otiari non patitur. Sicut autem otium malum est, ita et indecens exercitium. Ex eo autem quod praemisit poenitentiam, praedicat quod securis adiacet, non quidem incidens, sed terrorem incutiens
Ambrosius
Faciat ergo fructum qui potest gratiae, et qui debet poenitentiae. Adest dominus qui fructum requirat, fecundos vivificet, steriles reprehendat
3:10
san Gregorio Magno † 604 d.C. ubi sup.
In the preceding words of John, it is plain that the hearts of his hearers were troubled, and sought for advice from him. As it is added, And they asked him, saying, &c.
Origene † 253 d.C.
Three classes of men are introduced as enquiring of John concerning their salvation, one which the Scripture calls the multitude, another to which it gives the name of Publicans, and a third which is noticed by the appellation of soldiers.
Teofilatto † 1107
Now to the Publicans and soldiers he gives a commandment to abstain from evil, but the multitudes, as not living in an evil condition, he commands to perform some good work, as it follows, He that hath two coats, let him give one.
san Gregorio Magno † 604 d.C. ubi sup.
Because a coat is more necessary for our use than a cloak, it belongs to the bringing forth of fruits worthy of repentance, that we should divide with our neighbours not only our superfluities but those which are absolutely necessary to us, as our coat, or the meat with which we support our bodies; and hence it follows, And he who has meat, let him do likewise.
san Basilio Magno † 379 d.C.
But we are hereby taught, that every thing we have over and above what is necessary to our daily support, we are bound to give to him who hath nothing for God’s sake, who hath given us liberally whatever we possess.
san Gregorio Magno † 604 d.C. ubi sup.
For because it was written in the law, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, he is proved to love his neighbour less than himself, who does not share with him in his distress, those things which are even necessary to himself. Therefore that precept is given of dividing with one’s neighbour the two coats, since if one is divided no one is clothed. But we must remark in this, of how much value are works of mercy, since of the works worthy of repentance these are enjoined before all others.
sant'Ambrogio † 397 d.C.
For other commands of duty have reference only to individuals, mercy has a common application. It is therefore a common commandment to all, to contribute to him that has not. Mercy is the fulness of virtues, yet in mercy itself a proportion is observed to meet the capacities of man’s condition, in that each individual is not to deprive himself of all, but what he has to share it with the poor.
Origene † 253 d.C.
But this place admits of a deeper meaning, for as we ought not to serve two masters, so neither to have two coats, lest one should be the clothing of the old man, the other of the new, but we ought to cast off the old man, and give to him who is naked. For one man has one coat, another has none at all, the strength therefore of the two is exactly contrary, and as it has been written that we should cast all our crimes to the bottom of the sea, so ought we to throw from us our vices and errors, and lay them upon him who has been the cause of them.
Teofilatto † 1107
But some one has observed that the two coats are the spirit and letter of Scripture, but John advises him that hath these two to instruct the ignorant, and give him at least the letter.
san Beda † 735 d.C.
What great virtue there was in the discourse of the Baptist is manifested by this, that the Publicans, nay even the soldiers, he compelled to seek counsel of him concerning their salvation, as it follows, But the publicans came.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Hom. in Matt. 24.
Great is the force of virtue that makes the rich seek the way of salvation from the poor, from him that hath nothing.
san Beda † 735 d.C.
He commands them therefore that they exact no more than what was presented to them, as it follows, And he said unto them, Do no more than what is appointed to you. But they are called publicans who collect the public taxes, or who are the farmers of the public revenue or public property? Those also who pursue the gain of this world by traffic are denoted by the same titles, all of whom, each in his own sphere, he equally forbids to practise deceit, that so by first keeping themselves from desiring other men’s goods, they might at length come to share their own with their neighbours. It follows, But the soldiers also asked him. In the justest manner he advises them not to seek gain by falsely accusing those whom they ought to benefit by their protection. Hence it follows, And he says unto them, Strike no one, (i. e. violently,) nor accuse any falsely, (i. e. by unjustly using arms,) and be content with your wages.
sant'Ambrogio † 397 d.C.
Teaching thereby that wages were affixed to military duty, lest men seeking for gain should go about as robbers.
san Gregorio Nazianzeno † 390 d.C. Orat. 19.
For by wages he refers to the imperial pay, and the rewards assigned to distinguished actions.
sant'Agostino † 430 d.C. cont. Faust. lib. xxii c. 74.
For he knew that soldiers, when they use their arms, are not homicides, but the ministers of the law; not the avengers of their own injuries, but the defenders of the public safety. Otherwise he might have answered, “Put away your arms, abandon warfare, strike no one, wound no one, destroy no one.” For what is it that is blamed in war? Is it that men die, who some time or other must die, that the conquerors might rule in peace? To blame this is the part of timid not religious men. The desire of injury, the cruelty of revenge, a savage and pitiless disposition, the fierceness of rebellion, the lust of power, and such like things are the evils which are justly blamed in wars, which generally for the sake of thereby bringing punishment upon the violence of those who resist, are undertaken and carried on by good men either by command of God or some lawful authority, when they find themselves in that order of things in which their very condition justly obliges them either to command such a thing themselves, or to obey when others command it.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Hom. in Matt. 11.
But John’s desire when he spoke to the Publicans and soldiers, was to bring them over to a higher wisdom, for which as they were not fitted, he reveals to them commoner truths, lest if he put forward the higher they should pay no attention thereto, and be deprived of the others also.
Il testo latino
Gregorius in Evang
In praemissis verbis Baptistae Ioannis constat, quod audientium corda turbata sunt, quae consilium quaerebant, cum subinfertur et interrogabant eum turbae dicentes: quid ergo faciemus?
Origenes in Lucam
Tres ordines inducuntur sciscitantium Ioannem super salute sua: unus quem Scriptura appellat turbas; alius quem publicanos nominat; tertius qui militum appellatione censetur
Theophylactus
Et quidem publicanis et militibus a malo abstinere praecepit; turbis autem, quasi non malitiosis existentibus, bonum aliquod praecepit observari; unde sequitur respondens autem dicebat illis: qui habet duas tunicas, det non habenti
Gregorius
Propter hoc quod tunica plus est necessaria usui nostro quam pallium, ad fructum dignum poenitentiae pertinet ut non solum exteriora quaecumque, sed ipsa nobis valde necessaria dividere cum proximis debeamus; scilicet vel tunicam qua vestimur, vel escam qua carnaliter vivimus; unde sequitur et qui habet escas, similiter faciat
Basilius
Hic autem docemur quod ex omni eo quod affluit supra proprii victus necessitatem, tenemur erogare illi qui non habet, propter Deum, qui quaecumque possidemus largitus est
Gregorius
Quia enim in lege scriptum est: diliges proximum tuum sicut teipsum, minus proximum amare convincitur qui non cum eo in necessitate illius etiam ea quae sunt sibi necessaria partitur: idcirco de dividendis cum proximo duabus tunicis datur praeceptum; quoniam si una dividitur, nemo vestitur. Inter haec autem sciendum est quantum misericordiae opera valeant, cum ad fructus dignos poenitentiae ipsa prae ceteris praecipiuntur
Ambrosius
Alia enim officiorum praecepta propria sunt singulorum: misericordia communis est usus: ideo commune praeceptum est omnibus ut conferant non habenti. Misericordia est plenitudo virtutum. Misericordiae tamen ipsius pro possibilitate conditionis humanae mensura servatur, ut non sibi unusquisque totum eripiat, sed quod habet cum paupere partiatur
Origenes in Lucam
Profundiorem autem locus iste recipit intellectum. Quomodo enim non debemus duobus servire dominis, sic nec duas habere tunicas, ne sit unum indumentum veteris hominis et alterum novi: sed debemus nos exuere veterem hominem, et ei dare qui nudus est: alius enim habet unum, alius vero omnino non habet, contraria scilicet fortitudo; et quomodo scriptum est ut in profundum maris praecipitemus nostra delicta, sic proiici a nobis oportet vitia atque peccata, et iacere super eum qui eorum nobis causa extitit
Theophylactus
Quidam autem tunicas duas esse dixit spiritum Scripturae et litteram. Habentem vero duo haec monet Ioannes ut instruat ignorantem, et det ei ad minus litteram
Beda
Quantum autem Baptistae sermo virtutem habuerit, hinc probatur, cum et publicanos et milites ad consilium salutis suae coegerit inquirendum; unde sequitur venerunt autem publicani ut baptizarentur, et dixerunt: magister, quid faciemus?
Chrysostomus
Magna est virtutis fortitudo, dum felicitatis viam requirunt ab indigo locupletes
Beda
Praecepit ergo eis ne ultra praescriptum exigant; unde sequitur et ille dixit ad eos: nihil amplius quam quod vobis constitutum est faciatis. Publicani vero appellantur hi qui vectigalia publica exigunt, sive qui conductores sunt vectigalium fisci, vel rerum publicarum; nec non et hi qui saeculi huius lucra per negotia sectantur, eodem vocabulo censentur; quos omnes pariter in suo quemque gradu ab agenda fraude coercet; ut dum primo se ab alienorum temperarent appetitu, tandem ad propria cum proximis communicanda pertingerent. Sequitur interrogabant autem eum et milites, dicentes: quid faciemus et nos? Iustissimo autem moderamine praemonet, ne ab eis calumniando praedam requirant, quibus militando prodesse debuerant; unde sequitur et ait illis: neminem concutiatis, scilicet per violentiam, neque calumniam faciatis, scilicet per fraudulentam malitiam; et contenti estote stipendiis vestris
Ambrosius
Docens idcirco stipendia militiae constituta, ne dum sumptus quaeritur, praedo grassetur
Gregorius Nazianzenus
Stipendium enim appellat imperialem provisionem, et deputata per legem dignitatibus munera
Augustinus contra Faustum
Sciebat enim eos cum militarent non esse homicidas, sed ministros legis; et non ultores iniuriarum suarum, sed salutis publicae defensores: alioquin responderet eis: arma abjicite, militiam istam deserite, neminem percutite, vulnerate, prosternite. Quid enim culpatur in bello? An quia moriuntur quandoque morituri, ut dominentur in pace victuri? Hoc reprehendere timidorum est, non religiosorum. Nocendi cupiditas, ulciscendi crudelitas, implacatus atque implacabilis animus, feritas rebellandi, libido dominandi, et si qua similia, haec sunt quae in bellis iure culpantur; quae plerumque ut etiam inde puniantur, adversus violentiam resistentium, sive Deo, sive aliquo legitimo imperio iubente, gerenda ipsa bella suscipiuntur a bonis, cum in eo rerum humanarum ordine inveniuntur ubi eos vel iubere tale aliquid, vel in talibus obedire iuste ipse ordo constringit
Chrysostomus super Matth
Volebat autem Ioannes quando publicanis et militibus loquebatur, ad aliam maiorem philosophiam ipsos traducere; sed quoniam nondum erant ad illam idonei, minora reserat: ne si potiora proferret, nequaquam illis intenderent, et his etiam privarentur
3:15
Origene † 253 d.C.
It was meet that more deference should be paid to John than to other men, for he lived such as no other man. Wherefore indeed most rightly did they regard him with affection, only they kept not within due bounds; hence it is said, But while the people were expecting whether he were the Christ.
sant'Ambrogio † 397 d.C.
Now what could be more absurd than that he who was fancied to be in another should not be believed in his own person? He whom they thought to have come by a woman, is not believed to have come by a virgin; while in fact the sign of the Divine coming was placed in the childbearing of a virgin, not of a woman.
Origene † 253 d.C.
But love is dangerous when it is uncontrolled. For he who loves any one ought to consider the nature and causes of loving, and not to love more than the object deserves. For if he pass the due measure and bounds of love, both he who loves, and he who is loved, will be in sin.
Un espositore greco Metaphrastes.
And hence John gloried not in the estimation in which all held him, nor in any way seemed to desire the deference of others, but embraced the lowest humility. Hence it follows, John answered.
san Beda † 735 d.C.
But how could he answer them who in secret thought that he was Christ, except it was that they not only thought, but also (as another Evangelist declares) sending Priests and Levites to him asked him whether he was the Christ or not?
sant'Ambrogio † 397 d.C.
Or: John saw into the secrets of the heart; but let us remember by whose grace, for it is of the gift of God to reveal things to man, not of the virtue of man, which is assisted by the Divine blessing, rather than capable of perceiving by any natural power of its own. But quickly answering them, he proved that he was not the Christ, for his works were by visible operations. For as man is compounded of two natures, i. e. soul and body, the visible mystery is made holy by the visible, the invisible by the invisible; for by water the body is washed, by the Spirit the soul is cleansed of its stains. It is permitted to us also in the very water to have the sanctifying influence of the Deity breathed upon us. And therefore there was one baptism of repentance, another of grace. The latter was by both water and Spirit, the former by one only; the work of man is to bring forth repentance for his sin, it is the gift of God to pour in the grace of His mystery. Devoid therefore of all envy of Christ’s greatness, he declared not by word but by work that he was not the Christ. Hence it follows, There cometh after me one mightier than I. In those words, mightier than I, he makes no comparison, for there can be none between the Son of God and man, but because there are many mighty, no one is mightier but Christ. So far indeed was he from making comparison, that he adds, Whose shoes latchet I am not worthy to unloose.
sant'Agostino † 430 d.C. de Cons. Evang. lib. ii. 12.
Matthew says, Whose shoes I am not worthy to bear. If therefore it is worth while to understand any difference in these expressions, we can only suppose that John said one at one time, another at another, or both together, To bear his shoes, and to loose the latchet of his shoes, so that though one Evangelist may have related this, the others that, yet all have related the truth. But if John intended no more when he spoke of the shoes of our Lord but His excellence and his own humility, whether he said loosing the latchet of the shoes, or bearing them, they have still kept the same sense who by the mention of shoes have in their own words expressed the same signification of humility.
sant'Ambrogio † 397 d.C.
By the words, Whose shoes I am not worthy to bear, he shews that the grace of preaching the Gospel was conferred upon the Apostles, who were shod for the Gospel. (Eph. 6:15.) He seems however to say it, because John frequently represented the Jewish people.
san Gregorio Magno † 604 d.C. Hom. 7. in Evan.
But John denounces himself as unworthy to loose the latchet of Christ’s shoes: as if he openly said, I am not able to disclose the footsteps of my Redeemer, who do not presume unworthily to take unto myself the name of bridegroom, for it was an ancient custom thata when a man refused to take to wife her whom he ought, whoever should come to her betrothed by right of kin, was to loose his shoe. Or because shoes are made from the skins of dead animals, our Lord being made flesh appeared as it were with shoes, as taking upon Himself the carcase of our corruption. The latchet of the shoe is the connexion of the mystery. John therefore can not loose the latchet of the shoe, because neither is he able to fathom the mystery of the Incarnation, though he acknowledged it by the Spirit of prophecy.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. ubi sup.
And having said that his own baptism was only with water, he next shews the excellence of that baptism which was brought by Christ, adding, He shall baptize you with the Holy Spirit, and fire, signifying by the very metaphor which he uses the abundance of grace. For he says not, “He shall give you the Holy Spirit,” but He shall baptize you. And again, by the addition of fire, he shews the power of grace. And as Christ calls the grace of the Spirit, water, (John 4:14; 7:38.) meaning by water the purity resulting from it, and the abundant consolation which is brought to minds which are capable of receiving Him; so also John, by the word fire, expresses the fervour and uprightness of grace, as well as the consuming of sins.
san Beda † 735 d.C.
The Holy Spirit also may be understood by the word fire, for He kindles with love and enlightens with wisdom the hearts which He fills. Hence also the Apostles received the baptism of the Spirit in the appearance of fire. There are some who explain it, that now we are baptized with the Spirit, hereafter we shall be with fire, that as in truth we are now born again to the remission of our sins by water and the Spirit, so then we shall be cleansed from certain lighter sins by the baptism of purifying fire.
Origene † 253 d.C.
And as John was waiting by the river Jordan for those who came to his baptism, and some he drove away, saying, Generation of vipers, but those who confessed their sins he received, so shall the Lord Jesus stand in the fiery stream with the flaming sword, that whoever after the close of this life desires to pass over to Paradise and needs purification, He may baptize him with this laver, and pass him over to paradise, but whoso has not the seal of the former baptisms, him He shall not baptize with the laver of fire.
san Basilio Magno † 379 d.C. lib. de Spir. Sanct. c. 12.
But because he says, He shall baptize you with the Holy Spirit, let no one admit that baptism to be valid in which the name of His Spirit only has been invoked, for we must ever keep undiminished that tradition which has been sealed to us in quickening grace. To add or take away ought thereof excludes from eternal life.
Un espositore greco ubi sup.
By these words then, He shall baptize with the Holy Spirit, He signifies the abundance of His grace, the plenteousness of His mercy; but lest any should suppose that while to bestow abundantly is both in the power and will of the Creator, He will have no occasion to punish the disobedient, he adds, whose fan is in his hand, shewing that He is not only the rewarder of the righteous, but the avenger of them that speak lies. But the fan expresses the promptitude of His judgment. For not with the process of passing sentence on trial, but in an instant and without any interval he separates those that are to be condemned from the company of those that are to be saved.
san Cirillo di Alessandria † 444 d.C. Chrys. in Thes. lib. ii. c. 4.
By the following words, And he shall thoroughly purge his floor, the Baptist signifies that the Church belongs to Christ as her Lord.
san Beda † 735 d.C.
For by the floor is represented the present Church, in which many are called but few are chosen. The purging of which floor is even now carried on individually, when every perverse offender is either cast out of the Church for his open sins, (by the hands of the Priesthood,) or for his secret sins is after death condemned by Divine judgment. And at the end of the world it will be accomplished universally, when the Son of Man shall send His angels, and they shall gather out of His kingdom every thing that has offended.
sant'Ambrogio † 397 d.C.
By the sign of a fan then the Lord is declared to possess the power of discerning merits, since when the corn is winnowed in the threshing floor, the full cars are separated from the empty by the trial of the wind blowing them. Hence it follows, And he shall gather the wheat into his barn. By this comparison, the Lord shews that on the day of judgment He will discern the solid merits and fruits of virtue from the unfruitful lightness of empty boasting and vain deeds, about to place the men of more perfect righteousness in His heavenly mansion. For that is indeed the more perfect fruit which was thought worthy to be like to Him who fell as a grain of wheat, that He might bring forth fruit in abundance. (John 12:24.)
san Cirillo di Alessandria † 444 d.C.
But the chaff signifies the trifling and empty, blown about and liable to be carried away by every blast of sin.
san Basilio Magno † 379 d.C. non occ.
But they are mixed up with those who are worthy of the kingdom of heaven, as the chaff with the wheat. This is not however from consideration of their love of God and their neighbour, nor from their spiritual gifts or temporal blessings.
Origene † 253 d.C.
Or, because without the wind the wheat and chaff cannot be separated, therefore He has the fan in His hand, which shews some to be chaff, some wheat; for when you were as the light chaff; (i. e. unbelieving,) temptation shewed you to be what you knew not; but when you shall bravely endure temptation, the temptation will not make you faithful and enduring, but it will bring to light the virtue which was hid in you.
san Gregorio di Nissa † 395 d.C. non occ.
But it is well to know, that the treasures, which according to the promises are laid up for those who live honestly, are such as the words of man cannot express, as eye hath not seen, nor the ear heard, nor hath it entered into the heart of man to conceive. And the punishments which await sinners bear no proportion to any of those things which now affect the senses. And although some of those punishments are called by our names, yet their difference is very great. For when you hear of fire, you are taught to understand something else from the expression which follows, that is not quenched, beyond what comes into the idea of other fire.
san Gregorio Magno † 604 d.C. Mor. 15. sup. Job 20.
The fire of hell is here wonderfully expressed, for our earthly fire is kept up by heaping wood upon it, and cannot live unless supplied with fuel, but on the contrary the fire of hell, though a bodily fire, and burning bodily the wicked who are put into it, is not kept up by wood, but once made remains unquenchable.
Il testo latino
Origenes in Lucam
Dignum erat ut plus Ioanni quam ceteris hominibus deferretur, qui aliter quam cuncti mortales vixerat: quam ob causam diligebant quidem eum iustissime, sed non servabant in caritate modum; unde dicitur existimante autem populo, et cogitantibus omnibus in cordibus suis de Ioanne, ne forte ipse esset Christus
, et cetera. Ambrosius
Quid autem ineptius quam quod is qui in alio aestimatur, in seipso esse non creditur? Quem per mulierem venturum putabant, per virginem venisse non credunt: et utique divini adventus signum in virginis partu, non in mulieris constitutum est
Origenes
Habet autem periculum dilectio, si modum transeat: debet enim qui aliquem diligit, naturam et causas considerare diligendi, et non plus diligere quam meretur: nam mensuram caritatis modumque si transcenderit, et qui diligit et qui diligitur in peccato erit
Graecus
Unde Ioannes non fuit gloriatus in habita opinione de ipso ab hominibus, nec aliquatenus visus est primatum appetere; sed infirmam humilitatem amplexus est; unde sequitur respondit Ioannes, dicens omnibus: ego quidem baptizo vos in aqua
Beda
Quomodo autem respondit eis qui in secreto cordis quia Christus esset, cogitabant, nisi quia non solum cogitabant, sed etiam, sicut alius Evangelista declarat, missis ad eum sacerdotibus ac Levitis, an esset Christus inquirebant?
Ambrosius
Vel videbat Ioannes cordis occulta. Sed consideremus cuius gratia: Dei enim munus est qui revelat, non virtus hominis qui divino magis adiuvatur beneficio, quam naturali cernit officio. Cito autem respondens probavit non esse se Christum, qui visibili operatur officio: nam cum ex duabus naturis, idest ex anima homo subsistat et corpore, visibile per visibilia, invisibile per invisibile mysterium consecratur: aqua enim corpus abluitur, spiritu animae delicta mundantur: licet etiam in ipso fonte sanctificatio divinitatis aspiret: et ideo aliud fuit Baptisma poenitentiae, aliud est gratiae: istud Baptisma ex utroque, illud ex uno: opus hominis est gerere poenitentiam delictorum, Dei munus est gratiam implere mysterii. Declinans ergo maiestatis invidiam, non verbo sed opere declaravit non esse se Christum; unde sequitur venit enim fortior me post me. In hoc quod dicit fortior me, comparationem non fecit: neque enim inter Dei filium et hominem ulla poterat esse comparatio; sed quia multi fortes, fortior nemo nisi Christus. Denique fecit comparationem, eo quod addiderit cuius non sum dignus solvere corrigiam calceamentorum eius
Augustinus de Cons. Evang
Matthaeus quidem dicit: cuius non sum dignus calceamenta portare. Itaque si ad rem pertinet aliud intelligere in eo quod dictum est: calceamenta portare, et corrigiam calceamentorum solvere, ut unus Evangelistarum hoc, alii aliud dicerent, omnes verum narraverunt: si autem nihil intendit Ioannes, cum de calceamentis domini diceret, nisi excellentiam eius et humilitatem suam; quodlibet horum dixerit, sive de solvenda calceamentorum corrigia, sive de portandis calceamentis, eamdem tamen sententiam tenuit quisquis etiam verbis suis per calceamentorum memoriam, eamdem significationem humilitatis expressit
Ambrosius
Per hoc etiam quod dicit: cuius non sum dignus calceamenta portare, evangelicae praedicationis ostendit in apostolos gratiam esse collatam, qui sunt calceati in Evangelium. Videtur tamen ideo hoc dicere quod plerumque Ioannes personam accipit populi Iudaeorum
Gregorius in Evang
Sed et Ioannes se indignum esse ad solvendum corrigiam calceamenti eius denuntiat; ac si aperte dicat: ego redemptoris vestigia denudare non valeo, qui sponsi nomen mihi immeritus non usurpo. Mos enim apud veteres fuit ut si quis eam quae sibi competeret, accipere nollet uxorem, ille ei calceamentum solveret qui ad hanc sponsus iure propinquitatis veniret. Vel quia calceamenta ex mortuis animalibus fiunt, incarnatus dominus quasi calceatus apparuit, qui morticina nostrae corruptionis assumpsit. Corrigia ergo calceamenti est ligatura mysterii. Ioannes itaque solvere corrigiam calceamenti eius non valet: quia incarnationis mysterium nec ipse investigare sufficit qui hanc per prophetiae spiritum agnovit
Chrysostomus in Matthaeum
Et quia dixerat quod suum Baptisma nil plus haberet quam aquam, consequenter ostendit excellentiam exhibiti per Christum Baptismatis, cum subdit ipse vos baptizabit in spiritu sancto et igni: per ipsam dicti metaphoram ostendens abundantiam gratiae: non enim ait: dabit vobis spiritum sanctum, sed baptizabit: ac rursus per id quod de igne subicit, ostendit virtutem gratiae; et sicut Christus aquam vocat spiritus gratiam, ostendens per vocabulum aquae, nitorem qui contingit ex ea, et consolationem immensam quae mentibus capacibus illius ingeritur; sic et Ioannes per ignis vocabulum exprimit fervorem et rectitudinem gratiae, necnon et peccatorum consumptionem
Beda
Potest et spiritus sanctus nomine ignis significatus intelligi: quia incendit per amorem, et per sapientiam corda quae replet, illuminat: unde et apostoli Baptisma spiritus in ignis visione percipiunt. Sunt qui ita exponunt, quod in praesenti in spiritu, et in futuro baptizaremur in igne; ut videlicet, sicut in remissionem omnium peccatorum ex aqua et spiritu renascimur; ita et tunc de levibus quibusdam peccatis Purgatorii ignis ante ultimum iudicium Baptismate permundemur
Origenes in Lucam
Et quomodo Ioannes iuxta Iordanem fluvium venientes ad Baptismum praestolabatur, et alios abigebat, dicens: generatio viperarum, eos vero qui confitebantur peccata, suscipiebat, sic stabit in igneo flumine dominus Iesus iuxta flammeam rhomphaeam; ut quicumque post exitum vitae huius ad Paradisum transire desiderat, et purgatione indiget, hoc eum amne baptizet, et ad Paradisum transmittat: eum vero qui non habet signum priorum Baptismatum, lavacro igneo non baptizet
Basilius
Non autem propter hoc quod dicit baptizabit vos in spiritu sancto, integrum quis esse Baptisma fatebitur in quo nomen solius spiritus invocatum est: oportet enim semper illibatam manere assignatam traditionem in vivificante gratia: nam addere vel minuere quicquam excludit a vita perpetua: sicut enim credimus, sic et Baptisma suscipimus in nomine patris et filii et spiritus sancti
Graecus
Per hoc ergo quod dicit baptizabit in spiritu sancto, ostendit abundantiam gratiae et beneficii copiam. Ne autem aliqui putent quod dona largiri et potestas et voluntas est creatori: punire vero inobedientes nullam sibi fore causam; ob hoc subdit cuius ventilabrum in manu eius: ostendens quod non solum munificus est dignis, sed etiam praevaricationum ultor. Ventilabrum autem promptitudinem iudicii exprimit: non enim cum induciis, sed in instanti et absque quolibet intervallo separat damnandos a collegio salvandorum
Cyrillus
Per hoc autem quod subdit et permundabit aream suam, designat Baptista Ecclesiam pertinere ad Christum, quasi ad dominum
Beda
Per aream enim praesens Ecclesia figuratur, in qua multi sunt vocati, pauci vero electi; cuius areae purgatio et nunc viritim geritur, cum quisque perversus vel ob manifesta peccata de Ecclesia, sacerdotali castigatione, eicitur, vel ob occulta post mortem divina districtione damnatur. Et universaliter in fine perficietur, quando mittet filius hominis Angelos suos, et colligent de regno eius omnia scandala
Ambrosius
Ventilabri ergo indicio, discriminandorum dominus declaratur ius habere meritorum, eo quod dum frumenta ventilantur in area, plena a vacuis velut quodam aurae spirantis examine separantur; unde sequitur et congregabit triticum in horreum suum; paleas autem comburet igne inextinguibili. Per hanc comparationem dominus ostendit quod iudicii die solida merita fructusque virtutis ab inanis iactantiae, exiliumque factorum infructuosa levitate discernat, perfectioris meriti viros locaturus in mansione caelesti. Ipse enim perfectior fructus est qui meruit eius esse conformis qui sicut granum tritici excidit, ut plurimos fructus afferret
Cyrillus
At paleae lentos et inanes signant, et quolibet vento peccati ventilatos et volubiles
Basilius
Conferunt autem his qui digni sunt regno caelorum velut palea tritico; non tamen intuitu divinae caritatis et proximorum hoc faciunt, sive spiritualibus donis, sive corporalibus beneficiis
Origenes in Lucam
Vel quia absque vento non possunt triticum et paleae separari; ideo habet ventilabrum in manu sua; quod alios paleas, alios triticum esse demonstrat. Cum enim esses palea levis, idest incredulus, ostendit te esse tentatio quod latebas. Cum autem fortiter tentamenta toleraveris, non te faciet fidelem tentatio atque patientem; sed virtutem, quae in te latebat, profert in medium
Gregorius Nyssenus
Expedit autem scire, quod nec bona quae per repromissiones reposita sunt honeste viventibus, talia sunt ut verbo valeant explicari: quia nec oculus vidit, nec auris audivit, nec in cor hominis ascenderunt: nec peccatorum poenae ad aliquid eorum quae in praesenti sensum afficiunt, proportionem habent: et quamvis aliquae illarum poenarum per nostra nominentur vocabula, differt tamen non modicum: cum enim audis ignem, aliud quiddam conicere doceris ex eo quod additur inextinguibili, quod in istum ignem non cadit
Gregorius Moralium
Miro modo expressus est ignis Gehennae: ignis namque noster corporeus per congesta ligna nutritur, nec valet nisi fotus subsistere; at contra Gehennae ignis, cum sit corporeus, et in se missos reprobos corporaliter exurat, lignis non nutritur, sed creatus semel inextinguibilis durat
3:18
Origene † 253 d.C.
John having announced the coming of Christ, was preaching the baptism of the Holy Spirit, and the other things which the Gospel history has handed down to us. But besides these he is declared to have announced others in the following words, And many other things in his exhortation preached he unto the people.
Teofilatto † 1107
For his exhortation was the telling of good things, and therefore is fitly called the Gospel.
Origene † 253 d.C.
And as in the Gospel according to St. John it is related of Christ that He spoke many other things, so also in this place we must understand Luke to say the same of John the Baptist, since certain things are announced by John too great to be entrusted to writing. But we marvel at John, because among them that are born of women there was not a greater than he, for by his good deeds he had been exalted to so high a fame for virtue, that by many he was supposed to be Christ. But what is much more marvellous he feared not Herod, nor dreaded death, as it follows, But Herod the tetrarch being reproved by him.
Eusebio † 339 d.C. non occ.
He is called the tetrarch, to distinguish him from the other Herod, in whose reign Christ was born, and who was king, but this Herod was tetrarch. Now his wife was the daughter of Aretas, king of Arabia, but he had sacrilegiously married his brother Philip’s wife, though she had offspring by his brother. For those only were allowed to do this whose brothers died without issue. For this the Baptist had censured Herod. First indeed he heard him attentively, for he knew that his words were weighty and full of consolation, but the desire of Herodias compelled him to despise the words of John, and he then thrust him into prison. And so it follows, And he added this above all, that he shut up John in prison.
san Beda † 735 d.C.
But John was not imprisoned in those days. According to St. John’s Gospel it was not till after some miracles had been performed by our Lord, and after His baptism had been noised abroad; but according to Luke he had been seized beforehand by the redoubled malice of Herod, who, when he saw so many flock to the preaching of John, and the soldiers believing, the publicans repenting, and whole multitudes receiving baptism, on the contrary not only despised John, but having put him in prison, slew him.
La Glossa ordin.
For before that Luke relates any of the acts of Jesus, he says that John was taken by Herod, to shew that he alone was in an especial manner going to describe those of our Lord’s acts, which were performed since the year in which John was taken or put to death.
Il testo latino
Origenes in Lucam
Annuntiaverat Ioannes Christum, Baptismum spiritus sancti praedicabat, et cetera quae Evangelii tradit historia: exceptis ergo his alia annuntiasse monstratur in eo quod dicitur multa quidem et alia exhortans evangelizabat populo
Theophylactus
Exhortatio enim eius erat bona doctrina; et ideo convenienter Evangelium dicitur
Origenes
Et quomodo in Evangelio secundum Ioannem de Christo refertur, quia multa et alia locutus est, sic et in praesenti loco intellige quod Lucas hic dixit, quoniam maiora quaedam a Ioanne annuntiabantur quam ut deberent litteris credi. Miramur autem Ioannem, quo inter natos mulierum maior nemo fuerit, quod in tantam opinionem meritis virtutis ascenderit ut a plerisque Christus putaretur; sed illud multo mirabilius, quod non timuit Herodem, non formidavit interitum; unde sequitur Herodes autem tetrarcha cum corriperetur ab illo
, et cetera. Eusebius Eccles. Hist
Dicitur autem tetrarcha ad differentiam alterius Herodis, quo regnante natus est Christus: erat enim ille rex, hic autem tetrarcha. Erat autem illi coniux Aretae regis Arabum filia, quam, cum coniux esset fratris sui Philippi, more sacrilego duxit, quamvis prolem haberet a fratre: his enim solum licebat hoc agere quorum fratres sine prole vitam compleverant. Super hoc Herodem reprehenderat Baptista. Primo quidem diligenter eius audiebat sermones, cum sciret eos ponderosos, et consolatione plenos; sed Herodiadis concupiscentia cogebat eum aspernari verba Ioannis: unde et eum detrudit in carcerem; et hoc est quod dicitur adiecit et hoc super omnia, et inclusit Ioannem in carcere
Beda
Non autem his diebus captus est Ioannes, sed, iuxta Evangelium Ioannis, post aliqua gesta signa a domino, et post eius Baptismum diffamatum. Sed a Luca propter exaggerandam malitiam Herodis praeoccupatum est: qui cum videret ad praedicationem Ioannis multos confluere, milites credere, publicanos poenitere, totum vulgus Baptisma suscipere, ipse e converso non solum Ioannem contemnit, sed vinculat et occidit
Glossa
Ante etiam quam Lucas aliquid narret de actibus Iesu, dicit Ioannem ab Herode captum; ut ostendat se solummodo ea domini facta praecipue descripturum quae eo anno gesta sunt quo Ioannes captus est vel punitus
3:21
sant'Ambrogio † 397 d.C.
In a matter which has been related by others, Luke has rightly given us only a summary, and has left more to be understood than expressed in the fact, that our Lord was baptized by John. As it is said, Now when all were baptized, it came to pass. Our Lord was baptized not that He might be cleansed by the waters but to cleanse them, that being purified by the flesh of Christ who knew no sin, they might possess the power of baptism.
san Gregorio Nazianzeno † 390 d.C. in Orat. 39.
Christ comes also to baptism perhaps to sanctify baptism, but doubtless to bury the old Adam in water.
sant'Ambrogio † 397 d.C.
But the cause of our Lord’s baptism He Himself declares when He says, Thus it becomes us to fulfil all righteousness. But what is righteousness, except that what you would have another do to you, you should first begin yourself, and so by your example encourage others? Let none then avoid the laver of grace, since Christ avoided not the laver of repentance.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C.
Now there was a Jewish baptism which removed the pollutions of the flesh, not the guilt of the conscience; but our baptism parts us from sin, washes the soul, and gives us largely the outpouring of the Spirit. But John’s baptism was more excellent than the Jewish; for it did not bring men to the observance of bodily purifications, but taught them to turn from sin to virtue. But it was inferior to our baptism, in that it conveyed not the Holy Spirit, nor shewed forth the remission which is by grace, for there was a certain end as it were of each baptism. But neither by the Jewish nor our own baptism was Christ baptized, for He needed not the pardon of sins, nor was that flesh destitute of the Holy Spirit which from the very beginning was conceived by the Holy Spirit; He was baptized by the baptism of John, that from the very nature of the baptism, you might know that He was not baptized because He needed the gift of the Spirit. But he says, being baptized and praying, that you might consider how fitting to one who has received baptism is constant prayer.
san Beda † 735 d.C.
Because though all sins are forgiven in baptism, not as yet is the weakness of this fleshly substance made strong. For we rejoice at the overwhelming of the Egyptians having now crossed the Red sea, but in the wilderness of worldly living there meet us other foes, who, the grace of Christ directing us, may by our exertions be subdued until we come to our own country.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C.
But he says, The heavens opened, as if till then they had been shut. But now the higher and the lower sheep-fold being brought into one, and there being one Shepherd of the sheep, the heavens opened, and man was incorporated a fellow citizen with the Angels.
san Beda † 735 d.C.
For not then were the heavens opened to Him whose eyes scanned the innermost parts of the heaven, but therein is shewn the virtue of baptism, that when a man comes forth from it the gates of the heavenly kingdom are opened to him, and while his flesh is bathed unharmed in the cold waters, which formerly dreaded their hurtful touch, the flaming sword is extinguished.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C.
The Holy Spirit descended also upon Christ as upon the Founder of our race, that He might be in Christ first of all who received Him not for Himself, but rather for us. Hence it follows: And the Holy Spirit descended. Let not any one imagine that He received Him because He had Him not. For He as God sent Him from above, and as man received Him below. Therefore from Him the Spirit fled down to Him, i. e. from His deity to His humanity.
sant'Agostino † 430 d.C.
But it is most strange that He should receive the Spirit when He was thirty years old. But as without sin He came to baptism, so not without the Holy Spirit. For if it was written of John, He shall be filled with the Spirit from his mother’s womb, (Luke 1:15.) what must we believe of the man Christ, the very conception of whose flesh was not carnal but spiritual. Therefore He condescended now to prefigure His body, i. e. the Church, in which the baptized especially receive the Holy Spirit.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C.
That baptism savoured partly of antiquity, partly of novelty. For that He should receive baptism from a Prophet shewed antiquity, but the Spirit’s descent denoted something new.
sant'Ambrogio † 397 d.C.
Now the Spirit rightly shewed Himself in the form of a dove, for He is not seen in His divine substance. Let us consider the mystery why like a dove? Because the grace of baptism requires innocence, that we should be innocent as doves. The grace of baptism requires peace, which under the emblem of an olive branch the dove once brought to that ark which alone escaped the deluge.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C.
Or to shew the meekness of the Lord, the Spirit now appears in the form of a dove, but at Pentecost like fire, to signify punishment. For when He was about to pardon offences, gentleness was necessary; but having obtained grace, there remaineth for us the time of trial and judgment.
san Cipriano † 258 d.C. De unit. Eccles.
the dove is a harmless and pleasant creature, with no bitterness of gall, no fierceness of bite, no violence of rending talons; they love the abodes of men, consort within one home, when they have young nurturing them together, when they fly abroad, hanging side by side upon the wing, leading their life in mutual intercourse, giving with their bills a sign of their peaceful harmony, and fulfilling a law of unanimity in every way.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C.
Christ indeed had already manifested Himself at His birth by many oracles, but because men would not consult them, He who had in the mean time remained secret, again more clearly revealed Himself in a second birth. For formerly a star in the heavens, now the Father at the waves of Jordan declared Him, and as the Spirit descended upon Him, pouring forth that voice over the head of Him who was baptized, as it follows, And a voice came from heaven, Thou art my beloved Son.
sant'Ambrogio † 397 d.C.
We have seen the Spirit, but in a bodily shape, and the Father whom we cannot see we may hear. He is invisible because He is the Father, the Son also is invisible in His divinity, but He wished to manifest Himself in the body. And because the Father did not take the body, He wished therefore to prove to us that He was present in the Son, by saying, Thou art my Son.
sant'Atanasio † 373 d.C. De Dec. Nic. Syn.
The holy Scriptures by the name of Son set forth two meanings; one similar to that spoken of in the Gospel, He gave to them power that they should become the sons of God; another according to which Isaac is the son of Abraham. Christ is not then simply called a Son of God, but the article is prefixed, that we should understand that He alone is really and by nature the Son; and hence He is said to be the Only begotten. For if according to the madness of Arius He is called Son, as they are called who obtain the name through grace, He will seem in no way to differ from us. It remains therefore that in another respect we must confess Christ to be the Son of God, even as Isaac is acknowledged to be the son of Abraham. For that which is naturally begotten of another, and takes not its origin from any thing besides nature, accounts a son. But it is said, Was then the birth of the Son with suffering as of a man? By no means. God since He cannot be divided is without suffering the Father of the Son. Hence He is called the Word of the Father, because neither is the word of man even produced with suffering, and since God is by nature one, He is the Father of one only Son, and therefore it is added, Beloved. For when a man has only one son, he loves him very much, but if he becomes father of many, his affection is divided by being distributed.
sant'Atanasio † 373 d.C.
But as the prophet had before announced the promise of God, saying, I will send Christ my son, that promise being now as it were accomplished at Jordan, He rightly adds, In thee I am well pleased.
san Beda † 735 d.C.
As if He said, In Thee have I appointed My good pleasure, i. e. to carry on by Thee what seems good to Me.
san Gregorio Magno † 604 d.C. sup. Ezech. Hom. 8.
Or else, Every one who by repentance corrects any of his actions, by that very repentance shews that he has displeased himself, seeing he amends what he has done. And since the Omnipotent Father spoke of sinners after the manner of men, saying, It repents me that I have made man, (Gen. 6:7.) He (so to speak) displeased Himself in the sinners whom He had created. But in Christ alone He pleased Himself, for in Him alone He found no fault that He should blame Himself, as it were, by repentance.
sant'Agostino † 430 d.C. de Con. Ev. lib. ii. c. 14.
But the words of Matthew, This is my beloved Son, and those of Luke, Thou art my beloved Son, convey the same meaning; for the heavenly voice spoke one of these. But Matthew wished to shew that by the words, This is my beloved Son, it was meant rather to declare to the hearers, that He was the Son of God. For that was not revealed to Christ which He knew, but they heard it who were present, and for whom the voice came.
