He ansvvereth the tempting Pharisees, that the case of a man vvith his vvife shalbe (as in the first institution it vvas) vtterly indissoluble, though for one cause he may be diuorced. 10 And therevpon to his Disciples he highly commendeth Single life for heaven. 13 He vvil haue children came vnto him. 16 He shevveth vvhat is to be done to enter into life euerlasting: 20 What also, for a rich man to be perfect: 27 As also vvhat passing revvard they shal haue vvhich follovv that his counsel of perfection: 29 yea though it be but in some one peece.
1And it came to pass when Jesus had ended these words, he departed from Galilee and came into the coasts of Judea, beyond Jordan.Or finiti che ebbe Gesù questi ragionamenti, si partì dalla Galilea, e andò verso i confini della Giudea di là, dal Giordano.AND it came to passe, vvhen IESVS had ended these vvordes, he departed from Galilee, & came into the coastes of Ievvrie beyond Iordā,Et factum est, cum consumasset Jesus sermones istos, migravit a Galilæa, et venit in fines Judææ trans Jordanem, 2And great multitudes followed him: and he healed them there.E lo seguirono molte turbe, e quivi rendette loro la sanità.and great multitudes folovved him: and he cured them there.et secutæ sunt eum turbæ multæ, et curavit eos ibi. 3And there came to him the Pharisees tempting him, saying: Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause?E andarono a trovarlo i Farisei per tentarlo, e gli dissero: È egli lecito all'uomo di ripudiare per qualunque motivo la propria moglie?And there came to him the Pharisees tempting him, and saying, Is it lavvful for a man to dimisse his vvife, for euery cause?Et accesserunt ad eum pharisæi tentantes eum, et dicentes: Si licet homini dimittere uxorem suam, quacumque ex causa ? 4Who answering, said to them: Have ye not read, that he who made man from the beginning, made them male and female? And he said:Egli rispose, e disse loro: Non avete voi letto come colui, che da principio creò l'uomo, li creò maschio, e femmina? e disse:Who ansvvering, said to them, Haue ye not read, that he which did make' from the beginning, made them male and femal? And he said.Qui respondens, ait eis: Non legistis, quia qui fecit hominem ab initio, masculum et feminam fecit eos ? Et dixit: 5For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife, and they two shall be in one flesh.Per questo lascerà l'uomo il padre, e la madre, e starà unito colla sua moglie, e i due saranno una sola carne.For this cause, man shal leaue father and mother, and shal cleane to his vvife: and they tvvo shal be in one flesh.Propter hoc dimittet homo patrem, et matrem, et adhærebit uxori suæ, et erunt duo in carne una. 6Therefore now they are not two, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let no man put asunder.Non sono adunque più due, ma una sola carne. Non divida pertanto l'uomo quel, che Dio ha congiunto.Therfore novv they are not tvvo, but one flesh. That therfore vvhich God hath ioyned together, let not man separate.Itaque jam non sunt duo, sed una caro. Quod ergo Deus conjunxit, homo non separet.
7They say to him: Why then did Moses command to give a bill of divorce, and to put away?Ma perché dunque, dissero essi, Mosè ordinò di dare il libello del ripudio, e separarsi?They say to him, why then did Moyses commaund to giue a bil of diuorce, and to dimisse her?Dicunt illi: Quid ergo Moyses mandavit dare libellum repudii, et dimittere ? 8He saith to them: Because Moses by reason of the hardness of your heart permitted you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so.Disse loro: A motivo della durezza del vostro cuore permise a voi Mosè di ripudiare le vostre mogli: per altro da principio non fu così.He saith to them, Because Moyses for the hardnes of your hart permitted you to dimisse your vviues: but from the beginning it vvas not so.Ait illis: Quoniam Moyses ad duritiam cordis vestri permisit vobis dimittere uxores vestras: ab initio autem non fuit sic. 9And I say to you, that whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and he that shall marry her that is put away, committeth adultery.Io però vi dico, che, chiunque rimanderà la propria moglie, fuori che per causa d'adulterio, e ne piglierà un'altra, commette adulterio: e chiunque sposerà la ripudiata, commette adulterio.And I say to you, that Whosoeuer shal dimisse his vvife, but for fornication, and shal mary an other, doth committe aduoutrie: and he that shal mary her that is dimissed, committeth aduoutrie.Dico autem vobis, quia quicumque dimiserit uxorem suam, nisi ob fornicationem, et aliam duxerit, mœchatur: et qui dimissam duxerit, mœchatur. 10His disciples say unto him: If the case of a man with his wife be so, it is not expedient to marry.Dissero a lui i discepoli: Se tale è la condizione dell'uomo riguardo alla moglie, non torna a conto di ammogliarsi.His disciples say vnto him, If the case of a man vvith his vvife be so, it is not expedient to mary.Dicunt ei discipuli ejus: Si ita est causa hominis cum uxore, non expedit nubere. 11Who said to them: All men take not this word, but they to whom it is given.Ed egli disse loro: Non tutti capiscono questa parola, ma quegli, a' quali è stato conceduto.Who said to them, Not al take this vvord, but they to vvhom it is giuen.Qui dixit illis: Non omnes capiunt verbum istud, sed quibus datum est. 12For there are eunuchs, who were born so from their mother’s womb: and there are eunuchs, who were made so by men: and there are eunuchs, who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven. He that can take, let him take it.Imperocché vi sono degli eunuchi, che sono usciti tali dal sen della madre: e vi son degli eunuchi, che tali sono stati fatti dagli uomini: e ve ne sono di quelli, che si sono fatti eunuchi da loro stessi per amore del regno de' cieli. Chi può capire, capisca.For there are eunuches which vvere borne so frō their mothers vvombe: and there are eunuches vvhich were made by men: and there are eunuches, vvhich haue gelded them selues for the kingdom of heauen. He that can take, let him take.Sunt enim eunuchi, qui de matris utero sic nati sunt: et sunt eunuchi, qui facti sunt ab hominibus: et sunt eunuchi, qui seipsos castraverunt propter regnum cælorum. Qui potest capere capiat.
13Then were little children presented to him, that he should impose hands upon them and pray. And the disciples rebuked them.Allora furongli presentati de' fanciulli, affinchè imponesse loro le mani, e orasse. Ma i discepoli gli sgridavano.Then were litle children presented to him, that he should impose hands vpon them & pray. And the disciples rebuked them.Tunc oblati sunt ei parvuli, ut manus eis imponeret, et oraret. Discipuli autem increpabant eos. 14But Jesus said to them: Suffer the little children, and forbid them not to come to me: for the kingdom of heaven is for such.E Gesù disse loro: Lasciate in pace i piccolini, e non vogliate impedirli al venire a me: imperocché di questi tali è il regno de' cieli.But IESVS said to them, Suffer the litle children, and stay them not from comming vnto me: for the kingdom of heauen is for such.Jesus vero ait eis: Sinite parvulos, et nolite eos prohibere ad me venire: talium est enim regnum cælorum. 15And when he had imposed hands upon them, he departed from thence.E avendo imposte ad essi le mani, si parti da quel luogo.And when he had imposed hands vpon them, he departed from thence.Et cum imposuisset eis manus, abiit inde. 16And behold one came and said to him: Good master, what good shall I do that I may have life everlasting?Allora si accostò a lui un tale, e gli disse: Maestro buono, che farò io di bene per ottenere la vita eterna?And behold one came and said to him, Good Maister, vvhat good shal I doe that I may haue life euerlasting?Et ecce unus accedens, ait illi: Magister bone, quid boni faciam ut habeam vitam æternam ? 17Who said to him: Why askest thou me concerning good? One is good, God. But if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.Gesù gli rispose: Perché m'interroghi intorno al bene? Un solo è buono, Iddio. Che se brami di arrivare alla vita, osserva i comandamenti.Who said to him, what askest thou me of good? One is good, God. But if thou vvilt enter into life, keepe the commaundements.Qui dixit ei: Quid me interrogas de bono ? Unus est bonus, Deus. Si autem vis ad vitam ingredi, serva mandata. 18He said to him: Which? And Jesus said: Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness.E quali? rispose egli. E Gesù disse: Non ammazzare: non commettere adulterio: non rubare: non dire il falso testimonio.He saith to him, which? And IESVS said, Thou shalt not murder, Thou shalt not committe aduoutrie, Thou shalt not steale, Thou shalt not beare false vvitnes,Dicit illi: Quæ ? Jesus autem dixit: Non homicidium facies; non adulterabis; non facies furtum; non falsum testimonium dices;
19Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.Onora il padre, e la madre: ed ama il prossimo tuo come te stesso.Honour thy father and thy mother, Thou shalt loue thy neighbour as thy self.honora patrem tuum, et matrem tuam, et diliges proximum tuum sicut teipsum. 20The young man saith to him: All these have I kept from my youth, what is yet wanting to me?Dissegli il giovine: Ho osservato tutto questo dalla mia giovinezza: che mi manca ancora?The yong man saith to him, Al these haue I kept from my youth: vvhat is yet vvanting vnto me?Dicit illi adolescens: Omnia hæc custodivi a juventute mea: quid adhuc mihi deest ? 21Jesus saith to him: If thou wilt be perfect, go sell what thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, follow me.Gesù gli disse: Se vuoi essere perfetto, va', vendi ciò che hai, e dallo a' poveri, ed avrai un tesoro nel cielo: e vieni, e seguimi.IESVS said to him, If thou vvilt be perfect, goe, sel the things that thou hast, & giue to the poore, and thou shalt haue treasure in heauen: and come, folovv me.Ait illi Jesus: Si vis perfectus esse, vade, vende quæ habes, et da pauperibus, et habebis thesaurum in cælo: et veni, sequere me. 22And when the young man had heard this word, he went away sad: for he had great possessions.Udite il giovine queste parole, se ne andò afflitto: perché aveva molte possessioni.And vvhen the yong man had heard this vvord, he vvent avvay sad: for he had many possessions.Cum audisset autem adolescens verbum, abiit tristis: erat enim habens multas possessiones. 23Then Jesus said to his disciples: Amen, I say to you, that a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven.E Gesù disse a' suoi discepoli: in verità vi dico, che difficilmente un ricco entrerà nel regno de' cieli.And IESVS said to his disciples, Amen I say to you, that a rich man shal hardely enter into the kingdom of heauen.Jesus autem dixit discipulis suis: Amen dico vobis, quia dives difficile intrabit in regnum cælorum. 24And again I say to you: It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of heaven.E di bel nuovo vi dico, che è più facile per un cammello il passare per la cruna d'un ago, che per un ricco l'entrare nel regno de' cieli.And againe I say to you, it is easier for a camel to passe through the eye of a nedle, then for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of heauen.Et iterum dico vobis: Facilius est camelum per foramen acus transire, quam divitem intrare in regnum cælorum.
25And when they had heard this, the disciples wondered much, saying: Who then can be saved?Udito ciò i discepoli ne restarono molto ammirati, dicendo: Chi potrà dunque salvarsi?And vvhen they had heard this, the disciples marueled very much, saying, who then can be saued?Auditis autem his, discipuli mirabantur valde, dicentes: Quis ergo poterit salvus esse ? 26And Jesus beholding, said to them: With men this is impossible: but with God all things are possible.Ma Gesù guardatili, disse loro: Impossibile è questo appresso agli uomini: ma appresso Dio tutto è possibile.And IESVS beholding, said to them. With men this is impossible: but vvith God al things are possible.Aspiciens autem Jesus, dixit illis: Apud homines hoc impossibile est: apud Deum autem omnia possibilia sunt. 27Then Peter answering, said to him: Behold we have left all things, and have followed thee: what therefore shall we have?Allora Pietro prese la parola, e gli disse: Ecco, che noi abbiamo abbandonato tutte le cose, e ti abbiam seguitato: che sarà adunque di noi?Then Peter ansvvering, said to him, Behold vve haue left al things, & haue folovved thee: vvhat therfore shal vve haue?Tunc respondens Petrus, dixit ei: Ecce nos reliquimus omnia, et secuti sumus te: quid ergo erit nobis ? 28And Jesus said to them: Amen I say to you, that you who have followed me, in the regeneration, when the Son of man shall sit on the seat of his majesty, you also shall sit on twelve seats judging the twelve tribes of Israel.E Gesù disse loro: In verità vi dico, che voi, che mi avete seguito, nella rigenerazione, allorché il Figliuolo dell'uomo sederà sul trono della sua maestà, sederete anche voi sopra dodici troni, e giudicherete le dodici tribù d'Israele,And IESVS said to them, Amen I say to you, that you vvhich haue folovved me, in the regeneration, when the Sonne of man shal sitte in the seate of his maiestie, you also shal sitte vpon tvvelue seates, iudging the tvvelue tribes of Israel.Jesus autem dixit illis: Amen dico vobis, quod vos, qui secuti estis me, in regeneratione cum sederit Filius hominis in sede majestatis suæ, sedebitis et vos super sedes duodecim, judicantes duodecim tribus Israël. 29And every one that hath left house, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands for my name’s sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall possess life everlasting.E chiunque avrà abbandonato la casa, o i fratelli, o le sorelle, o il padre, o la madre, o la moglie, o i figliuoli, o i poderi per amor del mio nome, riceverà il centuplo, e possederà la vita eterna.And euery one that hath left house, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or vvife, or children, or landes for my names sake: shal receiue an hundred fold, and shal possesse life euerlasting.Et omnis qui reliquerit domum, vel fratres, aut sorores, aut patrem, aut matrem, aut uxorem, aut filios, aut agros propter nomen meum, centuplum accipiet, et vitam æternam possidebit.
30And many that are first, shall be last: and the last shall be first.E molti primi saranno ultimi, molti ultimi (saranno) primi.And many shal be first, that are last: and last, that are first.Multi autem erunt primi novissimi, et novissimi primi.
19:1
about the year A.D. 32.
19:3
Is it lawful? Here again the Pharisees, ever anxious to ensnare Jesus in his words, come to him and ask him, is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause? Thinking now they had to a certainty succeeded, they argue thus with themselves: shall he say that it is not lawful, we will accuse him of blasphemy, contradicting the Scriptures. For, it is written, Deuteronomy iv.[xxiv.?] 1, If a man take a wife, and she find not favour in his eyes, for some uncleanness, he shall write a bill of divorce. And Malachias, 2:16, When thou shalt hate her, put her away.
Denis the Carthusian
On the other hand, if he shall say it is lawful, we will accuse him of favouring the passions. But Jesus Christ, the wisdom of the eternal Father, silences them with the authority of that Scripture they attempted to bring against him. What God has joined together, let no man put asunder; intimating, that the connexion between husband and wife is so strict, that by it they become as one flesh, and can no more be separated than one member from another. (Denis the Carthusian)
Witham
To put away his wife for every cause,[Ver. 3. Quacunque ex causa, kata pasan aitian, ex qualibet causa.] or upon every occasion. They did not doubt it, if the cause was considerable. (Witham)
19:4
Tirinus
In the beginning. It is remarked by St. Jerome, St. Chrysostom, and Theophylactus, that the Almighty does not say of any of the animals which he created, as he does of man and woman, that he joined one male to one female; from which it appears, according to the reasoning of St. Augustine, that monogamy, as well as the indissolubility of marriage, was instituted from the beginning by the Almighty. (Tirinus)
19:5
Witham
And they two shall be in one flesh.[Ver. 5. Erunt duo in carne una, duo eis sarka mian, in carnem unam, as Genesis 2:7. factus est homo in animam viventem. See Maldonat.] I translate thus with submission to better judges; yet the sense may be, by a kind of Hebraism, they shall be esteemed as one person. (Witham)
19:7
Denis the Carthusian
The Pharisees, not satisfied, again attack our Saviour. To this second attack he replies: Moses indeed permitted you to put away your wives on account of the hardness of your hearts, and to prevent a greater evil, lest through your cruelty you should poison them, or put them to violent death; but in the natural law, signified by the beginning, it was not so. (Denis the Carthusian)
19:8
Witham
Moses, because of the hardness of your hearts, permitted you, etc. Whether this was permitted in the old law, so that the man who was divorced from his wife could marry another woman, is disputed. Some think this second marriage was still unlawful, though tolerated, and not punished. At least in the new law, a divorce upon just causes may be sometimes permitted; but this does not make it lawful for the man or woman so separated to marry another. (Witham)
Tirinus
The latter part of this verse, of St. Paul, (Romans 7:3,) and the constant tradition of the Church, shew that the exception only refers to separation, but not to the marrying another during the life of the parties. In this place Christ restores the original condition of the marriage state, and henceforth will have it to be a perfect figure of the hypostatic union of his divine person with our human nature, as also of his nuptial union with his Church, and consequently that it should be indissoluble. (Tirinus)
19:9
Bible de Vence
And I say to you. It is worthy of remark, that in the parallel texts, St. Mark 10:2.; Luke 16:18.; and St. Paul to Corinthians 7:10. omit the exception of fornication; and also that St. Matthew himself omits it in the second part of the verse; and says absolutely, that he who shall marry her that is put away committeth adultery. It perhaps crept in here from Matthew 5:32, where it is found in a phrase very similar to this, but which expresses a case widely different. Divorce is in no case admitted but in that of adultery. This is what Christ teaches in Matthew 5:32, and to this the exception is referred, marked in the two texts. But in this very case the separated parties cannot contract a second marriage without again committing adultery, as we must infer, from a comparison of this text with the parallel texts of St. Mark and St. Luke. (Bible de Vence)
Tirinus
If we did not understand it in this manner, the case of the adulteress would be preferable to the case of her who should be put away without any crime of her own; as in this supposition, the former would be allowed to marry again, which the latter would not be allowed. (Tirinus)
St. Augustine is very explicit on this subject. See lib. 11. de adult conjug. ch. XXI. XXII. XXIV.