Il testo latino
Ambrosius
Pulchre in his quae a ceteris dicta sunt, Lucas compendium sumpsit. Et intelligendum magis quod a Ioanne dominus baptizatus est, quam expressum reliquit; unde dicitur factum est autem, cum baptizaretur omnis populus, et Iesu baptizato et orante, apertum est caelum. Baptizatus est autem dominus, non mundari volens, sed mundare aquas; ut ablutae per carnem Christi, qui peccatum non cognovit, Baptismatis ius haberent
Gregorius Nazianzenus
Accedit etiam Christus ad Baptismum, forsan sanctificaturus Baptistam; quod autem nulli dubium est, ut totum veteranum Adam immergat aquae
Ambrosius
Quae etiam sit dominici causa Baptismatis, dominus ipse declarat, dicens: sic decet implere omnem iustitiam. Quae est ergo iustitia, nisi quia quod alterum tibi facere velis, prior ipse incipias, et tuo alios horteris exemplo? Nemo igitur refugiat lavacrum gratiae, quando Christus lavacrum poenitentiae non refugit
Chrysostomus
Fuerat autem Baptisma Iudaicum quod sordes carnis amovebat, non conscientiae crimina; nostrum autem Baptisma separat a peccatis, lavat animam, et spiritus copiam elargitur. Baptisma vero Ioannis Iudaico praestantius fuit: neque enim ad observantiam corporalium mundificationum inducebat, sed monebat a vitio in virtutem converti: nostro vero Baptismate minus, eo quod nec spiritum sanctum administrabat, nec remissionem quae per gratiam sit exhibebat; cum quasi finis quidam esset utrorumque Baptismatum. Sed neque Iudaico Baptismate, nec nostro baptizatus est Christus: quia nec indulgentia peccatorum egebat, nec illa caro expers erat spiritus sancti quae per spiritum sanctum ab ipso principio concepta est. Sed baptizatus est Ioannis Baptismate, ut ex ipsa natura Baptismatis scias quia neque causa peccati, neque propter indigentiam doni baptizatus est. Dicit autem baptizato et orante, ut perpendas quod, suscepto Baptismate, opportuna sit iugis oratio
Beda
Quia etsi peccata sunt omnia in Baptismo laxata, non adhuc terrenae carnis est fragilitas solidata: nam quasi transito mari rubro gratulamur submersos Aegyptios; sed in deserto mundanae conversationis hostes concurrunt alii, qui duce Christi gratia nostro sudore vincantur, donec perveniamus ad patriam
Chrysostomus
Dicit autem apertum est caelum, tamquam hactenus reclusum fuisset. Iam autem ovili superno et infimo in unum redacto, et uno existente ovium pastore, caelum patuit, et homo terricola aggregatus est Angelis
Beda
Non enim ei caelum tunc apertum est cuius oculi interiora cernebant; sed virtus ibi Baptismatis ostenditur, de quo quisque cum egreditur, regni caelestis ei ianua aperitur, dumque caro innoxia frigentibus tangitur aquis, opposita quondam noxiis rhomphaea extinguitur ignea
Chrysostomus
Descendit etiam spiritus sanctus ad Christum tamquam ad generis nostri principium, ut in Christo sit primo, qui non sibi, sed nobis potius illum suscepit: unde sequitur et descendit spiritus sanctus corporali specie, sicut columba, in ipsum. Non existimet aliquis quod cum non habuit eum, suscepit ipsum: ipse namque illum desursum tamquam Deus mittebat; at idem ut homo recipiebat inferius. Igitur ex eo devolavit in eum, ex ipsius deitate ad eius humanitatem
Augustinus de Trin
Absurdissimum autem est, cum iam triginta annorum esset, accepisse spiritum sanctum: sed venit ad Baptismum sicut sine peccato, ita non sine spiritu sancto. Si enim de Ioanne scriptum est: spiritus sancto replebitur ab utero matris suae, quid de homine Christo credendum est, cuius carnis ipsa conceptio non carnalis, sed spiritualis fuit? Nunc ergo corpus suum, idest Ecclesiam, praefigurare dignatus est, in qua baptizati praecipue accipiunt spiritum sanctum
Chrysostomus
Redolebat illud Baptisma aliquid vetustatis, et partim sapiebat novitatem: quod enim Baptisma susciperet a propheta, ostendebat aliquid vetustatis: quod autem spiritus descenderit, novum aliquid designabat
Ambrosius
Merito autem spiritus se in corpore demonstravit, quoniam divinitatis substantia non videtur. Advertamus mysterium quare sicut columba: simplicitatem enim lavacri requirit gratia: quoniam in typo veteri columba quondam ad illam arcam, quae sola fuit diluvii immunis, reversa est
Chrysostomus
Vel nunc ut mansuetudinem magistri declaret, in specie columbina apparet; in Pentecoste autem quemadmodum ignis, ut ostendat poenam. Cum enim oportebat delictis ignoscere, mansuetudo necessaria erat; sed ut adepti sumus gratiam, restat examinis et iudicii tempus
Cyprianus de Simpl. Praelat
Est autem columba simplex et laetum animal, non felle amarum, non moribus saevum, non ungulae laceratione violentum; hospitia humana deligere, unius domus nosse consortium; cum generant filios simul sedere; cum commeant, volatu invicem cohaerere; conversatione communi vitam suam degere; oris osculo concordiam pacis agnoscere; legem circa omnia unanimitatis implere
Chrysostomus
Et quidem Christus in ortu suo per plurima se manifestaverat oracula: verum quia noluerunt advertere, cum medio latuerit tempore, rursum se ab alio clariore patefecit principio. Non stella, sed desuper indicabat pater in undis Iordanis, et spiritus devolabat protrahens illam vocem super verticem eius qui baptizabatur; unde sequitur et vox de caelo facta est: tu es filius meus dilectus, in te complacui mihi
Ambrosius
Vidimus spiritum, sed in specie corporali; et patrem quem videre non possumus, audiamus: invisibilis enim est pater, sed et filius invisibilis secundum divinitatem: sed demonstrare se voluit in corpore: et quia pater corpus non gerebat, ideo probare voluit nobis in filio sese praesentem, dicens tu es filius meus
Athanasius de Syn. Nyc
Sacra quidem Scriptura ex nomine filii duplicem intellectum ostendit; unum quidem, ut in Evangelio Ioannis dicitur: dedit eis potestatem ut fiant filii Dei; alterum autem intellectum, iuxta quem Isaac est filius Abrahae. Christus ergo non simpliciter dicitur Dei filius, sed cum articuli additione, ut comprehendamus quoniam ipse solus est qui revera et secundum naturam est filius; quamobrem et unigenitus dicitur: nam si secundum insaniam Arii dicitur filius, sicut qui hoc nomen per gratiam assequuntur; in nullo a nobis differre videbitur. Restat ergo, secundum alium intellectum, fatendum esse Christum filium Dei, secundum quem Isaac filius Abrahae esse cognoscitur: quod enim ab alio naturaliter gignitur, non autem ab extrinseco sumit exordium, filium natura recenset. Sed dicitur: numquid ut hominis est passibilis nativitas filii? Minime; sed Deus cum sit indivisibilis, impassibiliter pater est filii: unde verbum patris dicitur: quia nec ipsum verbum humanum passibiliter producitur; et cum simplex sit natura divina, unius solius filii pater est; et propter hoc additur dilectus
Chrysostomus
Cum enim quis unum solum possidet filium, maxime diligit; si vero pater factus sit plurium, dispertitus affectus remittitur
sant'Atanasio
Cum autem antea propheta protulerit Dei promissa dicentis: mittam Christum filium meum, nunc apud Iordanem, quasi consummato promisso, decenter subiungit in te complacui mihi
Beda
Ac si dicat: in te placitum meum constitui, idest hoc per te gerere quod mihi placet
Gregorius super Ezech
Vel aliter. Omnis qui poenitendo corrigit aliqua quae fecit, eo ipso quod poenitet, se sibi displicuisse indicat, quia emendat quod fecit. Et quia omnipotens pater humano modo de peccatoribus locutus est, dicens: poenitet me fecisse hominem, quasi sibimetipsi displicuit in peccatoribus quos creavit: in solo autem Christo sibi complacuit, quia in solo eo non invenit culpam, in qua se reprehendat quasi per poenitentiam
Augustinus de Cons. Evang
Quod autem Matthaeus dicit: hic est filius meus, Lucas autem tu es filius meus dilectus, ad eamdem sententiam explicandam valet: vox enim caelestis unum horum dixit; sed Matthaeus ostendere voluit ad id valere quod dictum est: hic est filius meus, ut illis qui potius audiebant, indicaretur quod ipse esset filius Dei: non enim Christo indicabatur, qui sciebat; sed audiebant qui aderant, propter quos etiam ipsa vox facta est
3:23
Origene † 253 d.C.
Having related our Lord’s baptism, he next enters upon the generation of the Lord, not bringing it down from the higher to the lower, but beginning with Christ, he carries it up to God Himself. Hence he says, And Jesus Himself began. For when He was baptized, and had Himself undergone the mystery of the second birth, then He is said to have begun, that thou also mightest destroy this first birth and be born in the second.
san Gregorio Nazianzeno † 390 d.C. Orat. 39.
We must therefore consider who He was who was baptized, and by whom and when: seeing He was pure, baptized by John, and at a time when His miracles had begun, that we might thence derive the lesson of purifying ourselves beforehand, and of embracing humility, and of not beginning to preach until the maturity of our spiritual and natural life. The first of these was said for their sakes who are receiving baptism; for although the gift of baptism brings remission, yet we must fear lest we return again to our vomit. The second is pointed at those who exalt themselves against the stewards of the mysteries, whom they may excel in rank. The third was uttered for those who trust in their youth, and imagine that any age is fit for promotion and teaching. Jesus is cleansed, and dost thou despise purification? By John, and dost thou say ought against thy teacher. At thirty years old, but dost thou in teaching precede thy elders? But the example of Daniel and the like are ready in thy mouth, for every guilty person is ready with an answer. But that is not the law of the Church which seldom happens, as neither does a single swallow make the spring.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C.
Or, He waited accomplishing the whole law until that age which takes in every sin, that none might say that He abrogated the law because He was not able to fulfil it.
Un espositore greco Severus.
For this reason also He came at thirty years to be baptized, to shew that spiritual regeneration makes men perfect as far as regards their spiritual life.
san Beda † 735 d.C.
The thrice ten years also which our Saviour had passed when He was baptized might intimate also the mystery of our baptism, because of the faith in the Trinity, and the obedience to the Decalogue.
san Gregorio Nazianzeno † 390 d.C. Orat. 40.
Still must a child be baptized if necessity demands it. For it is better to be insensibly sanctified, than to pass from this life unsealed. But you will say, Christ is baptized at thirty years old, and He was God, but thou biddest us to hasten our baptism. In that thou saidst God, the objection was done away: He needed no cleansing, nor was any danger hanging over Him while He put off His baptism. But with thee it extends to no slight calamity, if thou passest from this life born in corruption, but not if thou hast put on the robe of incorruption. And truly it is a blessed thing to keep unsullied the clean robe of baptism, but it is better at times to be slightly stained, than to be altogether devoid of grace.
san Cirillo di Alessandria † 444 d.C. Glaph. in Exod. lib. 1.
Although in truth Christ had no father according to the flesh, yet some fancied he had a father. Hence it follows, As was supposed the son of Joseph.
sant'Ambrogio † 397 d.C.
Rightly as was supposed, since in reality He was not, but was supposed to be so, because Mary who was espoused to Joseph was His mother. But we might doubt why the descent of Joseph is described rather than that of Mary, (seeing that Mary brought forth Christ of the Holy Spirit, while Joseph seemed to be out of the line of our Lord’s descent,) were we not informed of the custom of the Holy Scripture, which always seeks the origin of the husband, and especially in this case, since in Joseph’s descent we also find that of Mary. For Joseph being a just man took a wife really from his own tribe and country, and so at the time of the taxing Joseph went up from the family and country of David to be taxed with Mary his wife. She who gives in the returns from the same family and country, shews herself to be of that family and country. Hence He goes on in the descent of Joseph, and adds, Who was the son of Eli. But let us consider the fact, that St. Matthew makes Jacob, who was the father of Joseph, to be son of Nathan, but Luke says that Joseph (to whom Mary was espoused) was the son of Eli. How then could there be two fathers, (namely, Eli and Jacob,) to one man.
san Gregorio Nazianzeno † 390 d.C. Carm. 18.
But some say that there is one succession from David to Joseph, which each Evangelist relates under different names. But this is absurd, since at the beginning of this genealogy, two brothers come in Nathan and Salomon, from whom the lines are carried in different ways.
Eusebio † 339 d.C.
Let us then more carefully explain the meaning of the words themselves. For if when Matthew affirmed Joseph to be the son of Jacob, Luke had in like manner affirmed that Joseph was the son of Eli, there would be some dispute. But seeing the case is that Matthew gives his opinion, Luke repeats the common opinion of many, not his own, saying, as was supposed, I do not think that there is any room for doubt. For since there were among the Jews different opinions of the genealogy of Christ, and yet all traced Him up to David because to him the promises were made, while many affirmed that Christ would come through Solomon and the other kings, some shunned this opinion because of the many crimes related of their kings, and because Jeremiah said of Jechonias that “a man should not rise of his seed to sit on the throne of David.” (Jer. 22:30.) This last view Luke takes, though conscious that Matthew gives the real truth of the genealogy. This is the first reason. The next is a deeper one. For Matthew when he began to write of the things before the conception of Mary and the birth of Jesus in the flesh, very fitly as in a history commences with the ancestry in the flesh, and descending from thence deduces His generation from those who went before. For when the Word of God became flesh, He descended. But Luke hastens forward to the regeneration which takes place in baptism, and then gives another succession of families, and rising up from the lowest to the highest, keeps out of sight those sinners of whom Matthew makes mention, (because that he who is born again in God is separated from his guilty parents, being made the son of God,) and relates those who have led a virtuous life in the sight of God. For thus it was said to Abraham, Thou shalt set out to thy fathers, (Gen. 15:15.) not fathers in the flesh, but in God, on account of their likeness in virtue. To him therefore fore who is born in God he ascribes parents who are according to God on account of this resemblance in character.
Pseudo-Agostino Aug. Quæst. Nov. ac Vet. Test. 56.
Or in another way; Matthew descends from David through Salomon to Joseph: but Luke beginning from Eli, who was in the line of our Saviour, ascends through the line of Nathan the son of David, and joins the tribes of Eli and Joseph, shewing that they are both of the same family, and thereby that the Saviour was not only the Son of Joseph, but also of Eli. For by the same reason by which the Saviour is called the son of Joseph, he is also the son of Eli, and of all the rest who are of the same tribe. Hence that which the Apostle says, Of whom are the fathers, and from whom Christ came according to the flesh. (Rom. 9:5.)
sant'Agostino † 430 d.C. Quæst. Ev. ii. qu. 5.
Or there occur three reasons, by one of which the Evangelist was led. For either one Evangelist has mentioned the father by whom Joseph was begotten, but the other his maternal grandfather, or some one of his ancestors. Or one of the fathers mentioned was the natural father of Joseph, the other his father who had adopted him. Or after the manner of the Jews, when a man has died without children, the next of kin taking his wife ascribes to his dead kinsman the son whom he has himself begotten.
sant'Ambrogio † 397 d.C.
For it is related that Matthas, who was descended from Salomon, begat Jacob as his son, and died leaving his wife living, whom Melchi took unto him as wife, and from her Eli was born. Again, Eli, when his brother Jacob died without children, was joined to his brother’s wife, and begot a son Joseph, who according to law is called the son of Jacob, since Eli raised up seed to his deceased brother, according to the order of the ancient law. (Deut. 25:5.)
san Beda † 735 d.C.
Or else, Jacob, taking the wife of his brother Eli who had died without children according to the command of the law, begot Joseph, by natural parentage his own son, but by the ordinance of the law the son of Eli.
sant'Agostino † 430 d.C. de Con. Ev. lib. ii. c. 3.
It is most probable that Luke took the origin by adoption, as not being willing to say that Joseph, was begotten by him whose son he related him to be. For more easily is a man said to be his son by whom he was adopted, than to be begotten by him from whose flesh he was not born. But Matthew saying, “Abraham begat lsaac, and Isaac begat Jacob,” and continuing in the word “begat,” until at last he says, but “Jacob begat Joseph,” has sufficiently expressed that he has carried through the succession of the fathers, to that father by whom Joseph was not adopted, but begotten. Although even supposing that Luke should say that Joseph was begotten by Eli, neither ought that word to perplex us. For it is not absurd to say that a man has begotten not in the flesh but in love the Son whom he has adopted. But rightly has Luke taken the origin by adoption, for by adoption are we made the sons of God, by believing on the Son of God, but by His birth in the flesh, the Son of God has rather for our sakes become the Son of man.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Hom. 31, in Ep. ad Rom.
But because this part of the Gospel consists of a series of names, men think there is nothing valuable to be derived therefrom. Lest then we should feel this, let us try to examine every step. For from the mere name we may extract an abundant treasure, for names are indicative of many things. For they savour of the Divine mercy and the offerings of thanks by women, who when they obtained sons gave a name significant of the gift.
La Glossa interlin.
By interpretation then Eli means, “My God,” or “climbing,” Who was the son of Matthat, i. e. “forgiving sins.” Who was the son of Levi, i. e. “being added.”
sant'Ambrogio † 397 d.C.
Luke rightly thought, seeing that he could not embrace more of the sons of Jacob, lest he should seem to be wandering from the line of descent in a superfluous course, that the ancient names of the Patriarchs though occurring in others far later, Joseph, Judah, Simeon, and Levi, should not be omitted. For we recognise in these four kinds of virtue; in Judah, the mystery of our Lord’s Passion prophesied by figure; in Joseph, an example of chastity going before; in Simeon, the punishment of injured modesty; in Levi, the priestly office. Hence it follows, Who was the son of Melchi, i. e. “my King.” Who was the son of Janna, i. e. “a right hand.” Who was the son ofJoseph, i. e. “growing up;” but this was a different Joseph. Who was the son of Mattathias, i. e. “the gift of God,” or “sometimes.” Who was the son of Amos, i. e. “loading, or he loaded.” Who was the son of Naum, i. e. “help me.” Who was the son of Matthat, i. e. “desire.” Who was the son of Mattathias, as above. Who was the son of Simei, i. e. “obedient.” Who was the son ofJoseph, i. e. “increase.” Who was the son of Judah, i. e. “confessing.” Joanna, “the Lord, his grace,” or “the gracious Lord.” Resa, “merciful.” Zorobabel, “chief or master of Babylon.” Salathiel, “God my petition.” Neri, “my lanthern.” Melchi, “my kingdom.” Addi, “strong or violent.” Cosam, “divining.” Her, “watching, or watch, or of skins.” Who was the son of Jesus, i. e. “Saviour.” Eliezer, i. e. “God my helper.” Joarim, i. e. “God exalting, or, is exalting.” Matthat, as above. Levi, as above. Simeon, i. e. “He has heard the sadness, or the sign.” Juda, as above. Joseph, as above. Jonah, a dove, or wailing. Eliachim, i. e. “the resurrection of God.” Melchi, i. e. “his king.” Menan, i. e. “my bowels.” Mattathias, i. e. “gift.” Nathan, i. e. “He gave, or, of giving.”
sant'Ambrogio † 397 d.C.
But by Nathan we perceive expressed the dignity of Prophecy, that as Christ Jesus alone fulfilled all things, in each of His ancestors different kinds of virtue might precede Him. It follows, Who was the son of David.
Origene † 253 d.C.
The Lord descending into the world took upon Him the person of all sinners, and was willing to be born of the stock of Solomon, (as Matthew relates,) whose sins have been written down, and of the rest, many of whom did evil in the sight of God. But when He ascended, and is described as being born a second time in baptism, (as Luke relates,) He is not born through Salomon, but Nathan, who reproves the father for the death of Uriah, and the birth of Solomon.
sant'Agostino † 430 d.C. Retract. i. c. 26.
But it must be confessed that a prophet of this same name reproves David, that he might be thought to be the same man, whereas he was different.
san Gregorio Nazianzeno † 390 d.C. ubi sup.
From David upwards according to each Evangelist there is an unbroken line of descent; as it follows, Who was the son of Jesse.
La Glossa ubi sup.
David is interpreted, “with a mighty arm, strong in fight.” Obith, i. e. “slavery.” Booz, i. e. “strong.” Salmon, i. e. “capable of feeling, or peace-making.” Naasson, i. e. “augury, or belonging to serpents.” Aminadab, “the people being willing.” Aram, i. e. “upright, or lofty.” Esrom, i. e. “an arrow.” Phares, i. e. “division.” Judah, i. e. “confessing.” Who was the son of Jacob, i. e. “supplanted.” Isaac, i. e. “laughing or joy.” Abraham, i. e. “the father of many nations, or the people.”
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Hom. in Matt 1.
Matthew, who wrote as for the Jews, had no further object than to shew that Christ proceeded from Abraham and David, for this was most grateful to the Jews. Luke however, as speaking to all men in common, carried his account beyond as far even as Adam. Hence it follows, Who was the son of Thara.
La Glossa ubi sup.
Which is interpreted, “finding out,” or “wickedness.” Nachor, i. e. “the light rested.” Sarug, i. e. “correction,” or “holding the reins,” or “perfection.” Ragan, i. e. “sick,” or “feeding.” Phares, i. e. “dividing,” or “divided.” Heber, i. e. “passing over.” Sala, i. e. “taking away.” Canaan, i. e. “lamentation,” or “their possession.”
san Beda † 735 d.C.
The name and generation of Cainan, according to the Hebrew reading, is found neither in Genesis, nor in the Chronicles, (dierum Vulg. verbis.) but Arphaxad is stated to have begot Sala his son, without any one intervening. Know then that Luke borrowed this generation from the Septuagint, where it is written, that Arphaxad at a hundred and thirty-five years old begot Cainan, but he at a hundred and thirty years begot Sala. It follows, Who was the son of Arphaxad.
La Glossa ubi sup.
i. e. “healing the laying waste.” Sem, i. e. “a name,” or being “named.” Who was the son of Noe, i. e. “rest.”
sant'Ambrogio † 397 d.C.
The mention of just Noah ought not to be omitted among our Lord’s generations, that as our Lord was born the builder of His Church, He might seem to have sent Noah beforehand, the author of His race, who had before founded the Church under the type of an ark. Who was the son of Lamech.
La Glossa ubi sup.
i. e. “humility, or striking, or struck, or humble.” Who was the son of Mathusalem, i. e. “the sending forth of death,” or “he died,” also “he asked.”
sant'Ambrogio † 397 d.C.
His years are numbered beyond the deluge, that since Christ is the only one whose life experiences no age, in His ancestors also He might seem to have felt not the deluge. Who was the son of Enoch. And here is a manifest declaration of our Lord’s piety and divinity, since our Lord neither experienced death, and returned to heaven, the founder of whose race was taken up into heaven. Whence it is plain that Christ could not die, but was willing that His death should profit us. And Enoch indeed was taken, that his heart might not change by wickedness, but the Lord, whom the wickedness of the world could not change, returned to that place whence He had come by the greatness of His own nature.
san Beda † 735 d.C.
But rightly rising up from the baptized Son of God to God the Father, he places Enoch in the seventy-seventh step, who, having put off death, was translated unto Paradise, that he might signify that those, who by the grace of adoption of sons are born again of water and the Holy Spirit, are in the mean time (after the dissolution of the body) to be received into eternal rest, for the number seventy, because of the seventh of the sabbath, signifies the rest of those who, the grace of God assisting them, have fulfilled the decalogue of the aw.
La Glossa
Enoch is interpreted “dedication.” Jared, i. e. descending or “holding together.” Malaleleel, i. e. “the praised of God,” or” praising God.” Cainan, as above. Enos, i. e. “man,” or “despairing,” or “violent.” Seth, i. e. “placing,” “settling,” “he hath placed.” Seth, the last son of Adam, is not omitted, that as there were two generations of people, it might be signified under a figure that Christ was to be reckoned rather in the last than the first. It follows, Who was the son of Adam.
La Glossa ubi sup.
Which is “man,” or “of the earth,” or “needy.” Who was the son of God.
sant'Ambrogio † 397 d.C.
What could better agree than that the holy generation should commence from the Son of God, and be carried up even to the Son of God; and that he who was created should precede in a figure, in order that he who was born might follow in substance, so that he who was made after the image of God might go before, for whose sake the image of God was to descend. For Luke thought that the origin of Christ should be referred to God, because God is the true progenitor of Christ, or the Father according to the true birth, or the Author of the mystical gift according to baptism and regeneration, and therefore he did not from the first begin to describe His generation, but not till after he had unfolded His baptism, that both by nature and by grace, he might declare Him to be the Son of God. But what more evident sign of His divine generation than that when about to speak of it St. Luke introduces first the Father, saying, Thou art my beloved Son?
sant'Agostino † 430 d.C. de Con. Ev. lib. ii. c. 3.
He sufficiently declared by this that he called not Joseph the son of Eli because he was begotten by him, but rather because he was adopted by him, for he has called also Adam himself son, since though made by God, yet by grace (which he forfeited by sin) he was placed as a son in paradise.
Teofilatto † 1107
For this reason he closes the generations in God, that we may learn that those fathers who intervene, Christ will raise up to God, and make them sons of God, and that it might be believed also that the birth of Christ was without seed; as if he said, If thou believest not that the second Adam was made without seed, you must come to the first Adam, and you will find that he was made by God without seed.
sant'Agostino † 430 d.C. ubi sup. c. 4.
Matthew indeed wished to set forth God descending to our mortality; accordingly at the beginning of the Gospel he recounted the generations from Abraham to the birth of Christ in a descending scale. But Luke, not at the beginning, but after the baptism of Christ, relates the generation not descending but ascending, as if marking out rather the high priest in the expiation of sins, of whom John bore testimony, saying, Behold, who taketh away the sins of the world. But by ascending he comes to God, to whom we are reconciled, being cleansed and expiated.
sant'Ambrogio † 397 d.C.
Nor do the Evangelists seem so to differ who have followed the old order, nor can you wonder if from Abraham down to Christ there are more successions according to Luke, fewer according to Matthew, since you must admit the line to have been traced through different persons. But it might be that some men have passed a very long life, but the men of the next generation have died at an early age, since we see how many old men live to see their grandchildren, while others depart as soon as they have sons born to them.
sant'Agostino † 430 d.C. Quæst. Ev. lib. ii. qu. 6.
But most fitly with regard to our baptized Lord does Luke reckon the generations through seventy-seven persons. For both the ascent to God is expressed, to whom we are reconciled by the abolition of sins, and by baptism is brought to man the remission of all his sins, which are signified by that number. For eleven times seven are seventy-seven. But by the tenth number is meant perfect happiness. Hence it is plain that the going beyond the tenth marks the sin of one through pride coveting to have more. But this is said to be seven times to signify that the transgression was caused by the moving of man. For by the third number the immortal part of man is represented, but by the fourth the body. But motion is not expressed in numbers, as when we say, one, two, three; but when we say, once, twice, thrice. And so by seven times eleven, is signified a transgression wrought by man’s action.
Il testo latino
Origenes in Lucam
Cum autem baptizatum dominum dixisset, generationem domini exponit, non a superioribus ad inferiora deducens, sed a Christo usque ad ipsum pervenit Deum; unde dicit et ipse Iesus erat incipiens quasi annorum triginta. Quando enim baptizatus est, et mysterium secundae generationis assumpsit, tunc dicitur incepisse, ut tu quoque priorem nativitatem destruas, et in secunda regeneratione nascaris
Gregorius Nazianzenus
Est ergo considerandum qui esset qui baptizatus est, et a quo, et quando. Mundus siquidem, et a Ioanne, et iam inceptis miraculis; ut ex hinc suscipiamus doctrinam nos praemundandi, et humilitatem amplexandi, quin et in perfectione et spiritualis et carnalis aetatis praedicandi: quorum primum dictum est Baptisma suscipientibus, et non praemunientibus se per habitum bonum; nam etsi relaxationem peccatorum faciat donum Baptismi, verendum tamen est ne ad eumdem vomitum revertamur. Secundum dictum est adversus insurgentes contra dispensatores mysterii: siquidem ipsi dignitate praecellunt. Tertium editum est illis qui de iuventa confidunt, et quodlibet tempus arbitrantur ad praelationem vel doctrinam spectare. Purgatur Iesus, et tu purgationem contemnis; a Ioanne, ac tu in tuum monitorem insurgis; tricenarius, tu autem docendo seniores, lanuginem praevenis. Sed adsunt Danielis et similium exempla in ore: nam quilibet noxius ad respondendum paratus est. Non est autem lex Ecclesiae quod raro contingit, eo quod nec unica hirundo ver statuit
Chrysostomus
Vel idcirco usque ad illam aetatem quae cuncta peccata recipit, expectat, totam legem perficiens, ne quis dicat, quod ideo legem solvit, quod eam non poterat consummare
Graecus
Ob hoc etiam tricenarius accedit ad Baptisma, ut ostendat quod spiritualis regeneratio viros parit perfectos secundum spiritualem aetatem
Beda
Potest etiam tricenalis baptizati salvatoris aetas, nostri etiam Baptismatis intimare mysterium, propter fidem scilicet Trinitatis, et operationem Decalogi
Gregorius Nazianzenus
Baptizandus est tamen infantulus, si necessitas urgeat: nam utilius est insensibiliter sanctificari, quam non signatos transmigrare. Sed dices: Christus tricenarius baptizatur, cum Deus esset; tu vero iubes accelerare Baptisma. Sed cum dixisti: Deus, id obiectum solvisti. Ipse non indigebat purgamine, nec aliquod imminebat ei periculum dum differret Baptisma; at tibi in parvum non redundat piaculum, si transmigres in corruptione natus, non autem incorruptionis veste indutus. At forsan times ne baptizatus Baptismatis munditiam custodias et propterea differs Baptismum. Sed melius est nonnunquam parumper inquinari, quam omnino gratia carere
Cyrillus
Licet tamen Christus secundum carnem careat patre, suspicabantur aliqui eum patrem habere; unde sequitur ut putabatur filius Ioseph
Ambrosius in Lucam
Bene ut putabatur, qui vere non erat; sed ideo putabatur, quia eum Maria, quae Ioseph viro suo erat desponsata genuerat. Cur autem Ioseph magis quam Mariae generatio describitur, cum Maria de spiritu sancto genuerit Christum, et Ioseph a generatione domini videatur alienus, dubitare possemus, nisi consuetudo nos instrueret Scripturarum, quae semper viri originem quaerit: maxime cum in Ioseph origine etiam origo sit Mariae: nam cum vir iustus fuerit Ioseph, utique ex tribu sua et ex patria sua accepit uxorem: itaque et census tempore ascendit Ioseph de domo et de patria David, ut profiteretur cum Maria uxore sua. Quae ex eadem domo et ex eadem patria professionem defert, utique eiusdem tribus et eiusdem patriae se esse designat: unde generationem Ioseph explicans subdit qui fuit Heli. Illud autem advertamus, quod sanctus Matthaeus Iacob, qui fuit pater Ioseph, filium Nathan esse commemorat; Lucas vero Ioseph, cui desponsata fuit Maria, filium Heli esse descripsit. Quomodo unius duo patres, scilicet Heli et Iacob, esse potuerunt?
Gregorius Nazianzenus
Dicunt autem quidam quod unica est successio a David usque ad Ioseph; licet diversis nominibus ab utroque Evangelista narratur. Sed hoc absurde fatentur: quoniam initium huius generationis duos fratres obtinuit, Nathan scilicet et Salomonem: unde generationes diversimode profluxerunt
Eusebius Eccl. Hist
Ipsorum ergo verborum sententiae intellectum attentius explicemus: si enim approbante Matthaeo Ioseph esse filium Iacob, Lucas similiter approbasset Ioseph esse filium Heli, esset aliqua controversia. Ceterum cum approbante Matthaeo, Lucas plurium opinionem declararet, non propriam, dicens ut putabatur, non arbitror aliquod relinqui dubium. Cum enim essent inter Iudaeos diversae opiniones de Christo, et omnes reducerent ipsum ad David propter promissiones ei factas; plurimi autem assererent Christum a David esse futurum per Salomonem et alios reges; quidam hanc opinionem vitabant, eo quod plurima de regibus dicuntur enormia; et quia de Iechonia Ieremias dixit, quod non oriretur semen ex eo collocandum in sede David: quorum opinionem commemorat Lucas, sentiens enarrare Matthaeum qualis esset veritas generationis: et haec est prima ratio. Est et alia profundior. Matthaeus enim cum inciperet scribere ante conceptionem Mariae, et carnalem nativitatem Iesu, opportune velut in historia praemittit carnalem progeniem: unde et generationem a superioribus derivat descendens: cum enim verbum Dei carnem acciperet, descendebat. Sed Lucas ad factam per lavacrum regenerationem prosilit, et ibi aliam generum successionem exponit, et ab imis ad prima sublevans, pariter et peccatorum, quos narravit Matthaeus, memoriam abdicat (eo quod quicumque in Deo renascitur, sit alienus a criminosis parentibus, Dei filius factus), et eorum qui secundum Deum vitam duxerunt honestam, meminit. Sic enim Abrahae dictum est: tu proficisceris ad patres tuos, non quidem carnales, sed in Deo patres, propter similitudinem honestatis. Igitur ei qui in Deo nascitur ascribit parentes, qui sunt secundum Deum per aequiparantiam morum
Augustinus de quaest. Nov. et Vet. Testam
Vel aliter. Matthaeus a David per Salomonem descendit ad Ioseph; Lucas vero ab Heli, qui tempore fuit salvatoris, ascendit per traducem Nathan filii David, et Heli et Ioseph iunxit tribum, ostendens unius generis esse utrumque; ac per hoc non solum Ioseph filium esse salvatorem, sed et Heli. Ipsa enim ratione qua Ioseph filius dicitur esse salvator, ipsa etiam est Heli filius, et caeterorum omnium qui de eadem tribu sunt. Hinc est quod dicit apostolus: quorum patres, et ex quibus Christus secundum carnem
Augustinus de quaest. Evang
Vel tres causae concurrunt, quarum aliquam Evangelista secutus sit: aut enim unus Evangelista patrem eius a quo genitus est, nominavit, alter vero vel avum maternum, vel aliquem de cognatis maioribus posuit: aut unus erat Ioseph naturalis pater et alter eum adoptavit: aut more Iudaeorum, cum sine filiis unus decessisset, eius uxorem propinquus recipiens, filium quem genuit propinquo mortuo deputavit
Ambrosius
Traditur enim, Nathan, qui a Salomone genus duxit, Iacob generasse filium, et uxore superstite decessisse, quam postea Melchi accepit uxorem, ex qua generatus est Heli; rursus Heli, fratre Iacob sine liberis decedente, copulatus est fratris uxori, et generavit alium Ioseph, qui iuxta legem Iacobi filius dicitur: quoniam semen fratris defuncti iuxta legis veteris seriem suscitabat
Beda
Vel aliter. Iacob fratris Heli sine liberis defuncti uxorem de mandato legis accipiens genuit Ioseph, natura quidem germinis filium suum, secundum vero legis praeceptum efficitur filius Heli
Augustinus de quaest. Nov. et Vet. Testam
Probabilius enim intelligimus Lucam adoptantis originem tenuisse, qui noluit Ioseph genitum dicere ab illo cuius filium esse narravit. Commodius enim filius dictus est eius a quo fuerat adoptatus, quam diceretur ab illo genitus cuius carne non erat natus. Matthaeus autem dicens: Abraham genuit Isaac, Isaac autem genuit Iacob, atque in hoc verbo, quod est genuit, perseverans donec in ultimo diceret: Iacob autem genuit Ioseph, satis expressit ad eum se patrem perduxisse originem generantium, a quo Ioseph non adoptatus, sed genitus erat. Quamquam si etiam genitum Lucas diceret Ioseph ab Heli, nec sic nos hoc verbum perturbare deberet: neque enim absurde quisque dicitur non carne, sed caritate genuisse quem sibi filium adoptavit. Merito autem Lucas adoptionis originem suscepit: quia per adoptionem efficiuntur filii Dei; per carnalem vero generationem filius Dei potius propter nos filius hominis factus est
Chrysostomus
Quia vero haec pars Evangelii consistit in serie nominum, nihil pretiosum exinde acquiri existimant. Ne igitur hoc patiamur, experiamur etiam hunc passum scrutari. Est enim ex nudis nominibus copiosum haurire thesaurum, quia plurimum rerum indicativa sunt nomina: nam et divinam clementiam, et oblatas a mulieribus gratiarum actiones sapiunt: cum enim filios impetrabant, nomen imponebant a dono
Glossa
Interpretatur igitur Heli, Deus meus, vel scandens; qui fuit Mathat, idest donans peccata; qui fuit levi, idest additus
Ambrosius
Pulchre Lucas, quoniam filios Iacob non poterat plures comprehendere, ne extra generationes evagari superflua serie videretur, licet in aliis longe posterioribus patriarcharum tamen antiqua nomina non praetermittenda arbitratus est: Ioseph, Iudae, Simeonis et levi. Quatuor enim genera in his cognoscimus fuisse virtutum: in Iuda passionis dominicae per figuram mysterium prophetatum; in Ioseph praecessisse castitatis exemplum, in Simeone vindictam pudoris; in levi officium sacerdotis; unde sequitur qui fuit Melchi, idest rex meus; qui fuit Ianne, idest dextera; qui fuit Ioseph, idest accrescens (fuit autem alius iste Ioseph); qui fuit Mathathiae, idest donum Dei, vel aliquando; qui fuit Amos, idest onerans, vel oneravit; qui fuit Nahum, idest consolatio, vel consolans; qui fuit Hesli, idest, adiuva me; qui fuit Nagge, idest meridies, vel meridianum; qui fuit Mahath, idest desiderium; qui fuit Mathathiae, ut supra; qui fuit Semei, idest obediens; qui fuit Ioseph, idest augmentum; qui fuit Iuda, idest confitens; qui fuit Ioanna, idest dominus, vel gratia eius, vel dominus misericors; qui fuit Resa, idest misericors; qui fuit Zorobabel, idest princeps, vel magister Babylonis; qui fuit Salathiel, idest petitio mea Deus; qui fuit Neri, idest lucerna mea; qui fuit Melchi, idest regnum meum; qui fuit addi, idest robustus, vel violentus; qui fuit Cosan, idest dominans; qui fuit Helmadam, quod est Dei mensura; qui fuit Her, quod est vigilans, vel vigilia, vel pelliceus; qui fuit Iesu, quod est salvator; qui fuit Eliezer, idest Deus meus adiutor; qui fuit Iorim, idest dominus exultans, vel exaltans; qui fuit Mathat, ut supra; qui fuit levi, ut supra; qui fuit Simeon, id est audivi tristitiam, vel signum; qui fuit Iuda, ut supra; qui fuit Ioseph, ut supra; qui fuit Iona, idest columba, vel dolens; qui fuit Eliakim, quod est Dei resurrectio; qui fuit Melcha, idest rex eius; qui fuit Menna, quod est viscera mea; qui fuit Mathathiae, idest donum; qui fuit Nathan, idest dedit, vel dantis
Ambrosius
Per Nathan autem expressam advertimus prophetiae dignitatem; ut quia unus omnis Christus Iesus, in singulis quoque maioribus genera virtutum diversa praecederent. Sequitur qui fuit David
Origenes in Lucam
Dominus descendens in mundum, assumpsit peccatorum hominum personam, et nasci voluit de stirpe Salomonis, ut refert Matthaeus, cuius peccata scripta sunt, et ceterorum, ex quibus multi fecerunt malum in conspectu Dei. Quando vere ascendit, et secundo per Baptismum ortus esse describitur, ut refert Lucas, non per Salomonem, sed per Nathan nascitur, qui arguit patrem super Uriae morte, ortuque Salomonis
Augustinus in Lib. Retract
Dicendum autem, quod huiusmodi nominis propheta arguit David, ne putetur idem fuisse homo, cum alter fuerit
Gregorius Nazianzenus
Sed a David ultra, secundum utrumque Evangelistam, est generis processus indivisibilis; unde sequitur qui fuit Iesse
Glossa
Interpretatur David manu fortis, Iesse incensum. Sequitur qui fuit Obed, quod est servitus; qui fuit Booz, quod est fortis; qui fuit Salomon, quod est sensibilis, vel pacificus; qui fuit Naasson, quod est augurium, vel serpentinus; qui fuit Aminadab, idest populus voluntarius; qui fuit aram, quod est erectus, vel excelsus; qui fuit Esron idest sagitta; qui fuit Phares, quod est divisio; qui fuit Iudae, idest confitens; qui fuit Iacob, quod est supplantator; qui fuit Isaac, quod est risus, vel gaudium; qui fuit Abraham, quod est pater multarum gentium, vel videns populum
Chrysostomus
Matthaeus quidem tamquam qui Iudaeis scribebat, nihil statuit ulterius scribere nisi quod ab Abraham et David Christus processerat: hoc enim maxime placabat Iudaeos. Lucas vero, sicut qui omnibus communiter loquebatur, ulterius protendit sermonem, attingens usque ad Adam; unde sequitur qui fuit Thare
Glossa
Quod interpretatur exploratio, sive nequitia; qui fuit Nachor, quod est requievit lux; qui fuit Sarug, quod est corrigia, vel comprehendens lorum, vel perfectio; qui fuit Ragau, quod est aegrotus, vel pascens; qui fuit Phaleg, quod est dividens, vel divisum; qui fuit Heber, quod est transitus; qui fuit sale, quod est tollens; qui fuit Cainan, quod est lamentatio, vel possessio eorum
Beda
Nomen et generatio Cainan, iuxta Hebraicam veritatem neque in Genesi, neque in verbis dierum invenitur, sed Arphaxad Selaa vel sale filium nullo interposito genuisse perhibetur. Scito ergo Lucam hanc generationem de Septuaginta interpretum editione sumpsisse, ubi scriptum est quod Arphaxad centum triginta quinque annorum genuerit Cainan, et ipse Cainan cum triginta quinque fuerit annorum, genuerit sale. Sequitur qui fuit Arphaxad
Glossa
Quod est sanans depopulationem; qui fuit Sem quod est nomen, vel nominatus; qui fuit Noe, quod est requies
Ambrosius
Noe quidem iusti inter dominicas generationes commemoratio non debuit praetermitti: ut quia aedificator Ecclesiae nascebatur, eum sui generis auctorem praemisisse videatur qui eam in typo ante fundaverat. Qui fuit Lamech
Glossa
Quod est humiliatum vel percutiendum, percussum vel humilem; qui fuit Mathusalem, quod est mortis emissio, vel mortuus est, et interrogavit
Ambrosius
Huius ultra diluvium numerantur anni; ut quoniam solus est Christus unus, cuius vita nullam sentit aetatem, in maioribus quoque suis non sensisse diluvia videretur. Qui fuit Enoch: et hic pietatis dominicae et divinitatis manifestum indicium est, eo quod nec mortem senserit dominus, et ad caelum remeaverit, cuius generis auctor raptus ad caelum est. Unde manifestum est Christum potuisse non mori, sed voluisse, ut nobis mors illa prodesset: et ille quidem raptus ne malitia mutaret cor eius; dominus autem, quem malitia saeculi mutare non poterat, eo unde venerat, naturae suae maiestate remeavit
Beda
Pulchre autem a baptizato Dei filio usque ad Deum patrem ascendens, septuagesimo gradu Enoch ponit, qui dilata morte translatus est in Paradisum; ut significet eos qui in gratiam adoptionis filiorum ex aqua et spiritu sancto regenerantur, interim post corporis absolutionem, aeternam suscipiendos in requiem: septuagenarius enim, propter septimam sabbati, illorum requiem significat qui iuvante Dei gratia Decalogum legis impleverunt
Glossa
Interpretatur autem Enoch dedicatio; qui fuit Iared, quod est defendens, sive continens; qui fuit Malaleel, quod est laudatus Dei, vel laudans Deum; qui fuit Cainan, ut supra; qui fuit Enos, idest homo desperans, vel violentus; qui fuit Seth, quod est positio sive posuit
Ambrosius
Seth posterior filius Adae non siletur; ut cum duae sint populi generationes, significaretur in typo, in posteriore potius quam in priore generatione Christum numerandum. Sequitur qui fuit Adam
Glossa
Quod est homo, vel terrenus, vel indigens. Qui fuit Dei
Ambrosius
Quid pulchrius potuit convenire quam ut sancta generatio a Dei filio inciperet, et usque ad Dei filium duceretur; creatusque praecederet in figura, ut natus in veritate sequeretur; ad imaginem factus praeiret, propter quem Dei imago descenderet? Putavit etiam Lucas ad Deum Christi originem referendam, quod verus Christi generator Deus sit, vel secundum generationem veram pater, vel secundum lavacrum et regenerationem mystici auctor numeris. Et ideo non a principio generationem eius coepit describere, sed posteaquam Baptisma eius explicuit; ut secundum naturam et secundum gratiam Dei filium demonstraret. Quod autem evidentius divinae generationis indicium, quam quod de generatione dicturus patrem praemisit loquentem tu es filius meus dilectus?
Augustinus. De Cons. Evang
Satis etiam per hoc demonstravit, non se ideo dixisse Ioseph filium Heli, quod de illo genitus: sed quod ab illo potius fuerit adoptatus; cum etiam ipsum Adam filium dixit, cum sit factus a Deo; sed per gratiam, quam postea peccando amisit, tamquam filius in Paradiso constitutus sit
Theophylactus
Ideo etiam generationem finit in Deum, ut addiscamus quod qui in medio sunt patres, Christus ad Deum eriget, et filios Dei faciet; et ut etiam crederetur Christi generatio sine semine fuisse; quasi dicat: si non credis quod secundus Adam factus sit sine semine, devenias ad primum Adam: invenies enim absque semine factum a Deo
Augustinus de Cons. Evang
Et Matthaeus quidem significare voluit dominum descendentem ad nostram mortalitatem; ideo generationes ab Abraham usque ad Christi nativitatem descendendo commemoravit ab initio Evangelii sui. Lucas autem non ab initio, sed a Baptismo Christi generationes narrat, nec descendendo, sed ascendendo, tamquam sacerdotem in expiandis peccatis magis assignans; cui Ioannes testimonium perhibuit dicens: ecce qui tollit peccata mundi. Ascendendo autem pervenit ad Deum, cui mundati et expiati reconciliamur
Ambrosius
Nec sic Evangelistae discrepare videantur, qui veterem ordinem sunt secuti. Nec mireris, si ab Abraham plures secundum Lucam successiones usque ad Christum sunt, pauciores secundum Matthaeum, cum per alias personas generationem fatearis esse decursam. Potest enim fieri ut alii longaevam transegerint vitam, alterius vero generationis viri immatura aetate decesserint: cum videamus quam plures senes cum suis nepotibus vivere, alios vero viros statim filiis obire susceptis
Augustinus de Cons. Evang
Convenientissime autem Lucas baptizato domino generationes per septuaginta septem personas sursum versus numerat; nam et ascensus ad Deum, cui per peccatorum abolitionem reconciliamur, expressus est; et per Baptismum fit homini omnium remissio peccatorum, quae illo numero significantur: nam undecies septem, septuaginta et septem sunt: in denario autem perfectio beatitudinis est; unde manifestum est quod transgressio denarii designat peccatum per superbiam plus aliquid habere cupientis. Hoc autem septies propterea ducitur, ut motu hominis facta significetur illa transgressio: ternario enim numero incorporea pars hominis significatur; quaternario vero corpus; motus autem in numeris non exprimitur, cum dicimus: unum, duo, tria; sed cum dicimus: semel, bis, ter. Unde per septies undecim significatur motu hominis facta transgressio
3:1
1. ANNO AUTEM QUINTODECIMO IMPERII TIBERII CAESARIS, PROCURANTE PONTIO PILATO JUDAEAM, TETRARCHA AUTEM GALILAEAE HERODE, PHILIPPO AUTEM FRATRE EJUS TETRARCHA ITURAEAE, ET TRACHONITIDIS REGIONIS, ET LYSANIA ABILINAE TETRARCHA, 2. SUB PRINCIPIBUS SACERDOTUM ANNA ET CAIPHA: FACTUM EST VERBUM DOMINI SUPER JOANNEM, ZACHARIAE FILIUM, IN DESERTO. — Ab anno duodecimo Christi transit Lucas ad annum ejus trigesimum, quo more Hebraeorum coepit officium doctoris et redemptoris exercere ac publice praedicare. IMPERII TIBERII. — Tiberius hic, ut patet ex Suetonio in ejus Vita, erat filius Liviae, quae postquam peperit Tiberium, nupsit Augusto Caesari, qui proinde mortuis Caio et Lucio, suis ex Julia filia nepotibus, Tiberium quasi privignum in filium adoptavit, ac imperii haeredem et successorem constituit. Regnavit Augustus a nece Julii Caesaris annos 57, mortuusque est die 19 augusti, cum successit ei Tiberius: quare ultimus Augusti annus non fuit integer, sed dimidiatus, talis consequenter fuit primus Tiberii, scilicet quinque mensium, puta ab augusto mense usque ad januarium, a quo Romani annum inchoare et numerare solebant. Tiberius hic, ex Actis Pilati, audiens mira de sanctitate et miraculis Christi, voluit eum inter deos referre, sed obstitit ei senatus Romanus, eo quod ipso inconsulto id tentasset, ut dixi Matth. XXVII, 24. PROCURANTE PONTIO PILATO JUDAEAM. — Nota: Archelaus Herodis Magni, puta infanticidae filius, ob suam tyrannidem ab Augusto Caesare ejectus fuit e sua Tetrarchia, actusque in exilium anno 10 tetrarchiae suae, qui fuit, ut nonnulli exacti Chronologi volunt, annus Augusti 52, vitae Christi 12. Quare Augustus Judaeam (id est duas tribus, Judam scilicet et Benjamin), tunc Archelao ademptam, adjecit ad Syriae provinciam ejusque praesidem, qui tum erat Quirinus, vel, ut Lucas vocat, Cyrinus, qui administrationem Judaeae commisit Coponio, ac per eum confiscavit facultates Archelai; qua de causa praesides Judaeae vocati sunt procuratores sive administratores, cum revera essent ejus praesides. Unde Pilatus hic a Luca Graece vocatur ἡγεμονεύων, id est rector, dux, praeses, princeps; et Arabicus vertit, in dominio Pilati Pontii super Judaeam. Porro, Coponio primo Judaeae procuratori sive praesidi, ab Augusto suffectus fuit secundus, M. Ambivius; deinde tertius, Annius Rufus, sub quo mortuus est Augustus: cui succedens Tiberius quartum Judaeae praesidem creavit Valerium Gratum, deinde quintum Pontium Pilatum, anno imperii sui 13. Porro, Pilatus Judaeae praefuit 9 annis, ac secundo ejus anno Christus baptizatus est, quinto vero ab eo crucifixus et mortuus. Quocirca vindice Deo Pilatus a Tiberio anno imperii ejus 23, sive ultimo, relegatus fuit in exilium. Pilato successit sextus Marcellus, septimus Cumanus, octavus Claudius Felix, nonus Porcius Festus (coram his duobus S. Paulus vinctus causam dixit, Actor. XXIII, 24, et cap. XXIV toto), decimus Albinus, undecimus Florus, cujus anno secundo, qui fuit Neronis imperii 12, Judaei coeperunt rebellare Romanis, ac quinto post anno a Tito expugnata est Jerusalem, et tota Judaea subacta. Haec omnia fuse narrat Josephus lib. XVIII Antiq., cap. I et seq. TETRARCHA AUTEM GALILAEAE HERODE. — Arabicus, in dominio Herodis principis super quartam Galilaeae, et Philippi fratris sui principis super quartam Ituraeae. Tetrarcha enim est qui quartae (τέτρα enim in compositione significat quatuor, ἀρχή est principatus) parti provinciae, vel regni alicujus praesidet. Unde a Theodoreto vocatur « quadruplaris. » Ut historiam hanc ab ovo intelligas, nota: Herodes infanticida moriens quinto die post infanticidium, anno secundo Christi, tres filios superstites reliquit (nam caeteros vivens occidit, et Antipatrum quidem in ipso infanticidio), scilicet Archelaum, Herodem Antipam et Philippum. His de successione in regnum Herodis patris sui inter se contendentibus, Augustus regnum in quatuor partes sive tetrarchias divisit, quibus totidem tetrarchas, sive principes, vel dynastas, praefecit: nimirum Judaeam attribuit Archelao, et eo expulso, Coponio; Galilaeam Herodi Antipae; Philippo Ituraeam et Trachonitidem; Lysaniae extero Abilinam. Tetrarchiae autem hae erant magnae et instar regni, ut docet Plinius, lib. V, 18. Unde Herodes Antipas, esto a Matthaeo, cap. XIV, 1, vocetur tetrarcha, a Marco tamen, cap. VI, 14, vocatur rex, uti dixi Matth. XIV. Sic et Herodes Agrippa uterque, id est pater et filius, qui Herodis Antipae erant nepotes, utpote ex fratre ejus Aristobulo prognati, regis nomen obtinuere a C. Caligula et Claudio Imperatore, ut patet Actor. XII, 1, et cap. XXV, vers. 23. PHILIPPO AUTEM FRATRE EJUS TETRARCHA ITURAEAE et Trachonitidis regionis. — Ituraea, ait Adrichomius, in Descript. Terrae sanctae, pag. 110, num. 60, a Iethur sive Ithur, filio Ismaelis, sic appellata, montosa ac nemorosa est « regio, ad radices montis Libani in longum porrecta. Nam a fluvio Jordane sumens initium, juxta eumdem Libanum versus Occidentem ad montes usque Sidoniorum et Tyriorum extenditur, aliquoties etiam saltus Libani nuncupatur. » Trachon, sive Trachonitis regni instar, ait Plinius, lib. V, cap. XVIII, regio est trans Jordanem inter Palaestinam et Caelesyriam sita, Arabiae desertae contermina ab Oriente, Damasco a Septentrione, quam occupavit dimidia tribus Manasse. Trachonitis autem regio haec appellatur, quod saxosa et aspera sit, atque subterraneis meatibus ac cavernis abundet; τραχών enim Graecis locum saxosum significat, et trachones etiam dicuntur occulti sub terra meatus ac specus. Fontibus et rivis haec regio penitus caret, ideoque pluviales aquas incolae per trachones, hoc est meatus subterraneos, in lacunis tam naturalibus quam artificiose factis diligenter colligunt, ac eorum plerique in trachonibus, id est speluncis et cuniculis commorantur, et ferarum more delitescunt. Rapto libenter vivunt. Ita ex Josepho, Wilhelmo Tyrio et aliis Adrichomius. ET LYSANIA, ABILINAE TETRARCHA. — Beda et Adrichomius censent Lysaniam hunc fuisse quartum Herodis infanticidae filium, ideoque fratrem Archelai, Herodis Antipae et Philippi, trium caeterorum tetrarcharum. Verum contrarium docet Josephus illis pene coaevus, scilicet Lysaniam hunc fuisse filium Lysaniae senioris, qui senior filius fuit Ptolemaei Minnaei, in Chalcide juxta montem Libanum imperantis, eique vita functo quasi filius successit in regnum, antequam Herodes infanticida, rex Judaeae, a Romanis designatus esset. Ita Josephus, lib. XIV Antiq., cap. XXI. Senior hic occisus est ab Antonio, triumviro et collega Augusti Caesaris et Lepidi, impulsu Cleopatrae, amasiae Antonii, quae regno Lysaniae inhians, illud avito Aegypti regno adjungere satagebat; occisus, inquam, est 30 annis ante Christi nativitatem, teste Josepho, lib. XV Antiq., cap. IV. Hic ergo senior Lysanias filium reliquit hunc sibi cognominem Lysaniam juniorem, qui Antigonum in regnum Judaeae restituere conatus est, et ejicere Hyrcanum, cui favebat Herodes infanticida; qua de causa Herodes a senatu Romano, urgente Antonio et Augusto Caesare, rex Judaeae, excluso tam Antigono quam Hyrcano, creatus est, uti narrat Josephus, lib. I Belli, cap. XI, qui et lib. XIX Antiq., cap. IV, asserit a Lysania totam ejus regionem dictam fuisse Lysaniam. ABILINAE. — Abila, alias Abyla et Abela, egregia Coelesyriae urbs est, ad montem Libanum sita, a qua Abilene, sive Abilina regio nomen accepit, quae ab Oriente adjacet Damasco, ab Occidente Chalcidi, a Septentrione Libano. Huic ergo a Romanis praefectus fuit Lysanias. Ita ex Josepho Adrichomius. Porro, tam operose Lucas hic principes, tam saeculares quam ecclesiasticos, puta pontifices Annam et Caipham enumerat: Primo, ut distincte et solide tempus et annum, quo praedicare coepit Joannes, indeque Christus, assignet. Secundo, ut significet jam defecisse sceptrum a Juda per Herodem alienigenam, ejusque filios tetrarchas, ac Tiberium et Romanos Judaeae imperantes, ac proinde venisse jam Messiam sive Christum, cujus praedicationis exordium ipse hoc capite recenset, juxta oraculum Jacobi, Genes. XLIX, 10. Tertio, ut innuat Israelem inter tot principes partim infideles, partim impios dissectum, eguisse adventu Messiae, qui eum redintegraret et salvaret. Quarto, quia principes hi in gestis Joannis et Christi, quae deinceps narrabit Lucas, magnam habuere partem: nam Tiberius, ut dixi, voluit Christum inter deos referre; Pilatus eum crucifixit, sed coactus a Judaeis, cum prius eum esse innocentem saepius esset protestatus; Herodes Antipas Philippo fratri suo uxorem Herodiadem eripuit, ideoque reprehensus a Joanne eum occidit, ac Christum veste alba indutum illusit; Annas et Caiphas Christum usque ad crucem persecuti sunt, aeque ac Apostolos post Christi mortem. Sub principibus sacerdotum Anna et Caipha. — Saecularibus principibus adjungit ecclesiasticos, principes scilicet pontifices. Dices: Unus duntaxat erat summus Judaeorum pontifex, ut patet ex Josepho et aliis, quomodo ergo hic duo nominantur? Respondet Eusebius, lib. I Hist., cap. X, Joannem Baptistam coepisse praedicare sub Anna, et continuasse usque ad pontificatum Caiphae. Alii respondent Annam et Caipham alternis annis vicissim pontificatum gessisse. Verum haec omnia refellit Josephus, lib. XVIII, cap. I et V, qui multos ponit pontifices medios inter Annam et Caipham, asseritque Caipham creatum pontificem a Valerio Grato, qui Pilatum proxime antecessit, ac perseverasse toto tempore Pilati usque ad finem imperii Tiberii Caesaris. Respondeo igitur unum duntaxat fuisse summum Judaeorum pontificem, scilicet Caipham, sed principes, id est primores sacerdotum, fuisse plures, ut patet Matth. XXVI, 3, et passim in passione Christi nominantur principes sacerdotum, sive pontifices, qui Christum apud Pilatum accusarunt, damnarunt, illuserunt, etc. Inter hos ergo principes summi fuere Caiphas et Annas: Caiphas, quia pontifex; Annas, quia socer Caiphae, et quia ipse pontifex fuerat, ac apud Judaeos summae erat auctoritatis. Unde et post se quinque filios pontifices habuit, teste Josepho, lib. XX Antiq., cap. VIII. Hac de causa Christus a Judaeis in horto captus, primo ductus est ad Annam, deinde ad Caipham, Matth. XXVI. FACTUM EST VERBUM (id est jussio, imperium, mandatum) DOMINI SUPER (id est ad) JOANNEM, ZACHARIAE FILIUM. — q. d. Jussit Deus anno 15 Tiberii Joanni Baptistae, ut praedicaret et baptizaret. Jussit, inquam, per inspirationem internam, forte etiam per vocem externam angeli, hoc ei ex parte Dei ore suo denuntiantis.
3:3
3. ET VENIT IN OMNEM REGIONEM JORDANIS, PRAEDICANS BAPTISMUM POENITENTIAE (id est, incitantem ad agendam paenitentiam) IN REMISSIONEM PECCATORUM, — scilicet percipiendam in baptismo Christi; q. d. Joannes praedicabat paenitentiam, ut per eam se disponerent ad veniam et gratiam accipiendam a Christo. Vide dicta Matth. III.
3:4
4. SICUT SCRIPTUM EST IN LIBRO SERMONUM ISAIAE PROPHETAE: VOX CLAMANTIS IN DESERTO: PARATE VIAM DOMINI, RECTAS FACITE SEMITAS EJUS. 5, 6. Omnis vallis implebitur, et omnis mons et collis humiliabitur; et erunt prava in directa, et aspera in vias planas: et videbit omnis caro salutare Dei. — Haec omnia explicui Isaia XL, 2. Porro S. Gregorius, homil. 20 in Evang.; S. Augustinus, S. Chrysostomus, Beda et alii haec sic exponunt, q. d. Omnis qui se exaltat, humiliabitur; et qui se humiliat, exaltabitur, ut ait Christus. Verum hic sensus huic loco non est genuinus, tum quia valles hic non vocantur humiles, sed potius pusillanimes; tum quia est concio Joannis non praedicentis futura, sed adhortantis ad mutationem vitae et morum, q. d. Parate, o Judaei, viam Christo, quasi Messiae vestro jam ad vos venturo: quare « omnis vallis implebitur, » id est, impleatur; « et omnis mons et collis humiliabitur; » id est humilietur; « et erunt, » id est fiant, vel sint « prava, » id est, viae obliquae et anfractuosae, « in directa, et aspera in vias planas, » hoc est, complanate vias omnes Christo quasi regi jam venturo, uti fieri solet regibus inaugurandis, ut viae asperae fiant planae et aequales, q. d. Tollite e mentibus vestris omne quod pravum, distortum, inaequale, altum nimis vel depressum est, v. g. qui superbiae montem in corde gerit, tumorem hunc deprimat; qui vallem pusillanimitatis et acediae in se continet, eam impleat, elevet et adaequet per magnanimitatem et fiduciam in Deum; qui asperis est moribus, ad suavitatem et modestiam se componat. ET VIDEBIT (id est, ita fiet ut) OMNIS CARO (id est omnis homo videat, id est videre possit, oculis tum corporis, tum potius mentis) SALUTARE DEI, — id est salvatorem Christum; videat, inquam, id est in se sentiat et experiatur salutem et vim gratiae a Christo allatae. Audi S. Gregorium, hom. 20 in Evang.: « Omnis vallis implebitur; Quia, inquit, donum humiles accipiunt, quod a se corda superbientium repellunt. Prava, directa fiunt, cum malorum corda per injustitiam detorta, ad justitiae regulam diriguntur; et aspera in vias planas immutantur, cum immites atque iracundae mentes, per infusionem supernae gratiae ad lenitatem mansuetudinis redeunt. » Caetera a vers. 7 usque ad vers. 10 audivimus, Matth. III, 7, ubi ea explicui.
3:10
10. ET INTERROGABANT EUM TURBAE: QUID ERGO FACIEMUS? — ut dignos paenitentiae fructus faciamus, itaque excidium a te comminatum evadamus, et salutem aeternam consequamur, ne scilicet excidamur et in ignem aeternum mittamur, ait Interlinearis. Joannes arguerat Pharisaeos et turbas, sed Pharisaei « spreverunt consilium Dei, » cap. VII, 30, ideoque concionem Joannis; turba vero et plebs, ejus vi permota et compuncta, quaerit modum paenitentiae ad capessenda Joannis jussa, ac promptam paratamque se ei offert. Ita et hodie plebeii facilius capessunt monita concionatorum, quam potentes, ideoque prae illis salvantur.
3:11
11. RESPONDENS AUTEM DICEBAT ILLIS: QUI HABET DUAS TUNICAS, DET NON HABENTI, ET QUI HABET ESCAS, SIMILITER FACIAT. — Est synecdoche: nam ex una specie magis communi et necessaria, uti est vestire et cibare pauperem, intelligit omne genus eleemosynae. « Duas, » ita scilicet ut una sufficiat ad corpus vestiendum et calefaciendum, ideoque altera sit superflua, hic illam « det non habenti, » id est nullam habenti, sed nudo et indigenti: nam si utraque sit necessaria habenti, ipse non tenetur alteram erogare pauperi. Ita S. Hieronymus, Quaest. 1 ad Hedibiam, et S. Ambrosius hic, quem audi: « Misericordiae, inquit, pro possibilitate conditionis humanae mensura servatur, ut non sibi unusquisque totum eripiat, sed quae habet cum paupere partiatur. » Additque: « Faciat ergo fructum qui potest, gratiae; qui debet, paenitentiae. Misericordiae communis est usus, ideo commune praeceptum; misericordia plenitudo virtutum est. » Et S. Gregorius: « Idcirco de dividendis tunicis datur praeceptum, quia si una dividitur, nemo vestitur; » si vero duae dividantur, duo vestiuntur. Et S. Basilius: « Docemur, ait, ex omni quod affluit, debere nos erogare ei qui non habet. » Hic ergo est unus e dignis paenitentiae fructibus, nimirum actus misericordiae et eleemosynae, juxta consilium Danielis, IV, 24, ad Nabuchodonosor: « Peccata tua eleemosynis redime, et iniquitates tuas misericordiis pauperum. » Vide ibi dicta. Adde: eleemosyna recte componit vitam ad omnem virtutem. Nam omnis virtus aut est debita, aut indebita et gratuita: debita, est justitia; indebita, misericordia; quare misericordia et pro se et pro justitia satisfacit, tum quia qui dat sua, non rapiet, sed restituet aliena; tum quia qui dat indebita et gratuita, multo magis solvet debita, ad quae ex justitia aliave virtute obligatur; tum quia misericordia fit ex amore et charitate: charitas autem est plenitudo legis. Nam « qui diligit, legem implevit, » Rom. XIII. Quocirca apte Euthymius: « Turbis, inquit, ut mutua benevolentia se complectantur, mutuis operibus se mutuo sublevent, injungit. » Turbae enim facile capiunt actus misericordiae et in eos propendunt, cum ad orationem, jejunia operaque paenitentiae sint difficiles, et subinde inhabiles.
3:12
12. VENERUNT AUTEM ET PUBLICANI UT BAPTIZARENTUR, ET DIXERUNT AD ILLUM: MAGISTER, QUID FACIEMUS? — ut animas nostras salvemus. Hic impletur illud Christi: « Publicani et meretrices praecedunt vos (o Scribae) in regno Dei, » Matth. XXI, 31. Peccatores enim magno spiritu a Joanne correpti compungebantur, culpam agnoscebant et quaerebant paenitentiam; Scribae vero superbi putantes se esse justos et sapientes, eam aspernabantur.
3:13
13. AT ILLE DIXIT AD EOS: NIHIL AMPLIUS QUAM QUOD CONSTITUTUM EST VOBIS, FACIATIS, — in exactione vectigalium; Graece enim est πράσσετε, quod et faciatis et exigatis verti potest, sed hic clarius, exigatis, uti interpretantur Syrus et Graeci. Ita Jansenius, Maldonatus, Franciscus Lucas et alii. Solent enim publicani ex avaritia augere vectigal, plusque exigere quam a principe constitutum sit, quod est furtum vel rapina: quare illud hic taxat Joannes. « Moderate praecipit, ait S. Augustinus, serm. 3 De Diversis, ut et iniquitas locum non habeat, et constitutum habeat vectigal effectum. » « Ita singulis generationibus hominum conveniens Baptista tribuit responsum, ait S. Ambrosius. » Idem faciat concionator, ut in particulari uxoribus, maritis, filiis, ancillis, servis, mercatoribus, agricolis, advocatis, etc., praescribat quid facere debeant, ac propria cuique vitae praecepta tradat.
3:14
14. INTERROGABANT AUTEM EUM ET MILITES, DICENTES: QUID FACIEMUS ET NOS? ET AIT ILLIS: NEMINEM CONCUTIATIS, NEQUE CALUMNIAM FACIATIS, ET CONTENTI ESTOTE STIPENDIIS VESTRIS. MILITES. — Militantes partim sub Herode Antipa contra Aretam, regem Arabum, partim sub praefecto templi, partim sub Pilato, praeside Romano; hi audientes Joannem detonantem in vitia eisque gehennam minitantem, conscii sibi rapinarum aliorumque scelerum, quae milites committere solent, voce Joannis compuncti, aeque ac publicani, ab eo poscunt remedium paenitentiae, vitae honestae et salutis: quibus tria assignat Joannes tribus militum vitiis opposita, quorum primum est, violentia; secundum, calumnia; tertium, rapina. Violentiam excludit Joannes dicens: « Neminem concutiatis, » id est nemini vim inferatis. Calumniam excludit dicens: « Neque calumniam faciatis, » Graece μηδὲ συκοφαντήσητε, id est ne sitis sycophantae, ut noxiis impingatis crimen aliquod, accusando eos quod sint fautores hostium, inimici, insidiatores, ut eos expolietis, vel eorum bona invadatis. Vetat ergo « ne ab eis calumniando praedam requirant, quibus militando prodesse debuerant, » ait Beda. Rapinam excludit dicens: « Contenti estote stipendiis vestris. » Simili modo Aurelianus Imperator aequi amantissimus, ait Vopiscus in ejus Vita, scribens ad vicarium suum: « Si vis, inquit, tribunus esse, imo si vis vivere, manus militum contine. Nemo pullum alienum rapiat, ovem nemo contingat. Uvam nullus auferat, segetem nemo deterat, oleum, sal, lignum nemo exigat, annona sua contentus sit. De praeda hostis, non de lacrymis provincialium habeat; arma tersa sint, ferramenta samiata, calceamenta fortia. Vestis nova vestem veterem excludat; stipendium in balteo, non in popina habeat; torquem brachialem et annulum apponat; equum saginarium suum defricet, captum animal non vendat, mulum centuriatum comiter curet. Alter alteri quasi servus obsequatur; a medicis gratis curentur. Aruspicibus nihil dent; in hospitiis caste se agant; qui litem fecerit, vapulet. » Tacite ergo insinuat Joannes, positis hisce tribus conditionibus, licere militare, et bellum esse licitum, uti docet S. Ambrosius, serm. 7, et S. Augustinus, lib. XXII Contra Faustum, cap. LXXIV. Extat insignis libellus Ferrandi, Diaconi Carthaginensis, qui floruit anno Christi 500, ac S. Fulgentio, Ruspensi Episcopo, fuit amicus et familiaris, ad Reginum comitem, in quo militi, imo duci militum, qualis erat Reginus, haec septem innocentiae dat praecepta: « Prima, inquit, innocentiae regula est, quam tenere inter actus debeas militares, ut nihil viribus tuis superbus adsignes, sed omnia quae sapienter aut fortiter aut feliciter geris, ad laudem referas potentissimi Creatoris. Secunda regula est innocentiae, militaribus actibus occupato, ut quasi in speculo, sic in illo milites videant quid agere debeant, et magis eos imitatio ad bonum provocet, quam potestas. Dux enim sapiens illuc debet ire, quo cupit ducere subditos: ideo enim dicitur dux, quia ducit. Tu ergo esto signifer disciplinae sanctissimae, tu erige trophaeum virtutis intuendum jugiter caeteris, tu imitandus appare, » praesertim in hisce tribus, quae hic Baptista sancit, et Ferrandus ibidem fuse explicat et exaggerat. Tertia innocentiae regula est, si praesis, ut prosis: prodesse autem videberis, si tempus et locum tuae administrationis intelligas, » quae deinde ipse particulatim declarat. « Quarta regula est, ut diligas rempublicam sicut teipsum charitate libera, » uti dilexit Moses, orans pro populo deleri de libro vitae, Exod. XXXII, et David in peste dicens angelo percutienti: « Convertatur manus tua in me, et in domum patris mei. Isti qui oves sunt, quid fecerunt? » II Reg. XXIV. « Quinta regula est: Deficiat temporibus administrationis tuae peccantium synagoga, crescat electorum numerus. Gaude ad lucra Christi; dole in dispendiis. Sexta regula est: Quidquid dixeris, gesseris, cogitaveris, ut Deo et hominibus placeas, et fervore charitatis mirabiliter iniquitatis frigus excludas. Noli esse multum justus, neque sapiens plusquam necesse est. » Explicat idipsum: « Esto justus ut corripias inquietos; noli esse multum justus, ut consoleris pusillanimes, ut suscipias infirmos, et patiens sis ad omnes. Considera ergo quibus imperes, et quam dura corda flectere cupias, ut modo minando, modo feriendo, modo veniam largiendo, nullatenus quidem remanere impunita militum peccata dimittas; neque tamen semper excessibus eorum supplicia condigna retribuas, dicens tibi ipsi: Noli esse multum justus. »
3:15
15. Existimante autem populo (Graece προσδοκῶντος, id est suspicante, existimante, exspectante, ut vertit Vatablus, sperante, seu spe, desiderio et exspectatione suspenso populo) ET COGITANTIBUS OMNIBUS IN CORDIBUS SUIS DE JOANNE, NE FORTE IPSE ESSET CHRISTUS, — scilicet Messias patribus promissus, et tam avide certoque hoc tempore, quo sceptrum a Juda erat translatum, et 70 hebdomades Danielis Christi praenuntiae erant impletae, a Judaeis omnibus exspectatus. Unde populo hanc de Joanne famam spargente, tandem ipsi primores Judaeorum ad eum legatos miserunt, qui rogarent an ipse esset Christus? Joan. I, 19. Adeo sanctus erat Joannes. Ita S. Ambrosius, Beda et alii. 16. RESPONDIT JOANNES, DICENS OMNIBUS: EGO QUIDEM AQUA BAPTIZO VOS, VENIET AUTEM FORTIOR ME, — scilicet Messias. Caetera quae subdit hic Lucas, explicui Matth. III, 11. Moraliter Origenes: Monentur hic, ait, concionatores, ne patiantur se a populo nimis laudari, vel honorari, sed laudes et honores hos supprimant, et ad Christum referant, ne ob superbiam his a Christo priventur.
3:23
23. ET IPSE JESUS ERAT INCIPIENS QUASI ANNORUM TRIGINTA. — Τὸ « incipiens » non referas ad τὸ « annorum triginta, » sic enim redundaret vox « quasi, » sed ad praedicationem publicam Jesu, ad quam missus erat a Patre, q. d. Jesus cum in baptismo per columbam et vocem Patris declaratus est Messias, orbis doctor, legislator et salvator, ideoque hoc suum munus et officium exercere, ac publice legem Evangelicam docere et praedicare inciperet, « erat quasi annorum triginta. » Patet ex Graeco, qui habet: Et Jesus erat quasi annorum triginta incipiens, id est cum inciperet officio fungi et praedicare. Ita Jansenius, Baronius et alii. Nota: τὸ « quasi, » id est circiter; non enim definit an Jesus praecise fuerit annorum 30. Nam si Jesum natum dicamus anno Augusti 42, Jesus hoc anno sui baptismi, qui fuit Tiberii Imperatoris decimus quintus, explebat annum aetatis 29, et inchoabat trigesimum. Sin dicamus eum natum anno 41 Augusti, explebat annum trigesimum: sin vero dicamus eum natum anno 40 Augusti, explebat annum 31 et inchoabat 32 per 43 dies. Nam Augustus regnavit 57 annos, sed ultimus ejus annus fuit dimidius duntaxat, quia mortuus est in augusto, tumque successit ei Tiberius: quare primus pariter Tiberii annus non fuit integer, sed dimidius, scilicet a mense augusto usque ad januarium, quo novus annus more Romano, ideoque secundus Tiberii annus numerari incipiebat. Christus vero natus est anno 40 Augusti finiente, puta die 25 decembris. Adde sedecim reliquos Augusti annos, et quindecim Tiberii, habebis annos vitae Christi 31, ideoque Lucas addit τὸ « quasi, » id est circiter, plus minus. Vide dicta cap. II, vers. 1. Annorum Triginta. — q. d. Joannes, et paulo post Christus, coepit praedicare non praepropere, sed justa aetate. Tradunt enim Hebraei, ante annum trigesimum nemini fuisse licitum publice docere; tum enim virilis et stata est aetas, ac judicium plane maturum et perfectum est, idque satis colligitur ex I Paralip. XXIII, 3. UT PUTABATUR, FILIUS JOSEPH, QUI FUIT (filius, ait Arabicus hic et insequent. omnibus) HELI, QUI FUIT MATHAT. — Ex hoc loco Porphyrius et Julianus Apostata Lucam falsitatis arguebant, eo quod Joseph non fuerit filius Heli, sed Jacob, ut ait Matthaeus, cap. I; quodque Lucas caeteros Joseph et Heli progenitores plane alios nominet ab iis quos nominat Matthaeus. Adde, quod haec faciunt ad genealogiam Jesu, qui non fuit filius Joseph, sed natus est ex Maria Virgine. Primo, respondet S. Augustinus, lib. II De Consensu Evang., cap. XIII, Joseph fuisse filium naturalem Jacob, sed adoptivum Heli. Sed id retractat lib. I Retract., cap. VII et merito. Nam hic naturales quaeruntur filii, non adoptivi: alioqui enim Jesus Davidis et Abrahae non esset naturalis filius, sed tantum adoptatus. Secundo, S. Hilarius, in Matth. I, et S. Ambrosius hic respondent, Matthaeum enarrare Christi generationem regiam, sive ex regibus; Lucam vero sacerdotalem, sive ex sacerdotibus; sed hoc aeque obscurum est, difficile et insufficiens. Tertio, alii respondent Joseph fuisse filium naturalem Jacob, sed legalem Heli: nam ex lege veteri, Deuter. XXV, 5, fratri sine liberis mortuo (uti videtur fuisse Heli) frater superstes (uti hic videtur fuisse Jacob) debebat suscitare semen, id est filios, quorum frater mortuus illiberis censebatur esse pater legalis. Nimirum Jesca, ait Euthymius, nupsit Mathat, ex eoque genuit Heli; deinde eadem nupsit Mathan, ex eoque genuit Jacob. Porro, Heli mortuus est sine filiis: quare uxorem ejus juxta legem accepit frater ejus Jacob, ex eaque genuit Joseph, qui proinde fuit filius naturalis Jacob, sed legalis Heli: sic ergo Heli hic vocatur pater legalis Joseph. Ita veteres passim, ut Justinus, Julius Africanus, S. Hieronymus, Eusebius, Nazianzenus, S. Augustinus, lib. II Retract., cap. VII; S. Ambrosius, S. Thomas, Anselmus, Beda, Damascenus, Salmeron, quos fuse citat hic Maldonatus et Suarez, III part., Quaest. XXVII, art. 1. Sed hi coguntur asserere quod Heli et Jacob fuerint fratres uterini duntaxat, quia scilicet habuere eamdem matrem, nam patres habuere diversos: pater enim Heli fuit Mathat, ut ait Lucas; pater vero Jacob fuit Mathan, ut ait Matthaeus; ac reliqui omnes horum duorum avi et abavi, plane alii et diversi sunt apud Lucam ab iis quos assignat Matthaeus. Lex autem jubens fratri defuncto sine liberis suscitari semen, loquitur de fratribus non uterinis, sed germanis ex eodem patre prognatis. Hi enim soli retinebant nomen et haereditatem patris. Adde Jescam hic impertinenter induci. Esto enim in ea velut matre coeant uterini fratres Jacob et Heli, tamen coire nequeunt in Mathat et Mathan, caeterisque eorum antecessoribus usque ad Davidem. Nihil ergo illi hic faciunt ad propositum, scilicet ad genealogiam B. Mariae et Christi, ita ut ex illis ostendatur Jesus ex semine Davidis secundum carnem esse prognatus. Si enim Jesus natus est ex Jesca et Mathat, idem non potuit gigni ex Jesca et Mathan: quomodo ergo Jesus ponitur filius tam Mathan quam Mathat? Quarto, alii respondent Lucam, quia Gentibus scribit, genus proprium Jesu texere per virginem matrem, cujus maritus erat Joseph: Joseph ergo, inquiunt, dicitur filius, id est gener Heli; Heli enim idem est cum Joachim, qui fuit pater B. Virginis; Matthaeum vero, quia scribit Judaeis, eorum more texere genus Christi per Joseph, qui fuit pater putativus Christi. Verum nec hoc satisfacit: nam sic genealogia quam texit Matthaeus, vere non pertinebit ad Christum, cum ipse vere non fuerit filius Joseph, sed solius Virginis; ac consequenter Christus vere non descendit per Salomonem (quod licet concedat vir doctus, tamen contrarium innuit Scriptura, II Reg. VII, 12; et Psalm. LXXXVIII, 37), ut habet Matthaeus, sed per Nathan, uti habet Lucas. Dico ergo: Valde verisimile est, quod tempore Christi notissimum erat Mathan fuisse communem avum Josephi et B. Virginis; Jacob vero, qui fuit pater Josephi, ac Heli sive Joachim (qui fuit pater B. Virginis) fuisse fratres germanos, ut vult Franciscus Lucas, aut potius Jacob fuisse fratrem S. Annae, quae fuit uxor Heli, sive Joachim, ex quibus genita est B. Virgo: quare dum unius genealogia describitur, alterius quoque describitur. Nam B. Virgo per matrem Annam naturaliter descendebat ex Jacob, Mathan et Salomone; per patrem vero Heli sive Joachim, descendebat ex Mathat et Nathan. Matthaeus ergo texit genealogiam B. Virginis, ejusque filii Christi per matrem, scilicet S. Annam, quae fuit soror Jacob et filia Mathan, nupsitque Heli sive Joachim, ex eoque genuit B. Mariam; Lucas vero texit per patrem, puta per Heli, id est Joachim, ut ostendatur Christum tam per patrem, quam per matrem descendere ex semine Davidis. Haec sententia probatur primo, ex caeterarum refutatione. Secundo, quia non est alius modus aptior conciliandi genealogias Matthaei et Lucae, nisi hic; quare ad eum nos cogit Matthaeus et Lucas: nam alioqui alterutra genealogia, scilicet vel Matthaei, vel Lucae, nil pertinebit ad B. Virginem et Christum, sed tantum ad Joseph, qui vere non fuit pater Christi. Cum ergo utraque genealogia haec afferatur a Luca et Matthaeo, ut per utramque ostendatur Christum vere et naturaliter ex semine Davidis esse prognatum, uti asserit Scriptura, necessario dicendum est ex utraque non legaliter, sed naturaliter secundum carnem prognatam esse B. Virginem et Christum. Tertio, quia Lucam texere genealogiam Christi per avum ejus Heli, sive Joachim, maritum S. Annae et patrem B. Virginis, communis est Doctorum sententia, S. Augustini, Dionysii Carthusiani, Cajetani, Jansenii, Palacii, Gagneii, Galatini, Driedonis, Canisii, Melchioris Cano, Dominici Soto, quos citat et sequitur Suarez, III part., Quaest. XXVII, art. 1, disp. 3, sect. 2. Ergo necessario dicendum est genealogiam Matthaei texi per S. Annam, eamque fuisse filiam Mathan: alioqui omnes ejus avi et abavi, quos recenset Matthaeus, ad Joseph tantum pertinebunt, non vero ad B. Virginem et Christum. Quarto, huic sententiae favet, quod, Numer. XXXVI, 7, feminae quae, deficiente prole mascula, parentum suorum sunt haeredes, jubentur nubere non solum in eadem tribu, sed etiam in eadem cognatione et familia proxima, ne scilicet haereditas illa ad remotos abeat, sed ad proximos, qui vicinissimum ad eam jus habent, transeat. Ergo Maria (quae unica erat Joachimi et Annae filia, ideoque eorum haeres) et Joseph fuerunt ejusdem familiae, scilicet filii, id est nepotes, Mathan avi sui. Cum ergo Matthaeus genealogiam Christi texuisset per aviam Annam usque ad Salomonem et Davidem, Lucas eamdem texere voluit per Nathan et Davidem, ut ostenderet duplici titulo Jesum fuisse Davidis filium, et duplici jure in regnum Davidis successisse. Nathan enim a Salomone proximus regno fuerat. Communis enim Patrum et Doctorum, ut S. Ambrosii, lib. III in Lucam; S. Hieronymi et Theodoreti, in cap. XXII Jerem.; S. Bernardi in illud, Signum magnum; Suarez et aliorum, sententia est, B. Virginem et Christum ex regibus, scilicet Salomone et Davide, genus traxisse. Ergo B. Virgo per matrem Annam descendit a Nathan et Salomone, ut habet Matthaeus. Nam Lucas non nominat Salomonem, sed pro eo ponit Nathan. Imo idipsum innuit Scriptura, Psalm. CXXXI: « De fructu ventris tui (o David) ponam super sedem tuam, » id est Christum filium tuum, o David, tibi in regno tuo substituam. Et Lucae I: « Erexit cornu salutis nobis in domo David pueri sui; » domus enim David est stirps regia Davidis. Igitur Matthaeus texit genealogiam Christi per Joseph patrem, Lucas per B. Mariam matrem; utraque coit in Davide, sed ab eo dividitur per duos ejus filios Salomonem et Nathan, in duos ordines utrimque descendentium continue usque ad Joseph et Mariam. Per Salomonem deducit Matthaeus, per Nathan Lucas. Heli ergo dicitur pater Joseph; pater, id est socer: Heli enim per apocopen idem est qui Eliachim, sive Joachim, maritus B. Annae et pater B. Virginis, cujus maritus erat Joseph, ideoque gener Joachim et Annae. Sic Joachim, rex Juda, vocatur Eliachim, IV Reg. XXIII, 34, et II Paral. XXXVI, 4; ac Eliachim pontifex vocatur Joachim, Judith. IV. Sicut enim Jehova vel Jo in Joachim est nomen Dei, sic et El est nomen Dei in nomine Eliachim: ita Rabbini et Hilarius. Porro, genealogiae Christi series, quas Lucas texit per Nathan, et Matthaeus per Salomonem, coeunt in S. Anna, quae fuit filia Mathan et soror Jacob, patris Josephi. Anna enim nupsit Heli sive Joachim, qui descendit ex Nathan. Anna autem fuit mater B. Virginis, quae nupsit Josepho, qui fuit filius Jacob, Mathan, Eleazar, etc., usque ad Salomonem. Accipe tabulam in qua genealogiae totius Christi et cognatorum ejus seriem gradumque ad oculum perspicies, ex Patribus et neotericis, ac praesertim ex Christophoro a Castro, cap. I De Deipara, probabiliter, sed accurate concinnatam. Tabula Genealogiae Christi ex SS. Matthaeo et Luca DAVID. — Ex eo geniti: Nathan, Salomon. [Genealogia Christi ex S. Luca:] Mathatha, Menna, Melca, Eliakim, etc., Eliud. [Genealogia Christi ex S. Matthaeo:] Roboam, Abia, Josaphat, Joram, etc. — Levi. — Eleazar. — Mathat. — Mathan, ex quo geniti Jacob et Anna. Anna nupsit Heli, id est Joachimo, et Sobe. Ex quibus genita Maria mater Jesu Christi. Sobe genuit Elisabetham, uxorem Zachariae, et matrem Joannis Baptistae. Jacob genuit Joseph, cujus uxor Maria; et Cleopham vel Alphaeum, cujus uxor Maria, ex quibus geniti: Jacobus Minor Apostolus, frater seu cognomento Domini, dictus Alphaei, primus Episcopus Hierosolymae, Actor. I, 13; Marc. XV, 40; Galat. I. — Judas Apostolus, cognomento Thaddaeus et Lebbaeus, frater Jacobi Minoris, auctor Epistolae Canonicae, Actor. I, 13; Luc. VI, 16; Matth. X, 3. — Joses sive Joseph, Matth. XXVII, vers. 56; Marc. XV, vers. 40. — Simeon, Matth. XXVIII, qui successit Jacobo fratri suo in Episcopatu Hierosolymae, martyrque occubuit anno 10 Trajani, cum annum ageret 120. — Maria, Marc. VI, 3. — Salome uxor Zebedaei, ex quibus geniti Jacobus Major et Joannes Evangelista. Ex hac tabula liquet B. Virginem per matrem S. Annam descendere per Mathan ex Salomone, aeque ac descendit Joseph; per patrem vero Heli, sive Joachim, descendere ex Nathan, qui fuit frater Salomonis et filius David. Rursum ex ea liquet S. Annam fuisse sororem Jacob et amitam Joseph, ideoque S. Mariam per matrem Annam, et Josephum per patrem Jacob, eumdem habere avum Mathan, eosdem caeteros proavos usque ad Salomonem et Davidem: quare Matthaeum, dum texit genealogiam Josephi per Jacob et Mathan, texere quoque genealogiam Mariae et Christi, qui per matrem et aviam Annam recta descendit ex Mathan et caeteris usque ad Nathan. Porro, Mathan quasi patri filios jam dictos assignat Menaeum, id est Officium Ecclesiasticum Graecorum, die 8 septembris, ubi ipsi hymnis et laudibus B. Virginis natales, parentes et avos celebrant. Cajetanus et Lyranus hic, item Joannes Annius, in Commentar. Philonis; Joannes Lucidus; Petrus Galatinus, De Arcanis fidei, et alii; quin et S. Hippolytus, episcopus Portuensis et martyr, apud Nicephorum, lib. II, cap. III, Mathan dat duas filias, scilicet Sobe, matrem S. Elisabethae, ex qua natus est Joannes Baptista, et Annam, matrem B. Virginis, ex qua natus est Jesus. Cleopham fratrem fuisse S. Joseph, sponsi B. Virginis, diserte docet Hegesippus, qui sub tempore Apostolorum vixit, apud Eusebium, lib. III, cap. X et XI; Cleophae vero quasi patri filios jam recensitos attribuunt S. Epiphanius, S. Chrysostomus, Hegesippus, Eusebius, Theodoretus, Beda, Nicephorus et alii quos citat noster Christophorus a Castro in Histor. B. Virginis, cap. I. Quare, licet Baronius putet aliam esse Mariam Cleophae, quae S. Simeonis Hierosolymorum Episcopi fuit mater, a Maria Jacobi et Joseph, scilicet matre; tamen unam eamdemque fuisse docent auctores jam citati, et S. Hieronymus, Contra Helvidium, Isidorus, Beda et Anselmus, quos citat Christophorus a Castro, cap. III, p. 426. Salomen autem fuisse uxorem Zebedaei, ex eoque genuisse Jacobum et Joannem, docent S. Epiphanius, Origenes, Theodoretus, Auctor Imperfecti, Theophylactus, Euthymius et alii, quos citat a Castro, De Deipara, cap. I. Imo S. Marcus, cap. XV, 40, Salomen vocat illam, quam S. Matthaeus, cap. XXVII, 56, nuncupat « matrem filiorum Zebedaei. » Ex dictis liquet S. Elisabetham fuisse consobrinam B. Virginis, ac neptem S. Annae, ex ejus sorore dicta Sobe, quam Sigebertus et alii vocant Esmeriam; rursum S. Jacobum Minorem et S. Judam Apostolos, ac S. Simeonem, Episcopum Hierosolymitanum, fuisse consobrinos Christi in primo gradu, quia fuerunt filii Cleophae, fratris Josephi sponsi B. Virginis, quae fuit mater Christi; Jacobum vero Majorem et Joannem Evangelistam fuisse consobrinos Christi in secundo gradu, quia Salome eorum mater fuit soror S. Jacobi Minoris, S. Judae et S. Simeonis. Omnium vero amita fuit S. Anna, mater B. Virginis; S. Anna enim fuit soror Jacobi senioris, filii Mathan; hic autem Jacob fuit pater Joseph et Cleophae, Cleophas autem genuit S. Jacobum, S. Judam, S. Simeonem et Salomen, cujus Salomes filii fuere S. Jacobus Major, et S. Joannes Evangelista; ac proinde S. Anna horum duorum fuit proamita. Jacobus ergo Minor fuit avunculus Jacobi Majoris, illoque senior; hic tamen dictus est Major, non aetate, sed electione et vocatione Christi. Denique Simeon, frater SS. Jacobi et Judae, diversus est a Simeone Chananaeo Apostolo, licet contrarium aliquando senserit Beda, sed postea idipsum retractavit. Nam ille oriundus fuit ex Nazareth, hic ex Cana Galilaeae; ille fuit Episcopus Jerusalem post S. Jacobum fratrem suum, hic Apostolus; ille martyr obiit sub Trajano die 18 februarii, hic longe anterius die 28 octobris, quando Ecclesia eorum festa celebrat. Jam sorores Jacobi, Joseph, Judae, Simeonis, ex eodem Cleopha patre et Maria ejus conjuge, quarum meminit Matthaeus, XIII, 55, et Marcus, VI, 3, duas fuisse refert Hippolytus apud Nicephorum, lib. II, cap. III. Uni nomen Esther, alteri Tamar. S. Epiphanius vero, haeresi 78, et Theophylactus, in cap. XIII Matth., vocant eas Mariam et Salomen, quae nomina ex Evangelio non obscure colligi possunt, ait a Castro, cap. I De Deipara, pag. 49. QUI FUIT HELI. — Τὸ « qui » potest referri ad Joseph, q. d. Joseph fuit filius, id est gener Heli, id est Joachim, quia duxit ejus filiam, scilicet B. Mariam Virginem in uxorem, ideoque Lucas non utitur verbo « genuit, » uti Matthaeus, sed verbo « fuit; » scilicet vel gener vel filius naturalis, vel etiam opus et plasma, ut cum dicitur de Adam, vers. ult., « qui fuit Dei, » scilicet plasma; Adam enim non fuit Filius Dei, sed plasmatus et formatus a Deo. Rursum pronomen « qui » ex Graeco plane referas ad « Jesus; » q. d. Jesus fuit filius, id est nepos, Heli sive Joachim, quia ex eo quasi avo per B. Virginem quasi matrem progenitus est. Cum enim Lucas praemisisset Joseph non esse verum patrem Christi, sed tantum putativum, non erat ratio cur Josephi genealogiam statim subjungeret, sed potius prosapiam B. Virginis et Christi secundum carnem: hanc enim describere intendit Lucas aeque ac Matthaeus; atque hic est finis et scopus genealogiae utriusque. Ita S. Augustinus (vel quisquis est Auctor, non enim videtur esse S. Augustini), lib. I Quaest. veteris et novi Testamenti, Quaest. LVI, et lib. II, Quaest. VI.