In Epitaph. Fabiolae
St. Jerome, in his high commendation of the noble matron, Fabiola, says of her: "that though she was the innocent party, for the unlawful act of marrying again, she did public penance." (In Epitaph. Fabiolae.)
This universally received doctrine of the Catholic Church was confirmed in the general council of Trent. (Session XXIV. canon 6.)
19:11
Witham
All receive not this word.[Ver. 11. Non omnes capiunt, ou pantes chorousi. Maldonat will needs have chorein, to signify intelligere, as it does sometimes. But St. Jerome on this place, unusquisque consideret vires suas, etc. And St. Chrysostom (hom. lxiii.) ut singulare esse certamen perdiscas. St. Jerome adds, Sed his datum est, qui petierunt; qui voluerunt; qui ut acciperent, laboraverunt. And St. Chrysostom, His enim datum est, qui spontè id eligunt. dedotai gar ekeinois tois boulomenois. Ed. Sav. p. 397.] To translate all cannot take, or cannot receive this word, is neither conformable to the Latin nor Greek text. To be able to live singly, and chastely, is given to every one that asketh, and prayeth for the grace of God to enable him to live so. (Witham)
Jesus Christ takes occasion from the remark of the Pharisees to praise holy virginity, which he represents as a great and good gift of heaven; and such it has ever been considered in the eye of true and genuine religion. Hence it appears that besides commandments, there are evangelical counsels, to the observance of which it is both lawful and meritorious for a Christian to devote himself, especially for the purpose of employing himself with greater liberty and less encumbrance in the service of his God.
Jansenius
Our Lord does not approve of the conclusion his disciples drew from his doctrine on the indissolubility of marriage, lest he should seem to condemn matrimony both good and necessary; neither does he reprove them for it, lest he should seem to prefer it before the state of continency. His answer therefore prudently avoids both difficulties, by seeming to grant, on the one hand, that it was more expedient not to marry, because chastity is a great gift of God; (1 Corinthians vii.) and plainly shewing on the other, that only few can have this privilege, because all do not receive this word, that is all are not called to this state. (Jansenius)
St. Chrysostom
All cannot receive it, because all do not wish it. The reward is held out to all. Let him who seeks for glory, not think of the labour. None would overcome, if all were afraid of engaging in the conflict. If some fail, are we to be less careful in our pursuit of virtue? Is the soldier terrified, because his comrade fights and falls by his side? (St. Chrysostom)
St. Jerome
He that can receive it, let him receive it. He that can fight, let him fight, overcome and triumph. It is the voice of the Lord animating his soldiers to victory. (St. Jerome)
19:12
And there are eunuchs, who have made themselves eunuchs, etc. It is not to be taken in the literal sense, but of such who have taken a firm and commendable resolution of leading a single life.
Witham
He that can receive it, let him receive it. Some think that to receive, in this and the foregoing verse, is to understand; and so will have the sense to be, he that can understand what I have said of different eunuchs, let him understand it; as when Christ said elsewhere, he that hath ears to hear, let him hear. But others expound it as an admonition to men and women, not to engage themselves in a vow of living a single life, unless, after a serious deliberation, they have good grounds to think they can duly comply with this vow, otherwise let them not make it. Thus St. Jerome on this place, and St. Chrysostom where they both expressly take notice, that this grace is granted to every one that asketh and beggeth for it by prayer. (Witham)
To the crown and glory of which state, let those aspire who feel themselves called by heaven.
19:13
about the year A.D. 33.
Witham
That he should lay his hands upon them. It was the custom to present children to men reputed holy, as it is now the custom for bishops and priests to pray and give a blessing to others. (Witham)
St. Remigius
It was customary with the Jews to present their children to the elders, that they might receive their blessing; hence they present them on this occasion to our Lord. (St. Remigius)
St. Jerome
And the disciples rebuked them, not because they were unwilling that the children should be blessed by the hands of our Saviour, but as they were yet weak in faith, they thought that, like other men, he would be teased by the importunity of the offerers. (St. Jerome)
Haydock
The people thought that the same hands, which could restore instantaneous health to the sick, must necessarily impart every good to such children as they should touch. The disciples thought they made too free with their Master, requesting what, in their ideas, was beneath his dignity. (Haydock)
19:14
Jesus said ... Suffer the little children, etc. He here blames the conduct of the apostles, and shews that his assertions in praise of virginity, were not meant as derogatory from the holiness of the marriage state, by giving his blessing to these little ones, the fruits of lawful wedlock; and declares that the kingdom of heaven is the portion of such as resemble these little ones, by the innocence of their lives and simplicity of their hearts. He, moreover, shews that confidence in our own strength, in our own free-will, and in our merits, is an invincible obstacle to salvation. St. Mark 10:16 says, that embracing them, and laying hands upon them, he blessed them. Hence probably arose the ancient custom of presenting children to bishops and priests, to receive their blessing, beside that of confirmation immediately after baptism.
Nicephorus tells us that the celebrated St. Ignatius, afterwards bishop of Antioch, was one of these children who, on this occasion, received Christ's blessing.
St. Chrysostom
If we would enter into the kingdom of heaven, we must imitate the virtues of little children. Their souls are free from every passion; void of every thought of revenge, they approach those who have grieved them as to their best friends. Though the parent repeatedly chastise his child, it still will adhere to him, still will it love him, and prefer him in all his poverty to all the fascinating charms of dazzling gold and purple. They seek not beyond what is necessary, they admire not the beauty of the body, they are not grieved at the loss of worldly wealth, therefore does the Saviour of the world say, that theirs is the kingdom of heaven. (St. Chrysostom, hom. lxiii.)
19:16
Witham
Behold one came. St. Luke (xviii. 18.) calls him a prince or lord. Some conjecture this young man came only in a dissembling way, to try or tempt our Saviour, as the Pharisees sometimes did, and without any design to follow his advice; but by all the circumstances related of him, by the evangelists particularly, when St. Mark (Chap. 10:22.) tells us, he went away sorrowful, he seems to have come with sincerity, but without resolution strong enough to leave his worldly goods and possessions. (Witham)
19:17
Witham
Why askest thou me concerning good?[Ver. 17. Quid me interrogas de bono? erotas peri agathou. In the common Greek copies, ti me legeis agathon.] In the ordinary Greek copies, why dost thou call me good? (Witham)
Tirinus
One is good, etc. God alone, by his own nature, is essentially, absolutely, and unchangeably good; at the same time, he is the source of all created goodness, as all goodness is a mere emanation from his. The person here addressing our Saviour, appears not to have believed that Christ was God: wherefore our Saviour, to rectify his misconception, tells him that God alone is good, insinuating thereby, that he should believe him to be God, or cease to address him by the title of good. (Tirinus)
Witham
The sense is, that only God is good necessarily, and by his own nature. The Arians bring this place to shew, that Christ is not truly and properly God: but by this way of speaking, Christ does not deny that he is good, even by his nature, and consequently God; but seems to speak in this manner, to make the man know who he was. (Witham)
19:19
St. Jerome thinks his answer was not conformable to truth, or he would not have been sorry when ordered to distribute his goods among the poor.
19:21
Witham
If thou wilt be perfect. This shews there is a difference betwixt things that are of precept, and those that are of counsel only, which they aim at, that aspire to the greatest perfection. (Witham)
Evangelical perfection essentially consists in the perfect observance of God's commandments, which is greatly assisted by embracing not only voluntary poverty, but also the other counsels given to us in the gospels, such as perpetual chastity, and entire obedience.
Bristow
Follow me. Thus to follow Christ, is to be without wife and care of children, to have no property, and to live in community; this state of life hath a great reward in heaven. This state, we learn from St. Augustine, the apostles followed; and he himself not only embraced it, but exhorted as many others as he possibly could to embrace it. (St. Augustine, ep. lxxxix, in fine, and in Ps. ciii. conc. 3. post. med.) (Bristow)
Nicholas of Lyra
The whole perfection of a Christian life consists in following Christ, by an imitation of his virtues. So that he who possesses poverty and chastity, does not immediately become perfect, but only enters upon the way of perfection, by facilitating his progress to perfection, removing hindrances, and laying aside all care of temporal concerns. (Nicholas of Lyra.)
In this chapter Jesus Christ delivers the evangelical counsels. In ver. 12, he recommends continency---here he proposes voluntary poverty, and immediately adds that of obedience, follow me. St. Augustine teaches, that the apostles bound themselves by vow to the observance of these three counsels. (De civit. Dei. Book xvii. Matthew 4.)
19:22
St. Augustine
Sorrowful. I know not how it happens, that when superfluous and earthly things are loved, we are more attached to what we possess in effect than in desire. For, why did this young man depart sad, but because he had great riches? It is one thing not to wish for, and another to part with them, when once we have them. They become incorporated, and, as it were, a part of ourselves, like food; and, when taken, are changed into our own members. No one easily suffers a member of his body to be cut off. (St. Augustine, ep. xxxi. ad Paul.)
19:24
Witham
It is easier for a camel,[Ver. 24. Camelum, kamelun, which is observed to be different from kamilos, a cable, or ship-rope. See Mr. Legh, Critica Sacra.] etc. This might be a common saying, to signify any thing impossible, or very hard. Some by a camel, would have to be meant a cable, or ship-rope, but that is differently writ in Greek, and here is commonly understood a true camel. (Witham)
But nothing is impossible to God.
19:25
St. Augustine and Nicholas of Lyra
They wondered very much. The apostles wondered how any person could be saved, not because all were rich, but because the poor were also included, who had their hearts and affections fixed on riches. (St. Augustine and Nicholas of Lyra.)
19:27
St. Jerome
Behold we have left all! What confidence this in Peter! He had been but a fisherman, always poor, living by his industry, and gaining his bread by the sweat of his brow; yet with great confidence he says, we have left all. (St. Jerome)
St. Gregory
For, we are not to consider what he left, but the will with which he left his all. He leaves a great deal, who reserves nothing for himself. It is a great matter to quit all, though the things we leave be very inconsiderable in themselves. Do we not observe with how great affection we love what we already have, and how earnestly we search after what we have not? It is on this account that St. Peter, and his brother, St. Andrew, left much, because they denied themselves even the desire and inclination of possessing any thing. (St. Gregory, on S. Mat. hom. v.)
St. Augustine
Though I have not been rich, I shall not, on that account, receive a less reward; for, the apostles, who have done the same thing with me, were no richer than myself. He therefore leaves all the world, who leaves all he has, and the desire of ever having more. (St. Augustine, ep. lxxxix. ad. Hilar.)
19:28
Tirinus
In the regeneration. Jesus Christ here calls the general resurrection the regeneration, because there will then be a renovation of the human body, and of the whole world. The promise which is here made to the apostles of sitting on thrones at the general judgment, and passing sentence on the 12 tribes of Israel, must not be understood as limited to the apostles, or to the Jews. For St. Paul says, (1 Corinthians 6:2-3,) that not only he, but also many of the Corinthians to whom he was writing, would judge not merely the 12 tribes, but the whole world, and moreover angels themselves. It is the opinion of many of the Fathers, St. Jerome, St. Augustine, St. Gregory, and others, that all apostolical men, that is such as, renouncing the goods of this life, adhere to Christ in mind and affection, and by every possible means promote his reign and the propagation of his gospel, will be so far honoured as to sit in judgment with him at the general resurrection. (Tirinus)
Witham
You also shall sit on twelve seats, or thrones, meaning at the general resurrection, when Christ will appear on the throne of his majesty, with his heavenly court, and with his elect, shall condemn the wicked world. (Witham)
19:29
Witham
Shall receive a hundred-fold. In St. Mark we read a hundred-fold now in this time, and in the world to come life everlasting. Which hundred-fold is to be understood of the blessings in this life, of interior consolations, of the peace of a good conscience, and in general of spiritual gifts and graces, which are much more valuable than all temporal goods. And besides these spiritual graces in this world, he shall have everlasting glory in the world to come. (Witham)
St. Chrysostom
Our Saviour does not here lay down a precept of separating from wives; but, as when he before said, he that loseth his life for my sake, shall find it, he did not counsel, much less command us to lay violent hands upon ourselves; so here he teaches us to prefer the duties of piety to every other consideration. (St. Chrysostom, hom. lxv.)
Bible de Vence
The reward will be a hundred-fold, by the accumulation of spiritual gifts and graces in this life, infinitely superior to all we have left, and the inheritance of life eternal in the next. (Bible de Vence)
19:9
Except it be, etc.... In the case of fornication, that is, of adultery, the wife may be put away: but even then the husband cannot marry another as long as the wife is living.
19:11
19:12
There are eunuchs, who have made themselves eunuchs, for the kingdom of heaven.... This text is not to be taken in the literal sense; but means, that there are such, who have taken a firm and commendable resolution of leading a single and chaste life, in order to serve God in a more perfect state than those who marry: as St. Paul clearly shews. 1 Cor. 7. 37, 38.
19:1
Concordanza Mr. 10, 1.
19:3
Liturgia The Gospel for Mariage. And for S. Agatha Febr. 5.
make man Gen. 1, 27.
19:4
Concordanza Gen. 2, 24.
19:6
6. Not man separate.] This inseparability betwixtman and wife riseth of that, that wedlocke is a Sacrament. Aug. li. 2. de pec. origine c. 34. to. 7. De•upt. & concupis. li. 1. c. 10.
Concordanza Deut. 24, 1.
19:8
Concordanza Mt. 5, 32
19:9
9. But for fornication.) Mariage after diuorce vnlawful. For aduoutrie one may dimisse an other, Mat. 5. But neither party can marry againe for any cause during life. Aug. li, 11. de adult. coniug. c. 21. 22. 24. for the which vnlawful act of marrying agayne, Fabiola that noble matrone of Rome albeit shee was the innocent part, In Epitaph. Fabiola. did publike penance, as S. Hierom writeth in her high commendation therefore. And in S. Paul Ro. 7. it is plaine that shee which is with an other man, her husband yet liuing, shal be called an aduouteresse: contrary to the doctrine of our Aduersaries.
Concordanza Mr. 10, 11.
Concordanza Luc. 16, 18.
19:10
Concordanza 1. Cor. 7, 11.
19:11
11. Not al take.) Whosoeuer haue not this gift geuen them, it is either for that they wil not haue it, or for that they fulfil not that which they wil: and they that haue this gift or attayne to this word, haue it of God and their owne free wil. Aug. li. de grat. & lib. arbit. c. 4. So that it is euident no man is excluded from this gift, Orig. tract. 7. in Mat. but (as Origen here saith) it is geuen to al that aske for it: contrarie to our Aduersaries that say it is impossible, and that for excuse of breaking their vowes, wickedly say, they haue not the gift.