3:24
24. QUI FUIT JANNE. — Hic est Janneus; secundus Hyrcanus, si Annio ejusque Philoni credimus, postremus Judaeorum dux ex prosapia Davidis et stirpe Asamonaeorum sive Machabaeorum, de quo Josephus, lib. XII, cap. IV et V, et Eusebius in Chronico. Christus enim tam a Pontificibus, quales fuere Judas, Jonathas, Simon Machabei, quam a regibus descendit, quasi rex et pontifex, uti docet D. Thomas, Bonaventura, ac ex Patribus S. Nazianzenus et Augustinus, quos citat et sequitur Suarez loco citato. Reges enim Juda uxores ducebant filias Pontificum.
3:27
27. QUI FUIT ZOROBABEL, QUI FUIT SALATHIEL. — Hi duo, alii et diversi sunt a Zorobabel et Salathiel quos recenset Matthaeus, cap. I, aitque eos a Davide per Salomonem esse progenitos, cum hi Lucae a Davide per Nathan descendant, ac proinde omnes avos et abavos habeant diversos ab illis Matthaei. Ita Toletus, Pererius, Franciscus Lucas et alii. Forte hi Lucae ex Nathan descendentes, ad principatum assumpti, mutuati sunt nomina eorum, qui a Salomonis familia in principatu illustres evaserunt.
3:31
31. QUI FUIT NATHAN, QUI FUIT DAVID. — Nonnulli putant Nathan hunc esse prophetam illum qui Davidem de adulterio cum Bethsabee perpetrato reprehendit, II Reg. XII, 1. Ita Origenes, Lyranus, Burgensis, Albertus Magnus, quin et S. Augustinus, lib. LXXXVIII, Quaest. LXI. Verum idem S. Augustinus merito id retractat, libro I Retract., cap. XXVI, quia hic Nathan natus est ex Davide et Bethsabee, post adulterium, jam legitimo matrimonio copulatis, ut patet II Regum V, 14; et I Paral. III, 5.
3:36
36. QUI FUIT CAINAN. — Hunc Cainan omittunt et expungunt Hebr. et Chaldaeus, Genes. XI, 12; et I Paral. I, 18 et 24. Addunt vero eumdem ibidem Septuaginta, et ex iis Lucas hic. Problema ergo chronologicum est, an Cainan hic Christi genealogiae et chronologiae inserendus sit cum Septuaginta et Luca, an vero omittendus cum Mose? In Genesi cum Mose stiti pro Mose, et rationes attuli cur omittendus videatur Cainan. Nunc in Luca stabo pro Luca, et rationes cur inserendus sit, afferam. Lector judicet et eligat quod sibi probabilius apparet. Omittendum esse Cainan censent Berosus, Philo, Josephus, Theophilus Antiochenus, Africanus, Orosius, Procopius, S. Hieronymus, Gregorius Turonensis, Isidorus, Ado, Beda, Abulensis, Eugubinus, Genebrardus, in Chronol. Genes. XI, 12, ac Jansenius et Cajetanus hic. Si eis objicias Lucam hic non omittere, sed inserere Cainan, respondent Lucam mere quia Gentibus scribebat, quibus nota erat duntaxat versio Graeca Septuaginta, non vero ipsa Hebraea Mosis, ex Septuaginta inserere Cainan, ne a Gentibus falsitatis vel ignorantiae insimularetur, quod contra fidem Bibliorum Graecorum, quae sola ipsi notant, omitteret Cainan. Ita respondet S. Hieronymus, in Quaest. in Genesin, dans causam cur Lucas, Act. VII, dicat ex Septuaginta 75 animas cum Jacob ingressas in Aegyptum, cum Moses (Genes. XLVI, 27) tantum assignet 70. « Facilis, inquit Hieronymus, excusatio est; non enim debuit S. Lucas, qui ipsius historiae scriptor est, in Gentes Actuum Apostolorum volumen emittens, contrarium aliquid scribere adversus eam Scripturam, quae jam fuerat Gentibus divulgata: et utique majoris opinionis illo duntaxat tempore septuaginta Interpretum habebatur auctoritas, quam Lucae, qui ignotus et vilis, et non magnae fidei in nationibus ducebatur. Hoc autem generaliter observandum, quod ubicumque sancti Apostoli aut Apostolici viri loquuntur ad populos, iis plerumque testimoniis abutuntur, quae jam fuerant in Gentibus divulgata, licet plerique tradant Lucam Evangelistam, ut proselytum, Hebraeas litteras ignorasse. » Huc usque S. Hieronymus. Quocirca, inquiunt auctores isti, in Luca nihil est falsi, nullum mendacium, cum ex Septuaginta interserit Cainan, sive verum, sive fictum et falsum, quia id facit non ex se, sed ex Septuaginta quos more communi sequitur; q. d. Ego Lucas recito vobis, o Gentes, genealogiam Christi juxta catalogum generationum, quam texunt Septuaginta qui a vobis toto orbe receptus est, in quo Cainan inseritur, esto juxta Hebraicam veritatem sit omittendus. Haec enim sententia est vera et irreprehensibilis, etiamsi a Septuaginta erratum vel evariatum esset. Qui enim in chronologia, aliave re affert communem auctorum gravium sententiam, non errat, cum illa probabilis sit, esto a parte rei minus sit vera et falsa. Sic Ecclesia consignans in Martyrologio, die 25 decembris, annum Nativitatis Christi, dicensque Christum natum esse anno a mundi creatione 5199, non errat, quia id facit ex mente Septuaginta qui totidem annos assignant, quos olim totus orbis sequebatur; esto in annis hisce revera juxta veritatem Hebraicam videatur esse error, uti ex S. Augustino ostendi Genes. V. Auctoritas enim Septuaginta Interpretum in chronologia facit sententiam probabilem, quam quisque tuto sequi et citare potest ut probabilem, imo illo aevo communem. Loquendum enim ut multi, sapiendum ut pauci. Saepe enim Scriptura et auctores Canonici loquuntur ex communi aliorum sensu et vulgi opinione, non ex rei veritate. Ne longe abeamus, exemplum est in Luca, qui alibi et cap. II Joseph vocat patrem Christi, cum revera non esset pater, sed tantum a vulgo putaretur esse ejus pater. Haec auctores illi, puta Eugubinus, Cajetanus, Genebrardus, Jansenius, liberius et audacius. Alii mitius et reverentius errorem hunc (si tamen est error) in inserendo Cainan tribuunt non ipsis Septuaginta, sed eorum descriptoribus, qui per oculorum lapsum, videntes Cainan paulo ante positum in genealogia Adae ante diluvium, eumdem hic post diluvium repetierunt. Quam enim eorum incuria vitiosi fuerint olim codices Septuaginta, praesertim in genealogiis et nominibus propriis, locuples testis est S. Hieronymus, epist. ad Domnionem et Rogatianum. Ex adversa parte inserendum esse Cainan censent Eusebius, S. Augustinus, Nazianzenus, Sulpitius, Hugo, Dionysius, Lipomanus, Melchior Canus, Delrio, Toletus, Barradius et alii moderni passim. Ratio est, quod omnia exemplaria eum hic interserant, Latina, Syra, Persica, Aegyptia, Ethiopica, Arabica, Graeca (unico excepto). Romae consului codices, manuscriptos antiquissimos in bibliotheca Vaticana, in basilica S. Pauli, in Oratorio Cardinalis Baronii, ubi vidi Biblia ante 800 annos manuscripta, Alcuini et Magni, in quibus omnibus hoc loco reperi insertum Cainan. Quare religio mihi est, a sacro S. Lucae textu adeo constanti et certo recedere: hanc enim reverentiam S. Lucae et sacris libris debere me existimo, praesertim cum minus incommodi sit dicere Cainan a Mose praeteritum ob causas nobis incognitas, quam in Lucam irrepsisse, aut falso poni in sacro S. Lucae textu, itaque in eo suspectam facere fidem omnium exemplarium. Imo Albertus Magnus, Glossa et Toletus suspicantur Cainan olim fuisse, Gen. XI, 12, in textu Hebraeo indeque Septuaginta eum in Graecum transtulisse. Alii censent Septuaginta eum addidisse ad mysterium, quod nos latet. Lyranus censet Cainan fuisse filium non naturalem, sed adoptivum Arphaxat. Alii Cainan censent esse eumdem cum Sale. Unde Lipomanus, in Gen. XI, Joannes Nauclerus et Joannes Lucidus legunt hic: « Qui fuit Sale, qui et Cainan, » sed contra omnium codicum fidem. Quare omnino retinendum hic censeo Cainan, uti et censui Genes. XI, 12. An chronologiae sit inserendus, sique addendi anni 30, ut caeteris, an non, variant Chronologorum sententiae, aliis annos hos 30 addentibus, aliis eos omittentibus. Forte enim alia de causa inseruere eum Septuaginta et ex eis S. Lucas. Est enim hoc, ut dixi, problema chronologiae. Unde Lucas non ait: « qui genuit, » sed: « qui fuit Cainan, » quod varie explicari potest, ac multo magis Graecum, τοῦ Καϊνάν. Simili modo Septuaginta alibi multa supplent et addunt, quae non sunt in Hebraeo, et ab eo saepe evariant. Fuere enim ipsi non tantum interpretes, sed et vates spiritu prophetico pollentes, teste S. Hieronymo et S. Augustino, lib. II De Consensu Evangel., cap. LXVI, et fusius in Quaestion. super Genes., in Quaest. CLXIX.
3:38
38. QUI FUIT DEI. — scilicet plasma, non filius, q. d. Deus ex terra, quasi figulus formavit et plasmavit primum hominem Adam. Unde Arabicus vertit, qui fuit a Deo; cum in caeteris τὸ « qui fuit, » vertat filius. Lucas ergo Christi genealogiam usque ad Adam deducit, Matthaeus vero usque ad Abraham duntaxat, qui fuit pater credentium et auctor Synagogae; hinc plures generationes sunt in Luca, quam in Matthaeo. Cur hoc addit Lucas? Primam causam dant nonnulli, ut integram plenamque Christi genealogiam a Jesu ad primum Adam, ac usque ad Deum Adae plastem pertexat. Secundam dat S. Athanasius, orat. in illud: Omnia tradita sunt mihi a Patre meo. « Lucas, inquit, a Filio Dei exorsus usque ad Adam recurrit, ut ostenderet corpus, quod Jesus assumpsit, ab Adam originem trahere, qui a Deo formatus fuit. » Tertiam dat S. Irenaeus, lib. III, cap. XXXIII: « Sic, inquit, Christus initium viventium factus, quoniam Adam initium morientium factus est; propter hoc et Lucas initium generationis a Domino inchoans, in Adam retulit, significans quoniam non illi hunc, sed hic illos in Evangelium vitae regeneravit. » Quartam dat S. Leo, serm. X De Nativ. Domini: « Lucas Evangelista ab ipso Domini ortu seriem generis sursum versus retexuit, ut etiam illa saecula quae diluvium praevenerunt, huic sacramento doceret esse connexa, omnesque ab initio successionum gradus ad eum, in quo uno erat salus omnium, tetendisse. » Quintam dat Franciscus Lucas, ut significaret Lucas per Jesum sursum homines reduci ad Deum, qui per Adam deorsum abducti fuerant a Deo. Symbolice, Euthymius: Lucas, ait, a Christi inchoans humanitate sermonem reducit ad ejus divinitatem, demonstrans Christum quidem ut hominem incepisse, ut Deum vero carere principio. Aliam causam dat S. Ambrosius: « Jam, inquit, de ipso Adam, qui juxta Apostolum figuram accepit Christi, quid pulchrius potuit convenire, quam ut sacrosancta generatio a Dei Filio inciperet, et usque ad Dei Filium deduceretur; creatusque praecederet in figura, ut natus in veritate sequeretur; ad imaginem Dei factus praeiret, propter quem Dei imago descenderet? » Porro S. Augustinus, lib. II De Consensu Evang., cap. IV, numerat hic 77 generationes, quo significatur, inquit, omnium prorsus remissio et abolitio peccatorum facienda per Jesum salvatorem, juxta illud Christi: « Non dico tibi usque septies, sed usque septuagies septies, » Matth. XVIII, 22. Denique vide hic nobile Christi stemma, quod Lucas et Matthaeus ab ipso Jesu per tot Reges, Prophetas et Patriarchas ad ipsum Adam protoplastum, imo ad ipsum Deum, per quatuor annorum millia, continua generationum serie producunt. Nemo enim est principum vel regum totius mundi, qui continua serie suam prosapiam ad mille annos pertexere et producere possit. Cur Christus tamdiu distulerit adventum et incarnationem suam, decem morarum rationes affert noster Barradius, tom. I, lib. V, cap. XXXI. Ad extremum genealogia haec Christi praefigurata fuit per scalam Jacob. Ita Rupertus, in cap. I S. Matth.: « Scala Jacob, inquit, generatio ista est; et latera scalae patres vel principes sunt hujus generationis, Abraham atque David, ad quos promissio facta est. Supremus gradus cui Dominus innixus est, beatus est Joseph: innixus, continuo desivimus esse. » Hinc Nazianzenus, in carm. De hominis externi vilitate, sic canit: Ipsum quod vivo, est veluti rapidissimus amnis, / Qui sursum exoriens, semper ad ima fluit. Et nonnullis interjectis: « a tumulo tumulum peto, » id est, ex utero matris nascens, tendo ad mortem et sepulcrum, juxta illud Job, 1: « Nudus egressus sum de utero matris meae, nudus revertar illuc; » « ut omnino nihil sit aliud tempus vitae hujus quam cursus ad mortem, » ait S. Augustinus, lib. XIII De Civit., cap. X; quotidie morimur: quotidie enim demitur aliqua pars vitae, et tunc quoque cum crescimus, vita decrescit: hunc quem agimus diem, cum morte dividimus, etc. Ergo cum primum vitam intramus, in mortem statim tendere et a vita egredi incipimus. Vive ergo aeternitati, in qua est perpetuum esse, perpetua stabilitas et constantia rerum omnium. Unde impii queruntur, Sap. V: « Nos nati continuo desivimus esse, » inquam, tanquam tutori pupillus. Quocirca S. Bernardus, serm. 1 De Adventu, hos Patriarchas montibus similes esse dicit, in quibus saliens Christus ad nos venit: « Ecce venit saliens in montibus, transiliens colles; » montes et colles Patriarchas et Prophetas accipe, et quemadmodum veniret saliens et transiliens, in libro generationis lege: « Abraham genuit Isaac, Isaac genuit Jacob, » etc. Ex his montibus prodiit radix Jesse. Tropologice: « qui fuit » significat vanitatem hujus saeculi, scilicet hominum vitam et generationes singulas praeterire, et illico ex praesenti verti in praeteritum, scilicet ex « est » in « fuit, » juxta illud: Fuimus Troes, fuit Ilium, et ingens / Gloria Teucrorum.
3:1
v. 1 anno autem quintodecimo imperti Tiberti Caesaris, notatu dignum est quod habet Orig. : « quando ad Tudaeos tantum sermo propheticus mittebatur, iudaici reges ponebantur in titulo,... quando vero sacramentum evangelii praedicandum erat et in toto orbe disseminandum, cuius princeps Ioannes in eremo erat, tune imperium Tiberii Caesaris adscribitur et in quintodecimo anno eius factum esse verbum Domini ad. loannem refertur ». 767 u. c. vel 14 p. Ch.; unde si eius imperium a morte Augusti computandum est, annus eius quintus decimus initium habuit a. d. 44 Kal. sept. vel 45 Kal. octobr. an. 781 u. ¢. (cf. Patritius 1. c. diss. 39). Praédicatione loannis per aliquod tempus facta Iesus venit ad eum cum esset quasi annorum triginta. lam ex opinione quae fere communiter recepta est Herodes mortuus est anno 750 u. c.; quare si Christus demum anno 782 ad baptismum venit, vix dici potest eum tunc fuisse quasi annorum triginta, cum iam fere 33 esse deberet. Unde non contemnenda erit eorum sententia, qui 4yevoviev Tiberii ab eo tempore determinandam esse statuunt quo provinciis cum imperio praeesse coepit. Ut enim Suetonius narrat, lex per consules lata est, ut provincias cum Augusto communiter administraret (Tib. c. 20. 21), idque ut Velleius memoriae tradidit factum est postulante Augusto (hist. rom. 2, 121; cf. Patritius 1. c. diss. 39 cap. 1). Hoc autem posito annus eius quintus decimus pro Judaeis incepit a neomenia tisri mensis 778 u. c. (plura de ea re vide apud Patritium 1. c. Wieseler, Beitraege p. 178 seq.) et cum Lucas ea quae narrat ab apostolis Christique discipulis, ludaeis gente, didicerit neque sit quod nos credere cogat eum curasse ut rationem computandorum annorum quam Judaei sequebantur ad illam redigeret quae erat Romanorum, iure etiam creditur annum illum quintumdecimum sic posuisse, sicut acceperat. Neque merito opponi potest ei sententiae alias computari annos Tiberii imperatoris a morte Augusti. Nam annos imperli aliter computari ab aliis res est non adeo insueta, cuius documentum y. g. habetur eo quod initium imperii Augusti ab antiquis sumebatur modo ab obitu Caesaris, modo a tempore quo primo consulatum gessit vel quo erat triumvir, modo a pugna apud Actium facta, modo ab expugnatione Alexandriae; tum a die 7 ianuarii 711 u. c., quo die titulo propraetoris imperium adeptus est vel a die 16 aprilis 711; tum a die 47 lanuarii 727 quo titulum Augusti sibi attribuit (a quo die Dio Cassius 53,17 computat) vel a die 27 iunii 731 quo potestatem tribunitiam nactus est (cf. Marquardt \. c. 2,3 p. 299 n. 1228). Cum Herode mortuo regnum eius ab Augusto divideretur, Archelaus nactus erat Iudaeam (proprie dictam) cum Samaria et Idumaea; sed eum tyrannidem exerceret intolerabilem, anno decimo principatus eius primores Iudaeorum et Samaritanorum eum apud Augustum accusarunt. Inde factum est, ut Archelaus Romam evocatus et principatu spoliatus in exsilium sit abactus Vienna Galliarum urbe in commorandi locum ei assignata (cf. Josephus, Ant. 17,13. 2). Ex eo tempore ludaea provinciae Syriae est attributa et per procuratores administrata, quorum primus erat Coponius, quintus autem Pontius Pilatus (an. 26-36 p. Ch.); unde procurante Pontio Pilato Iudaeam, ‘yzp2vevovtee dicitur sensu quodam latiore, quo etiam quandoque jyepor dicitur (cf. Ant. 18,3.1 et quae notavi ad Matth. 27,2); proprius ti- tulus est éxicooxce procurator; quare lectio éxizeorevevres rem acu tan- git: tetrarcha autem Galilaeae Herode; in illa ditionis Herodis divisione Herodes Antipas, filius Herodis et Malthaces, adeptus eratGalilaeam et Peraeam; appellatur in novo testamento, uti etiam in numis et saepe apud Iosephum Herodes solum; tetrarchiam tenuit usque ad annum 39 p. Ch. (vide ad Matth. 14,1); setezpyq¢ (vel ut alii scribunt secundum cod. x zeteaépyn¢) proprie est is qui quartae regni parti imperat. Quem in modum Strabo haec de Galatia memoriae tradidit : cum autem sint tres gentes eadem utentes lingua..., singulas earum quattuor in partes diviserunt quarum unamquamque tetrarchiam vocarunt quae proprium habebat tetrarcham (cf. Paéritéws 1. c. diss. 42 n. 2). Sed “mox nomina haec usurpari coepta sunt, ubi ditio non unius regni quarta parte continebatur, sed vel totam gentem vel quamcumque huius partem comprehendebat, latiore itaque modo. In illa divisione aliam partem nactus est Philippus, filius Herodis ex Cleopatra, Philippo autem fratre eius tetrarcha Ituraeae et Trachonitidis regionis, ex varils locis Josephi (Ant. 17,8. 1 et 11. 4; 18,%. 6; Bell. iud. 2,6. 3; cf. Schirer 1. ce. I p. 353) colligitur Philippo attributas esse regiones has : Batanaeam, Trachonitidem, Auranitidem, Gaulanitidem, Paniadem; sed eius tetrarchiam solitam esse designari una alterave ditione nominata patet tum ex losepho qui nullo loco omnes simul regiones enumerat, tum ex epistola Agrippae apud Philonem in qua integra Philippitetrarchia designatur * Toaywvizis Aeyowévq (Schitrer 1. c. p. 35%). Simili modo tetrarchia Herodis Antipae solo nomine Galilaeae tamquam a parte potiore appellari solet. Quae sit Ituraeae regio hoc loco nominata disceptatur. Olim Ituraei in montibus Antilibani habitabant; Eusebius (Onom. ed. Lagarde p. 268. 298) Ituraeam eandem esse dicit regionem cum Trachonitide; verum Lucas clare utramque distinguit. Ituraeam esse Auranitidem Patritius censet, non quidem totam, sed eam quae in montes adsurgat partem (diss. 42 n. 13); alii arbitrantur eo nomine designari Paniadem regionem quae olim ad regnum Ituraeorum pertinebat (Schiirer 1. ec. p. 35%. 600). Trachonitis, regio aspera, protenditur a Damasco meridiem versus fere usque ad Bostram; vocatur hodie ea regio El Ledscha. Demum evangelista tetrarchiam nominat a Damasco septemtrionem versus sitam et Lysania Abilinae tetrarcha, est Abilene ‘regio ab urbe Abila nuncupata, quae urbs 18 millia passuum a Damasco distans in via qua Heliopolin (Baalbek) itur sita erat; hodie vicus appellatur Suk ad rivum Barada. Intelligitur Lysanias ille de quo saepius Iosephus mentionem facit (cf. Ant. 18,6. 10; 19,5. 1;20,7. 4; Bell. iud. 2,41. 5; 2,12. 8). Imperatore Caligula regio illa quae fuit tetrarchia Lysaniae iam attributa est regno Agrippae; unde apparet quam accurate Lucas Luc. 3,4. | “TBR de tempore edoctus fuerit de quo scribit mentionem faciens tetrarchiae quae eo tempore quo scribebat evangelium iam diu desierat exsistere. Cum losephus non nominet Ituraeam, cum de tetrarchia Philippi refert, non defuerunt qui Lucam erroris accusarent. Sed perperam. Nam losephus eas regiones varie enumerat alia et alia omissa. Porro obiicit Schivrer 1. c. p. 354: Ituraei annis 38-49 p. Ch. regebantur a quodam Soemo (Dio Cass. 99,12. Tacit. 12,23), dum eo tempore Agrippa I totam tetrarchiam Philippi possidebat (losephus, Ant. 18,6. 10; 19,8. 2); unde apparet Ituraeam non potuisse pertinere ad ditionem Philippi (cf. Keim, Bibellex. ed. Schenkel Ill p. 41). Verum haec argumentatio non consistit. Neutro enim loco Josephus dicit totam Philippi tetrarchiam Agrippae esse datam. Dein quod Ituraei ab anno 38 Soemo obediebant, non impedimento est quominus antea Philippo essent subditi. Geterum ipsa regio Ituraeorum alium alio tempore habebat ambitum, de qua varietate ipse Schirer pluribus agit 1. c. p- 596-608. Quae de Lysania olim a rationalistis movebatur difficultas, hodie ab ipsis rationalistis exploditur. losephus scil. (Ant. 15,4. 1) et Dio Cassius (49,32) referunt de Lysania, filio Ptolemaei, rege Chalcidis ad montem Libanon quem Antonius instigante Cleopatra interfecit. Unde ab aliquibus clamatum est Lucam insigni errore Lysaniam iam ab annis 60 mortuum constituere tetrarcham. Ita v. ¢. asserere Strauss aliosque non puduit quamvis iam Baronius errorem illorum interpretum correxisset qui utique ad locum Lucae quandoque mentionem iniecerunt de Lysania filio Ptolemaei. Nam Baronius scribit ad an. 31 n. 6 : errore eos labi constat qui Lysaniam hunc illum putant esse filium Ptolemaei Mennaei, cuius losephus meminit; nam eiusdem auctoris testimonio expressum habetur eundem Lysaniam Cleopatrae arte fuisse necatum, ut eius potiretur ditione quae erat apud Libanum posita, idque Dione auctore contigisse constat sub consulatu Publicolae et Nervae anno 718 u. c.; dein n. 7 Baronius monet Iosephum de alio quoque Lysania mentionem facere. Atque Lucam nullo modo ea in re errasse hodie fatentur omnes; cf. Schiirer 1. c. p. 601 seq. ; neque solo testimonio Lucae et Iosephi constat exstitisse Lysaniam iuniorem, sed etiam inscriptione ad Abilam inventa : inte tig tHv xuptwy Le (Eactéiv) swtypiag xat <00 cbu(mavtoc) adroy otxov Nuugatos Auoaviov tetpupyou amehe (SMep0g) tiv ddov xttca¢ etc.; cum in ea de duobus Augustis sermo sit, inscriptio ante tempus Tiberii non potest esse posita; nam ante eum non erant plures Augusti simul, sed primum Ze6acroi appellabantur Tiberius eiusque mater Livia (cf. Schirer 1. c. p. 603). De tota hac quaestione vide Vigouroux, le nouveau Testament et les découvestes archéologiques p. 123-133; Cornely, Introd. III p. 155;. Wieseler, Beitraege p. 196 seq. Cur autem S. Lucas tetrarchae Lysaniae quoque mentionem fecerit, ratio probabilis non deest. Ditio enim Lysaniae a Caligula (an. 37) attributa est Agrippae I (Josephus, Ant. 18,6. 10), cui Claudius quoque imperator eandem possessionem confirmayit (Ant. 19,5. 4; Bell. iud, 2,44. 5). Agrippa I mortuo eius ditio ab anno 44-53 per procuratores romanos administrabatur; sed anno 33 tetrarchia Philippi et tetrarchia quae fuit Lysaniae a Claudio imperatore attributa est Agrippae II (Ant. 20,7. 1. Bell. iud. 2,42. 8). Unde cum Patritio, Reischl dicere possumus voluisse Lucam memoriae prodere quinam illa aetate cuius historiam scriberet dominarentur in regionibus, tum quibusante eos Herodes magnus, tum quibus cum ipse Lucas scriberet Agrippa II Herodis pronepos potiebatur. Wieseler existimat Lysaniam religione Iudaeum fuisse ideoque a Luca esse nominatum (I. ¢. p- 204). Post magistratus civiles eos quoque nominat evangelista qui in rebus sacris auctoritate et dignitate principatum gerebant
3:2
v. 2 sub principibus sacerdotum Anna et Caipha ni aeyzeéw¢ sub summo sacerdote Anna et Caipha; nomen et appellatio summi sacerdotis tribuebatur iis qui olim revera eo munere functi erant et iis quoque qui ex eorum familiis sacerdotes exsistebant (cf. quae notavi ad Matth. 2,'). Quare si Annas vocatur summus sacerdos, nondum sequitur eum revera eo tempore pontificatum gessisse. Erat Annas pontifex an. 6-15 p-. Ch., Joseph Caiphas an. 18-36 p. Ch.; Annas autem primo loco nominatur propter auctoritatem qua inter populares pollebat et qua ex suo arbitratu per Caipham fere omnia administrabat. Quantae enim Annas fuerit auctoritatis ex Josephz verbis licet concludere : seniorem hune Ananum atunt felicissimum exstitisse; nam quinque filios habuit hisque omnibus contigit Deo in pontificatu ministrasse, cum et ipse in primis ea dignitate in tempus longissimum functus esset; id quod nulli unquam apud nos pontitici contigit (Ant. 20,9. 1). Eum totius gentis Aaronitarum principatum habuisse ideoque nominari loco priore Patritius arbitratur (1. c. diss. 28 cap. 2 n. 21). Auctoritatis igitur gratia eum primum occupare locum, quod iam Lap. censuit, probabilissimum est; quod aliis placuit, eum fuisse praesidem synedrii (nwa; ef. Baronius ad an. 31 n. 10, Selden, Hammond, Wieseler 1. c. p. 205) vel eum fuisse 13D vicarium pontificis, qui scil. substitui solebat pontifici vespere diei expiationis, ut in promptu esset ad fungendum officio diei, si qua forte immunditie pontifex arceretur (Lightfoot adh. 1.) nequit probari. Atque multo minus asseri debet eos alternis annis pontificatu functos esse (Jans. Mald.), id quod falsum omnino est et certis documentis refellitur. Ex lege mosaica pontifex statuitur ad tempus vitae. Ex eo autem quod pro arbitrio procuratorum romanorum pontifices nominabantur et dignitate iterum spoliabantur, idque non sine culpa sacerdotum , cernere iam licet in quantum res religiosae Iudaeorum in deteriorem conditionem delapsae sint. Fuit homo missus a Deo (loan. 1,6), eumque missum esse eo modo quo Deus olim prophetas mittere et verba in ore eorum ponere solebat, ipso narrandi modo edicitur : factwm est verbum Domini super loannem , Zachariae filium, in deserto , « evangelista ut loannem prophetam esse indicaret eis locutionibus usus est quibus et prophetae » (Yol.); ef. Is. 38,4. Ter. 1,2. 4. 11; 2,1; 7,1 ete. Ez. 4,3. Os. 1,1. Ioel 1,1 etc. ; 2n deserto, ibi enim adoleverat 1,80 : et erat in desertis usque ad diem ostensionis suae ad Israel; qui sit ille dies, hic declaratur. Cum haee sententia factum est etc. intime iungatur cum antecedentibus, illa temporis designatio necessario referri debetad mandatum Toanni divinitus datum, ut munere praecursoris fungi incipiat, proin ad initium praedicationis eius (v. 3). Quare neutiquam dici potest cum Sanclemente assignari annum mortis Christi (contra eam opinionem ef. Patretius 1. ¢. diss. 39 cap. 2) neque cum Wiese/er denotari quando loannes missus sit in carcerem, neque cum Schegg, quando loannes occisus sit. Quale mandatum a Deo factum sit, exponitur narratione
3:3
v. 3 et venit in omnem regionem Tordanis, xzetyweov in omnem regionem circumiacentem lordanis, ad quam ex parte desertum quoque accensebatur (cf. 7,24. Matth. 3,1. Marc. 1,4) 1. e. regio non quidem agriculturae, sed gregibus pascendis apta, incultior, a paucis habitata; neque uno in loco constitit cf. loan. 3,23; 10,40. Non caret significatione quod initium evangelii (Marc. 1,1) ponitur in deserto et ad regionem Jordanis. In deserto enim praeparabatur populus olim ad possidendam terram promissam, quae terra erat pignus et typus regni messiani; ex regione lordanis inceperunt ingredi in hereditatem suam; quare ex eadem regione illis primo annuntiatur iam appropinquare regnum Dei ; praedicans baptismum poenitentiae in renissionem peccatorum i. e..sua praedicatione in populo excitare studet yeravouxy, mentis mutationem coniunctam cum dolore de male admissis (de qua notione vide in Comment. Matth. I p. 117), seu poenitentiam, in cuius signum suscipiebant a Ioanne baptismum, immersionem in Jordanem, ut ea ablutione exprimerent desiderium purgationis a peccatis et pro- . positum sese ab illis expediendi; quare dicitur 7m remisszonem peccatorum, quia illa poenitentia disponebantur ad remissionem accipiendam. Cor enim contritum et humiliatum Deus non despiciet. Plura de loannis baptismo dixil. c. p. 123 seq. Praedicatione autem poenitentiae et indoles regni messiani declaratur et ea indicatur praeparatio quam olim iam prophetae in vaticiniis de instauratione regni Dei postulaverant; cf. ler. 3,21-25. Ez. 16,61. Dan. 9,5 etc. Mich. 7,9. Evangelium ante iam promissum esse a Deo per prophetas suos in scripturis sanctis, apostolus docet (Rom. 1,2). Quod et foannes baptista ipse indicat (loan. 1,23) et evangelistae pariter nos monent cum praedicationem eius fieri ex vaticinio tradant
3:4
v. 4 stcut seriptum estin libro sermonum. Isaiae prophetae : vox clamantis in deserto : parate viam Domini, rectas facite semitas eius! ef. Is. 40,3; est metaphora sumpta ab adventu magni principis cui solent viae parari per quas venturus est in tirbem. IIlis verbis Isaias annuntiat instaurationem theocratiae eamque messianam, uti statim patet ex 40,5 et ex eo quoque quod in subsequentibus (cap. 42. 49 etc.) hanc liberationem messianam potissimum celebrat cuius praeambulum et praeparatio est prior illa ex exsilio babylonico; vide quae notavi ad Is. 40,3 (Comment. II p. 67; Comment. Matth. I p. 119). lam quid ea exhortatione efficiendum sit ulterius declaratur
3:5
v. 5 omnds vallis implebitur et omnis mons et collis humiliabitur et erunt prava in directa, tortuosa erunt in vias rectas, reddentur viae rectae, e¢ aspera in vias planas; Is. 40,4; « quattuor difformitates viarum per quas corporaliter gradimur corrigendas dicit propheta ad hoc ut via sit omnino suavis; difformitas est vel propter montes et colles quos oportet ascendere vel propter valles in quas oportet descendere , vel propter obliquitatem vel asperitatem viarum » (Cat.). Quae facile ad animorum praeparationem transferuntur, ut scil. omnia removeantur obstacula et impedimenta vitiorum et cupiditatum , quibus adventus Domini praecludatur et ab animo arceatur; varia in eam rem afferunt Orzg. Cyr. Euth. Bed. ; merito iidem aliique monent eiusmodi impedimenta ablatum et remotum iri per Salvatorem (To/. Cai. Schanz) vel humiles ab eo exaltatum iri, superbos depressum iri (vide ad Is. 40,4 1. c. p. 68). Jamque appropinquare salutem illam omnibus a Deo propositam
3:6
v. 6 et videbit omnis caro, omnis homo, salutare Dei;.Is. 40,5 LXX; hebr. et videbit omnis caro pariter quod os Domini locutum est; vide ad 2,30. 31. Lucas rationem vivendi loannis, quam satis iam ab angelo esse indicatam narraverat 2,15, hic non refert (cf. Matth. 3,4. Mare. 1,6), sed uno alterove exemplo ostendit quomodo officio suo sit functus. Narrat enim quomodo egerit cum Iudaeorum turbis, cum publicanis, pheta, facta sit animorum commotio, ex triplice hoc hominum genere quod ad eum confluxit satis apparet. Dum Matthaeus pro suo instituto statim duces populi moribus suis a baptista describi refert , Lucas rem magis generatim proponit, sed ut iam in praecursore depingat curam Salvatoris de peccatoribus et salutem alienigenis per evangelium oblatam, narrat baptistam et publicanos, hominum genus Iudaeis exosum tamquam peccatis onustum, et milites qui ex alienigenis conscribebantur (cf. Comment. Matth. Il p. 508) benigne suscepisse et edocuisse
3:7
v. 7 dicebat ergo, scil. prout munere suo postulabatur quod modo y. 4-6 ; Luc. 3,7-8. | 159 deseriptum est, ad turbas quae exibant ut baptisarentur ab ipso, ad caerimonias externas prompti erant Iudaeiiisque facile ita acquiescebant ut lis peractis omnia esse rite acta putarent vel sibi persuaderent (cf. Is. 1,11 seq. 58,5. fer. 7,10. Zach. 7,5 seq. Matth. 15,2 seq. 23,23 seq. Lue. 18,12) et de morum emendatione nibil essent solliciti. Tales itaque ad se venire perspexit Ioannes qui quidem libenter vellent caerimoniam haptismi subire, minime tamen pietatem-virtutemque sequi. In quos merito modo veterum prophetarum invehitur graviter : genimina viperarum, malae soboles malorum parentum actiones imitantes (Bed.), « acris reprehensio quae et gravitatem et antiquitatem peccati indicat; gravitatem eo quod viperas appellat, est enim animal hoc venenosum ; antiquitatem eo quod progenies seu genimina viperarum vocat quasi hereditario quodam scelere patres et maiores malos imitarentur » (Tol.), quis ostendit vobis fugere a ventura tra? « quasi diceret : ita vestris malis operibus inhaeretis, quasi quispiam vobis viam aliquam ostenderit evadendi supplicium a Deo inferendum; quis ergo hoc ostendit? profecto nemo, cum fieri nequeat ut evadatis iram Dei, si in peceatis perseveratis » (To/.). Similiter S. Cyr. sentit haec dici prophetice, cum praevideret Ioannes illos sibi fidem denegaturos et venenatam linguam moventes convicium facturos. Aliter S. Amdr. ; ostendi scil. his Dei miseratione infusam prudentiam, ut gerant suorum delictorum poenitentiam futuri terrorem iudicii provida devotione metuentes. Sed si ita esset, certe eos non adeo dure compellasset genimina viperarum. Alia vide ad Matth. 3,7. Vocat autem venturam iram iudicium Dei peccatoribus imminens, quale prophetae quoque simul cum regno messiano vaticinati sunt (Is. 50,44; 56,9 seq. 63,4; 66,15. Mal. 3,2.3) et ipse quoque v. 9 indicat. Quam ultionem Dei si evadere volunt revera, monet ut longe ab omni animorum praesumptione mores sedulo emendent
3:8
v. 8 facite ergo fructus dignos poenitentiae talia edant opera talesque se vita et conyersatione praebeant, ut manifestum sit eos et male actam vitam cum dolore detestari et veram iam amplecti pietatem et virtutem. Quale impedimentum auferendum sit et quod superbiae vulnus curandum docet : ef ne coeperitis dicere : patrem habemus Abraham, ne scil. admonitioni illi occurrant funesta illa et fatali persuasione : cum simus filii Abraham quem Deus elegit et quocum iniit foedus sempiternum, nunquam a Deo abiiciemur, iure ad nos pertinet regnum Dei (cf. Ioan. 8,33). Eandem superbiam et praesumptionem filii prae se ferunt quam in patribus prophetae reprehenderant; vide Ier. 7,4. Mich. 3,14 et ef: ad Matth. 3,9. Utique Abraham et semini eius facta sunt promissa ; vyerum quam inanis sit illa male secura fiducia, graviter declarat : dico enim vobis : quia potens est Deus de lapidibus istis suscitare filios Abrahae x °Ae2dy.; nam non omnes qui ab Abraham descendunt eius benedictionis esse participes, vetus iam docet testamentum in Ismael, in filiis Ceturae, in Esau. Filii demum illi censentur qui indolem patris exprimunt, qui fidem et obedientiam Abraham imitantur, ut Christus dicit : si filii Abrahae estis, opera Abrahae facite (Ioan. 8,39; ef. Rom. 4,12. Gal. 3,7. 9). Proinde baptista iam illud detegit vulnus letale ludaeorum quo de propagatione ab Abraham elati et sibi iustitiam arrogabant (Ioan. 8,33. 44. Rom. 2,17-20; 10,3) et gentes excludi volebant a regno messiano (Act. 13,46. 50; 17,5; 18,6 etc.). Retundit eorum superbiam et arrogantiam docens Deum ad regnum suum condendum minime eorum ope indigere; Deum posse etsi omnes obedientiam detrectaverint, sibi filios Abraham, qui scil. uti Abraham fide et obedientia excellant creare de lapidibus istis, quos scil. digito eis monstrat ad eorum fastum deprimendum; cf. Matth. 3,9. Atque quanta instet iis necessitas, ut ab hac praesumptione avellant animos et fructus dignos faciant poenitentiae, iis inculcat
3:9
v. 9 cam enim securis ad radicem arborum posita est; iam instat iudicium , quo Deus populum iudaicum reiecturus est nisi toto corde ad eum revertantur et pro gratiis sibi datis fructus afferant; cf. Ier. 11,16; securi ad radicem posita indicatur fore excidium, ita ut exspectari nequeat cum in exsilium elicerentur ex quo iterum revocati et restituti sunt civitate iudaica denuo erecta. Dein quod in universum minatus est, singulis quoque dici perhibet tamquam consequens ex iudicio ingruente : omnis ergo arbor non faciens fructum bonum excidetur et in ignem mittetur, exciditur, mittitur vel projicitur; tempore praesenti periculum imminens maiore declaratur emphasi, cum non statuatur quid futurum sit, sed quid regula normaque generali fiat fierique debeat ex axiomate communi et ab omnibus assumpto. Eandem parabolam Iesus explicat 13,6 seq. ; vir iustus comparari solet arbori frugiferae Ps. 1,3. ler. 17,8. Poena denuntiatur ea quae ler. 11,16, quaeque igne gehennae inexstinguibili postea declaratur cf. v. 17. Matth. 13,40. 42. 50; 18,8. Marc. 9,44. Admonitiones eius non caruisse fructu apud turbas — omnes enim habebant loannem sicut prophetam Matth. 21,26; aliter duces populi sentiebant : daemonium habet, Matth. 11,18 — patet tum ex eo quod baptizabantur ab eo confitentes peccata sua Matth. 3,6 tum ex
3:10
v. 10 e/ mterrogabant eum turbae dicentes : quid ergo faciemus? quae v. 10- {4 dicuntur Lucae propria sunt; quare quaerunt sintne haec deprompta ex eodem fonte seu documento ex quo narrationem cap. 1 et 2 hauserit, vel ex alio scripto, vel ex traditione orali aliis alii opinioni adstipulantibus. Ex qua varietate iam deprehenditur id inquiri quod sciri nequeat. Unum certo scitur, scil. quod 1,2. 3 legitur, et profecto non deerant ex quibus Lucas haec et alia discere poterat;
3:11
v. 41 respondens autem dicebat illis : qui habet duas tunicas det non habenti et gua habet escas similiter faciat ;opera misericordiae et caritatiscommendat; nam beati misericordes, quoniam ipsi misericordiam consequentur. Similiter Daniel dedit consilium regi : peccata tua eleemosynis redime et iniquitates tuas misericordiis pauperum (Dan. 4,24); nam eleemosyna resistit peccatis (Eccli. 3,33). Uno exemplo declarat quomodo fructus poenitentiae faciendus sit; qui durus erat in alios, qui sprevit pauperes, qui avarus erat et opibus inhiabat, is iam fiat misericors, opem ferat egenis, libenter de suis tribuat indigentibus. Commendat caritatem; nam qui fratrem suum quem videt non diligit, Deum quem non videt quomodo potest diligere (1 Joan. 4,20)? Operibus istis placatur Deus ut amplas tribuat gratias ad veram agendam poenitentiam. Et prae-_ eursor Iesu ei quoque mandato praeludit quod Jesus suum appellat mandatum. Haec etiam opera in indicio ultimo tamquam norma sententiae iudicis exhibentur (Matth. 25,35 seq.). Neque immerito dicit S. Ambr. : « misericordia communis est usus, ideo commune praeceptum; omnibus officiis, omnibus aetatibus necessaria et ab omnibus deferenda ». : « Quantam beati baptistae sermo virtutem habuerit, quantumque mentes concusserit audientium, hine probatur, cum etiam publicanos et milites ad consilium salutis suae coegerit inquirendum » (Bed.);
3:12
v. 12 venerunt autem et publican ut baptizarentur et dixerunt ad lum: magister quid faciemus? z2h6ve,, intelligendi sunt non publicani proprie, quippé qui plerumque ordinis equestris emerunt vel conduxerunt vectigalia, sed portitores, vectigalium exactores quorum opera publicanus (qui vectigalia unius provinciae vel regionis conduxerat) in exigendis vectigalibus utebatur. Iudaeis portitores erant maxime exosi et propter officium quo pro alienigenis vectigalia exigebant et propter avaritiam, fraudulentiam , vexationem qua lucri cupidi pecuniam extorquebant. Cum Ioannem baptistam salutent ma-. gistrum et quaerant quid sibi sit praestandum, ostendunt se ad baptismum venire vera poenitentia ductos et ad vitae emendationem paratos. Neque reprehenduntur, ut turbae v. 7, sed benigne suscipiuntur
3:13
v. 13 at tlle dixit ad eos : nihil amplius quam quod constitutum est vobts factatis xpdcczte exigatis; proinde ut intra limites iustitiae se contineant et lucri iniusti cupiditatem et avaritiam penitus -severius quo deterreantur, solum ut officio suo fungantur sine imiustitia. Iam in eose praebet praecursorem eius cuius iugum suave et onus est leve, neque ullo modo refert agendi modum pharisaeorum, qui onera gravia et importabilia in humeros hominum imponunt, digito autem suo nolunt movere (Matth. 23,4). In hac de publicanis narratione iam praeformatur id quod Christus postea pharisaeis exprobravit publicanos credidisse Ioanni, illos autem non egisse poenitentiam, quare fore ut publicani eos praecedant in regnum Dei (Matth. 21, 34. 32). ; Simili modo agit Ioannes cum militibus
3:14
v. 14 znterrogabant autem eum et milites dicentes : quid factemus et nos? illis quoque id unum et ait illis > neminem concutiatis, d.aseionte , notio verbi generatim ‘est turbare, molestiam inferre; sed speciatim incusso terrore aliquid extorquere, uti etiam concussio iurisconsultis crimen est, si aliquid terrore potestatis illicite extorquetur et aufertur (ef. Wetstezn ad h. 1.); quae significatio ad agendi modum militum in regione subiecta certe a apta est; neque calumniam faciatis, pdt svxogayvtheqze; suxcgdavtat dicebantur olim ii quorum erat eos deferre qui ficus ultra atticae ditionis fines exportarent; unde verbum notionem induit deferendi, et falso deferendi, calumniandi, vexandi, defraudandi; et content: estote stipendiis vestris; lis itaque quae ipsis lure debentur et dantur; cum frumentum, carnes, fructus stipendii loco militibus saepe darentur, dvoviov (edulium) dici consuevit de stipendio militari. — Notat Tod. probare ex hoc loco S. Amér. serm. 7 et S. Aug. c. Faustum 22,74 licere bellum Christianis; idque ulterius confirmat ex Matth. 8,10 quod Iesus centurionem laudet nec militiam vitio dederit et quod Act. 10 Cornelius centurio commendetur, baptizetur nec ei militia interdicatur. Tamquam praecursor Domini qui paret vias eius (1,76) etiam ipsum buit. Id fit v. 16. 17. Quantam animorum commotionem loannes in habitu et modo prophetae se sistens populo excitaverit et quam sibi auctoritatem conciliaverit, eo quoque declaratur quod existimabant eum forte esse Messiam; neque id turbae tantum coniiciebant , veram ipsi synedristae mittebant sacerdotes et levitas ad eum qui de eadem re eum interrogabant (id quod Ioan. 1,20 satis indicatur eo quoque quia respondet : non sum ego Christus). Insuper cum eo tempore exspectatio messiana satis esset communis (cf. Comment. in Danielem p- 265) neque memoria eorum quae in Bethlehem et in templo ante annos haud ita multos evenerant apud omnes posset plane esse ex- stincta, facile explicatur cur haec opinio nasci -potuerit; ¥.