〈Greek〉. caplunt.
19:12
12. Gelded them selues.) Vow of chastitie. They geld them selues for the kingdom of heauen which vow chastity. Aug. de virginitate c. 24. which proueth those kind of vowes to be both lawful, and also more meritorious, and more sure to obtaine life euerlasting, then the state of wedlocke, contrarie to our Adu, in al respectes.
19:13
13. Impose.) Bishops and Religious mens blessing. They knew the valour of Christes blessing, and therfore brought their children to him: as good Christian people haue at al times brought their children to Bishops to haue their blessing. See Annotation before Chap. 10, 12. And of Religious mens blessing see Russin. li. 2. c. 1. hist. S. Hierom in Epitaph. Paulae c. 7. & in vit. Hilarionis, Theodoret, in historia sanctorū Patrum num. 8.
Concordanza Mr. 10, 13.
Concordanza Luc. 18, 15.
19:14
14. He that can.) Counsels not Precepts. It is not said of the Precepts, keepe them who can, for they be necessarie vnder paine of damnation to be kept: Aug. ser. 6. de temp. but of Counsels only (as of virginity, abstaining from flesh and wine, and of geuing al a mans goods away to the poore) it is said, He that can attaine to it, let him doe it: which is counsel only, not a commaundement. Contrary to our Adu. that say, there are no Counsels, but only precepts.
19:16
Concordanza Mr. 10, 17.
19:17
Concordanza Luc. 18, 18.
I see not (saith S. Augustine) why Christ should say, If thou wilt haue life euerlasting, keepe the commaundements: if without obseruing of thē, by only faith one might be saued. Aug. de •id, & op. c. 15.
19:18
Concordanza Exo. 20, 13.
19:19
Concordanza Leu. 19, 18.
19:21
21. If thou wilt be perfect.] The Religious state of perfection. Loe, he maketh a plaine difference betwene keeping the commaundements, which is necessary for euery man: and being perfect, which he counseleth only to them that wil. And this is the state of greate perfection which Religious men doe professe, according to Christes counsel here, leauing al things and folowing him.
21. Folow me.] Thus to folow Christ is to be without wife and care of children, to lacke propriety, and to liue in common, and this hath great reward in heauen about other states of life: which, S. Augustine saith, the Apostles folowed, and him self, and that he exhorted others to it as much as lay in him. Aug. ep. 19. in fine, & in ps. 103 Conc 3. post med.
19:24
S. Marke expoundeth it thus, riche men trusting in their riches, ca. 10, 24.
19:26
26. Al things possible.] This of the camel through a nedels eye, being possible to God, although he neither hath done it, nor by like wil doe it: maketh against the blasphemous infidelity of our Aduersaries that say, God can do no more then he hath done or wil doe. We see also that God can bring a camel through a nedels eye, and therfore his body through a doore, and our of the sepulchre shut, and out of his mother a virgin, and generally aboue nature and contrary to nature do with his body as he list.
19:27
27. Left al.) Vow of pouertie in respect of reward. This perfection of leauing al things the Apostles vowed. Aug. li. 17. de Ciu. Dei c. 4.
27. What shal we haue.) They leaue al things in respect of reward, and Christ doeth wel allow it in them by his answer.
Liturgia The Gospel vpō the Conuersion of S. Paul Ian.
19:28
28. You also shal sitte.) Aug. in ps. 121. Note that not only Christ, who is the principal and proper iudge of the liuing and the dead, but with him the Apostles and al perfect Saints shal iudge: and yet that doeth nothing derogate to his prerogatiue, by whom and vnder whom they hold this and al other dignities in this life and the next.
25. And in a v• tiue Masse of SS. Peter and Paul, and for holy Abbotes.
19:29
Hereof is gathered that the Apostles amōg other things left their wiues also to folow Christ. Hiero. li. 1. aduers. Iouin.
Concordanza Mr. 10, 31.
19:30
Concordanza Lu. 13, 30.
19:1
Origene † 254 d.C. Origen's Commentary on Matthew 14.14
“ And it came to pass when Jesus had finished these words. ”
Origene † 254 d.C. Origen's Commentary on Matthew 14.15
Only, when Jesus had finished these words, having spoken them in Galilee about Capernaum, then “He departed thence, and came into the borders of Judæa,”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. The Harmony of the Gospels 2.62
… and great multitudes followed Him; and He healed them there. The Pharisees also came unto Him, tempting Him, and saying, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause?” And so on, down to the words, “He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.”
19:2
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 28
[9] But when his brethren went up unto the feast, he journeyed from Galilee, and [10] came to the borders of Judæa, to the country beyond Jordan;
Origene † 254 d.C. Origen's Commentary on Matthew 14.15
Only, when Jesus had finished these words, having spoken them in Galilee about Capernaum, then “He departed thence, and came into the borders of Judæa,” which were different from Galilee. But He came to the borders of Judæa, and not to the middle of it, but, as it were, to the outermost parts, where great multitudes followed Him,
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 59
“And,” when He was come, “great multitudes followed Him, and He healed them.”
19:3
Tertulliano † 220 d.C. On Monogamy 9
… secondly, because “What God hath conjoined, man shall not separate,”
Origene † 254 d.C. Origen's Commentary on Matthew 14.16
After this it is written that “ there came unto Him the Pharisees tempting Him and saying, Is it lawful for a man to wife for every cause? ”
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 59
But not so to the Pharisees, but even for this self-same thing they become more fierce, and come unto Him tempting Him. For because they could not lay hold of the works that were doing, they propose to Him questions. For they “came unto Him, and tempting Him said, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause?”
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 61
… For that in every case they questioned Him not in order to learn, but to find fault with His words, is clear, not from this passage only, but from many others also. Since when they came to Him and asked, “Is it lawful to give tribute unto Cæsar or not?” ( Matt. xxii. 17 ), when they spake about putting away a wife (
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. A Treatise Against Two Letters of the Pelagians 1.9
… Because concerning that very marriage which is now contracted, the Lord was consulted by the Jews whether it was lawful for any cause to put away a wife. And to the testimony of the law on the occasion mentioned, He added, “What, therefore, God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.”
19:4
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 25
… And the Pharisees came unto him, tempting [29] him, and asking him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife? He said, What [30] did Moses command you? They said, Moses made it allowable for us, saying , Whosoever [31] will, let him write a writing of divorcement, and put away his wife. Jesus answered and said unto them,
Tertulliano † 220 d.C. The Five Books Against Marcion 4.34
… “Moses,” says He, “because of the hardness of your hearts, suffered you to give a bill of divorcement; but from the beginning it was not so” —for this reason, indeed, because He who had “made them male and female” had likewise said, “They twain shall become one flesh; what therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.”
Origene † 254 d.C. Origen De Principiis 3.5.1
… David, too, declares: “The heavens shall perish, but Thou shalt endure; yea, all of them shall wax old as doth a garment: as a vesture shalt Thou change them, and they shall be changed: but Thou art the same, and Thy years shall have no end.” Our Lord and Saviour, indeed, in the words, “He who made them at the beginning, made them male and female,”
Origene † 254 d.C. Origen's Commentary on Matthew 14.16
… Only, the Saviour, in response to those who tempted Him, laid down dogmas; for they said, “Is it lawful for a man to put away his own wife for every cause?” and He answered and said, “Have ye not read that He who created them from the beginning made them male and female?”
san Metodio d'Olimpo † 311 d.C. From the Discourse on the Resurrection, Part I 1
… And Christ confirms the taking of these things as they are written, when, to the question of the Pharisees about putting away a wife, He answers: “Have ye not read that He which made them at the beginning made them male and female; and said, For this cause shall a man leave his father,”
sant'Atanasio di Alessandria † 373 d.C. On the Incarnation of the Word 1
… 5. But the sectaries imagine to themselves a different artificer of all things, other than the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, in deep blindness even as to the words they use. 6. For whereas the Lord says to the Jews
sant'Atanasio di Alessandria † 373 d.C. Against the Arians. (Orationes contra Arianos IV.) 2.19
… to be refused if it be received with thanksgiving ;’ and in the book of Wisdom it is written, ‘Having ordained man through Thy wisdom, that he should have dominion over the creatures which Thou hast made .’ And these, being creatures, are also said to be created, as we may further hear from the Lord, who says, ‘He who created them, made them male and female
sant'Atanasio di Alessandria † 373 d.C. Against the Arians. (Orationes contra Arianos IV.) 2.21
… wherefore also what is said of them, ‘In the beginning He made,’ is as much as saying of them, ‘From the beginning He made:’—as the Lord, knowing that which He had made, taught, when He silenced the Pharisees, with the words, ‘He which made them from the beginning, made them male and female
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 16
… since (what is more) in many cases, what He showed forth by His deeds, by His words He uttered not openly? Thus that it was Himself who made mankind He showed clearly even by that blind man; but when He was speaking of our formation at the beginning, He said not, “I made,” but “He who made them, made them male and female.”
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans 13
… ( Matt. v. 38 .) And so great was this condescension, that the written Law even required less than the law of nature. For the law of nature ordered one man to associate with one woman throughout. And this Christ shows in the words, “He which made them at the beginning, made them male and female.” (
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans 23
… For we see many that come to be with one another for evil, even by the law of marriage, and this we should not ascribe to God. But as He said Himself, “He which made them at the beginning, made them male and female, and said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife, and they twain shall be one flesh.” (
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Homilies on Ephesians 20
… and afterwards, making it more restricted, He no longer allowed sisters and daughters to be wives, lest we should on the other hand contract our love to one point, and thus in another manner be cut off from one another. Hence Christ said, “He which made them from the beginning, made them male and female.” (
san Girolamo † 420 d.C. Against the Pelagians 3.6
… He afterwards contended with an angel in the form of a man, and was strengthened by God; whereupon, instead of Jacob, the supplanter, he received the name, the most upright of God. For he would not have dared to return to his cruel brother unless he had been strengthened and secured by the Lord’s help. In the sequel we read,
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. City of God 14.22
… Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What, therefore, God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Reply to Faustus the Manichæan 19.29
… "Have ye not read, that He that made them at the beginning made them male and female, and said, For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife, and they two shall be one flesh? Therefore they are no longer twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined, let no man put asunder."
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. On Marriage and Concupiscence 2.9
… To the Manicheans it says: “Have ye not read that He which made man at the beginning, made them male and female; and said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife; and they twain shall be one flesh? Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What, therefore, God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. A Treatise Against Two Letters of the Pelagians 4.2
… They add, moreover, “What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. A Treatise Against Two Letters of the Pelagians 4.9
… What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder”?
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 41.7
… Now in the place where Christ Himself brought forward this testimony, He showed that the marriage bond might not be dissolved: ‘Have ye not read,’ said He, ‘that God which made them at the beginning, made them male and female; and said, They twain shall be in one flesh? What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.’
19:5
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 25
… He said, What [30] did Moses command you? They said, Moses made it allowable for us, saying , Whosoever [31] will, let him write a writing of divorcement, and put away his wife. Jesus answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, He that made them from the beginning [32] made them male and female, and said,
Tertulliano † 220 d.C. To His Wife i.3
… as if from this period onward I were prescribing an end to marrying. Let them see to that, who, among the rest of their perversities, teach the disjoining of the “one flesh in twain;”
Origene † 254 d.C. Origen's Commentary on Matthew 14.17
But since the Apostle understands the words, “ And they twain shall be one flesh, ”
san Girolamo † 420 d.C. The Letters of St. Jerome 55.2
… Or to put the matter in a different light: other sins are outside of us; and whatever we do we do against others. But fornication defiles the fornicator both in conscience and body; and in accordance with the words of the Lord, “for this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife; and they twain shall be one flesh,”
san Girolamo † 420 d.C. Against Jovinianus 1.5
5. First of all, he says, God declares that “therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.” And lest we should say that this is a quotation from the Old Testament, he asserts that it has been
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. A Treatise on the Merits and Forgiveness of Sins, and on the Baptism of Infants 1.21
… since (as we know) the woman is of the man, and the two are one flesh. Whence also it is written: “And they twain shall be one flesh; wherefore,” the Lord says, “they are no more twain, but one flesh.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Expositions on the Book of Psalms 45.3
… and He is even as a bridegroom coming out of his chamber.” The nuptial union is that of “the Word,” and the flesh. The Bridechamber of this union, the Virgin’s womb. For the flesh itself was united to the Word: whence also it is said, “Henceforth they are not twain, but one flesh.”
papa san Gregorio I Magno † 604 d.C. Register of the Epistles of St. Gregory the Great 11.45
… For the Truth in person says, What God hath joined together let not man put asunder ( Matth. xix. 6 ). He says also, It is not lawful for a man to put away his wife saving for the cause of fornication ( Ibid. 9 ). Who then may contradict this heavenly legislator? We know how it is written, Two shall be one flesh (
Pseudo-Cyprian Of the Discipline and Advantage of Chastity 5
… For both her own husband belongs to the woman, for the reason that besides him she may know no other; and the woman is given to the man for the purpose that, when that which had been his own had been yielded to him, he should seek for nothing belonging to another. And in such wise it is said, “Two shall be in one flesh,”
19:6
san Giustino † 165 d.C. The First Apology 16
… “The greatest commandment is, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and Him only shall thou serve, with all thy heart, and with all thy strength, the Lord God that made thee.” And when a certain man came to Him and said, “Good Master,” He answered and said, “There is none good but God only, who made all things.”
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 25
… Jesus answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, He that made them from the beginning [32] made them male and female, and said, For this reason shall the man leave his father [Arabic, p. 99] and his mother, and cleave to his wife; and they both shall be one body? [33]
Tertulliano † 220 d.C. On Monogamy 5
… And accordingly, those whom God “from the beginning” conjoined, “two into one flesh,” man shall not at the present day separate.
Origene † 254 d.C. Origen's Commentary on Matthew 14.16
… etc., and, subjoining to these words, because of the saying, “And the twain shall become one flesh,” teaching in harmony with one flesh, namely, “So that they are no more twain, but one flesh.” And, as tending to convince them that they should not put away their wife for every cause, is it said, “What God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.”
Origene † 254 d.C. Origen's Commentary on Matthew 14.17
But since the Apostle understands the words, “ And they twain shall be one flesh, ” of Christ and the church, we must say that Christ keeping the saying, “What God hath joined together let not man put asunder,”
sant'Atanasio di Alessandria † 373 d.C. Defence of His Flight. (Apologia de Fuga.) 17
… For with wise caution they guarded against these two things; either that they should offer themselves up without reason (for this would have been to kill themselves, and to become guilty of death, and to transgress the saying of the Lord, ‘What God hath joined let not man put asunder
san Basilio † 379 d.C. The Letters 160.4
… The words “None of you shall approach to any one that is near of kin to him, to uncover their nakedness,” embraces also this form of kinsmanship, for what could be more akin to a man than his own wife, or rather than his own flesh? “For they are no more twain but one flesh.”
san Girolamo † 420 d.C. The Letters of St. Jerome 48.4
… intercourse with her or repudiate her, so long as she does not sin, he must render unto his wife her due, because he has of his own free will bound himself to render it under compulsion.” Can one who declares that it is a precept of the Lord that wives should not be put away, and that what God has joined together man must not, without consent, put asunder
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Reply to Faustus the Manichæan 22.61
… To purchase the degradation of another, disgraces the purchaser; so that, though the sin would have been greater if Judah had knowingly lain with his daughter-in-law (for if, as the Lord says, man and wife are no more two, but one flesh,
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. A Treatise on the Grace of Christ, and on Original Sin 2.39
… and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife;” and considered as the bond of union: “What God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 9.2
… notwithstanding the same Lord declares in the Gospel, on being asked whether it be lawful for a man to put away his wife for any cause, that it is not lawful save for the cause of fornication. In His answer, if you remember, He said, “What God hath joined together let not man put asunder.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Ten Homilies on the First Epistle of John 1.2
… and that Bridegroom’s chamber was the Virgin’s womb, because in that virginal womb were joined the two, the Bridegroom and the bride, the Bridegroom the Word, and the bride the flesh; because it is written, “And they twain shall be one flesh;” and the Lord saith in the Gospel, “Therefore they are no more twain but one flesh.
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Expositions on the Book of Psalms 38.5
… whilst you hear at the same time the accents of the Head Itself also. Yet do not either, when you hear the voice of the Body, separate the Head from it; nor the Body, when you hear the voice of the Head: because “they are no more twain, but one flesh.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Expositions on the Book of Psalms 75.4
… But whether Head speaketh or whether members speak, Christ speaketh: He speaketh in the person of the Head, He speaketh in the person of the Body. But what hath been said? There shall be two in one flesh. “This is a great Sacrament:” “I,” he saith, “speak in Christ and in the Church.” And He Himself in the Gospel, “Therefore no longer two, but one flesh.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Expositions on the Book of Psalms 149.10
… if ye do, ye shall be bound more tightly with fetters. Such fetters the hands of the Bishop make strong for you. Do not men who are thus fettered fly to the Church, and are here loosed? Men do fly hither, desiring to be rid of their wives: here they are more tightly bound: no man looseth these fetters. “What God joined together, let not man put asunder.”
Giovanni Cassiano † 435 d.C. The Seven Books of John Cassian on the Incarnation of the Lord, Against Nestorius 5.11
And so to every man who breaks out into this mad blasphemy, the Lord Jesus in the gospel Himself repeats what He said to the Pharisees, and declares: “What God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.”
papa san Leone I Magno † 461 d.C. Letters 159
… But because we know it is written that “a woman is joined to a man by God ,” and again, we are aware of the precept that “what God hath joined, man may not put asunder
papa san Gregorio I Magno † 604 d.C. Register of the Epistles of St. Gregory the Great 11.45
… For, if they say that marriages should be dissolved for the sake of religion , be it known that, though human law has conceded this, yet divine law has forbidden it. For the Truth in person says, What God hath joined together let not man put asunder (
19:7
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 25
… 99] and his mother, and cleave to his wife; and they both shall be one body? [33] So then they are not twain, but one body; the thing, then, which God hath [34] joined together, let no man put asunder.
sant'Ireneo di Lione † 202 d.C. Against Heresies 4.15
… for them by Moses, on account of their hardness [of heart], and because of their unwillingness to be obedient, when, on their saying to Him, “Why then did Moses command to give a writing of divorcement, and to send away a wife?” He said to them, “Because of the hardness of your hearts he permitted these things to you; but from the beginning it was not so;”
Origene † 254 d.C. Origen's Commentary on Matthew 14.18
After this we will discuss the saying of the Pharisees which they said to Jesus, “ Why then did Moses command to give a bill of divorcement and put her away? ”
san Basilio † 379 d.C. The Letters 224.1
1. I have received your reverence’s letter and I am delighted at the title which you have felicitously applied to the writing which they have composed in calling it “a writing of divorcement.”
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 59
… ought they not to have marvelled at His wisdom? ought they not to have stood amazed at His accordance with the Father? But none of these things do they, but as though they were contending for the law , they say, “How then did Moses command to give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away?”
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans 12
… for how should there be, since when the husband was alive it allowed this to her who had a writing of divorcement? But this he does not set down, as it was rather a charge against the woman; for although this had been granted, still it was not cleared of blame. (
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Reply to Faustus the Manichæan 19.29
… For when the Jews replied, "Why did Moses then command to give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away?" Christ said unto them, "Moses, because of the hardness of your heart, suffered you to put away your wives."
19:8
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 25
… 99] and his mother, and cleave to his wife; and they both shall be one body? [33] So then they are not twain, but one body; the thing, then, which God hath [34] joined together, let no man put asunder. And those Pharisees said unto him, Why did Moses consent that a man should give a writing of divorcement and put her away? [35]
Tertulliano † 220 d.C. The Five Books Against Marcion 4.34
… But then you have rejected that other gospel which witnesses to the same verity and the same Christ. There, while prohibiting divorce, He has given us a solution of this special question respecting it: “Moses,” says He, “because of the hardness of your hearts, suffered you to give a bill of divorcement; but from the beginning it was not so”
Origene † 254 d.C. Origen's Commentary on Matthew 14.18
… but from the beginning it hath not been so.”
Origene † 254 d.C. Origen's Commentary on Matthew 14.23
… for something of this kind is indicated in the words, “Moses for your hardness of heart suffered you to put away your wives;”
Origene † 254 d.C. Origen's Commentary on Matthew 14.24
… but indeed perhaps Moses called every sin an unseemly thing, on the discovery of which by the husband in the wife, as not finding favour in the eyes of her husband, the bill of divorcement is written, and the wife is sent away from the house of her husband; “but from the beginning it hath not been so.”
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 17
… For such was the race of the Jews. For they who did not spare children, who slew prophets, and “shed blood as water,” much more would they have showed no mercy to women. For this cause He allowed the less, to remove the greater evil. For that this was not a primary law, hear Him saying, “Moses wrote these things according to the hardness of your hearts,”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. The Confessions 3.7
… Is justice, then, various and changeable? Nay, but the times over which she presides are not all alike, because they are times.
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. On the Profit of Believing 6
… were with him, but only for the priests?” But the instance pertains to ætiology, that, when Christ had forbidden a wife to be put away, save for the cause of fornication, and they, who asked Him, had alleged that Moses had granted permission after a writing of divorcement had been given, This, saith He, “Moses did because of the hardness of your heart.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. On the Good of Marriage 7
… And something like this custom, on account of the hardness of the Israelites, Moses seems to have allowed, concerning a bill of divorcement. In which matter there appears rather a rebuke, than an approval, of divorce.
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. On Marriage and Concupiscence 1.11
… though not by this world’s rule, which allows a divorce between the parties, without even the allegation of guilt, and the contraction of other nuptial engagements,—a concession which, the Lord tells us, even the holy Moses extended to the people of Israel, because of the hardness of their hearts.
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Our Lord’s Sermon on the Mount 1.14
… And, therefore, He who sought to interpose a delay in putting away, indicated as far as He could to hard-hearted men that He did not wish separation. And accordingly the Lord Himself in another passage, when a question was asked Him as to this matter, gave this reply: “Moses did so because of the hardness of your hearts.”
Pseudo-Clement The Clementine Homilies 3.54
… But it was, and is, in the word of our Jesus. Accordingly, He, knowing the true things of the law, said to the Sadducees, asking on what account Moses permitted to marry seven, ‘Moses gave you commandments according to your hard-heartedness; for from the beginning it was not so: for He who created man at first, made him male and female.’
Pseudo-Cyprian Of the Discipline and Advantage of Chastity 5
… Wherefore do I say ancient? Because they were ordained at the same time as men themselves. For both her own husband belongs to the woman, for the reason that besides him she may know no other; and the woman is given to the man for the purpose that, when that which had been his own had been yielded to him, he should seek for nothing belonging to another.
19:9
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 25
… the thing, then, which God hath [34] joined together, let no man put asunder. And those Pharisees said unto him, Why did Moses consent that a man should give a writing of divorcement and put her away? [35] Jesus said unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts gave you leave [36] to divorce your wives; but in the beginning it was not so.
Tertulliano † 220 d.C. On Patience 12
… takes the lead in every species of salutary discipline, what wonder that she likewise ministers to Repentance, (accustomed as Repentance is to come to the rescue of such as have fallen,) when, on a disjunction of wedlock (for that cause, I mean, which makes it lawful, whether for husband or wife, to persist in the perpetual observance of widowhood),
san Girolamo † 420 d.C. The Letters of St. Jerome 48.4
… and likewise, also, the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife,” we have subjoined the following: “The entire question relates to those who are living in wedlock, whether it is lawful for them to put away their wives, a thing which the Lord also has forbidden in the Gospel.
san Girolamo † 420 d.C. The Letters of St. Jerome 77.3
… I will only urge this one plea which is sufficient to exonerate a chaste matron and a Christian woman. The Lord has given commandment that a wife must not be put away “except it be for fornication, and that, if put away, she must remain unmarried.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. On the Good of Marriage 3
… nor is it allowed one put away by his wife to marry another, unless she who have separated from him be dead. Therefore, concerning the good of marriage, which the Lord also confirmed in the Gospel, not only in that He forbade to put away a wife,
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Of Holy Virginity 15
15. After that the same Apostle adds, and says, “Thou art bound to a wife, seek not loosening: thou art loosed from a wife, seek not a wife.” Of these two, that, which be set first, pertains unto command, against which it is not lawful to do. For it is not lawful to put away a wife, save because of fornication,
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. On Marriage and Concupiscence 1.18
… “He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.” He, however, who cannot receive it, “even if he marry, sinneth not;” and if a woman have not the gift of continence, let her also marry. “It is good, indeed, for a man not to touch a woman.” But since “all men cannot receive this saying, save they to whom it is given,”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Our Lord’s Sermon on the Mount 1.16
… But in this section of the Gospel nothing is to be more steadily kept in view, than that so great is the evil of fornication, that, while married people are bound to one another by so strong a bond, this one cause of divorce is excepted; but as to what fornication is, that we have already discussed.
papa san Gregorio I Magno † 604 d.C. Register of the Epistles of St. Gregory the Great 11.45
… For the Truth in person says, What God hath joined together let not man put asunder ( Matth. xix. 6 ). He says also, It is not lawful for a man to put away his wife saving for the cause of fornication (
19:10
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 25
… And his disciples, when he entered the house, asked him again [38] about that. And he said unto them, Every one who putteth away his wife, and [39] marrieth another, hath exposed her to adultery. And any woman that leaveth her husband, and becometh another’s, hath committed adultery. And whosoever marrieth [40] her that is divorced hath committed adultery.
Origene † 254 d.C. Origen's Commentary on Matthew 14.25
… was necessary for the man to endure and in this way suffer very great hardships, or if he did not endure, to transgress the word of Christ, the disciples say to him, taking refuge in celibacy as easier, and more expedient than marriage, though the latter appears to be expedient, “ If the case of the man is so with his wife, it is not expedient to marry. ”
san Gregorio Nazianzeno † 389 d.C. Select Orations of Saint Gregory Nazianzen 37
… For it is not only race, but disposition also that makes a Pharisee. Thus also I reckon as an Assyrian or an Egyptian him who is ranged among these by his character. What then say the Pharisees? If the case of the man be so with his wife, it is not good to marry. Is it only now, O Pharisee, that thou understandest this, It is not good to marry?
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 59
But what took place there, this happened here also. For as there, when the Jews had been put to silence the disciples were troubled, and came unto Him with Peter and said, “Declare unto us this parable;” even so now also they were troubled and said, “If the case of the man be so, it is good not to marry.”
san Girolamo † 420 d.C. The Letters of St. Jerome 55.3
… Wherefore the apostles seeing how heavy the yoke of marriage was thus made said to Him: “if the case of the man be so with his wife, it is not good to marry,” and the Lord replied, “he that is able to receive it, let him receive it.” And immediately by the instance of the three eunuchs he shows the blessedness of virginity which is bound by no carnal tie.
san Girolamo † 420 d.C. Against Jovinianus 1.12
… The Lord, when tempted by the Pharisees, and asked whether according to the law of Moses it was permitted to put away a wife, forbade the practice altogether. After weighing His words the disciples said to Him:
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Of Holy Virginity 23
23. Lastly, let us hear the Lord Himself delivering most plain judgment on this matter. For, upon His speaking after a divine and fearful manner concerning husband and wife not separating, save on account of fornication, His disciples said to Him, “If the case be such with a wife, it is not good to marry.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. A Work on the Proceedings of Pelagius 29
… “All men cannot receive this saying, save they to whom it is given.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. A Treatise on Grace and Free Will 7
… Well, the Lord was one day conversing on this very topic, when His disciples remarked to Him, “If such be the case of a man with his wife, it is not good to marry.” He then answered them, “All men cannot receive this saying, save they to whom it is given.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Expositions on the Book of Psalms 149.10
… Men do fly hither, desiring to be rid of their wives: here they are more tightly bound: no man looseth these fetters. “What God joined together, let not man put asunder.” But these bonds are hard. Who but knows it? This hardness the Apostles grieved at, and said, “If this be the case with a wife, it is not good to marry.”
19:11
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 25
… And any woman that leaveth her husband, and becometh another’s, hath committed adultery. And whosoever marrieth [40] her that is divorced hath committed adultery. And his disciples said unto him, If there be between the man and the woman such a case as this, it is not good for [41] a man to marry.
Origene † 254 d.C. Origen's Commentary on Matthew 14.25
… ” And to this the Saviour said, teaching us that absolute chastity is a gift given by God, and not merely the fruit of training, but given by God with prayer, “All men cannot receive the saying, but they to whom it is given.”
san Tascio Cecilio Cipriano † 258 d.C. The Epistles of Cyprian 61.5
… Strait and narrow is the way through which we enter into life, but excellent and great is the reward when we enter into glory. Let those who have once made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven
san Tascio Cecilio Cipriano † 258 d.C. On the Dress of Virgins 4
… as He Himself says: “All men cannot receive this word, but they to whom it is given. For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother’s womb; and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men; and there are eunuchs which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake.”
san Tascio Cecilio Cipriano † 258 d.C. Three Books of Testimonies Against the Jews 3.33
… “All men do not receive the word, but they to whom it is given: for there are some eunuchs who were born so from their mother’s womb, and there are eunuchs who have been constrained by men, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake. He who can receive it, let him receive it.”
Archelao † fl. 278 d.C. The Acts of the Disputation with the Heresiarch Manes 25
25. Manes said: Not all receive the word of God, but only those to whom it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven.
san Metodio d'Olimpo † 311 d.C. The Banquet of the Ten Virgins; or Concerning Chastity 11.1
… For great pursuits are liable to great falls, and evil is more opposed to that which is really good than to that which is not good. For many who thought that to repress vehement lascivious desires constituted chastity, neglecting other duties connected with it, failed also in this, and have brought blame
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 59
What then saith Christ? He said not, “yea, it is easier, and so do,” lest they should suppose that the thing is a law; but He subjoined, “Not all men receive it, but they to whom it is given,”
san Girolamo † 420 d.C. The Letters of St. Jerome 22.19
Some people may be eunuchs from necessity; I am one of free will.
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Letters of St. Augustin 188.6
… “I would that all men were even as I myself: but every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that.” Let her hear also Him who is the only Spouse, not only of herself, but of the whole Church, thus speaking of this chastity and purity: “All cannot receive this saying, save they to whom it is given;”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. On Continence 1
… We have it written in the Book of Wisdom, that no one can be continent, unless God grant it. But the Lord, concerning that greater and more glorious Continence itself, whereby there is continence from the marriage bond, says, “Not all can receive this saying, but they to whom it is given.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. On the Good of Widowhood 12
12. But since, as the Lord saith, “Not all receive this word;”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. On the Good of Widowhood 28
… In the first place, because with the endeavor that all be continent, there will still be but few, for “not all receive this word.” But forasmuch as it is written, “Whoso can receive, let him receive;”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. A Treatise on the Predestination of the Saints 2.37
… For it was not some one only, but Christ who said, “No man cometh unto me, except it were given him of my Father;” and, “To you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.” And concerning continence He says, “Not all receive this saying, but they to whom it is given.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Expositions on the Book of Psalms 149.10
… Who but knows it? This hardness the Apostles grieved at, and said, “If this be the case with a wife, it is not good to marry.” If the bonds be of iron, it is not good to set our feet within them. And the Lord said, “All men cannot receive this saying, but let him that can receive it, receive it.”
papa san Gregorio I Magno † 604 d.C. The Book of Pastoral Rule 3.28
… Yet the rest of the elect can hear this song, although they cannot utter it, because, through charity, they are joyful in the exaltation of those others, though they rise not to their rewards. Let those who are unacquainted with the sins of the flesh hear what the Truth in person says concerning this purity; Not all receive this word (
san Giovanni Damasceno † 749 d.C. An Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith 4.24
… Wherefore, although He did not enjoin that on us by law (for as He said, all men cannot receive this saying
19:12
sant'Ignazio di Antiochia † 108 d.C. Epistle to the Smyrnæans: Shorter and Longer Versions 6
Let no man deceive himself. Both the things which are in heaven, and the glorious angels, and rulers, both visible and invisible, if they believe not in the blood of Christ, shall, in consequence, incur condemnation. “He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.”
san Giustino † 165 d.C. The First Apology 15
… eye, than, having two eyes, to be cast into everlasting fire.” And, “Whosoever shall marry her that is divorced from another husband, committeth adultery.” And, “There are some who have been made eunuchs of men, and some who were born eunuchs, and some who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake; but all cannot receive this saying.”