3:15
15 existimante autem populo Teccsox@v7e¢, 1. €. cum exspectarent, cum. essent animis suspensis , et cogitantibus omnibus in cordibus suis de loanne, ne forte ipse esset Christus,
3:16
v. 16 respondit Ioannes dicens omnibus : ego quidem aqua baptizo vos; veniet autem fortior me; nota edi ab eo vaticinium; unde norma illa Deut. 18,21. 22 statuta applicari potest, qua dignosci voluit Deus a populo prophetam vere a se missum ; et quantae ille dignitatis sit indicat : cucus non sum dignus solvere corrigiam calceamentorum eius; i. e. ne inter ultimos quidem elus servos qui numerer et assumar dignus sum. Ita loquitur is quem turbae maxima veneratione suspiciunt et quem adeo colunt ut eum esse Messiam suspicentur. Unde ex eius loquendi modo necesse erat turbis indi summam quandam de fortiore illo existimationem. Quam opinionem confirmat et auget addens : zpse vos baptizabit in Spiritu sancto et ignz, ipse animos imbuet Spiritu sancto; uti ego corpora immergo in aquam, ita ille animos perfundet sancto Spiritu, itaque largietur Spiritum sanctum. Sed quis potest propria auctoritate dare Spiritum sanctum, nisi ipse Deus solus? Quare divinitas Messiae declaratur. Communicatio sancti Spiritus vel Spiritus Dei symbolo effusionis vel baptismi iam a prophetis pro tempore messiano clare effertur; vide Is. 43,3. Ez. 11,29; 36,26; 39,29. Ioel 2,28. Zach. 12, 10. Et quae sit eins largitionis vis et Salat significatur ignz. Quae dictio pariter ex prophetis satis explanatur. Deus ipse dicitur ignis consumens (Deut. 4,24), dicitur lavare sordes Jerusalem spiritu ardoris (Is. 1,25; 4,4); Messias appellatur ignis conflans, Messias sedebit conubi de variis quoque acceptionibus egi), Unde satis declaratur animos effusione Spiritus sancti mundari, et in divinam quandam similitudinem transformari. Etsi dicatur daptizabzt, tamen patet communicationem Spiritus quae fit per Christum minime uno baptismo concludi. Messiam fore iudicem quoque et prophetae iam annuntiarunt (Is. 63,3. Mal. 3,2) et Simeon in templo vaticinatus est (2,34). Baptista idem monet simul declarans venturam iram quam in vy. 7 comminatus erat
3:17
v. 17 cudus ventilabrum in manu eius et purgabit aream suam et congregabit triticum in horreum suum, paleas autem comburet agne inexstinguibule ; ef. Matth. 3,12 et vide parabolam Matth. 13,30; mentione ignis inexstinguibilis a parabola transitur ad rem Meconnany Primo declaratur iudicium Iudaeis imminens et abiectio et interitus eorum qui Messiam non susceperint; neque enim est aliud nomen in Iudaeos coarctanda est; nam regnum messianum fore universale et prophetae clare docuerunt et Simeon vaticinatus est (cf. Is. 2,2 seq. 42,6; 49,6 etc.); quare area eius, hereditas, possessio eius sunt gentes et termini terrae (Ps. 2,8). Erit itaque denuo cribratio popul1, similis illi quam exsilio fore Amos olim dixerat (9,9; cf. Comment. in Proph. min.I p. 334). Hisce evangelista specimina quaedam dedit concionum praecursoris quibus quo modo functus sit munere assignato sibi (1,16. 17. 76) adumbrat
3:18
v. 18 muita quidem et alia exhortans evangelizabat populo, et quanta intrepiditate principum quoque et potentium vitia insectatus sit et normam morum defenderit, ostenditur eius denuntiatione incestarum nuptiarum Herodis Antipae (cf. Matth. 14,4);
3:19
v. 19 Herodes autem tetrarcha (cf. v. 1) cum corriperetur ab illo de Herodiade uxore fratris sui et de omnibus malis quae fecit Herodes,
3:20
v. 20 adiecit et hoc super omnia et inclusit Ioannem in carcere ; de illis nuptiis cf. Josephus, Ant. 18,5. 1 et Comment. in Matth. IT p. 3 seq. ; quod aliqui codices addunt Phelippi fratris etus glossa est ex Matth. 14,3 graece et Marc. 6,17 transumpta; erat Philippus filius Herodis ex Mariamne, filia Simonis pontificis. Eiusmodi nuptiae lege prohibebantur (Lev. 18,16 et 20,21) et multo maius scelus erat uxorem vivo fratre ad adulterium et incestum pellicere. Mores eius Lucas ulterius delineat addens de omnibus malis etc.; Jesus‘ eum vulpem appellat (13,32); moribus enim non erat absimilis Herodi patri.
3:21
fst ( 3,21. “Eyéveto 08 retur omnis populus, et Iesu baptizato Tycod tod “EAuCeo to¥ Vlwecly tod Mad- Oat to Acvet, 30. tod Lupeddv tod “loddx he Iwojo to¥ “Twvden tod EAtaxelu, Medex tod Mew tod ~ Matrall& 32 Nadau. tod Aaverd, tov. “leosat tod >) \ “a Tw6rA Dare civ, 33. tod "Aduclv tod "Apvel tod °Egotoy tov’ Boos tov Naac-= to0 Daotc tod “lovda, 34. tod "Iaxm6 tod > X a 3 = Isadx tod "AGoadu tod Odox tod Naydo, 35:> tod. Leoody. to¥ “Payad Darex *Apoaksd to¥ Law tod Nie tod | Aduey, 37. tod Mafovodrn tod "Evy: tod "Iaess tov MaAckend tod Kawky , 38. tod "Evic tod 270 tod “Addu. tod Ocod.
3:22
v. 22 et descendit Spiritus sanctus corporalt specie sicut columba in ipsum; uti in apostolos igneis linguis, ita in Christum quoque visibili quadam forma descendit; in illos quidem, ut eos sua virtute imbueret; in Iesum autem ut palam manifestaretur plenitudo gratiae in eo inhabitans (cf. Is. 11,2; 61,1. Col. 2,9). Speciem vero columbae elegit, ut quemadmodum olim columba olivae ramum gestans tamquam pacis nuntia apparuit (Bed. Bon. Theoph.), ita per Iesum mundo reconciliationem pacemque tribui significaretur (ef. ad Matth. 3,16). Species columbae in eum descendit modo visibili, ne cui dubium esse posset ad quem vox illa dirigeretur; ef vor de coelo facta est : tues filius meus dilectus & eyangz4¢ , id quod cum emphasi additur, ut iste filius ab aliis filiis quos Scriptura vocat secernatur et modo quodam eminentiore atque adeo plane singulari filius declaretur ; id quod maxime significatur si adverteris apud LXX hebr. tn" wnicus, unigenilus saepius exprimi voce ayanqrds (Gen. 22,2. 12. 16. ler. 6,26. Am. 8,10. Zach. 12,10. Prov. 4,3), quae vocis notio etiam apud profa~ nos reperitur!; im te complacut mihi, qua voce is pariter designatur qui iam ab Jsaia 42,1 praedictus erat tamquam eadem salutatione a Deo compellatus. Et cum Deus Pater in hoc uno sibi quam maxime complaceat qui modo spopondit se pro expiatione hominum mortem subiturum , etiam consequitur eos demum gratos acceptosque Deo fore qui Christum induerint, qui conformes fuerint imagini eius (cf. Rom. 8,29; 13,14. Gal. 3,27. Col. 3,10). In iis quae ad Iesu baptismum facta sunt, sancti baptismatis vim, ut S. Cyr. ait, cognoscere possumus; sordes peccatorum abluuntur, reconciliatio et pax cum Deo datur, Spiritus sancti gratia et ipse Spiritus sanctus tribuitur, homo declaratur et fit filius Dei et ut'talis heres coeli. Haec symbolis et verbis in Iesu baptismo exhibentur. sesh } Ea manifestatione coelesti publicum Iesu munus inauguratur et Iesus palam declaratur is per quem coeli aperiuntur generi humano reconciliatione facta et adoptione filiorum communicata. Uti evangelista aliquam temporis determinationem in antecedentibus adiecit ad narrationem eventuum (1,5. 26. 39.59; 2,1. 24. 22. 42; 3,1-2), ita hoc quoque loco non omittit notare, quando Christus munus salutiferum docendi et patrandi miracula auspicatus sit
3:23
v. 23 appellatus filius Ioseph). dus erit ea Patri commendasse quae baptismo suscepto significare vo-_ luit. Eo autem Iesus declarat se personam induere peccatorum et in se suscipere peccata aliorum et ipsa immersione profitetur se velle mortem subire ad peccata expianda (vide ad Matth. 3,15). Suo quoque baptismo aquam quasi mundavit et consecravit, « ut abluta per carnem Christi quae peccatum non cognovit baptismatis ius haberet » (S. Ambr.), « ut tactu suae mundissimae carnis vim regenerativam conferret aquis, sicut in quolibet tactu suo aliquid operatus est divinum; tetigit leprosum et sanatus est » etc. (A/b.), quae ratio frequenter affertur a Patribus (cf. Zod. in h. 1. annot. 45, ubi aliae quoque causae recensentur). Bene autem notat S. Amdr. evangelistam sumpto compendio intelligendum magis quod a Ioanne Dominus baptizatus sit quam expressum reliquisse. Sed quo profundius Iesus se humiliat, eo gloriosius exaltatur; subditur enim clarificatio in exhibitione testimonil, ut ait S. Bon., quemadmodum fieri advertimus in humilitate nativitatis, oblationis in templo. Dum itaque Christus orat opus suum suosque Patri commendans apertum est coelum, splendor quidam in regione superiore apparuit, quasi coelorum apertura, ut et columbam et vocem coelitus mitti omnibus manifestaretur ; v. 23 ef ipse Iesus erat incipiens quast annorum triginta, ipse scil. cui divina illa testificatio designatum aggrederetur quasi vel circiter annos natus triginta. Esse zoyousves explicandum de initio muneris messianipublice obeundi, patet, uti iam Tol. Ipr. aliique monent, ex modo quo Lucas loquitur Act. 1,1. 22 et 10,37, et longe pleriqueita quoque exponunt ; Oreg. hom. 28 : quando enim baptizatus est... tune dicitur incepisse ; item Hippolytus, in Proverbia cap. 30 : perfectum hominem in mundo renovans prodigia edidit zo2¢y.eveg a loannis baptismate, uti evangelium testatur, et affertur locus noster; cf. Maz, nova bibil. Patrum t. 7 p. 2 p. 74; item Eusebius ad Stephanum qu. 1,1; M. 22,881; Bed. Euth. apyouevos THis Gig TOV Aadyv avadelEews , TIS avepAc MOAITElas Fron Toy onusluy nal THs St- Sacnatas, Bon. Alb. Tol. Ipr. lans. Lap. Sa, Menochius, Tirinus, Calm. Schegg, Reischl, Bisp. Patritius diss. 47 cap. 2 n. 23, Schanz, F al. Keal, Weiss, Sp.; eademque acceptio etiam exprimitur in Chronic. pasch. rum 30 fuisse seribitur; et 9, 28 quidem age! jyZoa dur dicitur tempus quod sex diebus Matth. 17,1 et Marc. 9,1 continetur. Quare fieri potest ut Iesum nondum attigisse annum tricesimum significetur. Cur ea aetate voluerit Iesus incipere magisterium , explicant ex eo quia haec sit aetas virilis perfectissima, ad quaevis opera viro digna apta, nullum relinquens illi calumniae locum, quae adolescentiam facile contemnat (Luc.). Praeterea monent Josephum anno tricesimo praeesse 468 SLING: Sb geas . | Aegypto coepisse (Gen. 441,46); Davidem annos 30 natum coepisse reenare (2 Reg. 5,4), et eodem anno tricesimo Ezechielem vidisse coelos apertos (Ez. 1,12), etiam a triginta annis esse recensitos filios Merari (Num. 4,30) et numeratos filios Levi tempore Davidis (4 Par. 23,3; ef. Orig. Tol. Luc.), Etiam apud Graecos haec aetas reputatur axp.y vitae (cf. Xenophon, Memorab. 1; Dion halic. hist. 4,4; Wieseler, Beitraege p: 465, 23Far), Alio modo Wieseler 1. c. p. 165 concipit épyeuevoc, scil. initio, primo tempore post baptismum Iesus erat circiter annos 30 natus, ita ut tacite intelligendum sit, postremo cum crucifigeretur illam aetatem iam excesserat. Dubito an haec explicatio invenerit laudatorem. Alii saepius referunt verbum ad ipsam aetatem : incipiebat esse annorum 30 circiter; ita certe Epiphanius qui duobus in locis textum ita exhibet zy dpyduevoc eivar eréiv cptax. (haer. 54,10. 16; M. 44,908. 920), dum alio loco illud <ive: omittit (haer. 69,22; M. 42,237). Immerito aliqui, uti Wieseler, etiam HLusebio, hist. eccl. 1,40 eam attribuunt sententiam, cum tamen eo loco textus verba solum recitet et ad Stephanum qu. 4,1 alteram explicationem prodat : mortalis aetatis tricesimum annum agens sistit se ad loannis baptisma atque hinc facit initium déneépyetat magisterii sui ac prodigiorum (J. 22,881). Sed cipiebat esse), Vatablus (ingrediebatur tricesimum annum), Stephanus (annum fere 30 ingrediebatur), Grotius (erat quasi incipiens esse), quibus jam praeivit Jrenaeus vel eius interpres latinus : Iesus autem erat quasi incipiens triginta annorum, i. e. qui inciperet esse tamquam triginta annorum, qui nondum triginta annos impleverat (adv. haer. 2,22. 5)'. Et ‘ recentiore tempore verba explicuit Riess : fere incepit esse annorum 30, referens wcet ad apyouevog, id quod vocis collocatione minime commendatur (cf. Geburtsjahr Christi p. 81). advenisse anno tricesimo nondum inito, sed fere » (diss. 47 cap. 1 n. 3). Cum itaque’sensus sit Ilesum fuisse annorum 30 plus vel minus, ex hoc loco argumentum ad tempus nativitatis accurate eruendum haberi nequit. Accedit quod nescimus quando Christus venerit ad baptismum, utrum scil. mox postquam Joannis inceperit praedicare an longiore temporis spatio, interposito. Nescio possitne ex 1,26 in mense autem sexto colligi, Iesum etiam mense sexto post loannem munus suum inchoasse. ° Recensetur genealogia Moysis Ex. 6,16 seq. tum cum publico munere legati Dei ad pharaonem fungi incipit; similiter Lucas hoc loco quo Tesus coelesti testimonio demonstratus iamiam munus suum aggreditur eius inserit genealogiam, ut putabatur filius Ioseph qui fuit Heli wy vids, O¢ évoulCeto, “Iwohe rod “Hac, ut scil. a ludaeis, mysteril ignaris putabatur; « et primum omnium neminem movere debet quod ita scriptum est : qui putabatur esse filius loseph; bene enim putabatur quia natura non erat; sed ideo putabatur quia eum Maria quae loseph viro suo erat eee generaverat; sic enim habes : nonne hic est filius loseph fabri » (Matth. 13,55; S. Ambr.)? aw sddxer cote “Toudatore (Euth.); ilud o¢ évouttero quasi per parenthesin inseritur, ne illud y vide ‘Iwofo perperam intelligatur. Ioseph autem filius Heli, +00 scil, viod; « ubi autem de Ioseph fecit mentionem ascendit et ad patrem loseph, dein etiam ad avum eius et ad proavum et abavum et ita consequenter regrediens ascendit usque ad Adam » (Euih.). Notum est -graece omitti solere nomen filii vel filiae et solum poni articulum sequente genetivo; ita legitur apud Herodotum 7,204 : Acwviane 6 ° Ava- Eavdorséw tod Agovteg 70d ete.; unde elucet Lucam genealogiam ex usu graeco conscripsisse et 700 “Hel non in unam confluere dictionem ex articulo et substantivo conflatam , sed od poni loco substantivi et “Hi<! esse genetivum ab illo articulo rectum, uti veteres versiones rite exprimunt : loseph qui fuit Heli, vel loseph ath Heli (vide lect. var.); similiter syr : existimabatur filius Ioseph filii Heli etc. undevicices tod. Proinde hac proprietate Avianca excluditur sententia eorum qui ex textu hoc eruere volunt Iesum dici filium Heli i. e. nepotem, indeque ostendere recenseri genealogiam b. Virginis. Plane enim arbitrarium est ov vios adiungere ad 70d ‘Hel proinde primum hoc tod omnino aliter accipere quam in sequenti enumeratione. Porro arbitrarium est tod ‘Hef explicare ita ut avus designetur, cum eadem dictio in subsequentibus constanter patrem enuntiet. Insuper dici debet modum loquendi esse plus quam mirum, si Lucas diceret : Iesum existimatum quidem fuisse filium Ioseph, at revera fuisse filium Heli. Unde ea explicatio quam proponunt Suares 3 p. qu. 27 disp. 2s. 3n. 9; Calm. Reischl, Wieseler, Keil aliique quos Keil enumerat (ad Matth. 1,17) nequit sustineri. Pariter,excluditur explicatio altera, quae iam reperitur apud auctorem quaestionum veteris et novi testamenti (qu. 56; M. 35,2253), quamque Lightfoot (ad Luc. 3,23) Bengel aliique quos enumerat Wolfius (curae criticae in Luc. 1. c.), Riggenbach (Studien und Kritiken 1845 p. 585), Weiss proponunt, Iesum dici filium Ioseph, filium Heli, filium reliquorum omnium, ita ut tod semper referendum sit ad vids. Simile quid etiam iam cerni videtur apud Epiphanium (haer. 51,11; M. 41,908), cum dicat Iesum dici in hac genealogia filium Dei. Neque admitti potest Ioseph dici filium Heli eo quod gener eius fuerit, ita ut Heli pater significetur esse b. Virginis et Ioseph ratione uxoris appelletur filius Heli et genealogia recenseatur Mariae, quam sententiam propugnant Ians. Cord. Luc. Caim. quoque (simul cum priore) Bisp. Fil. Cum enim evangelista nullibi indicet patrem Mariae fuisse Heli, nemini-eius rei in mentem venire poterat; neque eo in contextu tod “Hdet ullo modo accipi potest nova illa et alias inaudita significatione. Negant _ quoque recentiores patrem b. Virginis apud talmudistas unquam vocari Eli. Recensetur itaque genealogia Ioseph et Ioseph dicitur filius Heli. Etiam Matth. 1,16 proponitur genealogia Ioseph et ibi pater Ioseph _ vocatur Iacob et exceptis Salathiel et Zorobabel usque ad David regem alii maiores ac progenitores enumerantur. Ad utriusque genealogiae diversitatem commode explicandam praesto est documentum antiquum Iulii Africani qui illud ab ipsis Iesu cognatis traditum esse affirmat. Fuerunt scil. Heli et Iacob fratres uterini (ab eadem matre), ita ut Heli per patrem descenderet a Nathan, filio David, lacob autem a Salomone. Heli mortuus est uxore sine liberis relicta;ex lege leviratus eam duxit frater . eius Jacob, ut fratri suo secundum eee (quam eo tempore valuisse deneneantna Matth. 22,23 seq.) semen excitaret. Ex qua unione procreatus est loseph, qui proinde habet patrem legalem Heli, naturalem lacob. Matthaeus itaque genealogiam recenset secundum patrem naturalem Iacob ex stirpe salomonica, Lucas secundum patrem legalem ex progenie Nathan. Haec exponit Iulius Africanus in epistola ad Aristidem quam vide apud Mai, nova bibl. Patrum IV p. 231 ; pariter M. 10,53; r LUG 324-38. ; 171 apud Eusebvum, hist. ecel. 1,7; M. 20,89 (et quaestionesad Stephanum 42; M, 22,901). Ipse autem Africanus vocatur ab Eusebio gyvho iS+y10- NAl TOS aNd THe CEwhev matdelac Spumucvots exroavas qui multos egregios libros conscripserit. Vide quoque Cornely, Introd. IU p- 198 seq. Legitur in codicibus et versionibus, uti habetur in vulg. Heli qui fut Matthat qui fuit Levi qui fuit Meichi, at Iulius Africanus |. c. etiam Eusebius (qu. ad Steph. 4,2), Ambr. (lib. 3 n. 15 expos. in Luc.) et Gregorius naz. (carmen de Chr. genealogia 18,26; M. 37,481) scribunt Heli fuisse filium Melchi. Unde hi videntur hs nomina intermedia non legisse. Convenit utraque genealogia eo quod Zorobabel filius Salathiel dicitur. Et cum Salathiel a Matthaeo dicatur filius lechoniae, a Luca vero filius Neri, ad eandem leviratus legem discrepantia haec erit exigenda; « mirum enim nemini videbitur quod in decursu de- -cem saeculorum quae a Davide usque ad Christum defluxerunt in eadem familia haec lex saepius locum suum habuerit » (Cornely 1. c.); ceterum vide quae de Zorobabel filio Salathiel notavi in Comment. Matth. I p. 39. Dein Lucas genealogiam texuit per alium Zorobabelis filium, per Resa, dum apud Matthaeum Abiud nominatur; quare alia nomina apud utrumque leguntur. Eodem modo Lucas seriem ducit per Nathan, fillum David (2 Reg. 5,44. 2 Par. 3,5), dum Matthaeus per Salomonem enumerans reges recenset usque ad exsilium. A Davide usque ad Abraham utraque genealogia eodem texitur modo. Et in Abraham patre ludaeorum sistit Matthaeus qui Iudaeis genere suum conscripsit librum; Lucas autem ulterius ascendit per nomina patriarcharum usque ad primam generis humani originem, ut declaret salutem afferri omnibus, Iesum verum hominem pertinere ad totum genus humanum quod sicut ab uno originem hahet ita ab uno salute donatur. Porro sicut Adam non habet patrem nisi Deum, ita Iesus modo quidem plane sublimiore : tu es filius meus dilectus ; unde Iesus alter est Adam, parens et reparator generis humani, qui ad reparandum damnum ab Adam illatum venit in mundum et qui Adamo iam promissus erat; primus itaque homo de terra terrenus, secundus homo de coelo coelestis (1 Cor. 15,47; cf. Euth. Theoph. Mald. ad Matth. 1,16). Uti generatim apud Semitas, ita apud Iudaeos quoque g eenealogiae sedulo observabantur et custodiebantur. Documento est quoque 2,36. Cum Lucas seriberet, consanguinei Iesu erant superstites et ipse Lucas eum Paulo apostolo in urbe conversatus est cum Jacobo fratre Domini (Act. 21,18). Usque ad finem primi saeculi cognati Jesu in urbe Ierusalem munia gerebant ecclesiastica (cf. Hegesippus apud Eusebium , p. 25). Etiam Josephus testatur se generis sui successionem in medium attulisse prout eam in tabulis publicis descriptam (2y tals enpoctor Sé)co1) invenerit (Vita 1) et quanta cura sacerdotum genealogiae conficiantur et asserventur et ex Aegypto, Babylone aliisque regionibus Hierosolyma transmittantur, idem narrat c. Ap. 1,7. Iam certe concludendum erit non minore cura genus David esse in tabulas relatum. Quare a vero omnino alienum est quod Bleek, Meyer aliique contendunt, ex diversitate genealogiarum constare ne nomen quidem patris tas tunc notum fuisse cum evangelia conscriberentur. E contra iam ex tot nominibus aliunde plane incognitis quae uterque et praeprimis Lucas recenset concludi oportet genealogias esse e tabulis publicis vel privatis depromptas. Dicit quidem S. Hilarius, multos velle generationem quam enumerat Lucas, deputari Mariae (cf. Maz, Nova bibl. P. I p. 477); at ne-_ minem ex iis nominat neque ipse eis assentitur (cf. in Matth. 1; M. 9, 919). Alii quandoque eam acceptionem ab Epiphanio innui affirmant; at id haer. 51,11 (M. 41,908) minime asseritur. Verum, uti Patritius scribit, Patres omnes quotquot de istis genealogiis scripserunt omnesque bibliorum interpretes qui fuere ante saeculum 16 docuerunt utramque genealogiam ad Joseph pertinere; atque illud quoque animadvertendum est, quod etsi Patribus controversia haec de duplici Christi genealogia implexa satis ac difficilis videretur, nec raro manus eos conserere oporteret cum iis haereticis qui ex his genealogiis ar-. gumenta corradebant quibus’ Mariam integra virginitate peperisse negarent, nunquam tamen aliquis eorum hoe sibi effugium quaesiverit, ut diceret Matthaeum quidem Iosephi, Lucam vero Mariae edidisse patremque nominasse atque adeo ab uno Luca, non a Matthaeo, Christi genus enarrari; quo iam lis omnis esset dirempta (diss. 9 cap. 19 n. 4. 18). Et si genealogia ex tabulis publicis vel privatis erat descripta, eo ipso ostenditur esse genealogiam loseph; nam virorum, non mulierum genealogiae texebantur, Neque quidquam momenti tribuendum est quod (in Hieros. Ghagigah, fol. 77,4; Lightfoot ad_ Luc. 3,23) Maria, uti ibidem videtur, dicitur filia Heli .5y. Ex:traditione christiana pater eius vocatur loakim; sed ‘Sy neque cum loakim neque cum Eliakim (n»p*y) ullam habet cognationem. Cur autem merito detur genealogia loseph, vide quae exposui in Comment. Matth. I p. 42; quibus addo quae notavit Patritius - « cum itaque argumenta non atdinyt ex Scripturis simul atque ex Patribus deprompta quibus probemus Mariam losephi agnatam fuisse, eoque agnationis gradu huic propinqguam, ut omnes fere Iosephi maiores Mariae quoque maiores atque adeo Christi ipsius fuerint, camque inde’ appareat veram Christi prosapiam in duabus genealogiis integram ferme contineri, ergo, utut evangelistae illas ad losephum potius quam ad Mariam perduxerint, eas tamen Christi genealogias vere dici Christique genus ex iisdem his nos discere posse et evangelistarum consilio satis per eas factum esse tandem concludemus » (diss, 9 cap. 20 n. 26). Similia habet Didon, Jésus Christ, Appendice C. Ex hisce omnibus simul conficitur nullum esse argumentum eorum qui dicunt eo quod Lucas inserat : ut putabatur filius Ioseph iam aperte significari eum nolle tradere genealogiam Ioseph. Certe si Lucas dicere voluisset Iesum esse nepotem Heli vel si genealogiam Mariae tradere ei propositum fuisset, id clare expressisset pro eo perspicuo dicendi genere quo alias uti solet. Atque revera ad finem usque saeculi 15 ea obtinuit sententia de Iosephi genealogia descripta. Noli mirari, ait S. Ambr., quod loseph origo descripta est; etenim secundum carnem natus usum debuit sequi carnis et qui in saeculum venit saeculi debuit more describi, maximé cum in Joseph origine etiam origo sit -Mariae. Atque S. Bon. apposite monet propter duplicem modum paternitatis secundum naturam et secundum legem (qui apud Iudaeos obtinuit) genealogias Iesu esse descriptas, apud Matthaeum secundum naturam, secundum legem apud Lucam. _ ! (Leben Jesu II p. 155 seq.). Cuius tamen sententiae rationes aliae ab aliis proponuntur. Et S. Bon, quidem sacerdotium Christi describi censet eo quod post baptismum quo nostra regeneratio et adoptio significetur ponatur genealogia eaque usque ad Deum a quo adoptemur ascendat. Ad quam sententiam Alb. quoque accedit, sed insuper addit rationem a Nathan petitam, quem putat Nathan prophetam redarguentem David de peccato et annuntiantem peccati remissionem. Eandem etiam protulerat S. Aug. de cons, ev. 2,4. 42 et qu. 61 ex 83: Lucas qui tamquam ascendentem post ~abolitionem peccatorum sacerdotem Christum insinuat, per Nathan ascendit ad David, quia Nathan propheta missus fuerat cuius correptione David ipsius peccati abolitionem poenitendo impetravit »', idemque sentit S. Thomas |. c. Verum evidens est a Luca non commemorari Nathan prophetam, sed Nathan filium David quem David ex Bethsabee genuit (4 Par. 3,5) qui itaque Davidem de peccato contra Uriam admisso non poterat reprehendere, utpote nondum conceptus. Alii exinde rem deducunt quod Nathan fuerit sacerdos; ita §. Hilarius, Gregorius naz., Ambr., oe Aug. ]. c. et Grimm, qui omnino arguit ex 2 Reg. 8,17-48 et 3 Reg. 4,5. Ultimo hoc loco legitur : Zabud filius Nathan sacerdos amicus regis. Sed esse sermonem de Nathan filio David, nullatenus certum est; alii ex eo loco deducunt Nathan prophetam fuisse ex tribu Levi. Proinde iste locus ineptus est ad sacerdotium Nathan filii David probandum. De altero adverte, 2 Reg. 8,18 utique legi : filii autem David sacerdotes erant, 59353; at LXX iam vertere aiAdoyat, unde habere veterem latinam versionem : principes aulae regiae, interpretem syrum et chald. paraphrasten : magnates; et quod maioris est momenti, in loco parallelo 4 Chron. 18,17 ferri etiam in hebr. : et filii David primi ad manum regis, qua dictione itaque explicatur quid sibi velit sacerdos regis. Nam Sanctius iam monet eo quod sacerdotes regis sentur, ostendi officium a dignitate vere sacerdotali fuisse alienum (vide de Hummelauer, Comment. in libros Samuel p. 333). Et Lucam sacerdotale genus narrare /'ol, Mald. (ad Matth. 1,16) iam satis refutant. Censet S. Aug. quoque 1. c.. Nathan filium David ex tribu sacerdotali cerdotali cognationem duceret. Sed merito notat Zol. non apparere, unde hoc hauserit cum s. Scriptura nihil de ea re tradat. Alias s. doctor: sacer- erat de filiabus Aaron; unde concludit firmissime tenendum esse carnem tuum. 13, Et consummata omni ten- | tt elpntar, Odx exnetpdsetg Kuprov tov Ocdv tatione, diabolus recessit ab illo, usque | gov, 13. Kat cvuvteAdcas mdvta metpacpov ad tempus. 5 Srk60h0¢ antoty km” adtod ayor xatgod. Christus promulgaturus orbi legem novam cunctaque innovaturus secessit per quadraginta dies in desertum, ut inde prodiret ad exsequendum munus suum, quemadmodum Moyses fecerat accepturus et populo traditurus veterem legem (Ex. 24,18 et 34,28), sicut Elias rempublicam innovaturus (3 Reg. 19,8), et ut ostenderet evangelium legi et prophetis consentaneum (Lwc.). Venit Christus ut destrueret eum qui victoria de parente generis humani reportata princeps mundi effectus tyrannide sua homines trahebat in perniciem; quare conveniens erat ut statim ab initio cum eo congressus eum devinceret, qua vincendi ratione omnibus daret spem et exemplum victoriae. Primus Adam e paradiso in desertum, alter e deserto in paradisum regressus est simul omnibus viam pandens et ostendens. Populus Dei peccato in deserto commisso per annos quadraginta ibi versabatur, donec introitus pateret in terram promissam; Christus sua commoratione et victoria viam sternit ad regnum Dei fundandum; y. 1 Jesus autem plenus Spiritu sancto regressus est a lordane ; Christus homo a primo conceptionis momento erat plenus Spiritu sancto; et, ut Orig. monet, si apostoli repleti dicuntur Spiritu sancto, vide ne eos aequales putes Salvatori, sed Jesum et apostolos et alium quemlibet sanctum plenos cognosce secundum mensuram vasculi sui. Si iam peculiari occasione dicitur plenus Spiritu sancto, sensus est istam plenitudinem singulari quoque ratione sese es vel vultu et habitu eius vel verbis, miraculis totoque agendi modo, ita quidem ut quotquot eum idee non potuerint non ees eum coelesti virtute praeditum agere. Quare Lucas dicere vult Iesum ita a loco baptismi recessisse talivultu et haeius humanitate elucebat splendor quidam divinitatis. Dein narrat eiusdem Spiritus ductu Iesum versatum esse in deserto et agebatur a Spiritu ty 7 xvedparr (2,27; eo scil. spiritu imbutus ac perfusus) a deserium éy 7% ehvo, uli ductus est ab eo in desertum, ita ab eo quoque versans in deserto regebatur, ducebatur, v. 2 diebus quadraginta; numerum istum frequentem esse in Scripturis veteres notant eumque esse celebrem multis Dei operibus, quare Christum numerum explevisse mysticum et symbolicum (cf. Comment. Matth. I p. 145). Eum numerum pertinere ad %yz<o longe plerique rite statuunt (cf. Tol. Schegg, Schanz, Fil. Keil, Weiss); aliqui, ut Orig. Euth. (ad Matth. 4,3) Luc. referunt repatéyeves! ad dies 40, ita ut toto illo tempore Christus sit tentatus. Sed perperam. Nam participio praesenti id neutiquam requiritur, cum eo solum enuntietur Iesum esse tentatum dum versaretur in deserto. Id eo quoque confirmatur quod postmodum qua ratione tentatus sit explicite refertur. Lucas itaque, ut bene notat 7o/., prius narrat in genere quae gesta sunt in deserto, postea speciatim et distincte explicat quae in genere dixerat; proin sed quae confuse prius scripserat, postea clarius explicat et edisserit. ; Pp ) bus 40, ut sensus non sit eum per totum illud tempus esse tentatum a nels: Insuper quod Euth. vult Iesum iis diebus tentatum esse per quia imternam iatcoacnem in Christo admittere nefas est (cf. Suarez in 3 p. qu. 44 disp. 29s. 3 n. 8). Illis autem diebus Christus perseverabat in oratione incumbens divinis laudibus, intentus contemplationi et alloquio Dei et opus suum ac nostram salutem Patri commendans (ef. Luc. Suarez |. c. s. 1 n. 5); antea esuriem non sensit; « nam si quis narrat expleto tali tempore aliquid esse factum, plane significat antea non esse factum, ut patet ex similibus locutionibus eiusdem Lucae : postquam consummati sunt dies octo, cap. 2, ef cum complerentur dies pentecostes, Act. 1; adde hance esse communem veterum Patrum et expositorum intelligentiam » (Suarez 1. ¢. s. 2 n. 5); vide ad Matth. 4,2. Esurie infirmitatem humanae naturae subiit et manifestavit; inde diabolus arripit tentandi occasionem. Jesus autem post ieiunium tentari voluit, ut S. Thomas docet (3 p. qu. 41 art. 3), propter exemplum, nos docens oportere per ieiunium nos armari contra diabolum neque nos tutos esse a tentationibus etsi bonis operibus vacemus; v. 3 dixit autem ill diabolus, cam Lucas non explicite dicat, ut Matth. 4,3 et accedens tentator coneludit Weiss in « fonte antiquiore » rem ita esse narratam, ut diabolus non forma visibili ad Iesum accederet, sed sola allocutione interna animum eius tentaret. Sed quam arbitrarie id dicatur, elucet ex ipsa Lucae narratione v. 5.9 ubires externe gestaclarissime significatur; sz filiws Der es, dic lapidi huic quem digito ostendit, vel ut in picturis quandoque exhibetur, quem manu tenens Christo exhibet, hic loquendi modus rem describit magis vivide quam apud Matth. 4,3 (uti lapides isti), ut panis fiat; vault explorare diabolus sitne Iesus revera Filius Dei (ef. S. Cyr. Bed. Bon. Cai.}; unde ei suggerit : sirevera is es qui in baptismo es declaratus, sane minime te decet esuriem pati; utere ergo tua potentia. Iesu igitur persuadere vult, ut proprio marte hoc vitae genus eamque molestiam abrumpat sese subducens ductui Spiritus sancti. Proinde sicut protoparentes ad inobedientiam perduxit et ita opus Dei in illis destruxit, ita idem in Iesu tentat quem esse a Deo singulariter electum ad hominum salutem procurandam post ea quae in baptismo acciderant certe suspicatus est. Immo ex.secunda tentatione satis iam elucet diaessent promissa. Incepit autem satan, ut Luc. ait, inde unde olim vicerat; admovit primum illud gulae telum; y. & e¢ respondit ad illum Iesus : scriptum est quia non in solo pane vivit homo i. e. non solo pane, non solo cibo vita sustentari potest, verum etiam Dei virtute et voluntate. Atque ita declarat nullo pacto opus esse ut a Dei ductu se eximat. Jesus eo modo respondet quo quivis qui a Deo sibi vitae genus esse praescriptum sciebat merito respondere potuit ac debuit. Quare diabolum exploratorem fallit; quod porro additur sed in omni verbo esse inserta. Nam facilius explicatur ea esse adscripta quam ea esse omissa. Insuper alii putant ea consulto esse a Luca praectermissa, cum qua occasione ea dicta essent vix illi scirent quibus ipse scribebat (cf. Schanz); cf. ad Matth. 4,4. | “me Ex oraculis prophetarum Messiae promittebantur gentes et termini terrae tamquam possessio ; verum simul portendebatur eum istud regnum multo labore debere sibi acquirere (Is. 49,4: 50,4-8; 53,2-12. Zach. 43,7). Viam facillimam et omni sudore et molestia carentem proponit diabolus v. 5 et duxtt illum diabolus in montem excelsum et ostendit allt omnia regna orbis terrae in momento temporis, in puncto temporis i. e€. uno eodemque puncto temporis oculis eius exhibuit artificio quodam ac praestigio diabolico omnia regna mundi eorumque pompam, gloriam, luxuriem, obiiciendo aspectui eius vi quasi magica opes eorum et magnificentiam, fastum, adorantium obsequia et similia (/pr.) et haec ei exhibens vy. 6 azt illi : tibi dabo potestatem hanc universam et gloriam wllorum, quia mihi tradita sunt et cut volo do alla, aovhy scil. eoustay, ¢2ay; vero plurima admiscet falsa. Cum qui peccatum facit sit servus diaboli (loan. 8,34. 2 Petr. 2,19) et creatura vanitati sit subiecta (Rom. 8,20) et diabolus, deus huius saeculi et. princeps, excaecet mentes infidelium (2 Cor. 4,4) et gentes ea quae immolant daemoniis immolent (1 Cor. 10,20), vero aliquo sensu diabolus dicere poterat suae tyrannidi subesse maximam orbis terrae partem Deo ita permittente. Sed arrogantius loquitur spiritus superbiae ; a quo tradita sint vel potius sibi per aliquod tempus permissa, prudenter et callide tacet; caz volo do, impudentissime mentitur decipere et fallere desiderans. Iactat in immensum suam potentiam , quo facilius tanta promissione proposita ei persuadeat ut facili adorationis actu omnem illam gloriam sibi acquirat v. 7 fe ergo st adoraveris coram me erunt tua omnia, naox, scil. 2ovela, omne imperium totaque potestas tibi erit. En quam levi negotio ea acquiri posse suadet, quae Deus Messiae non est daturus nisi post labores et mortem ignominia et -cruciatu plenam. « Dicit ergo ad Dominum diabolus : ideo venisti, at adversus me dimices et tollas de imperio meo quos nunc subiectos habeo? nolo contendas, nolo nitaris, ne habeas ullam in certando molestiam; unum est quod precor : procidens adora me et accipe re- = gnum omne quod teneo » (Oreg.). Uti olim in paradiso, promittens egregie mentitur, totus in deceptionem et fraudem intentus. Propositum Domino erat humilitate diabolum vincere , non potentia (Bed. Bon.); ideirco v. 8 et respondens Iesus dixit ult : scriptum est : Dominum Deum tuum adorabis et ili soli sérvies, Deut. 6,13 et 10,20. - Sicut itaque Christus non sua uti voluit potentia ad molestiam famis depellendam, ita opem diaboli ad regnum suum obtinendum repudiat. Simplici autem responsione quam quivis pius Dei cultor daturus esset tentatoris exspectationem fallit. Is enim merito censetur sua promissione arroganti sperasse fore ut vel Iesus » Sl sit filius Dei, fanta improbitate provocatus se esse dominum omnium et adorandum diceret, vel si sit solum homo, allectus magnificis promissis et possidendi do- minandique libidine victus sug gestioni cederet, quemadmodum protoparentes falsa promissione decent sunt; ceterum vide ad Matth. 4,8. Merito plerique referunt hance alteram deniationém ad avaritiam , oa tertiam referunt ad superbiam vel vanam gloriam (cf. S. Cyr. Bed. cat. Cr. Theoph. Bon. Alb. Thom. 3 p. qu. 44 art. 4, Suarez 1. c. disp. 29 s. 4); v. 9 et duxit tllum in Ierusalem, nota Matthaeum Iudaeis scribentem dicere : assumpsit eum Risbolne s in sanctam civitatem 4,5, et statuit eum super pinnam templi; verbis clare exprimitur, uti in y. 5, Iesum se permisisse diabolo transferendum et collocandum in fastigio templi, eo scil. loco, ex quo si per aerem descenderet maximam plebis admirationem excitaret quasi coelitus delapsus in templi atrium et a Deo missus legatus; e¢ dixit illi : st filius Dei es, mitte te hine deorsum, et « quia videbat quod Christus semper per Scripturam se defendebat, ideo Scripturam allegat » (S. Bon.) v. 10 seriptum est enim quod angels suis mandavit (mandabit) de te, ut conservent tev. 11 et guia in manibus tollent te ne forte offendas ad lapidem pedem tuum, Ps. 90,11; « male interpretatur Scripturas diabolus » (Bed.). Declarat enim psalmista piis Dei cultoribus adfore angelorum opem et custodiam in periculis et insidiis inimicorum; verum neutiquam innuit eos iri protectum qui ipsi temere, sine necessitate, immo cum improbitate et vanitate extremum adeant discrimen. Suggerit itaque diabolus illo e fastigio templi descensu viam facillimam qua omunium in se oculos convertat seseque plebi probet nuntium coelitus missum. Proin ea quoque tentatione eum removere ac separare conatur a ductu et voluntate Dei eique persuadere, ut munus sibi commissum proprio marte aggrediatur adeoque exsistat Deo contrarius. Notat ol. forsan diabolum sperasse Christum responsurum id testimonium non esse de se pronuntiatum, ex quo tentatorem deprehensurum fuisse putat eum esse filium Dei. - Sed Christus vero Scripturae testimonio explorationem eludit et exspectationem diaboli fallit v. 12 e¢ respondens Iesus ait illi : dictum est : non tentabis Dominum Deum tuum, Deut. 6,16; Deum tentare est experimentum velle _capere potentiae, boniane: fidelitatis, aut alterius attributi divini, cum quis ex praesumptuosa Oe consdenne a Deo exspectans id mint humana ratione assequi potest, aut expetens id quod est praeter omnem necessitatem, vel cum quis ex incredulitate ~ et diffidentia id agere nolit quod Deus postulat (ef. Luc. Ipr.; vide et humanitatem recognoscens secundum hane suam ad Deum subiectionem profitetur (Swarez). Christus vincens diabolum nobis vincendi modum ostendit et vincendi fiduciam et gratiam largitur. Et cum diabolus i ipsum Christum tentarit quis se tutum ac securum esse sperare poterit? Neque una alterave victoria reportata de inimico nos in tuto collocat; qui enim ad Christum iterum rediit, quomodo non potius nos Eoitiniio infestabit? v. 13 et consummata omni tentatione diabolus recessit ab ilo usque ad tempus i. e. usque ad tempus opportunum. Omnem tentationem dici Theoph. censet quamyis tres solummodo recensitae essent, eo quod omnium tentationum tria sint capita : gula, avaritia, inanis gloria; itemque Jans. Ilud wsgue ad tempus Schegg ita accipit, ut omnistentatio protempore futuro excludatur : usque ad tempus quod consilio Dei statutum esset; putat quippe superata prima tentatione iam alteram non potuisse exsistere. Quae acceptio uti verbis contradicit, ita quantum scio a nullo est adoptata. Omnes quaerunt quale sit illud tempus opportunum quo satan denuo ad Iesum accesserit. Responsio dari videtur ab ipso Domino, dum ante | passionem dicit : venit Zpyeca, princeps mundi huius (Ioan. 14,30) et haec est hora vestra et potestas tenebrarum (Luc. 22,53); cui congruit quod Iudae proditio ad diabolum auctorem refertur : intravit autem satanas in Iudam (22,3. Ioan. 13,2. 27). Quare plerique merito tempus passionis designari existimant (cf. S$. Bon. Alb. Tol. Salmeron tom. 4 tract. 14, Tans. Sylv. Luc. Calm. Bisp. Schanz, Fil. Sp.; vide quae notaviin Comment. Matth. lp. 534). Alii fedseoee insidiis et malitia diabolum Christo eiusque discipulis bellum intulisse et eam non tam tentasse quam aperte oppugnasse malunt intelligere (cf. S. Amébr. Bed. cat. Cr. Euth. Lap. Reaschl). Hac parte evangelista nobis describit ministerium quod Jesus in Galilaea exercuit. Tria distingui possunt tempora. Et primum quidem ab incepto ministerio usque ad electionem apostolorum 4,13-6,11; alterum ab electione usque ad primam missionem eorum 6,12-8,56; tertium ab eorum missione usque ad discessum ex Galilaea 9,1-50. Et primo tempore [esus doctrina et miraculis admirationem populi magnam excitat; at mox sua erga peccatores clementia et misericordia et reiectione traditionum pharisaeorum et scribarum in odium incurrit horum populi ducum. Qui isto odio iam satis superque manifestant se esse ineptos ad regnum Dei. Christus itaque alios duces populo providet; eligit apostolos et prima ponit Ecclesiae suae initia. Ab eo tempore Iesus quidem populum docere pergit; at evangelista ea potissimum effert quae ad apostolorum institutionem spectant, quos Christus ad praedicationem et missionem praeparat. Dein cum sint reduces a missione fidem eorum augere et expolire studet et eos de passione sua edocere incipit. 4,14. Et regressus est Iesus in virtute 4,14, Kat Oaéotpedev 6 “Inoods ev tH ~ Quae immediate post tentationem facta sint a synopticis non tanguntur, verum supplentur, uti S. Aug. (de cons. evang. 2,18. 42) Bed. Gir ttaad Lue, AAA. monent, a S. Ioanne 1,29-4,3; quod Ioannes habet : reliquit Tudaeam et iterum abiit in Galilaecam, idem describit iter, de quo, ut alii (Matth. — 4,12. Marc. 1,14), Lucas mentionem facit ab eo initium capiens narrationis de Iesu vita publica v. 14 ef regressus est Iesus in virtute Spiritus in Galilaeam; indicat evangelista Iesum omnibus in rebus actum esse a Spiritu sancto (Ma/d.) et ita rediisse ut iam non ageret vitam privatam, sed ut promente se atque exserente virtute Spiritus palam magno animo praedicandi evangelii negotium aggrederetur et patraret miracula (Luc.); unde qualis in eo manifestata sit virtus Spiritus, ‘declaratur : ef fama exitt per universam regionem de illo; adeo potenter et efficaciter docebat et doctrinam miraculis confirmabat. Longius temporis spatium comprehendi elucet et ex verbis et ex v. 23; v. 15 ef ipse docebat in synagogis eorum scil. Galilaeorum et magnificabatur ab omnibus, celebrabatur laudibus et in omnium admiratione habebatur. Tali initio laetus promitti. videbatur successus. Verum mox alia rerum facies apparuit. Funestas mutationis causas non tacet evangelista. | Redux itaque in Galilaeam Iesus per aliquod tempus praedicavit a Galilaeis qui testes erant rerum in Jerusalem gestarum magni habitus; ex eo tempore S. Ioannes nobis refert unum miraculum patratum in favorem reguli (loan. 4,46 seq.), dum versaretur in Cana Galilaeae ; plura et splendida alia ab eo esse patrata in Capharnaum sermone Na- -zarethanorum docemur. Evangelistae satis erat ea innuere et nobis colligenda relinquere ex eorum vocibus; v. 16 ef venit Nazareth ubi erat nutritus (2,51. 52) et entravit secundum consuetudinem suam die sabbati in synagogam, morem designari quem a puero servaverit aliqui putant (ef. Lue. Fe. Meyer, God.); sed post v. 15 solum indicatur eum in synagoga sabbati diebus solitum esse docere, et surrextt legere; Act. 15,21 docemur per omne sabbatum aliquid ex lege Moysis esse ‘lectum in synagogis, et hoc loco discimus etiam ex prophetis lectionem esse factam. Quem morem Iudaei quoque posteriores servabant ; sed distributio illa in paraschas et haphtaras tempore Christi nondum exsistebat; postea est introducta et sua cuique sabbato portio assignata (cf. Cornely, Introd. I p. 35 2 edit.). Sacris litteris is honor habetur, ut. stet qui eas publice populo legit; v. 17 e¢ traditus est illi liber Isatae prophetae, et ut revolvit brum, graece in melioribus codd. dvolzac, sed revolvit avanrseas rem bene exprimit; erant enim Hebraeorum libri volumina, 1. e. non erant distinctis foliis compacti, ut sunt libri nostri, sed uno terete baculo circumvoluti et complicati in cylindri formam (cf. 7522); explicuit itaque Iesus et expandit membranam (cf. Luc. Calm.); vel ut Lamy rem declarat : volumina quorum usus erat in synagogis illigabantur duobus teretibus baculis, qui capulos habebant quos manu tenens qui legebat poterat convolvere vel evolvere librum, prout opus erat. Iesus wvenit locum, « et hoc providentiae Dei fuit » (Orig. Euth. Mald. Lue. Fil.); voluit scil. Christus ut statim sibi occurreret, wb7 seriptum erat v. 18 Spiritus Domini super me, Is. 61,1, ex Is. 11,2 et 42,1 iam apertum est haec Isaiam non dicere de se (ut perperam censet Schegq), sed Messiam ipsum inducere loquentem ; propter quod unxut me; ex hebraeo non Spiritus, sed lahve intelligitur eum unxisse ; unctione fiebat consecratio ad certa quaedam munera theocratica ; oleo ungebantur reges, sacerdotes; prophetae spiritu Dei ungebantur. Potiore iure Messias, rex et sacerdos et prophetarum summus, qui in humanitate sua et divinitate unctus est et plenitudine gratiae, Unctus vocatur. Et postquam in baptismo forma visibili Spiritus Dei in eum descendit, quid magis erat consentaneum quam ut se palam profiteretur unctum a Spiritu Domini? Et ad quid sit missus, consecratus, virtute divina imbutus, declaratur : evangelizare pauperibus misit me, lahve scil, ex hebraeo ("77 plerumque gen. femin. est; verbum maseul. formam habet); pauperes an2y sunt miseri, afflicti, qui tamen patientia et mansuetudine afflictiones ferunt (vide ad Matth. 5,4 beati mites, et ad Is. 61,1); iis itaque qui miseriis pressi salutem exoptant bonus ac salutaris nuntius est deferendus, nam esurientes implevit bonis, sanare contritos corde (vide lect. var.), hebr. fractos corde i. e.. tristes, deiectos, pusillanimes; proinde missus est, ut animos aegros erigat et confortet; v. 19 praedicare captivis remissionem et caecis visum LXX Is. 61,1; lis qui captivitate peccati et erroris tenentur afferet liberationem; oculos rebus coelestibus occlusos aperiet; per Messiam enim sedentibus in umbra mortis lux orietur (Is. 9,2; cf. 42,7; 49,6; 51,14); diméttere confractos in remissionem, quae verba ex 58,6 petita hic inserta esse videntur a Luca propter rei affinitatem ; 2y geéo2t, ita scil. ut qui miseri erant iam collocentur in felicitate et libertate a pressura: Voluit evangelista, ut 7o/. ait, rem et sensum explicatius et perfectius distinguere, vel ea tamquam explicationem proximorum verborum addere (Mald.), praedicare annum Domini acceptum i. e. annum beneplaciti, benevolentiae Domini (hebr.), allusio.esse videtur ad annum iubilaei Lev. 25,10. Ez. 46,17; qui annus ‘optime consideratur tamquam typus temporis messiani et eius temporis beneficiorum. Eo quippe anno servi in libertatem asserti aerumnosam et ignobilem conditionem mutabant et qui possessiones suas amiserant pressi aere alieno eas recuperabant; ita tempore messiano -captivi a Christo vindice liberantur a peccatis et erroribus et in statum eratiae et in ius hereditatis coelestis a quo genus humanum exciderat restituuntur. Eo quoque sensu intellige quod in it. vulg. additur e¢ diem retributionis, quod membrum graece non habetur, idque bene, cum ex hebr. dies wlééonts Dei designetur. Quamvis enim Christus veniat non solum in resurrectionem, sed etiam futurus sit in ruimam multorum, tamen hoc loco optime intelligitur cur ea solum legerit ex propheta, quae proxime ad eius missionem spectant et consolationem afferant; non enim misit Deus Filium suum in mundum, ut iudicet mundum, sed ut salvetur mundus per ipsum (Ioan. 3,17)- Ceterum uberiorem loci Isaiae explicationem vide in Comment. Is. II. p. 432 seq. | | Ex eo quod propheta et Iesus praelegens prophetam annuntiat annum Domini acceptum enata est apud aliquos veteres sententia Christum revera per unum solum annum praedicasse. Ita scribit Clemens alexandrinus : et quod anno solo oporteret eum praedicare hoc quoque sic scriptum est : annum acceptabilem Domino praedicare misit me; hoc et propheta dixit et evangelium (Strom. 1; M. 8,885). Pariter eandem sententiam proferunt ad eundem textum provocantes Philastrius et Gaudentius. Et ille quidem sic habet :,« propheta Isaias de anno illo dixit Salvatoris Domini, in quo docuit usque ad passionem et ascensionem in coelum, sicut et bea- M. 12,1220); Gaudentius autem suam aperit sententiam duplici fultus ratione et quod agnus paschalis debuit esse anniculus (et Christus erat anniculus, quia post baptismum usque ad passionem unius anni tempus impletur) et quod annum Domini placabilem praedicavit (tract. 3; M. 20,866). Alii quoque ex veteribus solummodo unum annum vitae Domini publicae assignant, uti fit in Clementis homilia 17,19 (M. 2,401) apud Lactantium, Instit. div. 4,10 (M. 6,474) et Hilarianum (de die paschae n. 15; M. 13,1114), sed non liquet utrum eam opinionem sibi statuerint ex hoc textu an ex modo narrandi synopticorum. Unum-quoque annum affirmare videntur Tertullianus (c. Iud. 8), Origenes (de prince. 4,5; M.. 11,349), Augustinus (de Civ. D. 18,54; M. 41,619); at aliis in locis aliam quoque sententiam eamque meliorem statuunt (cf. Patritius diss. 19 p. 189. 198. 216). Ex recentioribus Wieseler censet Christum in Nazareth ea legisse sabbato post festum purim, die 26 mensis martii anni 782 u. c. atque revera usque ad eius mortem (die 7 aprilis 783) annum fluxisse integrum (Synopse p. 272). Verum tota illa eius computatio fallax est et quando Iesus patriam suam visitaverit, accurate nequit determinari. Multo minus ex anno placabili quidquam colligi potest; nam ut dicitur Teste Philone quicumque doctus erat et peritus, poterat in synagoga facta lectione explanationem vel exhortationem reliquis proponere (cf. de septenario 6; Schiirer 1. c. Il p. 376). Tesum cuius fama iam plurimum invaluerat finita lectione verba esse facturum Nazarethani certe exspectabant; alias enim Paulum quoque et Barnabam peregre habendum legimus (Act. 13,45). Iesus itaque
3:1
Luc seul indique une date qui s'applique aw début de la prédication de Jean. C'est de la même manière qu'il a indiqué le temps de la conception: de Jean, encore que vaguement (τ, 5), non de celle de Jésus. Mais on peut croire que dans les deux cas Jésus est visé, et que san baptême n'a pas tardé beaucoup. ὃ Le mot de ἡγεμονία, si vague qu'il soit, marque l'autorité impériale. Tibère succéda à Auguste, mort le 19 août, 767 de Rome, 14. ap. J.-C. La quinzième année naturelle va done du 19 août 28 au 18 août 29 ap. J.-C., 781-782 de Rome. Jésus étant né au plus tard en 749 de Rome, puisqu'il est né avant la mort d'Hérode, mort au printemps de 750, avait denc environ trente-deux ans 1005 de son baptème, ce que Luc exprime plus loin (m1, 23) par « environ trente ans ». Quant à la durée de son ministère, Lue ne la précise pas, et rien ne prouve qu'en indiquant la date du ministère du Baptiste il ait entendu indiquer le temps de la mort de Jésus à la fin de cette mème année. La date de l'an 28 à 29 ayant paru trop tardive, à cause du chiffre de trente ans de Luc (ru, 23), plusieurs commentateurs (encore Knab.} prenucat pour point de départ du règne de Tibère le moment où il fut associé au geuvernement par Auguste, à la fin de 764 ou au commencement de 765 de Rome (14 ou 42), μέ provincias cum Augusto communiter administraret, simulque censum ageret (Suer. Tib. XXI); ut aequum ei jus in omnibus provineiis emercitibusque esset (Vez. Parerc. 15, 124); filius, collega imperii, consors tribuniciae potestatis adsumitur, omnisque per exercitus ostentatur (Tac. Ann. τ, 8). Mais les mêmes auteurs montrent Tibère ne commencant vraiment à se croire empereur et à régner qu'après la mort d'Auguste; Agrippa est mis à mort, primum facinus novi principatus (Tac. Ann. τ, 6); les sénateurs composent leur visage ne laeti excessu principis, neu tristiores primordio (ὃ. E 7); tandem quasi coactus… recepit imperium (Suer. Tib. 2%); una tamen veluti luctatio civitatis fuit, pugnantis cum Caesare senatus populique romani, ut stationt paternae succederet (ΝΈ14... Parerc. n, 191). D'ailleurs les médailles prouvent que Tibère ne prit le titre: d'Auguste qu'après ce moment (Ti. Caesar Augustus (rarement dans les provinces), np. Caesar Augustus). Or ce litre était le seul qui marquât le prineipat, et durañt les deux premiers siècles il n'y eut jamais qu'un Auguste. La corégence ne signifiait pas le partage du titre souverain; le collega imperi 5 était seulement l'associé à la puissance proconsulaire (sur le caractère de ces corégences, cf. Momusen, Le droit public romain, trad. franc. v, p. 459 ss.). Mais, la date de la corégence écartée, il reste un doute sur la manière de calculer les anntes de règne. Les années romaines demeurèrent réglées par le nom des consuls; les années impériales l'élaient ordinairement par les puissances tribunitiennes; quand on parlait des années de règne, on partait en Occident du 1°" janvier, « sauf le point incertain de savoir si l’année incomplète où les fonctions ont commencé est tout entière laissée de côté ou, au contraire, comptée comme complète » (Mommsen, ἰ. ἰ. p. 67); c'est ainsi que Tacite (Ann. iv, 1), en donnant l’année 23 comme la 9° de Tibère, semble commencer le règne au 1% janv. 45, si vraiment il compte à la manière romaine. Le P. Pfättisch (Die Dauer der Lehrtätigkeit Jesu…. p. 172), suppose au contraire avec vraisemblance que Luc ἃ commencé une deuxième année de Tibère au 4° janv. 15, et il semble que ce fut la pratique de Josèphe pour Néron (ef. ΖΕΙΤΙΑΝ, The Jewish Quart. Rev. 1919, p. 73). On peut obtenir le même résultat et même gagner trois mois, en s'appuyant sur la théorie de Mommsen que, en Orient et spécialement en Syrie, on comptait probablement « comme première année de règne le temps qui s'étendait de l'arrivée au pouvoir jusqu’au 1°" octobre suivant » (4. L. p. 68). C'est ainsi que Galba, qui régna du 9 juin 68 au 45 janv. 69 put avoir des monnaies de l'an I et de l'an IT (Ecer, 1v, 418). Si Luc a compté de cette manière, — et c'était probablement celle de son pays, — la deuxième année de Tihère a commencé le 1# octobre 14, et la quinzième le 4er octobre 27. Si Jean a dès lors baptisé, et si Jésus ἃ été bapiisé en hiver ou du moins avant Pâque de l’an 28, on peut fixer sa mort en l'an 30 et donner ‘toute la latitude nécessaire à la chronologie de l'évangile de 8. Jean. La Pâque de Jean (ni, 20), la première, est vraisemblablement datée de l’an 28, (Scnürer… 1, 370; ῬΕΑΕΤΤΙΒΟΗ, ἰ. ἐ. 11 55.). ἡγεμονεύοντος qui choque un peu pour un procurateur après que ἡγεμονίας ἃ élé dit de l'empereur, a été remplacé dans D par ex:roomevovros; les verss. n'avaient pas à se gêner, aussi la γώ. a employé deux mots, imperii et procurante. Sur Pontius Pilatus, cf. Mc. xv, 4 (Com.); il fut procurateur de l’an 26 à l'an 36 ap. J.-C. Ici la Judée est prise dans un sens relativement restreint, comprenant N l'ancien domaine d'Archélaüs, la Judée avec l’Idumée et la Samarie, ayant Césarée au bord de la mer pour capitale. — Le nom de tétrarchie ἃ d’abord été donné à la Thessalie, divisée en quatre régions (ScaürEr... 1, 423 ἢ. 12). Chacune avait son ἄρχων, qui était naturellement un tétrarque, ou chef d'un quart. Le nom paraît en Galatie, où chacune des trois grandes tribus était gouvernée par quatre tétrarques (Srnauon XI, v, 4). Plus tard le nom perdit ce sens spécial, et fut donné aux pelits potentats qui ne pouvaient prétendre au titre royal. Il n'y a aucune raison de penser que Euc ait songé au sens primitif en comptant Ponce Pilate pour le quatrième, puisque le mot était d’un usage fréquent, sans aucun rapport avec le chiffre quatre : PLuT. An£. 36 πολλοῖς ἐχαρίζετο τετραρχίας nat βασιλείας ἐθνῶν μεγάλων. Tac. Ann. xv, 25 : scribitur tetrarchis ac regibus praefectisque et procuratoribus… H'rode Antipas, fils d'Hérode le Grand et de Malthakë {4 av. — 39 ap. J.-C.) se perdit pour avoir ambitionné le titre de roi. En le nommant tétrarque, Luc montre plus de souci du protocole que Marc (vi, 14); deux inscriptions grecques de Kos (Corp. insc. graec. 2502), et de Délos (Bullet. de corresp. hell. ru, 365 s.) le nomment Hérode, le tétrarque, fits du roi Hérode, ce qui blessait sans doute sa vanité. Luc l’a mis spécialement en scène (πι, 19; 1x, 7.9; x, 34; xx, 7 ss.), informé peut-être par Jeanne, femme de Chouza, son ministre (vin, 3) ou par Manaen, son frère de Jait (Act. xur, 4). Déposé par Caligula, il fut banni à Lugdunum (Jos. Ant. xvin, 7, 2) ou en Espagne (Bell. τι, 9, 6). Schürer cherche à concilier les textes en proposant Lugdunum Convenærum, S. Bertrand de Comminges, au nord des Pyrénées, où l’on ἃ retrouvé récemment une grande basilique (Comptes rendus de PAc. des 1. et B.-L. 1914, janvier). Mais la conciliation serait fort imparfaite; -Mmieux vaut supposer que Josèphe, mieux informé, s’est corrigé dans les Antiquités. Le folk-ore a retenu la légende de Pilate aux environs de Lyon et en Suisse. Philippe était demi-frère d'Antipas, né d’Hérode le Grand et de Cléopâtre. Sa tétrarchie comprenait d'après Josèphe (Ant. ΧΥ͂ΠΙ, vin, 1 τις 4; XVII, 1v, 6; Bell. I, vr, 3) la Batanée, la Trachonitide, lAuranitide, la Gaulanitide, et la région de Panias. Luc indique la Trachonitide, et ajoute l'Iturée, dont Josèphe ne parle pas. On ἃ donc taxé Luc d'erreur. Certains défenseurs ont prétendu, soit que la Trachonitide équivalait à l'Iturée, erreur d'Eusthe, renouvelée par M. Ramsay, soit qu'on pouvait la chercher dans le Hauran où dans la plaine du Djedour. Mais Schürer a prouvé que le siège propre des Ituréens était lAntiliban, depuis Laodicée du Liban, jusqu'au sud de Chalcis, aujourd’hui Andjar, au sud de Zahlé, et de l'autre côté de la Beqa, ancienne Coelésyrie. Telle est done la région des Ituréens au sens propre οἱ restreint. Mais le nom de pays des Ituréens dut être donné à un pays beaucoup plus étendu vers 16 sud, et groupé ‘en royaume par Ptolémée, fils de Mennas (de 85 à 40 av. J.-C.). C'est ainsi que Strabon, d’après Timagène, disait qu'Aristobule (104-103 av. J.-C.) avait conquis une partie de la race des Ituréens (dans Jos. Ant. XII, xt, 3). Schürer veut même (1, 275) que ce soit la Galilée! Il suffit que ce soit le pays de Panias, qui fut certainement compris dans le royaume ituréen de Ptolémée, puis de Lysanias et de Zénodore, ses successeurs (Ant. XIV, xin, 3 et XV, x, 1), Ce pays de Panias fut donné à Hérode (Ant. XV, x, 3) et passa à Philippe, qui l'affectionna même particulièrement. Luc pouvait donc lui donner dans un sens large le nom d'iturée, quoique les Ituréens aient encore constitué un groupe distinct gouverné de 38 à 49 ap. J.-C. par un certain Soëmes {Dion Cass. Lix, 12; Tac. Ann. χα, 23). C'est la solution de Schürer (1, 427). Er nommant la Trachenitide et l'Iturée, Luc indiquait les points extrêmes de la tétrarchie de Philippe. Ce dernier ne figure pas personnellement dans l'Évangile; c'était un prince très favorable aux idées romaines ou même païennes, au point de construire un temple de Pan et de le représenter sur ses monnaies ; il est le fondateur de Césarée de Philippe (Mc. vur, 27). On a encore plus attaqué Luc à propos de Lysanias. Comme on ne connaissait que Lysanias, roi des Iluréens, mis à mort par Antoine en l'an 34 av. J.-C. (Dion Gass. xLix, 32), on prétendait que Luc avait confondu. Schürer ἃ montré que l'erreur est plutôt le fait de ses critiques. Abila, aujourd'hui Soug wadi Barada est située sur la pente est de l’Antiliban, sur la route et la voie ferrée qui conduit à Damas en venant de Beyrouth. Il est probable que cette région ἃ appartenu au’ grand royaume ituréen, mis eu pièces au temps où nous sommes, et un de ses débris constituait une tétrarchie, nommée précisément de Lysanias en l'an 37 ap. 3.-C., où Galigula la donna à Agrippa Ier. Claude confirma cette donation en 41, A6Aav τὴν Λυσανίου καὶ ὁπόσα ἐν τῷ Αἰϑάνῳ ὄρει (Ant. XIX, v, 4; cf. Bell. 11, κι, ὅς cf. pour la période suivante Ant. XX, vu ,1). Mais on aurait dà se garder de prétendre que l'Abilène, un tout petit pays, tenait son nom, comme tétrarchie, de l’ancien Lysanias, roi de tout le pays des lturéens. D'ailleurs on a trouvé près d'Abila une inscription (Corp. insc. graec. n° 4521 cf. addenda p. 4174) qui constate l'existence d'an tétrarque Lysanias, et qui ne peut être ni antérieure à Tibère, ni postérieure à Caligula; ce Lysanias est bien celui de Luc (Scnümen, 1, 717 ss.). La nouvelle inscription, variante de la première et trouvée près du Ouély Abil (RB. 1912, p. 533 ss.) indique plus clairement qu'on était au temps de deux Augustes, qui ne peuvent avoir élé que Tibère et Livie. Or Livie fut Augusta de la mort d'Auguste à la sienne (29 ap. J.-C.). L'inscription émane de Nymphaios, affranchi de Lysanias, tétrarque. La coïncidence ne saurait être plus heureuse. Nous sommes étonnés que ce principicule ait trouvé place dans un synchronisme qui commence par Tibère; mais Ὦ gouvernait un territoire voisin de celui de Philippe, de la Décapole et de Césarée de Philippe qui ont été visitées par Jésus; c'était comme la limite de son activité du côté du nord, un peu au nord de Sidon (1,6. νι, 17; x, 13 s.). Probablement Le. aura voulu indiquer les chefs des territoires groupés sous la même domination au moment où lui-même écrivait. Or M. Cronin (The Journ. of theot. Gt. 4917, p. 167) a montré que ce groupement, détruit en 66 au moment de la révolte, ne fut jamais reconstitué tel quel. C’est donc un indice que Le. écrivit avant 66.
3:2
ἐπὶ ἀρχιερέως avec l'immense majorité des bons mss. et 5s@h. contre açytpeuwv (it. Vg. go, boh.); les syrr. « sous le grand sacerdoce ». Luc a évité da formule : sous les grands prêtres, car il eût semblé dire qu'il y avait deux grands prêtres, comme deux consuls, Il a donc insinué que Le pouvoir, unique de droit, était partagé en fait. Il eût pu d’ailleurs, sauf l'inconvénient indiqué, [65 nommer tous deux grands prêtres, car les grands prêtres déposés conservaient certainement ce titre. La difficulté est que Luc semble regarder Anne comme le grand prêtre officiellement en fonction, puisqu'il dit ailleurs : Ἄννας ὁ ἀρχιερεὺς nai Καϊάφος καὶ Ἰωάνης χαὶ Ἀλέξανδρος at ὅσοι ἤσαν ἐχ γένους ἀρχιερατιχοῦ (Act. 1v, 6). Mais Mt. xxvi, 3. 57 et Jo. χι, 49 etc. nomment expressément grand prêtre Caïphe ou Kaïaphas, et ils sont d'accord avec Josèphe. D'après celui-ci (Ant. XVIIL, 11, 2; 1v, 5), Ananos, le Annas de Luc, grand prêtre depuis l'an 6 ap. J.-C., avait été déposé en l’an 15 par Valérius Gratus et remplacé successivement par Ismaël fils de Phiabi, par Eléazar fils d'Ananos, par Simon fils de Kamithos, et par Joseph, nommé Kaïaphas, vers l'an 18. Ce dernier, qui élait, d’après Jo. xviu, 43, le beau-fils d’Anne, fut déposé en l'an 36 par Vitellius. Anne, déposé par Valérius Gratus, reprit probablement un grand prestige, surtout à l’arrivée de Pilate, et eut toujours assez de crédit pour que cinq de ses fils arrivassent au souverain pontificat. Josèphe le cite comme le type de l'homme heureux (Ant. XX, 1x, 4). Schürer ἃ noté qu'Ananos le jeune et Jésus, fils de Gamaliel, quoique déposés, étaient à la tète des affaires dans la première période de la guerre. « La charge conférait à celui qui en était investi un character indelebilis qui lui permettait de conserver une grande partie des droits et des devoirs du grand prêtre en fonctions » (Scaüren, 11, 274 citant Anne, plus âgé et beau-père de Caïphe, était certainement le plus en vue; c'est à cause de cette situation de fait que Luc le nomme le premier, mais il s’est abstenu de le mettre en scène lors du jugement de Jésus; on ne peut donc lui reprocher une erreur formelle, mais seulement une expression officiellement inexacte (Schanz), comme celle ἀ ἡγεμονία pour Tibère. Knab. lui-même rejelte les anciennes échappatoires, qu'Anne présidait le sanhédrin, ou était le vicaire de Caïphe, ou qu'ils faisaient les fonctions chacun durant un an, ou que Jean avait commencé à prêcher sous Anne, — ἐγένετο ῥῆμα θεοῦ, est l'événement auquel se réfère le synchronisme chronologique. Le dessein de Dieu que nous connaissons par les premiers chapitres va se manifester, L'expression appartient à l'A. T. sous la forme ΠῚΠῚ 727 ΠῈΣ γίνεσθαι ῥῆμα ou λόγον Κυρίου. Luc ἃ mis θεοῦ montrant une certaine indépendance de la leçon toute faite des LXX, à moins qu'il n'ait eu en vue τὸ ῥῆμα τοῦ Θεοῦ ὁ ἐγένετο ἐπὶ Ἰερεμίου (Jer. 1, 1), avec ἐπὶ au lieu de πρός qui est normal dans VA. T. (Plum.), (Mich. 1, 1; Jon. r, 4 etc.). Jean est nommé ici seulement fils de Zacharie, en harmonie avec ce qui précède. Nous savions qu'il était dans les lieux déserts (1, 80), se fortifiant en esprit pour la mission qui lui était réservée. La parole de Dieu est le signal qui le fait sortir du désert, sans doute la région naturellement stérile qui va de Jérusalem, de Bethléem et d'Hébron à la mer Morte. 3. τὴν a. περίχωρον (T S V) plutôt que om. (H).
3:3
περίχωρος dans Luc a neltement le sens de région (cf. Mc. τ, 28), d'ailleurs ἡ περίχωρος τοῦ Ἰορδάνου est une expression toute faite (cf. Mt. in, δ) empruntée à VA. T. (Gen. xm, 10. 41; II Chr. 1v, 17), où elle rend JT 922. Le mot 753 désigne une plaine arrondie, un cirque, par opposition aux vallées allongées. C’est l'aspect qu'offre la vallée du Jourdain depuis le Qarn Sartabè jusqu'à l'embouchure du Jourdain. La partie nord est beaucoup plus étroite; Jean y ἃ prêché aussi (Jo. ur, 23; ef. ΗΒ. 1895, p. 508 ss.), mais le centre de son action semble avoir été fixé non loin de l'embouchure du Jourdain, où le fleuve traverse un véritable désert de marnes, qu'il coupe de sa ligne dessinée en vert et or par les tamaris. Il sortait probablement de son désert pour prècher la pénitence aux villes luxueuses des environs, à Jéricho surtout, la reine plantureuse assise au milieu des palmiers et des baumiers, puis à Archélaïs, et à Phasaëlis. L'impulsion donnée, les foules vinrent elles-mêmes le trouver. — κηρύσσων βάπτισμα μετανοίας εἰς ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν est lexluellement dans Mc. 1, ἀ, et semble lui avoir été emprunté, tandis que Mt, suit une autre voie. D'ailleurs Luc retrouve ici l’idée énoncée déjà dans le cantique de Zacharie (1, 11). On comprend très bien que Luc n'ait pas reproduit la première partie de la citation attribuée par Mc. à lsaïe el qui est tirée de Malachie; mais il se peut qu'il ne l'ait pas lue dans son texte; d’ailleurs elle reviendra plus loin (Le. vu, 27); ici elle est compensée en donnant plus complètement le texte d'Isaïe.
3:4
ἐν βίδλῳ pour une citation, au lieu de citer seulement l'auteur, se trouve dans Mc. xu1, 26 (ἐν τῇ B6lw) et seulement dans Luc (xx, 42, Act. 1, 20; vit, 421. Luc ἃ pris soin de distinguer le désert où la voix de Dieu ἃ appelé Jean (v. 2) et le cercle du Jourdain où il ἃ prêché (v. 3), tandis que Mc. n'avait parlé que du désert, que Mt. qualifie d’une façon inusitée de désert de Judée. Cependant Voix de celui qui crie dans le désert Préparez le chemin du Seigneur, RS rendez droits ses sentiers. 5 Tout ravin sera comblé ς et toute montagne et colline abaisste; et les chemins sinueux deviendront [une voie] droite, et les raboteux des chemins unis. 6 Et toute chair verra le salut de Dieu. Le. n’a pas hésité à reproduire la citation d'Isaïe. L'expression est d’ailleurs parfaitement exacte (contre Dibelius : Die vorchr. Ueberl. von Johannes dem Tüäufer). Le cercle du Jourdain est arrosé sur ses bords par les eaux qui descendent de la montagne, mais le centre est un vrai désert, οἱ le Jourdain, profondément encaissé entre ses rives, ne lui donne aucune fertilité. La rive occidentale n'est pas moins un désert que celle de l'Orient, nommée désert (MO) par les Hébreux. Luc pense sans doute comme Mc. au Seigneur Messie qui vient, aussi écrit-il comme lui τὰς τρίδους αὐτοῦ au lieu de τοῦ θεοῦ ἡμῶν, La même pensée avait été exprimée directement de Jean dans le cantique de Zacharie f1, 76). Le précurseur n'a pas seulement à préparer les gites; il. doit positivement faire la route, ce qui est encore l'usage en Orient quand on annonce de grands personnages; ainsi la route de la porte de Damas au mont des Oliviers par le nord a été faite avant l'arrivée de l'empereur d'Allemagne en 1898; cf. Jos. Bell. ΠΙ, vi, 2, de Vespasien : ὁδοποιοὶ τά τε σχολιὰ τῆς λεωφόρου χατεὐθύνειν καὶ χθαμαλοῦν τὰ δύσθατα (Plum.).
3:5
εὐθειαν (S V) plutôt que ενθειας (T H).
lsaïe s'était étendu sur ce travail. Les deux premières opérations sont imagées, quoiqu'on puisse citer des exemples de digues traversant les vallées et de collines abaissées; les deux dernières sont précisément celles qu’on vient de citer d’après Josèphe. Si Luc continue seul la citation, c’est sans doute pour aboutir à l'idée importante du v. 6. Cependant il ἃ pu avoir en vue le sens symbolique. Les vallées comblées, ce sont probablement les affamés remplis de biens (1, 52); les montagnes abaissées, ce sont les puissants déposés (1, 52); désormais le Seigneur trouvera des âmes droites, et des chemins aisés pour pénétrer dans les cœurs. La lecon εἰς εὐθείαν, comme dans les LXX, doit être préférée à εἰς εὐθείας, en sous-entendant ὁδὸν, cf. Arr. de exp. Alex. im, 7, ὃ oùx εὐθείαν δὲ ἐπὶ Βαδυλῶνα ἦγεν, Luc ἃ peut-être écrit εἰς ὁδοὺς λείας pour que le contraste soit mieux marqué, au lieu de εἰς πεδία, traduction littérale de l’hébreu par les LXX.
3:6
Luc omet : « et on verra la gloire du Seigneur », qui ne convenait ni pour son sens dans l'A. T., ni pour caractériser le premier avènement de Jésus. Au contraire le dernier mot (v. 6) emprunté aux LXX (héb. et toute chair ensemble la verra [la gloire de lahvé]) répond parfaitement à la prophétie du vieillard Siméon touchant Jésus (11, 30 s.), et à l'idée mise en relief par Luce de l’universalité du salut (Act. xxvu, 98). δ τὰ
3:7
Dans Luc l’admonestation s'adresse à tous; dans Mt. aux Pharisiens et aux Sadducéens; le terme « race de vipères » se retrouve encore chez lui deux fois en parlant des Pharisiens (Mt. xn, 34; xxur, 33). Luc ne parle pas expressément de la confession des péchés (Mt. et Mc.), peut-être pour qu'on ne croie pas qu'elle faisait partie essentielle du rite, et qu'on ne se pose pas l'objection si le: baptême convenait à Jésus. γεννήματα comme Jud. 1, 10; ἔχις (ότι. ἐχιδνή, ne se trouve dans les LXX que Sir. xxux, 30 (héb. {n2); la vipère est le type de l'animal venimeux et cruel, et des hommes qui ont ce caractère, συκοφάντην καὶ πιχρὸν καὶ ἔχιν τὴν φύσιν ἄνθρωπον (θέμ. 799); mais on remarquait aussi sa facilité ἃ s'insinuer sans être vue (Sopx. Ant. 532). Le serpent était pour les Juifs le type de la prudence (Mt. x, 16), et c'est probablement l'idée qui domine iei. Ces méchantes bêtes ont eu l'instinct de se dérober par le baptême au châtiment qui les menace. Jean craint qu'ils n’y voient qu'une mesure prophylactique, acceptée par superstition, mais sans le ferme dessein de se convertir au moral. Une fois baptisés, les Juifs, ayant satisfait à cette nouvelle exigence extérieure de leur Dieu, retrouveront leur confiance dans leur titre de fils d'Abraham, Ils seraient loin du compte (cf. Jer. νη). Ce ‘sont bien là 165 sentiments surtout des Pharisiens, ss ÉVARGILE SELON SAINT LUC; Im, 8-9. : 107 mais ils les avaient inspirés au peuple qui les suivait. La colère à venir était le jugement de Dieu, toujours suspendu sur la tête du peuple quand il était coupable. Si les Pharisiens se targuaient d'observer la Loi, Luc sait, aussi bien que Mt., qu’ils avaient leurs tares morales, comme aussi le peuple entier.
3:8
καρπὸν ποιεῖν (nr, 9; νι, 43; van, 8; x, 9) avec le sing., et ici dans Mt.; si donc Le. met ici le pluriel, c’est qu'il parlera plus loin de différents fruits de pénitence. καρπός au sens figuré (moral) est fréquent dans les LXX (Sir. vi, 19 etc.) et c’est d’ailleurs une figure très naturelle; ἄξιος, comme Act. xxvi, 20, dans le sens de Rom. vit, 48, des actes moraux proportionnés à la pénitence qu'on affecte par un rite extérieur. L'aor. imp. ποιήσατε « faites donc une bonne fois — ἄρξησθε est la seule variante sérieuse avec Mt. dans cette péricope (yevyrματα — βάλλεται), Mt. ἃ δύξητε : « n'ayez pas l'air de penser », « ne vous imaginez pas qu'il suffise de dire » (cf. Sopu. Ant. 762 τοῦτο μὴ δόξῃς ποτέ) qui est très élégant. Le terme de Luc est moins significatif; dans l'évangile il emploie très souvent ἄρχομαι, comme Mc., dans des cas où il paraît équivalent de l'aram. 1, « se mettre à faire quelque chose ». Luc serait donc plus dans la couleur de l'original, araméen ou grec aramaïsant (Moulton, 15); peut-être cependant a-t-il simplifié; cf. Comm. Mt. — ἐν ἑαυτοῖς est omis par 128, latt. (presque tous), vg., syrsin. et cur. sah. Les autorités pour l'omission sont donc de plus en plus nombreuses; l'addition s'expliquerait comme conformation à Mt. Avec l'omission le sens est « dire », tout court; avec ἐν ἑαυτοῖς « penser », qui convient mieux avec δόξητε qu'avec ἄρξησθε, car Luc écrit très souvent « il se mit à dire », 1v, 21; vu, 2% etc. Les Juifs étaient très fiers de descendre d'Abraham, xat ñ ἀγάπη σου ἐπὶ σπέρμα AGpadu (Ps.-Sal. χνπι, 4); de lui datait une ère nouvelle, la deraière du monde, allant de l’Abraham de l’histoire à un Abraham symbolique (IV Esdr. vi, 8). Mais eux-mêmes confessaient que la descendance charnelle n'était pas tout, puisque Dieu était intervenu deux fois miraculeusement, à la naissance d'isaac et à celle de Jacob. Sa toute-puissance pouvait susciter d'autres fils à Abraham, de ces pierres mêmes. L'image n’est sans doute pas venue à Jean d’une réminiscence de Dentalion, mais de l'assonance entre hanim « fils » et abanim « pierres » (Plum.), ou plutôt benoit et abnd en araméen, où encore parce qu'Abraham avañi été comparé par {saie à un roc, d'où Dieu avait détaché les Israélites (18. L1, { s.) comme les pierres d'une carrière,
3:9
Troisième divergence de Luc avec Mt., καί ajouté après δέ, ce qui est bien ‘dans sa manière (Schanz, Plum.); c'est donc lui qui a fait le changement. Les deux présents ἐχχόπτεται οἱ βάλλεται ont le sens du futur; la koëné connaissail cette tournure; néanmoins elle est plus naturelle dans un écrit juif, soit à cause de la certitude du décret divin, qui présente les choses futures comme accomplies, soit comme traduction d’une tournure sémitique. La seconde explication est préférable surtout pour βάλλεται dont l'action est postérieure à celle du premier verbe. ἀξίνη est, dans l'opinion commune, une forte hache de bûcheron, une cognte. Elle est disposée, κεῖται (comme u, 34), contre la racine de l’arbre, mais n’est point encore dans la main du bûcheron. Mais alors pourquoi dire « à la racine »? D’après l’usage palestinien, ce serait plutôt un coin qu'on place à la racine. Quand il est bien posé, il ne reste plus qu'à Faapper avec un lourd marteau. On suppose qu’un arbre peut encore faire de "4 sit, dans ce cas il ne serait pas coupé. Comparant leurs fautes à celles des gentils, les Juifs ne se croyaient guère coupables que d'ignorance; 16 châtiment pour eux ne pouvait être qu'une épreuve destinée à les purifier de taches légères (Ps.-Sal. xvrn, 4 ss.). Jean prend les choses plus à cœur; le jugement menace tous les arbres.