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 25
… And whosoever marrieth [40] her that is divorced hath committed adultery. And his disciples said unto him, If there be between the man and the woman such a case as this, it is not good for [41] a man to marry. He said unto them, Not every man can endure this saying, except [42] him to whom it is given.
Policrate di Efeso † 196 d.C. Polycrates, Bishop of Ephesus 1
… Then there is Polycarp, both bishop and martyr at Smyrna; and Thraseas from Eumenia, both bishop and martyr, who rests at Smyrna. Why should I speak of Sagaris, bishop and martyr, who rests at Laodicea? of the blessed Papirius, moreover? and of Melito the eunuch,
Tertulliano † 220 d.C. On the Resurrection of the Flesh 27
We have also in the Scriptures robes mentioned as allegorizing the hope of the flesh. Thus in the Revelation of John it is said: “These are they which have not defiled their clothes with women,” —indicating, of course, virgins, and such as have become “eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake.”
Tertulliano † 220 d.C. On Patience 13
… Further, if we set down in order the higher and happier grades of bodily patience, (we find that) it is she who is entrusted by holiness with the care of continence of the flesh: she keeps the widow, and sets on the virgin the seal and raises the self-made eunuch to the realms of heaven.
Tertulliano † 220 d.C. On the Apparel of Women ii.9
… Why, are there not many, withal, who so do , and seal themselves up to eunuchhood for the sake of the kingdom of God,
Tertulliano † 220 d.C. To His Wife i.6
… When anything seems difficult, let us survey others who cope with still greater difficulties. How many are there who from the moment of their baptism set the seal (of virginity) upon their flesh? How many, again, who by equal mutual consent cancel the debt of matrimony—voluntary eunuchs
Tertulliano † 220 d.C. On Monogamy 3
… that even if the Paraclete had in this our day definitely prescribed a virginity or continence total and absolute, so as not to permit the heat of the flesh to foam itself down even in single marriage, even thus He would seem to be introducing nothing of “novelty;” seeing that the Lord Himself opens “the kingdoms of the heavens” to “eunuchs,”
Tertulliano † 220 d.C. On Monogamy 7
… remaineth, that both they who have wives so be as if they have not,” because “the time is compressed;” and “the sour grape” chewed by “the fathers” has ceased “to set the sons’ teeth on edge,” for, “each one shall die in his own sin;” and “eunuchs” not only have lost ignominy, but have even deserved grace, being invited into “the kingdoms of the heavens:”
Tertulliano † 220 d.C. On Monogamy 8
… while He tells (them) that “the kingdom of heavens” is “children’s;” while He associates with these (children) others who, after marriage, remained (or became) virgins;”
Tertulliano † 220 d.C. On Monogamy 14
… How long shall we allege “the flesh,” because the Lord said, “the flesh is weak?” But He has withal premised that “the Spirit is prompt,” in order that the Spirit may vanquish the flesh—that the weak may yield to the stronger. For again He says, “Let him who is able to receive, receive (it);”
Tertulliano † 220 d.C. De Fuga in Persecutione 14
… It is better that you sometimes should not see your crowds, than subject yourselves (to a tribute bondage). Keep pure for Christ His betrothed virgin; let no one make gain of her. These things, my brother, seem to you perhaps harsh and not to be endured; but recall that God has said, “He who receives it, let him receive it,”
Pierio di Alessandria † 309 d.C. Pierus of Alexandria 1
… of whom Pierius, when he was expounding and unfolding the meaning of the apostle, and purposed to explain the words, For I would that all men were even as I myself , added this remark: In saying this, Paul, without disguise, preaches celibacy.
san Metodio d'Olimpo † 311 d.C. The Banquet of the Ten Virgins; or Concerning Chastity 2.7
… since it is not given to all to attain that undefiled state of being a eunuch for the sake of the kingdom of heaven,
Eusebio di Cesarea † 339 d.C. The Church History of Eusebius 6.8.1
1. At this time while Origen was conducting catechetical instruction at Alexandria, a deed was done by him which evidenced an immature and youthful mind, but at the same time gave the highest proof of faith and continence. For he took the words, “There are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake,”
sant'Ambrogio † 397 d.C. On the Duties of the Clergy 2.6
… what so seemly as to preserve the body unspotted and undefiled, and its purity unsullied? What, again, is so seemly as that a widow should keep her plighted troth to her dead husband? What more useful than this whereby the heavenly kingdom is attained? For “there are some who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake.”
sant'Ambrogio † 397 d.C. Concerning Widows 13
… “I would that they were mutilated who desire that you should be circumcised.” For why should the means of gaining a crown and of the practice of virtue be lost to a man who is born to honour, equipped for victory? how can he through courage of soul mutilate himself? “There be eunuchs which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake.”
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 59
… Then to show the possibility of it, He saith, “There are some eunuchs, who were so born from their mother’s womb, there are some eunuchs which were made eunuchs of men, and there be eunuchs which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of Heaven’s sake,”
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 62
He goeth not up at once to Jerusalem when He is come out of Galilee, but having first wrought miracles, and having stopped the mouths of Pharisees, and having discoursed with His disciples of renouncing possessions: for, “if thou wilt be perfect,” saith He, “sell that thou hast:” and of virginity, “He that is able to receive, let him receive it:”
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 75
But wherefore doth He set forth this parable in the person of the virgins, and doth not merely suppose any person whatever? Great things had He spoken of virginity, saying, “There are eunuchs, who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of Heaven’s sake;” and, “He that is able to receive, let him receive it.”
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. A Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles 32
… Yea, so it is, man can be the maker of an angel. Perchance this saying has startled you? Hear however Christ saying: “In the Resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like unto the angels.” ( Matt. xxii. 30 .) And again, “He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.” (
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Homilies on First Thessalonians 5
… And justly. For these things indeed being done bring punishment, but not being done, yet bring no praise. The acts of virtue however, such as to give away our goods, and such like, are not of the order of commandment, he says. But what? “He that is able to receive, let him receive.” (
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Homilies on Titus 1
… first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift.” ( Matt. v. 23, 24 .) This also is a command. But when He says, “If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell all that thou hast” ( Matt. xix. 21 .): and, “He that is able to receive it, let him receive it” (
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 36
… Many are by their very nature passionless; shall we call these good tempered? Not at all. And so the Lord after naming three manners of the eunuch state, leaveth two of them uncrowned, and admitteth one into the kingdom of heaven. (
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 68
And if, “they could not,” is put, instead of, “they would not,” do not marvel, for He saith also in another place, “He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.” (
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 74
… carnal desire is natural indeed but not necessary, for many have got the better of it, and have not died. But the desire of wealth is neither natural nor necessary, but superfluous; and if we choose we need not admit its beginning. At any rate, Christ speaking of virginity saith, “He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.” (
san Girolamo † 420 d.C. The Letters of St. Jerome 14.6
… “are not all my fellow-townsmen Christians?” Your case, I reply, is not that of others. Listen to the words of the Lord: “If thou wilt be perfect go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and come and follow me.” You have already promised to be perfect. For when you forsook the army and made yourself an eunuch for the kingdom of heaven’s sake,
san Girolamo † 420 d.C. The Letters of St. Jerome 48.15
… But if I grieve that I have not shared in Christ’s body it does help me to avoid for a little while my wife’s embraces, and to prefer to wedded love the love of Christ. A hard discipline, you will say, and one not to be borne. What man of the world could bear it? He that can bear it, I reply, let him bear it;
san Girolamo † 420 d.C. The Letters of St. Jerome 66.8
… Great enterprises are always left to the free choice of those who hear of them. Thus the apostle refrains from making virginity a positive duty, because the Lord in speaking of eunuchs who had made themselves such for the kingdom of heaven’s sake finally said: “He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.”
san Girolamo † 420 d.C. The Letters of St. Jerome 123.11
… whose teaching and advice as to life will form for you a rule of virtue. For if many wives in the lifetime of their husbands come to realize the truth of the apostle’s words: “all things are lawful unto me but all things are not expedient,” and make eunuchs of themselves for the kingdom of heaven’s sake
san Girolamo † 420 d.C. Against Jovinianus 1.36
… Be not afraid that all will become virgins: virginity is a hard matter, and therefore rare, because it is hard: “Many are called, few chosen.” Many begin, few persevere. And so the reward is great for those who have persevered. If all were able to be virgins, our Lord would never have said:
Sulpicio Severo † 420 d.C. The Doubtful Letters of Sulpitius Severus 2.2
… I will give them an eternal name, and it shall not fail.” The Lord again speaks concerning such eunuchs in the Gospel, saying, “For there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. The Confessions 2.2
… but he that is married careth for the things that are of the world, how he may please his wife.” I should, therefore, have listened more attentively to these words, and, being severed “for the kingdom of heaven’s sake,”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. The Confessions 8.1
… I had heard from the mouth of truth that “there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake;” but, saith He, “he that is able to receive it, let him receive it.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. On the Good of Marriage 15
… of our salvation was veiled in prophetic sacraments, even they who were such before marriage, yet contracted marriage through the duty of begetting children, not overcome by lust, but led by piety, unto whom if there were given such choice as in the revelation of the New Testament there hath been given, the Lord saying “Whoso can receive, let him receive;”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. On the Good of Marriage 25
… but when it is not done, it can be done, only there is no need. This habit, in the matter of that continence which is from sexual intercourse, they have not, unto whom it is said, “If they contain not, let them be married.” But this they have, unto whom it is said, “Whoso can receive, let him receive.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. On the Good of Marriage 27
27. Therefore at that time, when the Law also, following upon the days of the Patriarchs, pronounced accursed, whoso raised not up seed in Israel, even he, who could, put it not forth, but yet possessed it. But from the period that the fullness of time hath come, that it should be said, “Whoso can receive, let him receive,”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Of Holy Virginity 9
… but now, when from out every race of men, and from out all nations, members of Christ may be gathered unto the People of God, and City of the kingdom of heaven, whoso can receive sacred virginity, let him receive it; and let her only, who contains not, be married.
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Of Holy Virginity 30
30. Ye also who have not yet made this vow, who are able to receive it, receive it.
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Of Holy Virginity 37
… I did in being ignorant, in unbelief.” Yea more, that, which Thou commandedst not, but only didst set forth, for such as would, to seize, saying, “Whoso can receive, let him receive;” they have seized, they have vowed, and, for the sake of the kingdom of heaven, not for that Thou threatenedst, but for that Thou exhortedst, they have made themselves eunuchs.
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Reply to Faustus the Manichæan 16.22
… "I would that they were even made eunuchs that trouble you." But if we remember who the writer is, we may see in this ambiguous expression an ingenious style of benediction. For there are eunuchs which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake.
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Reply to Faustus the Manichæan 30.4
… And what shall we say of Jesus, the Master Himself, and the source of all sanctity, who is the unwedded spouse of the virgins who make this profession, and who, when specifying in the Gospel three kinds of eunuchs, natural, artificial, and voluntary, gives the palm to those who have "made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven,"
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. A Treatise on the Merits and Forgiveness of Sins, and on the Baptism of Infants 2.25
… hesitate to do that which the Lord enjoined on the rich man, who inquired of Him about the attainment of eternal life, after he had told Him, in answer to His first question, that he had already fully kept every commandment in the law,—that “if he wished to be perfect, he must sell all that he had and give to the poor, and transfer his treasure to heaven;”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. On Marriage and Concupiscence 1.18
… “He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 20.3
3. But the catholic faith has it, that the works of the Father and of the Son are not separable. This is what I wish, if possible, to speak to you, beloved; but, according to those words of the Lord, “he that is able to receive it, let him receive it.”
Giovanni Cassiano † 435 d.C. The Conferences of John Cassian 21.5
… for it says: “Cursed is everyone that does not continue in all things that are written in the book of the law to do them.” But here on account of the superiority and excellence of the commandments it is said: “He that can receive it, let him receive it.”
Ecumenical Councils The Canons of the 318 Holy Fathers Assembled in the City of Nice, in Bithynia 1
The feeling that one devoted to the sacred ministry should be unmutilated was strong in the Ancient Church.…This canon of Nice, and those in the Apostolic Canons and a later one in the Second Council of Arles (canon vii.) were aimed against that perverted notion of piety, originating in the misinterpretation of our Lord’s saying (
Ecumenical Councils The Canons of the Holy Fathers Assembled at Gangra, Which Were Set Forth After the Council of Nice 1
… The saying of our Blessed Lord with reference to those who had become “eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake,”
Pseudo-Clement The First Epistle of the Blessed Clement, the Disciple of Peter the Apostle 1
To all those who love and cherish their life which is in Christ through God the Father, and obey the truth of God in hope of eternal life; to those who bear affection towards their brethren and towards their neighbours in the love of God; to the blessed brother virgins, who devote themselves to preserve virginity “for the sake of the kingdom of heaven;”
19:13
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 25
… and he said unto them, Suffer the children to [Arabic, p. 100] come unto me, and prevent them not; for those that are like these have [45] the kingdom of God. Verily I say unto you, Whosoever receiveth not the [46] kingdom of God as this child, shall not enter it. And he took them in his arms, and laid his hand upon them, and blessed them.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 59
4. “Then were there brought unto Him little children, that He should put His hands on them, and pray: and the disciples rebuked them. But He said unto them, Suffer the little children to come unto me, for of such is the kingdom of Heaven. And He laid His hands on them, and departed thence.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. The Harmony of the Gospels 2.63
123. Matthew proceeds thus: “Then were there brought unto Him little children, that He should put His hands on them, and pray; and the disciples rebuked them;” and so on, down to where we read, “For many are called, but few are chosen.”
19:14
Tertulliano † 220 d.C. On Baptism 18
… Who both themselves, by reason of mortality, may fail to fulfil their promises, and may be disappointed by the development of an evil disposition, in those for whom they stood ? The Lord does indeed say, “Forbid them not to come unto me.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. The Confessions 1.18
… It was, then, the stature of childhood that Thou, O our King, didst approve of as an emblem of humility when Thou saidst: “Of such is the kingdom of heaven.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. A Treatise on the Merits and Forgiveness of Sins, and on the Baptism of Infants 1.24
And let no one suppose that infants ought to be brought to baptism, on the ground that, as they are not sinners, so they are not righteous; how then do some remind us that the Lord commends this tender age as meritorious; saying, “Suffer the little children to come unto me, and forbid them not, for of such is the kingdom of heaven?”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Expositions on the Book of Psalms 47.1
… “Crucify Him, Crucify Him.” For childhood is set before us to imitate humility, and childhood is set before us to beware of foolishness. To imitate humility, childhood was set before us by the Lord, when He called children to Him, and because they were kept from Him, He said, “Suffer them to come unto Me, for of such is the Kingdom of Heaven.”
19:16
Tertulliano † 220 d.C. On Monogamy 14
… For again He says, “Let him who is able to receive, receive (it);” that is, let him who is not able go his way. That rich man did go his way who had not “received” the precept of dividing his substance to the needy, and was abandoned by the Lord to his own opinion.
sant'Ilario di Poitiers † 367 d.C. De Trinitate or On the Trinity 9.16
16. Let us see, then, how the questioner styled Him, beside calling Him good. He said, Good Master, what good thing shall I do
san Cirillo di Gerusalemme † 386 d.C. The Catechetical Lectures of S. Cyril 18.30
… for He says, And he that hateth his life in this world, shall keep it unto life eternal . And again, by preferring Christ to riches or kindred; And every one that hath forsaken brethren, or sisters , and the rest, shall inherit eternal life . Moreover it is by keeping the commandments, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies on the Statues to the People of Antioch 2.14
… But besides this,—Paul is not accustomed to enjoin everything on every man, but accommodates himself to the weakness of his hearers, even, indeed, as Christ also did. For when that rich man came to him, and asked him concerning Life, he did not say at once, “Go, sell that thou hast,”
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 27
… He doth not openly convict, but by His answer He manifests the purpose of them that are coming unto Him. Thus to him again that said, “Good Master,” and had thought by such flattery to gain His favor, according to his purpose He made answer, saying, “Why callest thou me good? There is none good but one, that is, God.”