3:10
Les foules paraissent convaincues de la nécessité de faire une véritable pénitence, mais en quoi consistera-t-elle? On comprend mieux maintenant pourquoi Luc n’a pas nommé les Pharisiens; il eùt été difficile de leur supposer une pareille bonne volonté. Après ποιήσωμεν, subj. délibératif, on ἃ ajouté pour la clarté wa σωθωμεν (D 9 37 73 lait (0 8 4) sah cur), qui était inwile; cf. la même tournure Act. 11, 37. . .
3:11
La meilleure pénitence est Ἂ pratique de la εὐ, Ce 1 n'est point une raison pour parler des tendances ébionites de Luc, d'autant qu'il s’agit d'une parole de Jean, écho de la pensée d'Isaïe (cv, 7). Le jeùne (c'est-à-dire la pénitence) qui plaît à Dieu c'est « partager son pain avec l’affamé, héberger les pauvres sans abri; qui se trouve nu, le vètir » ny Condamin). Jean ne dit pas de partager sa tunique, ni de ne posséder qu’une tunique, mais, si l'on en a deux, soit sur soi, soit à sa disposition, d’en donner une à qui n'en ἃ pas. La tunique était le vêtement de dessous, regardé comme indispensable. Avoir deux tuniques, ce n’est pas avoir la tunique de dessous (n3n2) et par-dessus cette autre tunique plus longue, sans manches, qui était un hâbit de luxe (bia), wais avoir en, double ce dont le prochain ne peut se passer. Au sujet de lanourriture, on se conduira d'après le même principe. C'est d’ailleurs encore aujourd’hui une règle en Orient de ne point manger sans offrir à ceux qui sont présents. Malgré l'imminence du jugement, Jean n'exige donc point qu'on se dépouille de ses biens, qu’on change les conditions de sa vie, pourvu qu'on soit pitoyable aux miséreux.
3:12
Il admet même qu'on demeure dans certaines situations qui passaient aux yeux des Juifs trop zélés pour incompatibles avec la justice et la sainteté requises par la Loi. Il ne prétend pas régler toutes les positions, mais montre que la pénitence est compatible avec toutes, à la condition d'y vivre sans commettre d'injustices. En même temps Luc nous fait comprendre l'intensité du mouvement qui atteint même (καῇ ceux qu'on regardait comme désespéris. C'est déjà l’universalité de l'Évangile, du moins au sein d'Israël, car ni les publicains ni les soldats ne figurent comme étrangers. Sur τελῶναι cf. Me. 11, 45. Si les publicains posent la question, ce n'est pas que le précepte de la charité ne les oblige pas; ils se demandent s'ils ne sont pas encore tenus à quitter leur office. Aussi Jean ne répond que pour l'avenir, sans les dispenser pour cela de restituer le bien volé.
3:13
Les taxes étant déterminées, comment les publicains pouvaient-ils percevoir davantage? C’est que, dit le tarif de Palmyre (de 137 ap. J.-C.; Dirr. Or. 629), les larits n'étaient pas assez détaillés, de sorte qu'on percevait trop souvent d’après la coutume (ἐπράσί σετῆο δὲ ἐκ συνηθείας), car il était convenu qu'on devait opérer la perception (τὴν πρᾶξιν ποιεῖσθαι) d’après la loi et la coutume. Pour obvier à ces difficultés, la ville de Palmyre fit graver sur une stèle un tarif plus détaillé, enjoignant aux magistrats d'empêcher de percevoir davantage (raparpäasew). L'introduction grecque du texte de Palmyre est le meilleur commentaire de Luc, surtout quant au sens de πράσσειν (cf. xix, 23), mal rendu par la Vg. faciatis. Outre les prétentions exagérées que les publicains fondaient sur la coutume, il leur était facile de tromper les illettrés, surtout. avec la complicité des pouvoirs publics.
3:14
στρατευόμενοι, selon la rigueur du terme, des soldats qui vont en campagne, ou plus simplement une classe de personnes, des soldats (Chrys. t. VIL,. Ρ. 466 D, cité par Field). Mais quels soldats? Ceux que Ponce-Pilate avait à son service n'étaient que des troupes auxiliaires composées de non-Juifs. Les soldats d'Antipas ne pouvaient guère se présenter dans la plaine du Jourdain, au moins sur la rive droite, parmi la foule qui venait surtout de Jérusalem. 11 est plus vraisemblable que ce sont des postes recrutés pour prêter main forte aux publicains, des douaniers, qui pouvaient être juifs. On s’expliquerait très bien ainsi leur nat ἡμεῖς, « nous aussi », qui participons à ce négoce, et les injonctions de Jean. — διασείω, « intimider », d’où : extorquer de l'argent par intimidation, naturellement sans le porter aux recettes, délit aussi funeste aux fermiers bénéficiaires de l'impôt qu'aux imposés. — συκοφαντέω, agir en sycophanie. L'étym. est toujours douteuse; l'ancienne est la plus vraisemblable; celui qui dénonce des figues, c'est-à-dire qui est toujours prêt à dénoncer (D’après Gran, Revue des études grecq. L. NX, 1907, p. 443-163, « celui qui apparait dans le figuier », pris en flagrant délit}; en tout cas « délation, eseroquerie, et chantage » (Saczio, ad verbum) sont le fait du sycophante. Les douapiers avaient le droit et le devoir de dénoncer la fraude, mais non de s’entendre pour dénoncer faussement et « faire chanter. »; c’est bien un erime de publieain; cf. χιχ, 8. Les deux abus signalés ici étaient précisément reprochés aux publicains en Égypte, et un certain Dioscourides, haut fonctionnaire, adressait en 145 av. J.-C. des avis qui ressemblent assez à ceux du Baptiste, car on se plaignait surtout des publicains, de leurs extorsions, et erreurs, et même d'être faussement dénoncé par eux : μάλιστα δὲ κατὰ τῶν πρὸς ταῖς τελωνία!:ς ἐντυγχανόντων, περί te διασεισμῶν xai παραλογειῶν (majorations de taxes ?), ἐνίων δὲ "καὶ φυχοφαντεῖσθαι προφερομένων (Notices et extraits, XVIH, τι, p. 351), ce qui ne convient pas à leur profession. On trouve encore συχοφαντία el διασεισμός réunis dans une pétition qui semble dirigée contre des policiers subalternes (Tebt. par. 43; 118 av. J.-C.). Ces abus sont donc plutôt le fait de la police ou gendarmerie des douanes que des soldats. Aucun de ces abus ne se produirait si les donaniers militaires se contentaient de leur solde; ὀψώνιον, primilivement « vivres achetés d'avance », ὄψον et ὠνέομαι, Un poste douanier d'importance se comprend bien au pont du Jourdain (marqué sur la mosaïque de Mâdaba), commandant la circulation entre la Judée et la Pérée, probablement non loin du pont actuel, à une heure et demie au nord-est (6 Jéricho. .
3:15
προσδοχῶντος dans un sens vague, sans que l'objet soit déterminé, comme Act. xxvir, 33; sxvin, 6. D'après le contexte c’est l'attente du Messie; l'apparition de Jean lui a donné une nouvelle impulsion; après cette manifestation devenue si rare de l'esprit prophétique, on était dans l'attente de quelque grand événement, et, dans la situation des esprits, on pénse au Messie. μή ποτε αὐτὸς εἴη, optatif bien'choisi pour marquer l'incertitude; comme xxu, 23 τὸ τίς ἄρα εἴη ... ὃ τοῦτο μέλλων πράσσειν. Il y avait bien des raisons de douter; outre que Jean était d’origine lévitique et même sacerdotale, non point davidique, il n'avait encore accompli aucun acte vraiment messianique. La même supposition dans le discours de Paul, Act. x, 25, cf. Jo. 1, 19.55. Luc n’explique pas ce que signilie 6 χριστός, il ἃ déjà dit que c'est le sauveur (n, 41; cf. n, 26 ss.).
3:16
Les paroles de Jean sont présentées comme une réponse (comme dans Jo. 1, 26), parce qu'elles répondent à la pensée des foules; comme cette pensée était commune à tous (πάντων), Jean répond à tous (πᾶσιν), et comme l'interrogation muette portait sur sa personne, il explique d'abord son propre rôle (de même Mt.). Luc s’écarte donc de l’ordre de Mc. qui met tout d’abord plus en relief le Messie, mais il revient à Mc. en écrivant ὕδατι sans ἐν, ἔρχεται qui est pittoresque, délier le cordon des sandales, au lieu de porter les sandales (Mt.). Comme Luc avait alors sous les yeux une source semblable à Mt. (in, 44 s.), il est difficile de s'expliquer comment il est d'accord avec Mc. s’il ne l’a pas suivi, d'autant qu'une fois que Me. s’est arrêté, avant καὶ πυοί, Luc est beaucoup plus semblable à Mt. L'opposition du baptême de Jean, dans l'eau, et du baptôme dans l’Esprit-Saint est commune aux quatre évangilistes (Mc. 1, 8; Mt. 1n, 11; Jo. 1, 33); Dibelius (Die vorchrist. Ueberl. von Johannes dem Täufer) prétend {après Harnack etc.) que Jean n’a pu prononcer cette parole, puisque ses disciples ne savaient pas même qu'il existât un Esprit-Saint (Act. xx, 2). Mais l'argument prouverait trop. Des disciples de Jean ne peuvent avoir ignoré l'existence de l'Esprit-Saint; ceux dont parlent les Actes ont recu récemment le baptême de Jean, sans avoir été ses disciples. Les relations du Messie avec l'Esprit du Seigneur étaient fortement marquées dans Is. xt, 2 s., et ce passage n'avait pas été perdu de vue; cf. Ps.-Sal. xvn, 42; Hén. xrix, 3; Lxnt, 2, d'autant que le temps du salut devait être celui de l'effusion de l'Esprit-Saint (Joël. πὶ, Au surplus ne voulons-nous pas soutenir comme absolument certain que Jean ait prononcé le mot « Saint », mais seulement que c'est une explication correcte de sa pensée (Syrsin et Syreur « dans le feu et dans l'Esprit-Saint »), quand il aurait dit seulement : « par l'esprit et le feu » Car il s'agit à tôut le moins d'être baptisé par le feu, non pas celui du v. 17 qui puit ceux qui sont déjà discernés, mais un feu qui purifie, 17. om. μὲν α. σιτὸον (T HV) et non add. (5). 20. om. καὶ a. χατεχλεισὲν (T Η) et non add. (S. V). ‘ ἡ“ L'opposition avec l'eau cest parfaitement claire. On purifie les objets au moyen de l’eau; si l’eau ne suffit pas, on les fait passer par le feu; ce qui ne supporte pas l'épreuve est détruit, le - est purifié. Le feu ἃ certainement ce rôle dans l'A. T., par exemple Sir. 11, 5, mais surtout dans des Rassages où il s'agit de lihtervention de Dieu, Is. 1, 25 calin, εἰς χαθαρόν, 15. IV, + ἐκκαθαριεῖ... ἐν πνεύματι κρίσεως καὶ πνεύματι καύσεως, Zach. xu1, 9 πυρώσω αὐτοὺς ὡς πυροῦται. τὸ ἀργύριον... αὐτὸς ἐπικαλέσεται τὸ ὄνομά μου, spécialement des temps messianiques ; Mal. nn, 2, 3. Le baptême dont parle Jean ne peut être comparé à ectte suprême purification, mais les deux actions sont du même ordre, ce qui ne serait pas si Jean se bornait à annoncer l'exécuteur du châtiment. Le baptème dans l’Esprit-Saint (Luc ἃ écrit ἐν pour marquer que l'Esprit-Saint n’est pas un instrument comme l’eau) n'exclut pas en réalité l'usage de l’eau, et Ézéchiel ἃ uni la purification par l’eau et le don de l'Esprit de Dieu (Ez. xxxvr, 25-27), mais l'exécution n'était pas dans la perspective de Jean qui a seulement marqué l'opposition entre son temps et celui du plus fort, ou le temps du salut, c'est-à-dire d’une action divine - plus pénétrante. Au v. 16 le feu peut très bien, dans la pensée de Le., être une allusion au don de J'Esprit-Saint (Act. n, 3).
3:17
Ce verset n'est pas l'explication du précédent, mais l'indication d’un autre rôle du Messie, quoique les perspectives ne soient pas très distinctes. οὗ τὸ πτύον... αὐτοῦ, comme au v. 16 οὖ... αὐτοῦ, tournure sémitique, surlout hébraïque, mais tolérable en grec. Au lieu de καὶ διακαθαριεῖ (de καθαρίζω) de ME, parataxe sémitique, Luc lie et met l’infinitif de but de διακαθαίρω (sur l'aor. en α, au lieu de ἐχκάθηρα, cf. Pap. Petr. τι, 12, 5, ἀναχαθᾶραι, Pap. Leyd. x, 7, 13 καθᾶραι et Exxaθάρατε, 1 Cor. v, 7); le mode et le verbe sont changés par élégance. Au lieu de συνάξει de Mt., Luc a plus probablement συναγαγεῖν, quoique συνάξει soit très soutenu pour harmoniser avec Mt.; d'autant que le second infinitif du but est encore parfaitement justifié, car πτόον n'est pas un van, mais une pelle à vanner, qui servait aussi à rentrer le grain. Dans Luc αὐτοῦ est toujours à la fin de chaque incise, d'une facon rythmée. La paille est courte en Palestine, et on ne coupe guère que l'épi; il n'y a donc pas grand inconvénient, une fois le blé rentré, à brûler les déchets sur l'aire ὥςπερ ἐν ἅλῳ πῦρ ἀνάπτον χαλαμὴν αὐτοῦ (Ps.-Sal. χαι, 2). I ne s'agit plus ici d’une purification par le feu, compatible en somme avec une rénovation temporelle; il s’agit de la consommation définitive; les hommes sont divisés en deux groupes, les uns échappent à la flamme φλὸξ πυρὸς χαὶ ὀργὴ ἀδίχων οὐχ ἅψεται αὐτοῦ (Ps.- Sal. xv, 6), et vont auprès de Dieu (Ps.-Sal. 11; 16 etc.), tandis que les autres sont comme le chaume consumé par le feu. Le feu dans les roseaux ou dans l'herbe ne purifie pas, il consume (15. x, 17; Joël, ir, 5; Zach. xn, 6); il est d’ailleurs impossible de l'éteindre, tant qu'il n'a pas consumé entièrement (κατακαίειν) une matière aussi inflammable. Le tout constitue une comparaison, l’esquisse d’une parabole; il n'y a donc pas lieu d’allégoriser et de se demander si l'aire est le monde ou la Palestine, si le feu est inextinguible de sa nature etc.; la comparaison a dû être choisie parce que les méchants seront livrés au feu vengeur qui ne s’éteindra pas, καὶ τὸ πῦρ αὐτῶν οὐ σόεσθήσεται (Is. 1xvi, 24). On ne saurait donc confondre ce feu avec le feu purificateur du v. 46. Il n’a rien d’un baptême et exerce sa fureur sur des objets qui sont tous déjà discernés et ne peuvent plus être purifiés.
3:18
JEAN EN Prison, Propre à Luc qui termine ici ce qui regarde la prédication de Jean, car son arrestation par Hérode en fut la conséquence. Le baptême de Jésus appartient moins à l'histoire de Jean qu'à celle de Jésus. Cette terminaison ressemble à celle de 1, 80. 18 5.) Les deux versets sont étroitement unis par l'opposition entre μέν et δέ. οὖν après μέν (le seul cas de l'évangile, fréquent dans Actes) a perdu ici de sa valeur affirmative; il sert de transition pour passer à une autre idée, après avoir résumé tout ce qui précède; cf. Thuc. τ, 15 τὰ μὲν οὖν ναυτιχὰ τῶν Ἑλλήνων τοιαῦτα ἦν... ἰσχὺν δὲ περιεποιήσαντο... (Kühner, $ 507, c). C'est pour ne pas l’avoir compris que Dibelius (1. 1., p. 53) regarde ce verset comme contredisant le y. 17, sous prétexte que le jugement n’est pas une bonne nouvelle. Mais Luce a soin de dire que la prédication de Jean contenait divers thèmes, ἕτερα. Il ἃ prêté à Jean des reproches et des exhortations, des menaces, qui convergent vers l'annonce de la venue du Messie que Luc regarde avec raison commè une bonne nouvelle. Sur Hérodiade, ef. Me. vi, 17, Com. Elle motive le seul grief allégué par Me. οἱ Mt. (χιν, 3 s.), mais Luc, bien informé sur Hérode (cf. sur v. 4), a pu savoir que le Baptiste ne s'en était pas tenu là. Il a d'ailleurs évité de nommer le frère d'Hérode (Philippe dans Mc.). — πάντων ὧν comme xix, 37; Act. x, δος xx, 39: xxu, 10; xxvi, 2 et Cf. πὶ, 20; ix, 48; xxiv, 25,
3:20
προσέθηκεν, dans un sens péjoralif, γι il peut avoir en grec, nullement dans le sens sémitique, comme προσέθετο πέμψαι: (xx, 11. 13) où συλλαθδεῖν (Act. χα, 3). C'est le sens de Polybe, p. 1265 τούτων 8 ἑξῆς τὸ συνεχὲς nt Louer χαὶ ne ετίϑεσαν, ποιοῦντες ἀναπολόγητον τὴν ἁμαρτίαν (Plum.)
3:21
Luc comprend tout ce qu’il a à dire dans une belle période, dont le terme comme le but est la filiation divine de Jésus. - βαπτισθῆναι, à l'aor. indique une action passée, mais Plum. exagère en supposant que Jisus est venu seul après que tout le peuple eût été baptisé, car ἐν τῷ indique bien quelque chose de simultané; l'événement simultané doit être le baptème de Jésus, qui est aussi au passé par rapport à la prière de Jésus. Ces deux choses sont donc antécédentes, le baptême du peuple et celui de Jésus, celui de Jésus ayant eu lieu probablement vers la fin (καῦ de celui des autres, qui cependant pouvaient être présents. Lue dit que tout le peuple avait été baptisé, ce qu'il faut sûrement entendre en atténuant le « tout » dont il est prodigue, probablement pour insinuer que Jésus devait faire comme Les autres, dans Fesprit qui l'a soumis aux observances de la cireoncision et de la présentation. ΤΙ est certain qu'il mentionne volontiers la prière de Jésus (v, 16; vr, 42; 1x, 48. 28; xxn, 11), mais iei la prière, après le baptême, a une efficacité particalière; les cieux s'ouvrent (ἀνεῳχθῆναι pour ἀνοιχϑῆναι); l'Esprit-Saint (Mc. l'Esprit, Mt. l'Esprit de Dieu) est fréquent dans Lue (r, 45. 35 etc.). Sur le symbolisme de 18 colombe, cf. Me. Eom. p. 42. Si Luc a insisté plus que Me. sur la forme corporelle, c’est sans doute pour mieux marquer la réalité de l'apparition; peut-être aussi pour détacher davantage l’individualité du Saint-Esprit; il descend sur lui, ce qui a 3e inême sens, mais est plus correct que εἰς αὐτόν ἀδ Mc. La voix est la voix du Père; l'intention trinitaire est donc assez marquée. Les paroles sont exactement celles de Me., plus naturelles dans Mc. où c'est Jésus qui voit, aussi Mt. ἃ mis οτος. Luc a donc insisté sar le caractère objectif de la vision; il n'a pas dit expressément qu'elle ait été perçue de la foule, mais il l’a laissé entendre. . Le peu d'importance qu'il attache au baptême met davantage eu relief La valeur de cette déclaration. Elle correspond exactement à ce qu'on pouvait altendre de la parole de l’ange (τ, 35). Toute l'histoire des origines de Jean et de Jésus, conduite jusqu'au moment où ils se rencontrent pour la première fois, aboutit à constater la nature divine de Jésus. Il n’appartenait pas à Jeau de révéler ce mystère; il annonce seulement un plus fort que lui, dont il n'est pas digne de délier les sandales, et un baptême dans l'£sprit-Saint. Après que Jésus a été baptisé, l'Esprit-Saint apparaît, comme au moment de la conception surnaturelle il était venu sur Marie, et le Père reconnaît son Fils. La parole céleste est conçue dans D, abc ff* L'r υἱὸς μου εἰ συ, ἐγὼ δημέρον ysyevymmae σὲ, 06 qu représente une partie des latt. (européens, mais non africains) et D; aucune autorité découverte depuis Ti. ne s’est jointe à cux, ni syrsén ni sah. ni 8 ni W. Augustin (de cons. ev. τι, 14) : ἡ αὶ vero quod nonnulli codices habent secundum Lucam hoc illa voce sonuisse quod in psalmo seriptum est: filius meus es tu, ego hodie genui te, quamquam in antiquioribus codicibus Graecis non inventri perhibeatur… c'est dire presque ouvertement que ce texte a été inséré ici d'après le ps. u, 7, et c'est à l'état d’ajoute que cette lecon paratt dans Clém. d'A, (Paed. 1, νὴ υἱός μου εἶ συ ἀγαπητός, ἐγὼ σήμερον γεγεννηχά σε, et dans l’évangile dit des Ébionites (βριρη. Huer. xxx, 13) χαὶ φωνὴ ἐγένετο ἐχ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ λέγουσα’ Σύ μου εἴ ὁ ἀγαπητός" ἐν σοὶ ηὐδύόχησα, Καὶ πάλιν ᾿γὼ σήμερον γεγέννηκά σε. Dans Justin (6. Tryph. Lxxxvmr et cru) elle est seule, sans doute parce qu'elle ἃ supplanté l'autre, cf. Acta Petri et Pauli xxx, Const. Ap. πὰ, 32, LACTaNce, Inst, divin. 1v, 15; Hilaire. Soden eite faussement l'épitre à Diognète. Quant à Origène, dans le commentaire en latin, il ἃ la lecon commune de Mt. (PG. x, 1871) et dans le commentaire de Jean en gree (1, 29 ed. Preusehen) il cite le psaume et non Euc. C’est cette lecon, si dénuée d'appuis diplomatiques, que préfèrent de nombreux critiques indépendants, parce qu'elle semble indiquer que Jésus est devenu Fils de Dieu au baptême, si bien que Dibelius (p. 63) finit par croire que c’est la lecon originale de Marc! Au surplus on reconnaît (Klost.j que Le. aurait dû comprendre que ce passage était inconeiliable avec la conception miraculeuse, et c'est dans Le. seulement que cette lecon ἃ une apparence de probabilité d'après les mss.! C'est montrer bien ouvertement le parti pris de faire dater l'adoption de Jésus comme Fils de Dieu du jour du baptême. Encore dans Le. σήμερον ne peut signifier que le jour éternel (cf. Heb. 1, 5), et les modernes lisent adoption où le texte parle de génération. Le copiste qui ἃ fait l'addition n'y mettait pas tant de malice; il était heureux de confirmer le texte évangélique par celui d'un psaume. ἢ faut beaucoup d'aplomb pour soutenir que c'est un commentaire non une citation (Klost.), car elle est littérale. Mis en goût, les evraient admettre la suite de l'évangile des ébionites : καὶ εὐθὺς critiques ἃ περιέλαμψε τὸν τόπον φῶς μέγα; CE feu qui resplendit sur le Jourdain se trouve encore dans Justin (c. Tryph. Lxxsvint) καὶ πῦρ ἀνήφθη ἐν τῷ Ἰορδάνῃ, dans Éphrem (Moes. #3) lumine super aquas eæorto. Dans la Prædicatio Pauli (citée par le pseudo-Cyprien de Rebaptismale xvu). On le trouve encore dans les oracles sibyllins (vu, 82-84) et dans quelques lait (a g!) après Mt. m, 15. Sur le texte de Tatien d'après Isho'‘dad, cf. R B. 1930 p. 329 5.
3:23
Les principaux critiques catholiques et protestants sont d'accord sur ce verset qui n’a de difficultés que pour ceux qui veulent voir dans la généalogie la liste des ascendants de Marie, ou qui prétendent qu'elle aboutissait à Jésus comme fils naturel de Joseph. Pour chacune de ces deux manières il faut changer le texte, d'ailleurs très solidement assis. . yat αὐτός, selon la manière de Luc (1, 22; 11, 28; un, 50, 1x, 36), met en relief la personnalité du sujet, mais sans une emphase spéciale (contre Vocr). ἀρχόμενος est pris par tous les modernes (Schanz, Knab. Plum. Holtz. ete.) dans le sens de commençant sa mission. Luc indique l'âge de Jésus au moment où il commence sa vie publique (cf. Gen. χει, 46), prenant pour point de départ le baptême de Jean ἀρξάμενος ἀπὸ τοῦ βαπτίσματος ᾿Ιωάννου (Act. 1, 22). Mais ce sens n'a pas toujours été compris; ἀρχόμενος a élé interprété « commençant d'avoir à peu près trente ans ». Cela est contradictoire, car la précision d'une année commençante exclut le vague d'« à peu près ». Ceux qui comprenaient ainsi ont, où diminué la difficulté en mettant ἀρχόμενος après τριάκοντα (AD etc.) ou l'ont supprimée en retranchant ἀρχόμενος, comme le ms. gr. 124, quelques latt. (e ἢ), le ms. de S. Martin de Tours pour la Vulgate, les Syriens (Diat. ar., Syrsin et cur, pal [ms B], pes), l'éth. La suppression est encore plus naturelle et moins importante chez les Pères, où ερχομενος pouvait se glisser dans la phrase : Ir. (Π, xx, 4) Ad baptismum enim venit nondum qui triginta annos suppleverat, sed qui inciperet esse tanquam triginta annorum: Clem. Alex. (Str. 1, xxi) : ἣν δὲ Ἰησοῦς ἐρχόμενος ἐπὶ τὸ βάπτισμα ὡς ἐτῶν τριάκοντα; Aphr. (Dim. xxt, Li Tes Jésus âgé d'environ trente ans vint au Jourdain ᾿Αρχόμενος étant certain, la date de Luc se rapporte non au Hayes mais à l'inauguration de la vie publique, qui d'ailleurs coïncident en fait. Jésus eût pu être baptisé à un âge quelconque, mais celui de trente ans convenait pour l’enseignement, puisque le'plan de l'Incarnation suivait les normes ordinaires. C'était, d’après les Hébreux, l'âge des fonctions lévitiques (Num. 1v, 2 ss.) et selon les Grees et les Romains, Pâge οἱ où y entrait Je Ja vie publique (Denys D'Haz. Ant. rom. 1v, 6). ὡσεί donne une certaine marge, de 28 à 32 ans. On peut y que les foules se sont portées vers le baplème peu après que Jean eut commencé à prêcher. Si l'an 15 de Tibère commençait en octobre 780 de Rome (cf. v. 1), Jésus, né en 750 au plus tôt, n'avait guère plus de trente οἱ un ans 51] vint au y dans l'hiver avant-la pâque de l'an 780. ὧν doit être précédé d'une virgule, et se rattache directement à ᾿[ησοῦς, non à ἀρχόμενος. υἱός se rapporte naturellement à Ἰωσήφ, comme Ἰωσήφ commande τοῦ ‘ei, Si Luc ne-s'est pas écarté de tout le langage en cours, il ἃ voulu dire que Joseph était fils d'Héli. Il est dit encore plus clairement que Jésus ctait fils de Joseph, mais avec la restriction ὡς ἐνομίζετο (entre deux virgules), « selon l'opiaion générale », fondée seulement sur les apparences. C’est ainsi que toute l'antiquité ἃ compris la phrase, aucun Père n'ayant supposé que Luc ἃ voulu dire : Jésus, qui passait pour fils de Joseph, était {en réalité) fils d'Héli, c'està-dire par Marie, fille ἀ 1611. Merx se donne beaucoup de mal pour établir que le texte disait simplement Jésus fils de Joseph el que ὡς ἐνομίζετο est une addi= 33, τοῦ Autvaôa6 (T 5 V) ou om. (H\. tion récente. ἢ a seulement montré que ces mots ont Cté traduits de différentes façons, mais ils ne manquent dans aucun ms. ni du grec ni des versions. Blass ἃ mis, ὡς ἐνομίζετο, entre deux virgules, après τριάκοντα, de facon qu'il puisse se rapporter à ce qui précède : « Trente ans, comme on pensait », parce que ὁ ff? ont quod putabatur esse et q quod videbatur esse. Maïs les Latins, n'ayant pas ce participe, ont dù transposer esse qui y répondait, et leur pensée est bien eelle du grec. D'ailleurs ὡσεί indique déjà que l’âge n’est pas emprunté à un document officiel, mais à l'opinion; ajouter ὡς ἐνομίζετο serait un pléonasme, tandis que ces mots sont tout à fait opportuns, dans tout le contexte de Luc, pour rappeler la véritable origine de Jésus (ce que Blass reconnait à la fin). Toutes ces arguties ne font que mettre en évidence le parti pris de certains critiques. D'ailleurs pour tout le monde Joseph avait été le père de Jésus, et il méritait ce titre pour l'avoir élevé, étant uni à Marie par un véritable mariage, sans détriment de sa virginité. Lightfoot cite Chemoth Rabbu, lol. 160, 4 : une orpheline fut élevée par un intendant, homme bon et fidèle. Il voulut la marier. On appelle un scribe, pour rédiger le contrat de sa dot. Il lui demande le nom de son père. Elle se tait. Son intendant lui dit : « Pourquoi te tais-tu? » Elle « Parce que je ne connais d'autre père que toi, car c'est celui qui élève qui est appelé père, non celui qui a engendré : Tan ΝΟ ΣΝ ΝῊΡ Ἐὰν Ἃ — Ἰωσήφ est le seul nom qui n’a pas d'article, mais cela est tout à fait naturel; le τοῦ qui précède les autres noms indique le rapport généalogique entre ces noms et les précédents, rapport suffisamment marqué par υἱός entre Jésus et Joseph. “πὸ τοῦ Ἡλεί, cf. Ἀαιλάμειν Αἱράνου τοῦ Moxluou τοῦ Aipévou τοῦ Μαθθᾶ, à Palmyre, ue 5. ap. J.-C. (Wadd. 2586). D'après ceux qui veulent que la généalogie aboutisse à Jésus par Marie, τοῦ ‘HAst dépend de ἦν, tout le reste étant une parenthèse. Jésus serait fils d'Héli. Mais, outre que l’omission du nom de Marie ne s'explique guère, ἣν est déterminé par ἀρχόμενος; aussi, pour donner quelque vraisemblance à son système, Heer est-il obligé de supprimer ce mot, dont l'authenticité n’est pas douteuse. Lightfoot a supposé d'une facon moins invraisemblable, que υἱός dominait toute la liste : fils de Joseph, et par conséquent fils d'Héli,.… fils d'Adam, fils de Dieu. Dans ce système, fils de Dieu s’entendrait au sens propre, comme les autres termes de la généalogie. Mais il y ἃ quelque chose de bizarre à rattacher directement Jésus à chacun des ancêtres, alors qu'une généalogie est comme une chaine dont tous les anneaux se tiennent. Lightfoot cite Gen. xxxwi, 2, « Oholibama, fille de ‘Ana, fille de Sibe‘on », où ‘Ana est un homme. Mais, quelle que soit l'explication de cette anomalie, le Sam., les LXX et la Pes. ont la seconde fois fils au lieu de fille, ce qui prouve à tout le moins que le texte massorttique ne leur a pas paru naturel. Vogt ἃ argumenté aussi des leçons latines, quod (ὁ ὁ ff? L q aur.) ou qui (r) devant putabatur ou videbatur. Le traducteur aurait voulu dire que Jésus était personnellement fils d'Héli, et il l'aurait dit, en contradiction avec l'opinion commune, parc qu'il étail tenu par elle pour fils de Joseph. Mais outre que quod et qui ont pu être confondus à cause de l'abréviation, quod putabatur peut être la traduction assez normale de ὡς ἐνομίζετο, avec le sens non pas de « parce que », mais de « selon qu'on croyait qu'il était, fils » etc. Qui peut être la traduction de ὡς faussement lu ὅς ({eer). La traduction ut putaretur (am et lird de Vg.) est une anomalie qui montre seulement l'embarras que causait incipiens, surtout aux Latins. Il est impossible de voir dans ces variantes, d’ailleurs aberrantes, l'indice d’une tradition qui eùt rattacht Jésus directement à Héli. Les mss. ne témoignent que d'une tentative pour éviter la contradiction apparente avec Mt. 1, 46, qui donne Jacob et non Héli pour père à Joseph, c'est celle de D (et d), qui remplace la généalogie de Luc par celle de Mt. dans l’ordre inverse : nv δὲ Inooù ὡς ἔτων τριαχοντὰ ἀργομενος ὡς ἐνομίζετο eve (l'infinitif d'après le lalin!) υἱος [Ιωσηφ τοῦ laxeoS vou λίαθθαν x. τ, ἕ. οἱ # mate a σον noms bibliques omis par Mt. La pensée de rattacher τοῦ Ἡλεί à Jésus n'est pas venue non plus à un ancien auteur qui croyait cependant que la généalogie (racée par Luc était celle de Marie. Il s'agit de documents (Nesrix, Ezæposilory Times, xiv, 567) publiés par ‘de Lagarde (Septuaginta Studien, τι, p. 26 ss.). Le premier, qu'il croit originaire de l'église catholique d'Afrique vers 463, est une sorte de généalogie universelle. On y dit : Redeamus ad Nathan fratrem Salomonis, unde Maria originem trahit… et plus loin : Eli genuit Iosef. losef genuit Ioachim. loachkim genuit Mariam hec est Maria anno quadragisimo primo imp. Augusti imperatoris. Un autre document (2. ἐ., p. 41 ss.) rédigé d'après le précédent, et connu par un ms. du vaut 5 (Fricx, Chronioa minora, 133 ss.) Ecrit : Heli genuit loseph. loseph genuit loachim. Toachim genuit Marium matrem Domini lesu Christi. Hanc progeniem secundum Nathan introducit Lucas, et secundum Salomonem Matthaeus, ut cognoscatur ea una radice lesse, id est David, venire Ioseph sive Maria Mater. Ces vieilles pièces montrent que la généalogie de Luc ἃ été regardée comme celle de Marie dès le ve siècle, mais aussi quelles insertions il fallait commettre pour interpréter son texte dans ce sens! La netteté du texte de Lue explique la fermeté de la tradition qui ne voit ici que la généalogie de Joseph. Dans l’autre sens on ne peut citer, — outre les deux documents anonymes ci-dessus — que le commentaire de l’Apocalypse attribué à Victorin de Petlau, dans une recension certainement postérieure (P.L. v, 324), . et un commencement d’exégèse de 5. Matthieu, faussement attribué à 5. Hilaire . (Mar, Nova Patr. bibl. τ, 471), puis Annius de Viterbe (en 1490) citant un auteur antérieur qu'il regarde faussement comme 5. Jérôme. ι Les exégètes catholiques qui voient ici l'arbre généalogique de Marie ne s'écartent donc pas moins de la tradition des Pères que du texte. N'est-ce pas sacrifier les principes normaux de l'interprétation à un désir impérieux d'harmonisation ?
Luc a placé la généalogie de Jésus au moment où il allait inaugurer son ministère public. Il a lu quelque chose de semblable pour Moïse et Aaron, dont l'origine est indiquée au moment où ils vont commencer les miracles devant le Pharaon (Ex. vi, 14-27; Plum.). Mais la vraie raison est sans doute que Luc voulait mettre le sceau à la doctrine de la filiation divine de Jésus par l’afir- ͵ mation du Père céleste, avant d'indiquer la série de ses ancêtres selon le droit humain. Aussi cette généalogie termine-t-elle plutôt la première partie, le pré-évangile, qu'elle n'inaugure l'évangile lui-même; tout au plus c'est une transition à la vie active. nt ver M
3:25
Nombre des ascendants, critique textuelle. Le nombre des personnes citées devait éveiller l’attention des allégoristes. S. Irénée (nr, 33, 3) en compte soixante-douze : Propter hoc Lucas genealogiam, quae est a generatione Domini nostri usque ad Adam, sepluaginta duas generationes habere ostendit; finem coniungens initio et significans, quoniam ipse est qui omnes gentes exinde ab Adam dispersas et universas linguas et generationem hominum cum ipso Adum ân semetipso recapitulatus est. Unde et a Paulo typus futuri dictus est ipse Adam. Ce chiffre de 72, qu'on avait obtenu en additionnant les peuples dans la Genèse (x), est aussi celui que préfère Clém. d'Al. (Stromates, 1, PG. VIII, 877 éd. Berlin, p. 88), les Recognitiones de Clém. τι, 42 (P. G., 1, 1269) Épiphane (contra hær. lib. 1 tom. I, v, P. G., XLI, 43% et hæres. xxxix, P. G., ΧΕΙ, 673) et Augustin (de civit. Dei, XVI, nr, 2) : unde colligitur septuuginta tres, vel potius (quod postea demonstrabitur) septuaginta duas gentes tunc fuisse, non homines. D'autres cependant raisonnaient d'après Deut. xxx1t, 8, où le nombre des nations est égal au nombre des fils d'Israël, qui était (Gen. xcvi, 27) de soixante-dix d'après l'hébreu et de soixante-quinze d'après les Scptante. Le chiffre de soixante-dix est celui de Pseudo-Clém. Hom. xvin, 4 (P. G., If, 408) et de Procope de Gaza (P. G., LXXXVIHL, 957). Clément d'Al. (Stromates, L. 1.) croyait qu'Éphore avait dit soixante-quinze d'après Gen. χινι, 27 : Ἔφορος δὲ χαὶ ἄλλοι πολλοὶ τῶν ἱστορικῶν nai ἔθνη καὶ γλώσσας πέντε καὶ ἑόδομήχοντα λέγουσιν εἶναι, ἐπαχούσαντες τῆς φωνῆς. Μωυσέως λεγούσης; ἦσαν δὲ πᾶσαι αἱ ψυχαὶ ἐξ Ἰαχὼδ πέντε καὶ ἑδδομήχοντα αἵ εἰς Αἴγυπτον χατελθοῦσαι. Ce chiffre de 75, inscrit en toutes lettres dans la Genèse, et cité par Luc (Act. vit, 44) avait plus de chances de fixer l'attention que l'addition des peuples de Gen. x, pour lesquels d’ailleurs il est plus aisé d'abouür à 70 qu'à 72. Si donc Luce avait cherché un nombre symbolique, il eût pu s'arrêter à 75 aussi bien qu’à 72. D'ailleurs Augustin n’est pas moins certain d’un autre symbolisme (de cons. evang. I, 1v, 12) : ipse quoque numerus, quem Lucas eæsequitur, certissime prorfils de Juda, 8: fils de Jacob, fils d'Isaac, fils d'A role, fils de sus abolitionem indicat peccatorum.…. ideo in eo numero, qui est penes Lucam, et ipse Christus, a quo incipit numeratio, et deus, ad quem pervenit, tonnumerantur et fit numerus septuaginta septem, quo significatur omnium prorsus remissio el abolitio peccatorum. Si donc Irénée a bien pénétré la raison pour laquelle Lue est remonté à Adam, il est moins certain que le nombre total des personnes ait une valeur symbolique. Mais son pme ne er pas soixante- nues noms seulement? M. Heer ἃ bien montré qu'il y a aie ue ἡ de ἴδαισε : 4) un συν Jatt. très important, e avec a ὁ οἱ a 72 noms, en complant Jésus et Adam; 3) f?q et la Vg. ont 76, à peu près autant que le grec (77); 3) le syrsin. ἃ 75 comme on peut en juger avec certitude malgré les lacunes. Il n’y a donc qu'un groupe qui vise le chiffre 72, et sûrement à dessein, puisque, pour ne pas le dépasser, 6 a supprimé Malaleël (v. 37) et ὁ Lévi (v. 29); or on peut supposer qu'il a enlevé d'autres noms dans le même but, par exemple Mattathias et Amos (v. 25) qui paraissent bien attestés. Le groupe de lait. qui abeutit à 72 n'a donc pas une très grande autorité, et ne peut passer pour le texte que suivait Irénée. Ï aurait plutôt élé rédigé d après le canon Le par Irénée. Le texte grec ἃ 77 noms, sans compter celui de Dieu, qu ‘dti n'a conipté que pour arriver à 77. Son texte n'avait donc que 76 noms, comme celui de la Vg. Entre Naasson et Esron B n’a que deux noms, et de même plusieurs /att. Vg. et Syrsin.; il Υ ἃ ici un nom à retrancher du grec d’après 1 Chr. 11, 9 s. Εἰ si le premier groupe a visé au petit nombre, le second n'a-t-il pas grossi le total? Matthat et Lévi reviennent deux fois (v. 24 et v. 29) dans le même ordre. Jules Africain raisonne comme s’il ne les lisait pas la première fois : ᾿Ιωσὴφ γὰρ υἱὸς ‘MA τοῦ Μελχι (Eus. H. E. 1, vu, 5); ils sont encore omis par Eusèbe {P.G. XXIT, 896), Ambr. (Heli filium Melchi, Com. m, 15) et c. Le Syrsin. n'a que Malthat, plus une lacune qui peut contenir Melchi aussi bien que [μόν]. Ces deux noms retranchés, nous serions à 74, en comptant Jésus et Adam. Il était d'usage en pareil cas de compter les deux derniers termes de la généalogie (Heer), mais peut-être {rénée, dans l'intérêt du symbolisme, s'est-il écarté de cette règle. En tout cas rien absolument n’aulorise à rayer Joseph, ni même Gaïnan au v. 36. Il est vrai que Syrsin. l'a remplacé par ‘Atlam, paree que Caïnan ne figure à cette place ni dans le texte massorétique, ni dans la peschittâ, mais s’il a cherché un nom dans la Bible, c'était pour remplacer Caïnan qui figurait donc dans le texte de Luc (de même e thamon). Il est bien hardi de prétendre (Meræ, Heer) qu'on l’a introduit dans le texte de Luc d'après les LXX. C'est Luc qui a naturellement ici suivi les LXX. Or c'est là un indice que la liste ἃ cté rédigée dans un milicu sgh ou plutôt par Luc luimême. On saït que la génédugie de Luc at un des principaux arguments allégués contre la conception surnaturelle de Jésus. Merx exprime brutalement l'opinion de nombreux critiques : « [l n’y ἃ pas à insister, entre personnes compétentes, sur la contradiction intime qu’il y ἃ à dresser l'arbre généalogique d'un père qui n’est pas père en réalité » (p. 211). M. Heer ἃ eu l'imprudence d'accepter ce verdict, pour obliger d'admettre que la généalogie se termine en réalité à Marie. 11 faut avoir le courage de dire qu'il est puéril de juger des idées de l'antiquité, et spécialement des Sémites, d'après les nôtres. Ce qu'il faut concéder, c'est que Luc n'aurait eu aucun prétexte de donner la généalogie de Hsus par Joseph, s’il n'avait passé pour son père. Et c'est précisément pour cela qu'il a eu soin de rappeler que Jésus avait été cru fils de Joseph selon la chair. On s'était donc habitué à regarder les ancêtres de Joseph comme ceux de Jésus. Mais ce n'esi point ce que veulent les critiques dont nous parlons. Ils prétendent que oul n’a songé à chercher les ancêtres de Jésus avant qu'il n'ait été reconnu comme 16 Messie, et que ce sont donc des chrétiens qui ont cherché à justifier leur foi en <e messianisme, en prouvant que Jésus descendait de David selon la chair. Pour cela on aurait composé les généalogies, dans un esprit ébionite. A cela on doit répondre qu'en effet Luc a bien dû puiser ses renseignements quelque part, mais rien ne prouve que sa généalogic ait constilué un document distinct. En tout cas il serait d'origine hellénistique, plutôt que judto-chrétienne, comme le prouvent et le nom de Caïnan (v. 36) qui ne se treuve que dans les Septante, et la transformation qu'ont subie les noms hébreux. 1l est vrai que Luc rencontre le nom de David, mais il n’a pas rattaché Jésus à Salomon, évitant ainsi la lignée royale, qui se scrait imposée si l’on avait compost arliicielement une ginéalogie dans un intérêt messianique. Ce qu'il faut surtout nier absolument, c'est que les anciens, les Sémites surtout, aient attaché une importance suprème à la descendance physiologique en matière de généalogie. La connaissance plus approfondie des usages de l'Orient ἃ fait ici pleine lumière, et des critiques pourront se renseigner dans le dictionnaire biblique de M. Vigouroux, au mot généalogie (Art. du R. P. Prat) : « I ne faudra donc pas être surpris de trouver, dans les tables g‘néalogiques, des peuples et même des pays mélés à des individus. El n'y a pas dà de mythe; il y a filiation véritable; seulement le nom de l’aïeul oublié est remplacé par le nom ethnique ou géographique » (0. 163)... «ἢ faudrait savoir encore si, quand deux familles ou deux maisons faisaient fusion, les ancôtres devenaient communs. Les Arabes ne conçoivent pas autrement la généalogie, et bous les membres d'une tribu ou d'une sous-tribu sont censés descendre du fondateur éponyme. Cela simplilie singulièrement les arbres généalogiques. N'y aurait-il pas eu chez les Israélites une fiction semblable? Ces questions, jusqu'ici négligées, sont irès difficiles mais elles seraient d'une extrême importance pour risoudre bien des divergences et des antilogies » (col. 463}. À l'appui de ces principes, je ciberai seulement l'exemple de Caleb qui en dernier lieu épouse Ephrat, qui a pour petit-fils Bethléem {1 Chr. 1, 19-50; 1v, 4). Toute cette g‘néalogie de Caleb est bourrée 4e noms de villes, comme Teqôa, Qiryath-Yearim, ou « cité des boïs », qui n'est sûrement pas un nom de personne. On ne prétend pas ici que la généalogie de Luc contienne des noms de villes; on veut dire seulement qu'avec cette manière de comprendre les généalogies, on pouvait en dresser une sans prétendre aboutir à une descendance charnelle. L'adoption conférait les mêmes droits. Ou a prétendu (Vogt) que Luc, s'adressant à des Gentils, devait nécessairement leur parler de filiation naturelle. C’est oublier que l'arbre généalogique des Antonins, gravement ranscrit avec les titres de fit, nepotes, pronepotes, abnepotes, est un arbre adoptif jusqu'à la cinquième génération. Il serait plus prudent de prétendre que les Juifs ne connaissaient pas l'adoption. Mais alors ils feraient -exceplion parmi les Sémites : W. Robertson Smith ἃ écrit (The religion of the Semites; 2° éd. p. 273): « l'idée que la parenté n'est pas purement une affaire de naissance, mais peut être acquise, est complètement sortie de notre cercle d'idées; c'était pourtant la conception primitive de parenté », et aujourd'hui encore, parmi les tribus arabes du pays de Moab, l'adoption remplace si complètement la génération que l’adopté devient damawy. fils par le sang, en même temps que samawy, fils par le non (JAUSsEN, Coutumes des Arabes, p. 25). D'ailleurs, si le lévirat est une preuve positive que les Juifs admettaient les effets de l'adoption, nous n'avons pas le droit de dire que c'était la seule [orme possible, comme l'a bien compris S. Augustin (de cons. ex, H, 11) : Antiqua est -enim consuetudo adoptandi etiam in illo populo dei, ut sibi filios facerent, quos non ipsi geruissent, et il le prouve par le fait de Jacob adoptant Ephraïm et Manassé (Gen. xivin, 5 5.). ὲ On peut encore juger des idées de l'antiquité par 8. Ambroise, qui admet certes la conception virginale, mais qui ne saurait comprendre une généalogie autrement que par Joseph (Com. ui, 3) : γὲρὲ enim persona quaeritur, qué etiam in senatu et reliquis curiis civilatum generis asserit dignitatem. Quam deforme autem si relicta viri origine, origo feminae quaereretur, ut videretur patrem non habuisse ille totius mundi populis praedicandus? C'est pour cela que S. Augustin a pu écrire (de consensu evang. I, τ) : Ac per hoc, eliamsi demonstrare aliquis .possel Mariam ex David nullam consanguinitatis originem ducere, sat erat secun- <lum istam rationem accipere Christum filiun David, qua ratione etiam ioseph .pater eius recte appellatus est; οἱ dans un texte cité par Schanz (p. 172) : Cum autem Christus ex ea, quae veru uæor Joseph erat, natus sit, ideo potuit Joseph -dici pater Christ et Christus filius David, etiam si beata Virgo non fuissel ex David. Il était donc parfaitement conforme aux idées de l'antiquité, soit juive, soit romaine, de tracer l'arbre généalogique de Jésus, tout en sachant qu'il n'était pas le fils naturel de Joseph. Comme l’a très bien vu M. Allen (sur Mt. p. 6), l’auteur d’une généalogie devait tenir compte d'un double fait traditionnel -Jésus était né de la Vierge Marie, il descendait de David. D'après nos idées, il eût dû tracer la généalogie de Marie; d'après les idées anciennes, i était plus normal de faire état de la naissance officielle de Jésus, né de Marie, mariée à Joseph. C'est ce qu'ent fait Luc et Matthieu, sans entrevoir une contradiction qui m'existait pas dans les idées anciennes. Cette solution est la seule qui soit <ritique, puisque rien absolument, — sauf nos préjugés modernes — n'oblige à dire que les généalogies ont été composées artificiellement pour: prouver le messianisme de Jésus par des personnes qui ne connaissaient pas sa conception surnaturelle. Il faut naturellement adopter le même critérium quand il s'agit d'apprécier la valeur historique de la généalogie de Lue. Il ne l’a point inventée. Pour la partie la plus haute il a pu consulter la Bible; pour les générations plus récentes que David et surtout que Zorobabel, il a dù s'en tenir aux souvenirs de la famille de Joseph. Il devait regarder l'arbre comme légitime, même s'il avait été concu d’une façon large, sans qu'on prétendit ne passer aucun chainon, ou les aligner dans l’ordre de la filiation naturelle et de primogéniture, de facon que le dernier descendant eût été le seul qui pût revendiquer le trône de David. On peut être certain d’appartenir à une famille sans toujours pouvoir rétablir tous ses ascendants; il se peut que dans tel ou tel cas un oncle remplace un père, ou même qu'on se rattache à un nom de famille plutôt qu'à un nom d'homme. ἢ n’y ἃ pas lieu d'être plus exigeant pour les temps postérieurs à David que pour les temps les plus reculés, où l’on procédait comme nous venons de le voir. Tout cet ensemble un peu imprécis constituait une possession d'état pour. la famille de Joseph. Dans l’histoire de l'exégèse, le problème s’est posé par la comparaison entre la généalogie de Luc et celle, différente, de Matthieu. Aucun Père ni aucun théologien, avant le xve siècle, même ceux qui-affirmaient que Marie descendait de David (cf. sur 1, 36), n'a eu recours à celte solution qui parait si simple aux modernes, que Luc avait écrit la généalogie de Marie. Quelques-uns ont osé dire que les généalogics étaient symboliques, celle de Mt. représentant la royauté du Christ, celle de Luc, son sacerdoce. C’est l'opinion que Jules Africain nous ἃ fait connaitre dans le fragment de la lettre à Aristide négligé par Eusèbe, et publié par Routh (Reliquiae sacrae τι, 228 ss.). Il l’a rejetée avec raison, comme n'étant pas assez objective; si peu précise que soit une généalogie sémitique, elle ne peut être tout entière symbolique. La difficulté qui a préoccupé le plus l'Africain, c'est que Joseph est dans Mt. fils de Jacob, dans Luc fils d'Héli. On pourrait la résoudre par l'adoption, Joseph étant par exemple fils naturel de Jacob et fils adoptif d'Héli, ce qui nm'oblige pas à rapprocher Jacob et Héli l’un de l'autre. C'est la solution qu'Augustin avait trouvée pour son compte (Cont. Faust. II, τα; XKVIn, 3; Sermo Li, 4-24). Maïs l’Africain avait préféré la solution du lévirat (Eus. H. Æ., I, vu, 3). Jacob et Héli étaient frères utérins, parce que Mathan, descendant de Salomon et Melchi, descendant de Nathan, avaient épousé la même femme, nommée Estha. Héli étant mort sans enfants, Jacob avait épousé sa veuve; son troisième fils, Joseph, était bien son fils selon la nature, mais on l’attribuait à son frère mort. Joseph était donc fils de Jacob et fils d'Héli. Cette combinaison, l'Africain la tenait de la famille du Seigneur, qui en avait conservé le souvenir dans ses archives privées, mais elle se défendait d'en apporter la preuve publique sous prétexte qu'Hérode le Grand avait fait brûler toutes les généalogies officielles pour dissimuler la bassesse de sa propre origine. Aussi l’Afrieain luimême ne regarde sa solution que comme la plus vraisemblable. Saint Augustin, quand il l’eut connue, en fut séduit et l'adopta dans ses Rétractations (nu, τ οἱ 16), quoique cette question fût toujours assez obscure pour lui (Quaest. in Heptat. 1, 46). Nous ne sommes point obligés de lui reconnaitre la valeur d’une véritable tradition. Ce qui paraît certain, du point de vue critique, c'est que Luc et Mt. ont puisé à des sources différentes. Il n'est pas impossible que le même homme ait été connu sous le nom de ben ou bar Tagob et de ben ou bar Héli. L'un des deux devait être son père, l’autre pouvait être son oncle, ou plutôt, d’après les usages sémitiques, son grand-père ou même un aïeul plus reculé. Ïl est un autre point sur lequel Mt. et Luc se rencontrent sur un homme avec des pères différents. C’est le cas de Salathiel, père de Zorobabel dans les deux listes. Il est impossible que ces personnages ne soient pas les mêmes, appartenant au même temps. D'ailleurs le nom de Zorobabel, fils de Chealtiel (LXX Salathiel), chef de la captivité, s'imposait comme représentant la maison de David au temps de la captivité (Esd. τι, 2; v, 2; Agg. 1, 14.12.14; 11, 3). Mais comment Salathiel est-il dans Luc fils de Néri, dans Mt. fils de Jéchonias? On peut conjecturer que Luc a précisément voulu éviter ce Jéchonias, nommé Coniah (Jer. xx, 34) et Jehoiachin (Jer. Lu, 31; 11 Reg. xxiv, 6; IE Chr. xxx, 9), dont Jérémie avait prédit (xx, 30) qu'il serait stérile et qu'aucun de ses descendants ne s’assiérait sur le frône de David. Les LXX ont ἐκχήρυχτον (excommunié) au lieu de stérile, et il est possible que le sens de l’hébreu lui-même refuse à Jéchonias moins des fils selon la nature que des héritiers du trône de David. Mais Luc ἃ pu penser que Jésus étant appelé au trône de David (1, 32), il y avait inconvénient à le faire descendre de Jéchonias. Au lieu donc de suivre la lignée royale de David par Salomon, il rattache Salathiel à David par Nathan, né de David à Jérusalem et l'aîné de Salomon (I Sam. v, 14; I Chr. τῇ, 5; xiv, 4). La lignée de Nathan dont parle Zacharie (xu1, 12) est probablement celle-là, demeurée célèbre après le retour de la captivité. Comme on lisait (IL Sam. vi, 17) que les fils de David étaient prûtres, et qu’un Nathan, spécialement, avait porté ce titre (1 Reg. 1v, 5), on s'est plu dans l'antiquité à regarder la généalogie de Luc comme sacerdotale, par opposition à la lignée royale de Mt. On pourrait donc regarder Salathiel, fils de Néri, comme succédant à Jéchonias, de la même façon que Henri IV a succédé à Henri III; en hébreu, on pouvait très bien nommer Salathiel fils de Jéchonias dans ce sens. Il semble bien qu'entre eux il faut placer Assir (I Chr. m1, 17), que de nombreux exégètes prennent pour un qualificatif de Jéchonias, « le captif ». Si assir est une épithète, Jéchonias aurait eu huit fils. D'ailleurs Assir est attesté comme nom propre (Ex. vi, 24; I Chr. vi; 8.22). Nous ne voudrions pas prétendre qu'Assir ait porté le nom symbolique de Néri ou Neryah, « la lumière qui ne s'est point éteinte » (11 Sam. χχι, 17). Il n'est pas nécessaire d'avoir une précision aussi absolue, d'autant que Zorobabel luimême, d’après le texte massorétique, n'est pas le fils de Chealtiel, mais de son frère Padaïah. Les généalogies bibliques assignent pour enfant à Zorobabel, Mechoullam et Hananiah. Ce qui suit est très obscur. On croit entrevoir la lignée Hananiah, Pelatiah, Jechiah, Arnan, Obadiah, Checaniah. Aucun de ces noms n’a été emprunté ni par Lue, ni par Mt. qui suivent chacun sa voie. Plummer ἃ proposé de regarder Resa « le chef », comme un surnom de Zorobabel, d'identifier Ἰωανάς de Luc avec Hananiah, et Ἰούδα de Luc avec Ἀδιούδ de Mt. qui pourrait être Hodaviah (1 Chr. m1, 24) lui-même égal à Iouda (cf. Esdr. m, 9 et Neh. x, 9 avec Esdr. 11, 40 et 1 Chr. 1x, à. Mais il est difficile de s'orienter dans ce labyrinthe. | d Le sens de la généalogie. Il n'y a aucune raison de penser avec les anciens que Luc ἃ voulu tracer la généalogie sacerdotale du Christ. Le Nathan, qualifié de prêtre, dans un sens énigmatique et sans aucun accent (! Reg. ιν, 5), pourrait bien n'être pas Nathan le fils de David, et Euc n’a nullement attiré l'attention sur lui. Nous avons indiqué un motif plus probable du choix de cette lignée. Sa pensée résulte bien plutôt de ce qu'il a étendu la généalogie jusqu’à Adam, et même jusqu'à Dieu. Par le premier terme, Jésus n'apparait pas seulement comme l'héritier de David, mais comme celui vers lequel converge toute l'histoire. Tous les hommes peuvent se dire ses frères, à meilleur titre même que les Israélites, puisque la parenté remonte au point où tous les hommes viennent de Dieu. En écrivant τοῦ θεοῦ, Luc n'a pas voulu dire que Jésus qui passait pour fils de tous les ascendants jusqu'à Adam, était en réalité fils de Dieu, comme si toute la généalogie n'était qu'une immense parenthèse, mais un Israélite ne pouvait pas non plus conclure du récit de la Genèse qu'Adam était proprement fils de Dieu. On devait comprendre, d'après ee qui précède, que Jésus était un second Adam, bien supérieur au premier. Comme Dieu avait créé le premier en soufflant sur le limon de la terre, l'Esprit-Saint avait produit le corps du second dans le sein de la Vierge, pour sauver toute l'humanité : praeformante Deo primum animalem hominem, videlicet ut a spiritali salvaretur (Ir. ΠῚ, xxum, 3). Désormais nous sommes pleinement éelairés sur les origines du Fils de Dieu sur la terre. Il est temps pour lui de commencer son ministère. CHAPITRE IV iv, 1-43. La texrarton (Mt. 1v, 1-11; ef. Me. 1, 12-13). (6 n’est pas d’après ‘le récit de la tentation qu'on prouverait que Luc ἃ suivi Me., mais ce fait est cependant vraisemblable même iei, si l'on tient compte de son désir de le compléter par une tradition plus détaillée sur les trois tentations. Cette tradition, telle qu’elle est représentée par Mt., placçait ces tentations à la fin, et c'est aussi ce que fait Luc, mais ce qu’il concilie avec la vague indication de Mc. sur les tentations pendant le séjour au désert. On s’expliquerait très bien que Euc ait fondu en une seule les deux petites phrases de Mc., évitant une double mention du désert, et supprimant la circonstance des bêtes comme un trait trop coneret οἱ sans portée morale claire; sur le service des anges, cf, sur v. 43. Quant aux trois tentations, Lue suit évidemment ta même tradition que Mt., maïs on ne peut prouver qu'il ait suivi 16 texte grec de Mt. La principale divergence est dans l'ordre des tentations. Pourtant on ne saurait décider si Luc s’est écarté de cet ordre de propos délibéré ou parce que la tradition de lui connue en suivait un autre. Peut-être at-il voulu simplifier en remplacant la haute montagne par un lieu quelconque élevé dans le désert, et alors il était assez naturel de elore Fa tentation à Jérusalem. S'il a entendu de Jésus : « Tu ne tenteras pas le Seigneur ton Dieu », il était évident que la tentation du Temple devait être la dernière et supprimait toute discussion. Harnack (Sprüche. 35 s.) a très bien indiqué ce qui peut passer pour propre à Luc dans son réeit. Voici le tableau de ces particularités de style dont tes plus importantes sont indiquées dans le commentaire
3:1
ABILENE (Volgata: Abilina). - Tetrarchia (Lc. 3, 1), così denominata dalla capitale Abila, spesso menzionata da Flavio Giuseppe come Abila di Lisania.
AUGUSTO, GAIO GIULIO CESARE OTTAVIANO (GAIUS IULIUS CAESAR OCTAVIANUS AUGUSTUS)
… Accettò invece le designazioni del defunto per gli altri figli superstiti assegnando ad Antipa la tetrarchia della Galilea e della Perea, a Filippo quella della Batanea e della Traconitide (Lc. 3, 1). A. intervenne ancora negli affari di Palestina deponendo Archelao (6 d. C.) e affidando la Giudea ai procuratori romani.
… La B., spesso nominata da Flavio Giuseppe (Batravaia; mai nella Bibbia), era tra la Gaulanitide a ovest, la Traconitide e l'Auranitide ad est, l'Ulatha-Paniade (= « Iturea » di Lc. 3, 1) a nord, l'Arabia Nabatea e la Decapoli a sud. Aveva per limiti: a ovest il Nahr el-'Allān, a sud il Wādi ed-Deheb, a est la linea dei monti di el-Leğā e di Hawrān; a nord includeva …
II. EPOCA DEL BATTESIMO E DELL'INIZIO DEL MINISTERO PUBBLICO DI CRISTO. — Il ministero di Giovanni si iniziò «nel 15° anno del regno di Tiberio» (Lc. 3, 1). In merito si avanzano tre ipotesi. …
… Le regioni della sua tetrarchia erano: 1) l'Iturea (Lc. 3, 1; Giuseppe Flavio non usa questo nome; Iturei erano chiamati gli abitanti del Libano e dell'Antilibano); 2) la Traconitide (nome con cui Giuseppe Flavio designa l'insieme dei territori …
G. B. ricevette direttamente da Dio l'ordine di iniziare la missione (Lc. 3, 1-2), e si stabilì nel deserto di Giuda, vicino al Giordano, cioè tra le montagne di Giuda, Gerico ed il Mar Morto. …
… tre, con il titolo di etnarca; Erode Antipa (4 a. C.-39 d. C.) la Galilea e la Perea, con il titolo di tetrarca; Filippo (4 a. C.-34 d. C.), come tetrarca, ebbe la Batanea (con la Traconitide, l'Auranitide, la Gaulanitide, e l'Ulata, cioè l'Iturea di Lc. 3, 1). Salome (4 a. C.-10 d. C.) ebbe le città: Azoto, Iamnia, Archelaide, Fasaelide. …
… Alla morte di Zenodoro (20 a. C.), Augusto uni Ulatha e Paneade al regno di Erode il Grande e alla sua morte l'Imperatore concesse questo territorio con la Traconitide, la Batanea e l'Auranitide al figlio Filippo, che Lc. 3, 1, nomina «tetrarca dell'I. e della Traconitide». …
LISANIA. - Tetrarca dell'Abilene (v.), ricordato da Lc. 3, 1 nell'anno 15º dell'imperatore Tiberio.
… L. riferisce con compiacenza ciò che è particolarmente favorevole ai Gentili (Lc. 1, 1-10; 17, 11-19). Manifesta considerazione per le autorità romane (ibid. 2, 1-2; 3, 1; 7, 2-9).
All'infuori della narrazione del processo di Gesù Cristo, in cui P. ha sì gran parte, egli è nominato sei volte nel Nuovo Testamento, tre volte con il nome completo, in Lc. 3, 1; Act. 4, 27; I Tim. 6, 13; altre tre volte con il solo soprannome di P.: Lc. 13, 1; Act. 3, 13; 13, 28. Di passaggio, s. Luca (13, 1) accenna ad un episodio di crudeltà in cui P. fece …
… Data la divisione della Palestina ai tempi di Gesù (ibid. 3, 1), non tutti i p. riscuotevano ivi per lo stesso signore. …
… Vangeli, ma vi si parla ripetutamente dei suoi imperatori (Lc. 2, 1; 3, 1; Mt. 22, 17-21; Mc. 12, 14-17; Lc. 20, 22-25; 23, 3; Io. 19, 12.15; ecc.) e dei loro rappresentanti: il legato di Siria (Lc. 2, 2), il procuratore di Giudea Pilato (Lc. 3, 1; ecc.). …
… Ad es.: la predicazione del Battista, il Battesimo e le tentazioni (Mt. 3,1 - 4, 12 = Mc. 1, 1-14 = Lc. 3,1-4, 14); la tempesta sedata, gli indemoniati geraseni, la guarigione del paralitico, la vocazione di Matteo-Levi, la disputa sul digiuno, la figlia di Jair e l'emorroissa (Mt. 8,23 - …
… della Galilea e della Giudea) fin dal 41 a. C. T. è nel Nuovo Testamento il titolo ordinario di Erode Antipa (Mt. 14, 1; Lc. 3, 1. 19; 9, 7; Act. 13, 1), chiamato però talvolta anche re (Mt. 14, 9; Mc. 6, 14. 22. 25 sgg.), certo secondo l'uso popolare; Lc. 3, 1 dà lo stesso titolo di t. ad Erode Filippo, figlio di Erode il Grande: infatti tanto l'Antipa quanto Erode Filippo avevano ereditato ciascuno una delle quattro parti del Regno di Erode …
TIBERIO, CLAUDIO NERONE (Tiberius Claudius Nero; dopo l'adozione ad Augusto, Tiberius Iulius Caesar), IMPERATORE ROMANO. - N. il 16 nov. 42 a. C., m. nella villa di Miseno il 16 marzo 37 d. C. Nel Nuovo Testamento è nominato espressamente solo in Lc. 3, 1; si accenna a lui in Mt. 22, 17, 21 e paralleli (quando Gesù è interrogato sulla liceità del tributo a Cesare), Lc. 23, 2 e Io. 19, 12.15 (al processo di Gesù davanti a Pilato). …
TRACONITIDE (GR. Ἡ ΤΡΑΧΩΝΊΤΗΣ ΧΏΡΑ)
TRACONITIDE (gr. ἡ Τραχωνίτης χώρα). - Territorio ad est del Giordano, che insieme a quello dell'Iturea formava la tetrarchia di Filippo (v.), figlio di Erode il Grande (Lc. 3, 1).
3:2
ANNA (ÁNANO: CORRISPONDE ALL'EBR. HÁNAN[JAH])
… Durante la vita pubblica di Gesù era considerato ancora sommo sacerdote, non solo di onore, ma anche di fatto, forse perché lo si riteneva tale di diritto. Lc. 3, 2, lo elenca assieme a Caifa; Io. 18, 13, nota che Gesù, arrestato, fu condotto «prima da A.» e lascia intendere che il primo
… Sotto il pontificato di C., s. Giovanni Battista cominciò il suo ministero (Lc. 3, 2). Dopo risuscitato Lazaro, C. consigliava al Sinedrio di uccidere Gesù (Io. 11, 47-54; 18, 14). Annotando, nel racconto di questo episodio, che C. «era il sommo sacerdote di quell'anno», …
3:3
… Il termine « B. » nella S. Scrittura non è riservato esclusivamente al Sacramento istituito da Gesù Cristo (cf. Mt. 3, 7; Mc. 7, 4.8; Lc. 3, 3) e neppure è l'unica parola scelta a designarlo (Eph. 5, 26; Tit. 3, 5; F. Prat, I, p. 551; Oepke, pp. 527-28, 543).
3:4
Il disinteresse personale, l'oblio di se stesso, dà principio ad una s. più equistia, designata dalla parola ἀρπλάτης, la quale rievoca tanto la buona terra «non sassosa» della parabola (Lc. 8, 13), quanto la «via appianata» predicata dal Battista (Lc. 3, 4-5; cf. spagn. llaneza). …
… uniformità in costrutti rari, come ἀπεκρίμενο invece del più comune ἀπεκρίθη (Mt. 27, 12 = Mc. 14, 61 = Lc. 23, 9), in citazioni del Vecchio Testamento uniformi nei S. ma diverse tanto dall'ebraico che dal greco dei Settanta (cf. Mt. 3, 3 = Mc. 1, 3 = Lc. 3, 4; Mt. 26, 31 = Mc. 14, 27).
… titolo di t. ad Erode Filippo, figlio di Erode il Grande: infatti tanto l'Antipa quanto Erode Filippo avevano ereditato ciascuno una delle quattro parti del Regno di Erode il Grande, mentre Archelao aveva avuto le altre due parti con il titolo di etnarca. Lc. 3, 4 nomina pure un Lisanía (v.) t. dell'Abilene (v.).
3:5
ATTRIZIONE (DAL LAT. ATTERO = ABBATTO, SCHIACCIO)
… Tale dottrina è ben fondata nella Scrittura, che presenta i Profeti (Ier. 31, 18-20; Ez. 36, 31-32; Dan. 3, 38-40), Gesù Cristo (Mt. 5, 20-30; 10, 28-33; 13, 41; Lc. 7, 44; 3, 5; Io. 6, 14), gli Apostoli (Act. 8, 23; II Pt. 3, 3-9) come predicatori di penitenza, che fanno leva soprattutto sul timore delle pene eterne. …
… nel santuario per una settimana: « entravano » e « uscivano » di servizio il sabato (II Par. 23, 4, 8). Al ritorno dall'esilio rimanevano solo 4 capifamiglia sacerdotali (Neh. 7, 39-42); essi ricostituirono le 24 classi con gli antichi nomi (cf. Lc. 3, 5: Abia). …
3:7
nel granaio e brucerà la paglia ad un fuoco, che mai non si estinguerà » (Lc. 3, 7, 17). L'idea del fuoco inestinguibile unita a quella del verme che non muore, già potentemente sceneggiata da Is. 66, 23-24, ripetuta da Iud. 16, 20-21, ripresa da s. Giovanni, ritorna …
3:8
… di Dio con A. (Lc. 1, 55-73) che si verificano in Gesù, « figlio » del patriarca (Mt. 1, 1; Lc. 3, 34). Gesù stesso dà ad una malata e a Zaccheo questo titolo « figlio di A. » di cui gli Ebrei erano particolarmente fieri (Lc. 13, 16; 10, 9; Mt. 3, 9; Lc. 3, 8; Io. 8, 39), ma dichiara che non è la discendenza carnale, bensì la imitazione delle opere di A. che vale (Io. 8, 33-44). A. è in cielo (Lc. 13, 28) e giudei e gentili riposeranno …
3:9
Dei codici «insulari» vanno ricordati: il Lichfeldensis (sigla L), in Lichfield in Inghilterra, del sec. VII-VIII, contenente solo Mt. 1,1 - Lc. 3,9; il Dublinensis (sigla D), detto anche Book of Armagh, dell'812; il Kenanensis (sigla Q) o Book of Kells, conservato parimenti a Dublino, del sec. VII-VIII; l'Ottobonianus …
3:11
… E il precetto di Giovanni di dare una tunica a chi non ne ha, è rivolto al singolo che ne avesse due (Lc. 3, 11 e, così almeno secondo una interpretazione tradizionale, ibid., 11, 41). La Chiesa ha un diritto, prima che un dovere, della cura dei poveri. …
3:12
… giustizia di cui dà tutto il merito a se stesso (Lc. 18, 9-14). I p. avevano ascoltato con docilità la predicazione di Giovanni Battista (ibid. 7, 29 sg.), che, ponendo il dito sulla piaga, ingiungeva loro di non esigere più di quanto era stabilito (ibid. 3, 12 sg.).
3:13
… sulla terra, in lotta con le proprie passioni e con le seduzioni del mondo esterno (Iob 7,1; 14, 17, II Cor. 10, 4; I Tim. 1,18; Iac. 4,1; I Pt. 2, 11) ed alle schiere armate paragona le gerarchie celesti (Deut. 17,3; II Par. 33,3; Is. 24, 21; Ier. 8,7; Lc. 3, 13; Act. 7,42).
3:14
Ad accorrere al battesimo di penitenza di Giovanni il Battista fra i primi sono i soldati (Lc. 3, 14). Il caso si ripete con la predicazione di Gesù e degli Apostoli. …
3:15
… La predicazione apostolica ha per tema centrale che Gesù è il C., da Pietro (Act. 2, 36) e Paolo (Act. 9, 22; 17, 3; 18, 5, 28) a Giovanni (Io. 20, 31; I Io. 2, 22; 5, 1; II Io. 7, 9). Ferve in proposito la polemica contro i giudei, i quali aspettavano il C. (Io. 1, 20, 25, 41; 3, 28; Lc. 3, 15), sospettavano che fosse Gesù (Io. 4, 29; 7, 26 sg. 31, 41; 10, 24; 12, 34) e lo interrogano nel Sinedrio (Mt. 26, 63; Mc. 14, 61; Lc. 22, 67), poi esigono la condanna accusandolo …
… 38). Anche il vecchio Simeone « aspettava la consolazione d'Israele » (ibid. 25). Giovanni Battista sulle rive del Giordano annunziava prossima l'instaurazione del Regno di Jahweh, e molti credevano che proprio il Battezzatore fosse il Messia promesso (ibid. 3, 15-17; Io. 1, 19-28).
… Questo movimento di masse fece nascere il sospetto che G. B. fosse il Messia (Lc. 3, 15), non ostante che non appartenesse alla stirpe di David.
3:16
Non si riferisce alla materia del B. il fuoco di cui parla Giovanni Battista in Mt. 3, 11 e Lc. 3, 16. Ivi, il fuoco caratterizza l'azione dello Spirito Santo di cui mette in rilievo l'efficacia somma. …
Giovanni, del resto, è esplicito su questo punto: «Io vi ho battezzati in acqua; ma egli vi battezerà in Spirito Santo» (Mc. 1, 8), «in Spirito Santo e fuoco» (Mt. 3, 11; Lc. 3, 16), dove l'aggiunta «fuoco» sta ad indicare che la grazia, data dal B., consumerà come fuoco i peccati, purificherà e illuminerà. …
… Dio ». Il Verbo eterno è l'Unigenito del Padre, μονογενής (ibid), e non si può confondere con le creature tutte fatte per mezzo di lui, mentre egli non è strumento del Padre, pur essendo in ordine di natura dopo il Padre: è mandato e donato dal Padre (Lc. 3, 16), riceve dal Padre (16, 5), ma è una cosa sola con il Padre, che è immanente in lui: « Filippo, chi vede me, vede anche il Padre... non credete che io sono nel Padre e il Padre è in …
3:17
GIOVANNI, APOSTOLO, EVANGELISTA, SANTO
… D'altra parte nei Sinottici si trovano delle allegorie (Mt. 3, 12 = Lc. 3, 17: il mietitore che si serve del crivello; Mt. 15, 13 sg.: il giardiniere che sradica la pianta che un altro ha posto nel suo giardino). …
3:21
BATTESIMO di GESÙ. - La scena narrata dai sinottici (Mt. 3, 13-17; Mc. 1, 9-13; Lc. 3, 21-22) e accennata da Giovanni (Io. 1, 32-34) si può ricostruire facilmente così: sui trent'anni (Lc. 3, 23), Gesù parte da Nazareth, si presenta al Giordano in mezzo alla folla accorsa …
… La scena meravigliosa con la discesa dello Spirito Santo sotto forma di colomba, è descritta con vivacità dai Sinottici (Mt. 3, 13-17; Mc. 1, 9-11; Lc. 3, 21 sgg.).
… Gli Evangelisti escludono in modo evidente ogni parte diretta dello Sposo di Maria nella generazione di Cristo (cf. Mt. 1, 18-25; Lc. 1, 26-38). In particolare Luca si prende cura di annotare che Gesù era « reputato » figlio di G.: « ut putabatur » (Lc. 3, 21); dunque propriamente non lo era. Ma, esclusa la paternità vera e propria, naturale, devesi riconoscere a s. G. una paternità che non è fittizia, fondata cioè su un mero titolo colorato …
… Così nelle acque del Giordano e sul Thabor (Mc. 17, 11; Mt. 3, 16 e 17, 1; Lc. 3, 21). Gesù opera come Dio: rimette i peccati (Lc. 5, 20) perfeziona e completa la legge di Dio (Mt. 5, 21), è padrone del sabato (Mt. 12, 8; Mc. 3, 1), è giudice di tutti gli uomini …
3:22
… J. Buxtorf, G. Dalman, B. W. Bacon, P. Billerbeck riallacciano (senza fondamento) alla b. q. la «voce dal cielo» a Gesù di Mt. 3,17 (Mc. 1, 11; Lc. 3, 22) e Mt. 17,5 (Mc. 9, 7; Lc. 9, 35) e Io. 12, 28, la «voce» a Paolo e a Pietro (Act. 9,4 [22,7]; 26,14]; 10,13, 15), e Apoc. 10, 4-8; 18,4.
… facilmente così: sui trent'anni (Lc. 3, 23), Gesù parte da Nazareth, si presenta al Giordano in mezzo alla folla accorsa alla parola del Battista, e domanda di essere anch'egli battezzato (Mt. 3, 15). Quando esce dall'acqua ed è immerso nella preghiera (Lc. 3, 22), i cieli si aprono, ne discende lo Spirito Santo in forma di colomba, che si possa sopra di lui e una voce proclama: «Questo è il mio Figlio diletto, in cui mi sono compiaciuto». …
… Egli è vero Figlio di Dio, proclamato tale dal cielo durante il Battesimo e la Trasfigurazione (Mt. 3, 17 e 17, 5; Mc. 1, 11 e 9, 7; Lc. 3, 22 e 9, 35), da Pietro per divina ispirazione (Mt. 16, 16), perfino dai demoni (ibid. 8, 29; Mc. 5, 7). Gesù stesso si dichiara Figlio di Dio e per questo è condannato a morte (Mt. 26, …
… Sotto quale influsso, se non quello del Maestro incomparabile, nel quale hanno finito per riconoscere il Figlio prediletto del Padre (Mt. 3, 17; Mc. 1, 11; Lc. 3, 22; Mt. 17, 5; Mc. 9, 6; Lc. 9, 35), il suo eguale (Mt. 11, 27), il Giudice dell'ultimo giorno (Mt. 16, 27; Mc. 8, 38; Lc. 9, 26; Mt. 11, 21; Mc. 10, 37), il maestro che ha loro imposto …
… baptizantes eos in nomine Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti » (Mt. 29, 19); la teofania al Giordano: « Et descendit Spiritus Sanctus corporali specie sicut columba in ipsum et vox de caelo facta est: Tu es filius meus dilectus, in te complacui mihi » (Lc. 3, 22; cf. Mt. 3, 16-17; Mc. 1, 10-11); la distribuzione delle Grazie: « Divisiones vero Gratiarum sunt, idem autem Spiritus, et divisiones ministrationum sunt idem autem Dominus, et divisiones …
3:23
A. è ricordato in esegesi biblica per aver risolutamente sostenuto per primo (Antiq. var., l. XIV: Chronographia Philonis, fol. 101 sg.) che in Lc. 3, 23 sg. si dà la genealogia di Maria S.ma, allo scopo di risolvere l'antilogia tra le genealogie di Mt. 1 e di Lc. 3.
BATTESIMO di GESÙ. - La scena narrata dai sinottici (Mt. 3, 13-17; Mc. 1, 9-13; Lc. 3, 21-22) e accennata da Giovanni (Io. 1, 32-34) si può ricostruire facilmente così: sui trent'anni (Lc. 3, 23), Gesù parte da Nazareth, si presenta al Giordano in mezzo alla folla accorsa alla parola del Battista, e domanda di essere anch'egli battezzato (Mt. 3, 15). Quando esce dall'acqua …
… Già nelle genealogie che elencano gli antenati di G., appare che egli si è inserito nella storia dell'uomo discendendo dalla famiglia di David e di Abramo, in cui non mancano debolezze: le peccatrici Thamar, Raab e « quella di Uria ». Due sono le genealogie, contenute in Mt. 1, 1-16 e Lc. 3, 23-38, e sembrano riferire dati contrastanti. …
I. NELLA S. SCRITTURA. - Il nome di s. G. figura nella genealogia di Cristo quale diretto discendente di David (Mt. 1, 16), quindi «figlio di David» (Mt. 1, 20; cf. Lc. 2, 4; 3, 23 sgg.), titolo messianico da lui legittimamente trasmesso al suo Figlio legale, Gesù (v. GESÙ CRISTO, genealogia).
… flos de radice eius ascendet» (11, 1), l'iconografia medievale ha immaginato il patriarca J. per lo più disteso sul letto o dormiente; da lui si eleva un grande albero i cui rami sostengono i re suoi discendenti, secondo la genealogia di Mt. 1, 1-17 o Lc. 3, 23-32, fino a giungere a Giuseppe, sposo di Maria, e a Gesù Cristo. …
… Sarebbero discendenti di Adamo allo stesso modo che Cristo è presentato come figlio di Adamo e di Dio (Lc. 3, 23-38). I discendenti dei preadmiti sarebbero i gentili, gli americani, gli australiani, i groenlandesi, i vernacoli di Abramo (Gen. 17, 22. 27). Ai preadmiti Dio avrebbe dato solo la legge …
… Più strane sono le differenze tra i S. anche nei punti dove si aspetterebbe la maggiore consonanza verbale; ad es., nelle genealogie (v.) di Gesù (Mt. 1, 1-17 e Lc. 3, 23-38), nel Pater noster (Mt. 6, 9-13 e Lc. 11, 2-4), nelle parole della consacrazione ove Matteo (26, 26-28; cf. Mc. 14, 22-24) diverge da Luca (22, 19-20); nel titolo della Croce (Mt. …
… Si sa infatti che in esso mancavano, p. es., le genealogie di Gesù (Mt. 1, 1-7; Lc. 3, 23-38) e ciò che poteva rivelare un'origine umana del Salvatore. …
… 1) sarebbe molto utile per precisare in quale anno della nostra era si iniziò la predicazione del Battista e quella di Gesù (che incominciò tre, al massimo nove mesi più tardi), come anche l'età del Signore in quel tempo (indicata troppo vagamente in Lc. 3, 23). Purtroppo rimane incerto sia l'inizio del computo (dalla morte di Augusto: 19 ag. 14, oppure dalla correggenza di T. con Augusto nel governo delle province, iniziata nel 12), sia …
3:25
(solo in Lc. 3, 25) a penultimo dei « Giudici »; della
3:26
La forma Ἀκέλδαμαχ, è composta dal nome aramaico (estranco alla lingua ebraica) ḥaqlā « campo » e dēmā (ebr. dam) « sangue »; la consonante finale si aggiunge come in Σειράζ (Eccli., proemio) e Ἰωαέζ = Ἰωαέ « Giuseppe » (Lc. 3, 26) per la pronuncia volgare della consonante (G. Dalman, Grammatik des jüd.-paläst. …
3:27
SALATHIEL (EBR. SÉ'ALTL'EL - « DOMANDATO DA DIO »)
… Sé'altl'el - « domandato da Dio »). - Padre di Zorobabel (v.) in Esd. 3, 2; 5, 2; Neh. 12, 1; Agg. 1, 1. 12. 14; 2, 3. 24; I Par. 3, 17 e nelle genealogie di Gesù (Mt. 1, 12; Lc. 3, 27).
ZOROBABEL (EBR. ZERUBBĀBEL, NOME D'ORIGINE BABILONESE, ZIR-BABILI, « SEME » O « RAMPOLLO DI BABEL »)
ZOROBABEL (ebr. Zerubbābel, nome d'origine babilonese, zir-Babili, « seme » o « rampollo di Babel »). - Principe di Giuda, figlio di Salathiel e discendente del re Ioachin (v.) prigioniero in Babilonia; è tra i progenitori del Messia (Mt. 1, 13; Lc. 3, 27). Diresse il rimpatrio dei Giudei dall'esilio babilonese e la ricostruzione del Tempio di Gerusalemme. …
3:29
ELIEZER (El'ezer « il mio Dio è soccorso »)
… inservienti al Tempio, da una colonia giudaica in Babilonia (Eid. 8, 16-20). 8 e 9. Sacerdote e levita, che ripudiarono le spose straniere prese, dopo il rimpatrio dall'esilio (Eid. 10, 18, 23). 10. Figlio di Herem, antenato di Gesti (Eid. 10, 31; Lc. 3, 29).
2. Nome di tre personaggi menzionati nel Nuovo Testamento: il pubblicano, figlio di Alfeo, nel secondo e terzo Vangelo (Mc. 2, 14; Lc. 5, 27), nel primo (Mt. 9, 9) detto Matteo (v.); il figlio di Simeone e il figlio di Melchi, nella genealogia di Gesù in Lc. 3, 29, 34.
3:31
NATHAN (EBR. NĀTHĀN « [DIO] HA DATO »)
Altri nella Bibbia portano lo stesso nome: un giudeo in I Par. 2, 36; un figlio di David (II Sam. 5, 15; Zach. 12, 12), attraverso il quale Cristo fa capo a David nella genealogia di Luca (Lc. 3, 31); il padre (o fratello?) di un guerriero di David (II Sam. 23, 36; I Par. 11, 38); un messo di Esdra (Estd. 8, 16); un sacerdote postesilico che aveva preso in moglie una straniera …
3:33
… 3). I suoi discendenti furono benedetti da Dio (Ruth 4, 12). Per la genealogia v. Ruth 4, 18-22 e I Par. 2, 5, 9-3, 24. Al tempo di Zorobabel 468 discendenti di P. abitavano Gerusalemme (Neh. 11, 4-6). È ricordato nelle genealogie di Gesù (Mt. 1, 3; Lc. 3, 33).
3:34
Nel Nuovo Testamento, Maria Vergine e Zaccaria cantano le promesse ed il patto di Dio con A. (Lc. 1, 55-73) che si verificano in Gesù, « figlio » del patriarca (Mt. 1, 1; Lc. 3, 34). Gesù stesso dà ad una malata e a Zaccheo questo titolo « figlio di A. » di cui gli Ebrei erano particolarmente fieri (Lc. 13, 16; 10, 9; Mt. 3, 9; Lc. 3, 8; Io. 8, 39), ma dichiara …
… notati: l'età in cui generò il successore, quanto tempo visse in seguito, la somma totale della vita, che ebbe altri figli e figlie, e poi, degli antediluviani, la morte, ad eccezione di Henoch (v.) che «cammino con Dio e non è più perché lo tolse Dio»; Lc. 3, 34-36 enumera i P. Sethiti e semiti tra i progenitori di Cristo (cf. anche I Par. 1, 24-27). Dei cainiti invece si riferiscono notizie molto importanti: Caino edifica una città chiamandola …
THARÉ (EBR. TÉRAH, SETTANTA ΘΆΞΑ, ΘΆΞΑ)
… Con Abramo, Sarai e Lot (v.) emigrò da Ur nella Caldea a Haran (v.), ove morì (Gen. 11, 26-27.31; Lc. 3, 34).
3:35
… P. generò Reu, all'età di 30 anni, e « morì a 230 anni lasciando figli e figlie » (Gen. 11, 18 sg.). È ricordato da Lc. 3, 35.
SARUG (ebr. Šērāgh). - Discendente di Sem, presentato come figlio di Reu e padre di Nachor; quindi sarebbe stato proavo di Abramo (Gen. 11, 20-23; I Par. 1, 26). È ricordato anche nella genealogia di Gesù, che si legge in Lc. 3, 35.
3:36
2. Discendente di Seth e figlio di Mathusala (Gen. 5, 25-31; I Par. 1, 3; Lc. 3, 36 sg.).
I P. postdiluviani nel testo masoretico sono 9, nei Settanta e in Lc. 3, 36 sono 10 per l'aggiunta di Cainan (cf. anche I Par. 24, 27). In Gen. 11, 10-26 sono presentati come genealogia di Sem; in Gen. 10, 21 sg. si ha un'altra discendenza di Sem: Aelam, …
3:37
IARED (EBR. JEREDH, IN PAUSA JĀREDH)
1. Patriarca antidiluviano, della discendenza di Seth, figlio di Malaleel e padre di Henoch (Gen. 5, 15-20; I Par. 1, 2; Lc. 3, 37).
Douay-Rheims (Challoner) · Vulgata Clementina · Douay-Rheims originale (Reims 1582), trascrizione 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')). Pubblico dominio.