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 71
And together with what we have said, He brings forward an example also to teach thee moderation. And like as the physician, to alarm the sick man saith, that such a one died from the use of cold water; so doth He also bring in the rich man,
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 39
… “And what,” saith some one, “is it that maketh us to enjoy that life?” Hear the Judge Himself conversing with a certain young man on this matter. When the young man said, “What shall I do to inherit eternal life?” (
san Girolamo † 420 d.C. The Letters of St. Jerome 130.14
… The apostle too tells us that covetousness is idolatry, and to one who asked the Lord the question: “Good Master what good thing shall I do that I may have eternal life?” He thus replied: “If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven; and come and follow me.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. The Confessions 13.19
… judge the fatherless; plead for the widow,” that the earth may bring forth the green herb for meat, and the tree bearing fruit; and come let us reason together, saith the Lord, that there may be lights in the firmament of heaven, and that they may shine upon the earth. That rich man asked of the good Master what he should do to attain eternal life.
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. A Treatise Concerning Man’s Perfection in Righteousness 32
… and yet at the same time He did not hesitate to say that they were “evil.” Your author, however, does not explain to us how they are good, whilst yet “there is none good save one, that is, God.” Accordingly the man who asked “what good thing he was to do,”
19:17
Mathetes (A Diogneto) † fl. 130 d.C. Epistle to Diognetus 8
… Yea, He was always of such a character, and still is, and will ever be, kind and good, and free from wrath, and true, and the only one who is [absolutely] good;
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 28
[42] And while Jesus was going in the way, there came near to him a young man of the rulers, and fell on his knees, and asked him, and said, Good Teacher, what is [43] it that I must do that I may have eternal life? Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou [44] me good, while there is none good but the one, even God? Thou knowest the commandments. [45]
sant'Ireneo di Lione † 202 d.C. Against Heresies 4.12.5
5. Now, that the law did beforehand teach mankind the necessity of following Christ, He does Himself make manifest, when He replied as follows to him who asked Him what he should do that he might inherit eternal life: “If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.”
Tertulliano † 220 d.C. On Modesty 2
“But,” say they, “God is ‘good,’ and ‘most good,’
sant'Ippolito † 235 d.C. The Refutation of All Heresies 5.2
… “I become what I wish, and I am what I am: on account of this I say, that what puts all things in motion is itself unmoved. For what exists remains forming all things, and nought of existing things is made.” He says that this (one) alone is good, and that what is spoken by the Saviour
sant'Ippolito † 235 d.C. The Refutation of All Heresies 7.19
… For this reason, he affirms, Jesus came down unbegotten, in order that He might be liberated from all (admixture of) evil. And He has, he says, been liberated from the nature of the Good One likewise, in order that He may be a Mediator, as Paul states, and as Himself acknowledges: “Why call ye me good? there is one good.”
Origene † 254 d.C. Origen De Principiis 2.5.4
… There still remains to them, however, that saying of the Lord in the Gospel, which they think is given them in a special manner as a shield, viz., “There is none good but one, God the Father.”
Origene † 254 d.C. Origen Against Celsus 5.11
… And here I may employ this illustration, as bearing upon this point: Our Lord and Saviour, hearing Himself on one occasion addressed as “Good Master,”
Origene † 254 d.C. Origen's Commentary on the Gospel of John 6.28
… Naaman, then, is still in error, and does not see how far inferior other rivers are to the Jordan for the cure of the suffering; he extols the rivers of Damascus, Arbana, and Pharpha, saying, “Are not Arbana and Pharpha, rivers of Damascus, better than all the waters of Israel? Shall I not wash in them and be clean?” For as none is good
san Tascio Cecilio Cipriano † 258 d.C. On the Unity of the Church 2
… But how can we possess immortality, unless we keep those commands of Christ whereby death is driven out and overcome, when He Himself warns us, and says, “If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments?”
san Tascio Cecilio Cipriano † 258 d.C. Three Books of Testimonies Against the Jews 3.2
… and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. The young man saith unto Him, All these things have I observed: what lack I yet? Jesus saith unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell all that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me.”
Antipapa Novaziano † 258 d.C. A Treatise of Novatian Concerning the Trinity 30
… Who has suspended the mountains in a balance, and the woods on scales?” And Hezekiah: “That all may know that Thou art God alone.” Moreover, the Lord Himself: “Why askest thou me concerning that which is good? God alone is good.”
san Gregorio di Nissa † 395 d.C. Against Eunomius 11.2
… However, they claim the Scripture on their side, and say that they are hardly treated when they are accused for using the very words of Scripture. For they say that the Lord Himself has said, “There is none good but one, that is, God
sant'Ambrogio † 397 d.C. On the Duties of the Clergy 1.11
… For we read in the Gospel that the Lord said: “If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments. He saith: Which? Jesus said to him: Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Honour thy father and thy mother, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.”
sant'Ambrogio † 397 d.C. On the Holy Spirit 3.18
133. So, then, no one is without sin except God alone, for no one is without sin except God.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 60
Wherefore then doth Christ thus reply to him, saying, “There is none good?”
Sulpicio Severo † 420 d.C. The Doubtful Letters of Sulpitius Severus 2.4
… But that eternal life cannot be merited except by the keeping of all the divine commandments, the Scripture testifies, saying, “If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. The Confessions 13.19
… That rich man asked of the good Master what he should do to attain eternal life. Let the good Master, whom he thought a man, and nothing more, tell him (but He is “good” because He is God)—let Him tell him, that if he would “enter into life” he must “keep the commandments;”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. On the Holy Trinity 1.13
… On this account also He replied to him, who had called Him Good Master, when seeking advice of Him how he might attain eternal life, “Why askest thou me about good? there is none good but One, that is, God.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. The Harmony of the Gospels 2.63
… askest thou me about the good?” while according to the others they were, “Why callest thou me good?” The sentence, “Why askest thou me about the good?” may then be referred more particularly to what was expressed by the man when he put the question, “What good thing shall I do?” For there we have both the name “good” applied to Christ, and the question put.
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 34
On the words of the Gospel, Matt. xix. 17 , “If thou wouldest enter into life, keep the commandments.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 35.1
1. The Gospel lesson which has now sounded in our ears, Brethren, requires rather an attentive hearer and a doer, than an expositor. What is more clear than this light, “If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments”?
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 40.2
… If all within are good, whom did I advise them to bear with being evil? Let me first then with the Lord’s assistance get out of this difficulty as best I can. If you consider good perfectly and strictly speaking, none is good but God Alone. Ye have the Lord saying most plainly, “Why callest thou Me good? there is none Good but One, that is, God.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 22
… Behold, in this life, which, just as I have said, is not yet life, there is a passing from death to life, so that there may not be a coming into judgment. But why did I say that it is not yet life? If this were life, the Lord would not have said to a certain man, “If thou wilt come into life, keep the commandments.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Expositions on the Book of Psalms 103.7
… For one thing is good to one creature, another to another, and all creatures have a certain good of their own, to the completeness and perfection of their nature. There is a difference as to what is essential to each imperfect thing, in order that it may be made perfect; seek for thy own good. “There is none good but One, that is, God.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Expositions on the Book of Psalms 119.10
… This is styled life absolutely and without any addition; nor is any life save that which is everlasting and blessed understood, as though it alone were to be called life, compared with which that which we now lead ought rather to be called death than life: according to those words in the Gospel, “If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.”
Pseudo-Clement The Clementine Homilies 3.57
“But to those who are persuaded that He is evil, as the Scriptures say, He said, ‘Call not me good, for One only is good.’
Pseudo-Clement The Clementine Homilies 17.4
“‘And that he does not really believe even the doctrines proclaimed by his teacher is evident, for he proclaims doctrines opposite to his. For he said to some one, as I learn,
Pseudo-Clement The Clementine Homilies 18.1
… At once, then, state to me whether you maintain that the framer of the world is the same as the lawgiver or not? If, then, he is the lawgiver, he is just; but if he is just, he is not good. But if he is not good, then it was another that Jesus proclaimed, when he said,
19:18
sant'Ambrogio † 397 d.C. Concerning Widows 12
… for that is a commandment which has a penalty for its transgression. But when he said that he had fulfilled all the commandments of the Law, there is given to him a counsel that he should sell all that he had and follow the Lord,
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 35.1
… Why art thou slow to both? why settest thyself against both? The greater are, “Sell all that thou hast, and give to the poor, and follow Me.” The less are, “Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shall not bear false witness. Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Thou shalt love thy neigh bour as thyself.”
19:19
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 28
… The young [Arabic, p. 110] man said unto him, Which of the commandments? Jesus said unto him, [46] Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not do injury, Honour thy father [47] and thy mother: and, Love thy neighbour as thyself.
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. On Patience 10
… or how shall that man be judged innocent, to whom is said, “Thou shall love thy neighbor as thyself,”
19:20
sant'Ambrogio † 397 d.C. On the Duties of the Clergy 1.11
37. Upon this the young man says to Him: “All these things have I kept from my youth up, what lack I yet? Jesus said unto him: If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell all thy goods and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven; and come and follow Me.”
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 60
… Then since Jesus mentioned those out of the law, he saith, “All these things have I kept from my youth up.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. The Confessions 13.19
… let him not kill, nor commit adultery, nor steal, nor bear false witness; that the dry land may appear, and bud forth the honouring of father and mother, and the love of our neighbour. All these, saith he, have I kept.
19:21
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 28
… and, Love thy neighbour as thyself. That young man said unto [48] him, All these have I kept from my youth: what then is it that I lack? And Jesus [49] looked intently at him, and loved him, and said unto him,
sant'Ireneo di Lione † 202 d.C. Against Heresies 4.13.3
3. And for this reason did the Lord, instead of that [commandment], “Thou shalt not commit adultery,” forbid even concupiscence; and instead of that which runs thus, “Thou shalt not kill,” He prohibited anger; and instead of the law enjoining the giving of tithes, [He told us] to share
Tertulliano † 220 d.C. On Idolatry 12
… For what is it you say? “I shall be in need.” But the Lord calls the needy “happy.” “I shall have no food.” But “think not,” says He, “about food;” and as an example of clothing we have the lilies. “My work was my subsistence.” Nay, but “all things are to be sold, and divided to the needy.”
san Tascio Cecilio Cipriano † 258 d.C. On the Lapsed 11
… And therefore the Lord the teacher of good things, forewarning for the future time, says, “If thou wilt be perfect, go, sell all that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me.”
san Tascio Cecilio Cipriano † 258 d.C. On Works and Alms 7
… For where thy treasure is, there will thy heart be also.” And when He wished to set forth a man perfect and complete by the observation of the law, He said, “If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven; and come and follow me.”
Eusebio di Cesarea † 339 d.C. The Church History of Eusebius 3.37.2
2. For indeed most of the disciples of that time, animated by the divine word with a more ardent love for philosophy, had already fulfilled the command of the Saviour, and had distributed their goods to the needy.
sant'Atanasio di Alessandria † 373 d.C. Life of Antony. (Vita Antoni.) 1
… and how they in the Acts sold their possessions and brought and laid them at the Apostles’ feet for distribution to the needy, and what and how great a hope was laid up for them in heaven. Pondering over these things he entered the church, and it happened the Gospel was being read, and he heard the Lord saying to the rich man
san Basilio † 379 d.C. The Letters 150.3
… 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;” and for another our Lord’s prohibition to His disciples to have two coats. He further added “If thou wilt be perfect go and sell that thou hast and give to the poor.”
san Cirillo di Gerusalemme † 386 d.C. The Catechetical Lectures of S. Cyril 8.6
… A man may even be justified by money: I was hungry, and ye gave Me meat : that certainly was from money. I was naked, and ye clothed Me : that certainly was by money. And wouldest thou learn that money may become a door of the kingdom of heaven? Sell , saith He, that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven
sant'Ambrogio † 397 d.C. Exposition of the Christian Faith 1.20
… and so he, too, intoxicated with thy wine, may love peace, and, confident in the exultation of faith, may never know the death of unbelief, and may display loving patience, have no part in other men’s profanities, and hold the faith of more account even than kindred and children, as it is written: “Leave all that thou hast, and come, follow Me.”
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies on the Statues to the People of Antioch 2.14
… For when that rich man came to him, and asked him concerning Life, he did not say at once, “Go, sell that thou hast,” but omitting this, he spoke to him of other commandments. Nor afterwards, when he challenged Him and said, “What lack I yet?” did He simply say, “Sell what thou hast;” but, “If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast.”
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies on the Statues to the People of Antioch 5.13
… For that death as well as grief takes away sin, is evident, in the first place, from the case of the martyrs; and it is plain too from what Paul saith to those who had sinned, speaking on this wise, “For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.”
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 60
What then saith Christ? Since He was going to enjoin something great, He setteth forth the recompenses, and saith, “If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in Heaven: and come, and follow me.”
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 61
… the rod? the net? the boat? the craft? These things dost thou tell me of, as all? Yea, saith he, but not for display do I say these things, but in order that by this question I may bring in the multitude of the poor. For since the Lord had said, “If thou wilt be perfect, sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in Heaven;”
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 62
He goeth not up at once to Jerusalem when He is come out of Galilee, but having first wrought miracles, and having stopped the mouths of Pharisees, and having discoursed with His disciples of renouncing possessions: for, “if thou wilt be perfect,” saith He, “sell that thou hast:”
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 81
… and if each bestowed one loaf to some one of the poor, all would be in plenty; but if one farthing only, no one would be poor; and we should not undergo so many revilings and jeers, in consequence of our care about the money. For indeed the saying, “Sell thy goods, and give to the poor, and come and follow me,”
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 86
… And this you may learn from the Master of the conflicts Himself. What then doth He Himself say to the rich man seeking eternal life? He said not, “raise up the lame,” but, “Sell thy goods, and give to the poor, and come and follow me, and thou shalt have treasure in Heaven.”
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. A Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles 25
… And Paul also says, “Only that we remember the poor” ( Gal. ii. 10 ): and everywhere the Scripture has much discourse concerning this matter. “The ransom,” it saith, “of a man’s soul is his own wealth” ( Prov. xiii. 8 ): and with reason: for, saith (Christ), “if thou wouldest be perfect, sell what thou hast, and give to the poor, and come, follow Me.” (
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. A Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles 45
… For in fact here he has shown both boldness in meeting dangers, sympathy with those over whom he ruled, teaching with (unshrinking) boldness, humility, (voluntary) poverty: but, what we have here is even more than that poverty. For if He says there (in the Gospel), “If thou wilt be perfect, sell what thou hast and give to the poor” (
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Homilies on First Corinthians 32
But not even yet have I pointed out the whole of the excellency, until I bring forward the testimonies of Christ which were spoken concerning almsgiving and death. What then are His testimonies? To the rich man He saith, “If thou wouldest be perfect, sell what thou hast and give to the poor, and come, follow me.” (S.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Homilies on First Corinthians 34
… 10 .) And the wealth of Jacob thence had its beginning. There is also a poverty which cometh from Him, that which is commended, such as He once would have introduced to the knowledge of that rich man, saying, “If thou wouldest be perfect, sell thy goods, and give to the poor, and come, follow Me.” (
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Homilies on Second Corinthians 13
… xix. 24 .) but of the poor the contrary, “If thou wilt be perfect, sell that thou hast, and give to the poor; and come, follow Me; and thou shalt have treasure in heaven.” (
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Homilies on Philippians 1
… ( Luke xi. 41 .) Think how the widow maintained Elias; and she did not more feed than she was fed: she did not more give than receive. This now also takes place in a much greater thing. For it is not a “barrel of meal,” nor “a cruse of oil” ( 1 Kings xvii. 14 .), but what? “An hundred fold, and eternal life” (
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Homilies on Philippians 10
… For touching riches we read, “It is easier for a camel to go through a needle’s eye, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of Heaven.” ( Matt. xix. 24 .) But He has made no such declarations about poverty; nay, the very reverse. “Sell thy goods, and give to the poor, and come follow Me” (
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Homilies on Titus 1
… first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift.” ( Matt. v. 23, 24 .) This also is a command. But when He says, “If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell all that thou hast” (
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Homilies on Titus 6
… but what? “Break off thy sins by almsdeeds, and thine iniquities by showing mercy to the poor.” ( Dan. iv. 27 .) Part with thy wealth, not that others may be fed, but that thou mayest escape punishment. And Christ again says, “Go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor…and come and follow Me.” (
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 39
… For if a man hath envied or spoken evil of another, if he hath not helped him when injured, or not imparted to him of his substance, then neither hath he loved him. Now Christ hath commanded not only this, but something besides. What then is this? “Sell,” he saith, “that thou hast, and give to the poor; and come, follow Me” (
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Epistle to the Hebrews 18
[5.] Let no man then henceforth esteem poverty a cause of disgrace. For if virtue be there, all the wealth of the world is neither clay, nor even a mote in comparison of it. This then let us follow after, if we would enter into the kingdom of heaven. For, He saith, “Sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in Heaven.” (
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Epistle to the Hebrews 33
… xix. 24 .) Seest thou to how many good things wealth is a hindrance, and dost thou seek to be rich? Dost thou not rejoice that the hindrance has been overthrown? So narrow is the way which leadeth into the Kingdom. So broad is wealth, and full of bulk and swelling out. Therefore He says, “Sell that thou hast” (
san Girolamo † 420 d.C. The Letters of St. Jerome 14.6
… The calm that you speak of is itself a tempest. “Why so?” you will perhaps argue; “are not all my fellow-townsmen Christians?” Your case, I reply, is not that of others. Listen to the words of the Lord: “If thou wilt be perfect go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and come and follow me.”
san Girolamo † 420 d.C. The Letters of St. Jerome 58.2
2. As for you, when you hear the Saviour’s counsel: “if thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and come follow me,”
san Girolamo † 420 d.C. The Letters of St. Jerome 60.10
… He who has been a loyal soldier under a strange banner is sure to deserve the laurel when he comes to serve his own king. When Nepotian laid aside his baldrick and changed his dress, he bestowed upon the poor all the pay that he had received. For he had read the words: “if thou wilt be perfect, sell that thou hast, and give to the poor and follow me,”
san Girolamo † 420 d.C. The Letters of St. Jerome 66.8
8. “If thou wilt be perfect,” the Lord says, “go and sell that thou hast and give to the poor.…and come and follow me.”
san Girolamo † 420 d.C. The Letters of St. Jerome 79.4
… For he knew the commandment of the Lord: “If thou wilt be perfect go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and come and follow me.”
san Girolamo † 420 d.C. The Letters of St. Jerome 145
… I do not speak thus because I know you to be covetous, but because I have a notion that your object in remaining so long in the army is to fill that purse which the Lord has commanded you to empty. For they who have possessions and riches are bidden to sell all that they have and to give to the poor and then to follow the Saviour.
san Girolamo † 420 d.C. Against Jovinianus 1.34
… Nor did they lay down rules for continence, nor hint at virginity, nor urge to fasting, nor repeat the directions given in the Gospel to the Apostles, not to have two tunics, nor scrip, nor money in their girdles, nor staff in their hand, nor shoes on their feet. And they certainly did not bid them,
san Girolamo † 420 d.C. Against Jovinianus 2.6
… or to sell all they possess and give to the poor, and follow Jesus? Of course not: but the command is for those who wish to be perfect. On the contrary John the Baptist lays down one rule for the soldiers, another for the publicans. But the Lord says in the Gospel to him who had boasted of having kept the whole law:
san Girolamo † 420 d.C. Against Vigilantius 14
… As for his argument that they who keep what they have, and distribute among the poor, little by little, the increase of their property, act more wisely than they who sell their possessions, and once for all give all away, not I but the Lord shall make answer:
san Girolamo † 420 d.C. Against the Pelagians 1.10
… for, by spending their riches on good works, they ceased to be rich; nay, rather, inasmuch as they were rich, not for themselves, but for others, they ought to be called God’s stewards rather than rich men. But we must seek evangelical perfection, according to which there is the command,
san Girolamo † 420 d.C. Against the Pelagians 2
Matt. xix. 21 . The young lawyer had kept all the law, yet failed.
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. The Confessions 8.12
Chapter I should light upon. For I had heard of Antony, that, accidentally coming in whilst the gospel was being read, he received the admonition as if what was read were addressed to him, “Go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven; and come and follow me.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. The Confessions 13.19
… All these, saith he, have I kept. Whence, then, are there so many thorns, if the earth be fruitful? Go, root up the woody thicket of avarice; sell that thou hast, and be filled with fruit by giving to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven; and follow the Lord “if thou wilt be perfect,”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Letters of St. Augustin 130.2
… He gave them this marvellous and merciful reply: “The things which are impossible with men are possible with God.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Of Holy Virginity 46
… Next, when we set it down that many men and women so keep virginal chastity, as that yet they do not the things which the Lord saith, “If thou willest to be perfect, go, sell all that thou hast, and give unto the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in Heaven: and come, follow me;”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Reply to Faustus the Manichæan 5.3
… I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink," and so on; therefore "inherit the kingdom." Not, "Because ye believe that I was born, inherit the kingdom." Again, to the rich man seeking for eternal life, He says, "Go, sell all that thou hast, and follow me;"
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Answer to the Letters of Petilian, the Donatist 2.105
… By this are signified those who are perfected in faith within the Church. For in the skirts is perfection. And I presume you must remember what was said to a certain rich man: "If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shall have treasure in heaven; and come and follow me."
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 10.7
… if thou despise not His warning, let what He says be done. He who has given thee such counsel doth not deceive thee. Thou shalt not lose what thou hast given away, but shalt follow what thou hast only sent before thee. Therefore my counsel is, “Give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 35.1
… The rich young man in the Gospel said that he had kept the commandments; then he heard the greater precepts, “If thou wilt be perfect, one thing is lacking to thee, go sell all that thou hast, and give to the poor;” thou shalt not lose them, but “thou shalt have treasure in heaven; and come and follow Me.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 36.0
On the words of the Gospel, Matt. xix. 21 ,“Go, sell that thou hast, and give to the poor,” etc.
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 36.2
… Before He taught, He was called “Good.” He did not hear what he wished, but he did hear what was proper for him; he had come with longing, but he went away in sadness. What if He had told him, “Lose what thou hast”? when he went away sad, because it was said, “Keep what thou hast securely.” “Go,” saith He, “sell all that thou hast, and give to the poor.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 36.10
… but now let the Lord say the same words, now let righteousness speak: the words will be the same, but not the same the meaning. “Keep for thyself,” saith the Lord, “consult for the future.” Now ask Him, “Where shall I keep?” “Thou shalt have treasure in heaven, where no thief approacheth, nor moth corrupteth.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 92.9
… What else has he said? “If I should distribute all my goods to the poor.” What more perfect thing can be done? When indeed the Lord commanded the rich man this for perfection’s sake, saying, “If thou wilt be perfect, go, sell all that thou hast, and give to the poor.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 122.2
… so much so, that when the rich man went away from Him in sorrow, because of His saying to him, “Go sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven, and come follow me,” Peter said unto Him, “Lo, we have forsaken all, and followed Thee.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Expositions on the Book of Psalms 50.8
… There be some that now follow Christ with lightened shoulders without the load of the world’s cares, who have not heard in vain, “If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell all that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, follow Me;”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Expositions on the Book of Psalms 52.10
… For what doth it profit thee, if thou dost want means, and thou burnest with cupidity? When our Lord Jesus Christ to that rich man that was grieved, and that was departing from Him, had said, “Go, sell all that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven, and come follow Me:”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Expositions on the Book of Psalms 91.9
… Who these are will soon be clear in Christ’s name; for to some He promised that they should judge with Him, namely, to the Apostles, who left all things, and followed Him.…Those judges then are the heads of the Church, the perfect. To such He said, “If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Expositions on the Book of Psalms 95.5
… And all these five thousand were so converted that they sold their own property, and laid the price of it at the Apostles’ feet. That which one rich man did not do, when he heard from the Lord’s mouth, and sorrowfully departed from Him,
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Expositions on the Book of Psalms 95.9
… “Like a flock of sheep that are shorn.” Why, “that are shorn”? Because they have laid aside the burdens of the world. Were not those sheep, of which I was a little before speaking, shorn, whom the bidding of God had shorn, when He saith, “Go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor; and thou shalt find treasure in heaven: and come and follow Me”?
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Expositions on the Book of Psalms 104.23
… Sparrows are birds indeed, and fowls of the air, but small fowls are wont to be called sparrows. There are therefore some spiritual ones that build in the cedars of Libanus: that is, there are certain servants of God who hear in the Gospel, “Sell all that thou hast, and give to the poor; and thou shalt have treasure in heaven; and come and follow Me.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Expositions on the Book of Psalms 112.4
… listen to what is written, “Thou shalt have treasure in heaven.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Expositions on the Book of Psalms 149.10
… the strong, and the foolish things of the world hath God chosen to confound the wise, and things which are not, just as things which are, that the things which are may be brought to nought.” …It is said by the Lord, “If thou wilt be perfect, go sell all that thou hast, and give to the poor, and come, follow Me, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven.”
Giovanni Cassiano † 435 d.C. The Twelve Books on the Institutes of the Cœnobia, and the Remedies for the Eight Principal Faults 7.16
… “If thou wilt be perfect, go sell all that thou hast and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me.”
Giovanni Cassiano † 435 d.C. The Twelve Books on the Institutes of the Cœnobia, and the Remedies for the Eight Principal Faults 7.27
If then through the desire of perfection you have forsaken all things and followed Christ who says to thee, “Go sell all that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come follow me,”
Giovanni Cassiano † 435 d.C. The Conferences of John Cassian 3.7
… “And though I give my body to be burned, but have not charity, I am nothing:” As if he had said in other words, though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor in accordance with that command in the gospel, where we are told “If thou wilt be perfect, go sell all that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven,”
Giovanni Cassiano † 435 d.C. The Conferences of John Cassian 21.5
Wherefore we ought to know that we from whom the requirements of the law are no longer exacted, but in whose ears the word of the gospel daily sounds: “If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell all that thou hast and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven, and come follow Me,”
Giovanni Cassiano † 435 d.C. The Conferences of John Cassian 24.24
But the fact that to us on the contrary the yoke of Christ seems neither light nor easy, must be rightly ascribed to our perverseness, as we are cast down by unbelief and want of faith, and fight with foolish obstinacy against His command, or rather advice, who says: “If thou wilt be perfect, go sell (or get rid of) all that thou hast, and come follow Me,”
Socrate Scolastico † 440 d.C. The Ecclesiastical History of Socrates Scholasticus 4.23
… ‘Cease your blasphemy,’ said he to the person that told him; ‘my father is immortal.’ One of the brethren who possessed nothing but a copy of the Gospels, sold it, and distributed the price in food to the hungry, uttering this memorable saying—‘I have sold the book which says, “Sell that thou hast and give to the poor.”’
19:22
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 28
… what then is it that I lack? And Jesus [49] looked intently at him, and loved him, and said unto him, If thou wouldest be perfect, what thou lackest is one thing: go away and sell everything that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and take thy [50] cross, and follow me.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 60
“But when the young man heard it, he went away sorrowful.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. The Confessions 13.19
… which likewise also will not be unless thy treasure be there, as thou hast heard from the good Master. But the barren earth was grieved,
19:23
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 29
… and now in this time, houses, and brothers, and sisters, and mothers, and children, and lands, with persecution; [11] and in the world to come ever lasting life. Many that are first shall be last, and that are last shall be first.
Tertulliano † 220 d.C. To His Wife 2.8
… for the more any is rich, and inflated with the name of “matron,” the more capacious house does she require for her burdens, as it were a field wherein ambition may run its course. To such the churches look paltry. A rich man is a difficult thing (to find) in the house of God;
Origene † 254 d.C. Origen Against Celsus 7.23
From what has been said, it is clear then that Jesus, “the man of Nazareth,” did not promulgate laws opposed to those just considered in regard to riches, when He said, “It is hard for the rich man to enter into the kingdom of God;”
Eusebio di Cesarea † 339 d.C. The Church History of Eusebius 6.41.12
12. But some advanced to the altars more readily, declaring boldly that they had never been Christians. Of these the prediction of our Lord is most true that they shall ‘hardly’
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 60
What then saith Christ? “How hardly shall the rich enter into the kingdom of Heaven!”
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Homilies on Philippians 9
… Would ye that I should add still more? “Whosoever forsaketh not all that he hath, saith the Christ, is not worthy of Me.” ( Luke xiv. 33; Matt. x. 37 .) What when he says, “It is hard for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of heaven”? (
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Homilies on First Thessalonians 11
… For hear what Christ says to them, “Ye cannot serve God and Mammon” ( Matt. vi. 24 .); and again, “It is hard for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of heaven”; and again, “It is easier for a camel to go through a needle’s eye, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of heaven.” (
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Epistle to the Hebrews 18
… This then let us follow after, if we would enter into the kingdom of heaven. For, He saith, “Sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in Heaven.” ( Matt. xix. 21 .) And again, “It is hard for a rich man to enter into the Kingdom of Heaven.” (
san Girolamo † 420 d.C. The Letters of St. Jerome 79.3
… We must not hastily conclude that this statement conflicts with that of the Lord: “verily I say unto you that a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven; and again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of heaven.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 35.2
2. The rich man “went away sorrowful;” and the Lord said, “How hardly shall he that hath riches enter into the kingdom of heaven!”
19:24
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 29
[1] Verily I say unto you, It is difficult for a rich man to enter the kingdom of [2] heaven.
Origene † 254 d.C. Origen Against Celsus 6.16
In the next place, with regard to the declaration of Jesus against rich men, when He said, “It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God,”
san Gregorio Nazianzeno † 389 d.C. Select Orations of Saint Gregory Nazianzen 30
… For in what sense is either impossible, except that it is contrary to the will? There is a somewhat similar meaning in the expressions which imply that a thing impossible by nature is possible to God if He so wills; as that a man cannot be born a second time, or that a needle will not let a camel through it.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 60
“It is easier” saith He, “for a camel to enter in by the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of Heaven.”
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Homilies on Second Corinthians 13
… For what leadeth unto a kingdom, riches or poverty? Let us hear the Lord Himself of the heavens saying of those, that “it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of heaven:” (
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Homilies on Philippians 10
… For touching riches we read, “It is easier for a camel to go through a needle’s eye, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of Heaven.” (
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Epistle to the Hebrews 33
Consider how great evils have oftentimes arisen from wealth. For “It is easier” (it is said) “for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of Heaven.” (
san Girolamo † 420 d.C. The Letters of St. Jerome 145
… For in the gospel He says: “Whosoever doth not leave all that he hath and bear his cross and come after me cannot be my disciple.” Cast from you the burthen of the things of this world, and seek not those riches which in the gospel are compared to the humps
san Girolamo † 420 d.C. Against the Pelagians 1.10
C. Since you press me to give what I am not bound to give, consider what our Lord says,
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. A Treatise on the Spirit and the Letter 1
… and yet that except One in whom “all shall be made alive,” no one has ever lived or will live by whom this perfection has been attained whilst living here. It appeared to you absurd to say that anything was possible of which no example ever occurred,—although I suppose you would not hesitate to admit that no camel ever passed through a needle’s eye,
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. A Treatise on the Spirit and the Letter 62
… Hence arose the subject treated of in this book; and thus did it devolve on me to show that a thing was possible although no example of it could be found. We accordingly adduced certain cases out of the gospel and of the law, at the beginning of this work,—such as the passing of a camel through the eye of a needle;
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 35.2
… For every impossible thing is difficult; but not every difficult thing is impossible. As to how difficult it is, take heed to the comparison; “Verily I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Expositions on the Book of Psalms 52.10
… rich man that was grieved, and that was departing from Him, had said, “Go, sell all that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven, and come follow Me:” and great hopelessness for rich men foretold, so that He said, more easily could a camel pass through the eye of a needle, than a rich man enter into the kingdom of Heaven,
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Expositions on the Book of Psalms 111.5
… let them not be sorrowful and say, “Who then can be saved?” For “it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.” For “with men these things are impossible, but with God all things are possible.”
19:25
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 23
… duly to perform all this, but also to correct others, and to distinguish between the evil and them that are not such, the dogs and them that are not dogs (although there be much that is hidden in men):—that they might not say, “these things are grievous and intolerable,” (for indeed in the sequel Peter did utter some such things, saying, “Who can be saved?”
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 58
… But I fear lest to them that are inclined to wickedness, and love continually to sin, I should furnish still greater security, or should drive the meeker sort to despair, and they should repeat that saying of the disciples, “who can be saved?”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 35.2
… “Verily I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.” A camel to go through the eye of a needle! If He had said a gnat, it would be impossible. And then when His disciples heard it, they were grieved and said, “If this be so, who then can be saved?”
19:26
san Giustino † 165 d.C. The First Apology 19
… And that it is better to believe even what is impossible to our own nature and to men, than to be unbelieving like the rest of the world, we have learned; for we know that our Master Jesus Christ said, that “what is impossible with men is possible with God,”
Tertulliano † 220 d.C. On Idolatry 12
… It knows, likewise, that hunger is no less to be contemned by it for God’s sake, than every kind of death. It has learnt not to respect life ; how much more food ? [You ask] “How many have fulfilled these conditions?” But what with men is difficult, with God is easy.
Tertulliano † 220 d.C. On the Resurrection of the Flesh 57
… as if it were not permitted the Lord God both to change nature, and to preserve her, without subjection to a law. How is it, then, that we read, “With men these things are impossible, but with God all things are possible;”
Tertulliano † 220 d.C. Against Praxeas 10
… neither is He the Son, since in like manner He has not the Father: for while He is the Father, He will not be the Son. In this way they hold the Monarchy , but they hold neither the Father nor the Son. Well, but “with God nothing is impossible.”
san Cirillo di Gerusalemme † 386 d.C. The Catechetical Lectures of S. Cyril 14
… Does then the Lord grant life to His own servant, by sending His power with him, and can He not grant it to Himself as well? If that is credible, this is credible also; if this is incredible, that also is incredible. For to me both are alike worthy of credence. I believe that Jonas was preserved, for all things are possible with God
san Gregorio Nazianzeno † 389 d.C. Select Orations of Saint Gregory Nazianzen 30
… The sentence The world cannot hate you, comes under the same head, as does also How can ye, being evil, speak good things? For in what sense is either impossible, except that it is contrary to the will? There is a somewhat similar meaning in the expressions which imply that a thing impossible by nature is possible to God if He so wills;
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 60
… Wherefore also He affirmed it to be a work of God, that He might show that great grace is needed for him who is to achieve this. At least, when the disciples were troubled, He said, “With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible.”
san Girolamo † 420 d.C. The Letters of St. Jerome 24.4
… All the year round she observed a continual fast, remaining without food for two or three days at a time; but when Lent came she hoisted—if I may so speak—every stitch of canvas and fasted well-nigh from week’s end to week’s end with “a cheerful countenance.” What would perhaps be incredible, were it not that “with God all things are possible,”
Teodoreto di Cirro † 458 d.C. Dialogues. The “Eranistes” or “Polymorphus” of the Blessed Theodoretus, Bishop of Cyrus 1
Eran. —He who underwent mutation into flesh was made flesh, and, as I said just now, as He knows. But we know that with Him all things are possible,
Teodoreto di Cirro † 458 d.C. Dialogues. The “Eranistes” or “Polymorphus” of the Blessed Theodoretus, Bishop of Cyrus 2
… After the passion and the resurrection the disciples were gathered together, and when the doors were shut the Lord stood in the midst of them. Never at any time before the passion did He do this. Could not then the Christ have done this even long before? For all things are possible to God.
Teodoreto di Cirro † 458 d.C. Dialogues. The “Eranistes” or “Polymorphus” of the Blessed Theodoretus, Bishop of Cyrus 3
Eran. —We have learnt that all things are possible with God.
19:27
Tertulliano † 220 d.C. Five Books in Reply to Marcion 3
10 Like him, have all things left, life’s pilgrimage
sant'Atanasio di Alessandria † 373 d.C. Festal and Personal Letters of Athanasius 52.1
1. To those in every place who are living a monastic life, who are established in the faith of God, and sanctified in Christ, and who say, ‘Behold, we have forsaken all, and followed Thee
sant'Ambrogio † 397 d.C. Concerning Widows 12
74. And so they who have fulfilled the commandments are able to say: “We are unprofitable servants, we have done that which was our duty to do.” The virgin does not say this, nor he who sold all his goods, but they rather await the stored-up rewards like the holy Apostle who says: “Behold we have forsaken all and followed Thee, what shall we have therefore?”
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 46
Bearing in mind then all this, let us imitate those things whereby the apostles became great. And whereby did they become great? Hear Peter, saying, “Behold we have forsaken all, and followed Thee; what shall we have therefore?”
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 60
… For when Peter had said, “Behold, we have forsaken all, and followed Thee,” and had asked, “What shall we have therefore?” having appointed the reward for them; He added, “And every one who hath forsaken houses, or lands, or brothers, or sisters, or father, or mother, shall receive an hundred fold, and shall inherit eternal life.”
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 86
… He said not, “raise up the lame,” but, “Sell thy goods, and give to the poor, and come and follow me, and thou shalt have treasure in Heaven.” And Peter again said not, “Behold, in Thy name we cast out devils;” although he was casting them out, but, “Behold, we have forsaken all and followed Thee what shall we have?”
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Homilies on First Corinthians 10
… Wouldest thou see faithful stewards? Hear what saith Peter, “Why look ye so earnestly on us, as though by our own power or godliness we had made this man to walk?” ( Acts iii. 12 .) Unto Cornelius also he saith, “We also are men of like passions with you:” and unto Christ Himself, “Lo, we have left all, and followed Thee.” (St.
san Girolamo † 420 d.C. Against Jovinianus 1.26
… In accordance with this rule Peter and the other Apostles (I must give Jovinianus something now and then out of my abundance) had indeed wives, but those which they had taken before they knew the Gospel. But once they were received into the Apostolate, they forsook the offices of marriage. For when Peter, representing the Apostles, says to the Lord:
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Letters of St. Augustin 31.5
… namely, “Let your light so shine before men, that they may behold your good works, and may glorify your Father which is in heaven.” The fishermen of Galilee found pleasure not only in leaving their ships and their nets at the Lord’s command, but also in declaring that they had left all and followed Him.
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. City of God 17.4
… and I have counted them not only loss, but even dung, that I might win Christ.” Therefore that poor one is raised up from the earth above all the rich, and that beggar is lifted up from that dunghill above all the wealthy, “that he may sit among the mighty of the people,” to whom He says, “Ye shall sit upon twelve thrones,”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 92.9
… Peter, Brethren, was already one of those who had left all and followed the Lord. For as that rich man went away in sadness, when the disciples bring troubled, asked how then any one could be perfect, and the Lord consoled them, they said to the Lord, “Behold, we have forsaken all, and followed Thee; what shall we have therefore?”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 119.3
3. But what was this “his own,” unto which John took the mother of the Lord? For he was not outside the circle of those who said unto Him, “Lo, we have left all, and followed Thee.” No, but on that same occasion he had also heard the words, Every one that hath forsaken these things for my sake, shall receive an hundred times as much in this world.
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Expositions on the Book of Psalms 104.23
… and come and follow Me.” …Let him who hath resigned many things, not be proud. We know that Peter was a fisherman: what then could he give up, to follow our Lord? Or his brother Andrew, or John and James the sons of Zebedee, themselves also fishermen; and yet what did they say? “Behold, we have forsaken all, and followed Thee.”
Giovanni Cassiano † 435 d.C. The Conferences of John Cassian 3.10
… But concerning visible and worthless riches Peter says to the Lord: “Lo, we have left all and followed thee. What shall we have therefore?”
19:28
san Giustino † 165 d.C. Dialogue with Trypho 113
… For I have proved that it was Jesus who appeared to and conversed with Moses, and Abraham, and all the other patriarchs without exception, ministering to the will of the Father; who also, I say, came to be born man by the Virgin Mary, and I lives for ever. For the latter is He after
Taziano il Siro † 180 d.C. The Diatessaron 29
… And Jesus looked at them intently, and said unto them, With men this is not possible, but with God it is: [6] [Arabic, p. 111] it is possible for God to do everything. Simon Cephas said unto him, Lo, we have left everything, and followed thee; what is it, thinkest thou, that we [7] shall have?
Tertulliano † 220 d.C. On Idolatry 18
… through them, too, penalties prepared for the impious are ignored. But “both your birth and your substance are troublesome to you in resisting idolatry.” For avoiding it, remedies cannot be lacking; since, even if they be lacking, there remains that one by which you will be made a happier magistrate, not in the earth, but in the heavens.
Origene † 254 d.C. Origen's Commentary on Matthew 11.3
… And I think that the twelve baskets were in the possession of the disciples to whom it was said “Ye shall sit upon twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.”
Origene † 254 d.C. Origen's Commentary on Matthew 14.15
… he did not simply follow, but “having arisen;” for “having arisen” is an important addition. There are always those, then, who follow like the great multitudes, who have not arisen that they may follow, nor have given up all that was theirs formerly, but few are they who have arisen and followed, who also, in the regeneration, shall sit on twelve thrones.
Eusebio di Cesarea † 339 d.C. The Church History of Eusebius 10.4.46
… For having received from him the promise of much greater things than these, she desires to share uninterruptedly throughout eternity with the choir of the angels of light, in the far greater glory of regeneration,
Afraate † 346 d.C. Aphrahat: Select Demonstrations 5.22
22. For Isaiah first set men of Judah as judges over them, and there was planted amongst them a new and beloved planting. But these are those judges who shall sit on twelve thrones and judge their twelve tribes .
Afraate † 346 d.C. Aphrahat: Select Demonstrations 6.1
… Though no man know us, yet they that have knowledge of us are many. Let us rejoice in our hope at every time, that He Who is our hope and our Redeemer may rejoice in us. Let us judge ourselves righteously and condemn ourselves, that we may not hang down our faces before the judges who shall sit upon thrones and judge the tribes.
Afraate † 346 d.C. Aphrahat: Select Demonstrations 22.16
16. Remember that the Apostle also said, We shall judge angels . And our Lord said to His disciples, Ye shall sit on twelve thrones, and judge twelve tribes of the house of Israel .
sant'Ambrogio † 397 d.C. Exposition of the Christian Faith 5.6
… for there are four and twenty other seats, as we have it in the Revelation of John: “And upon the seats four and twenty elders sitting.” In the Gospel also the Lord Himself says: “When the Son of Man shall sit in the throne of His glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.”
sant'Ambrogio † 397 d.C. Concerning Widows 12
… And so it is said to him and the others: “Ye which have followed Me, in the regeneration, when the Son of Man shall sit in the throne of His glory, shall also yourselves sit upon twelve thrones, judging the tribes of Israel.”
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 26
For not at all among Jews only may one see this taking place, but also among them that have believed. For Judas too was a child of the kingdom, and it was said to him with the disciples, “Ye shall sit on twelve thrones;”
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 61
What then saith He? “Verily, I say unto you, that ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of Man shall sit on the throne of His glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.”
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. A Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles 2
… 19 ); they learned what is to take place in the judgment ( Matt. xvi. 27 ); learned that they shall then sit and judge the twelve tribes of Israel ( Luke xxi. 27 ); learned that the Jews would be cast out, and in their stead the Gentiles should come in (
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Homilies on Ephesians 4
… For now the things which are said may to the unbelievers seem to be foolishness; but then all shall know them. Wouldest thou understand too, how He hath made us sit together with Him? Hear what Christ Himself saith to the disciples, “Ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.” (
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Homilies on Ephesians 8
… Is there any that loveth Christ, he knows the dignity of this title, he knows what a virtue is this, he knows how great a boon he bestowed upon mankind, even this, to be bound for His sake. More glorious this, perhaps to be bound for His sake, than “to sit at His right hand,” ( Matt. xx. 21 .) more august this, than to “sit upon the twelve thrones.” (
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 82
“Then dost Thou gain by prayer, and dost Thou not yet possess that concerning which they enquired continually, saying, ‘Whither goest Thou?’ What sayest Thou? How then didst Thou say to them, ‘Ye shall sit upon twelve thrones’? (
san Girolamo † 420 d.C. The Letters of St. Jerome 16
… Therefore I implore your blessedness, by our Lord’s cross and passion, those necessary glories of our faith, as you hold an apostolic office, to give an apostolic decision. Only tell me by letter with whom I am to communicate in Syria, and I will pray for you that you may sit in judgment enthroned with the twelve;
san Girolamo † 420 d.C. The Letters of St. Jerome 71.3
… But to offer one’s self to God, this is the mark of Christians and apostles. These like the widow out of their penury cast their two mites into the treasury, and giving all that they have to the Lord are counted worthy to hear his words: “ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. City of God 20.5
In like manner He says to His disciples, “Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration, when the Son of man shall sit on the throne of His glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. A Treatise on the Merits and Forgiveness of Sins, and on the Baptism of Infants 2.9
… “In the regeneration,” says He, “when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of His glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. A Treatise Against Two Letters of the Pelagians 3.5
… this weakness with which we contend, with alternating failure and progress, even to the death of the body, and which is of great importance as to what it can overcome in us, shall be consumed by another regeneration, of which the Lord says, “In the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit on the throne of His glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones,”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. A Treatise Against Two Letters of the Pelagians 4.31
… while another generation does not receive sins;—let us consider whether by any means there may not be a regeneration for us after the course of this life,—of which regeneration it is said, ‘In the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of His glory.’
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 19.0
On the words of the Gospel, Matt. xix. 28 , “Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden,” etc.
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 28.6
… Yes, it labors; but “the Lord will not cast off His people, and He will not forsake His inheritance until justice is turned into judgment.” “Until the justice,” which is now in His saints, “be turned into judgment;” when that shall be fulfilled which was said to them, “Ye shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Expositions on the Book of Psalms 12.1
1. It has been said on the sixth Psalm, that “the eighth” may be taken as the day of judgment. “For the eighth” may also be taken “for the eternal age;” for that after the time present, which is a cycle of seven days, it shall be given to the Saints.
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Expositions on the Book of Psalms 45.21
… For all the souls that have been born through their preaching and evangelizing are “daughters of kings:” and the Churches, as the daughters of Apostles, are daughters of kings. For He is “King of kings;” they themselves kings, of whom it was said, “Ye shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Expositions on the Book of Psalms 50.8
… and come, follow Me;” to which sort is said, “Ye shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Expositions on the Book of Psalms 50.10
… What mean the twelve thrones, which signify all men every where that have been enabled to be so perfect as they must be perfect, to whom it is said, “Ye shall sit over the twelve tribes of Israel”?
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Expositions on the Book of Psalms 68.39
… and the virtue of Him in the clouds.” For not alone He shall come to judgment, but with the elders of His people: to whom He hath promised that they shall sit upon thrones to judge,
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Expositions on the Book of Psalms 75.5
… according to His nature as Son of Man He hath received a time, as of being born, and of suffering, as of dying, and of rising again, and of ascending, so of coming and of judging. In Him His Body also saith these words, for not without them He will judge. For He saith in the Gospel, “Ye shall sit upon twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Expositions on the Book of Psalms 86.21
… Yet wherefore saith He not this also? Was it not said to servants, “Ye shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel”?
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Expositions on the Book of Psalms 87.4
… And twelve gates of Jerusalem are spoken of, and the one gate is Christ, and the twelve gates are Christ for Christ dwells in the twelve gates, hence was twelve the number of the Apostles. There is a deep mystery in this number of twelve: “Ye shall sit,” says our Saviour, “on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Expositions on the Book of Psalms 94.14
… 15 ). Listen now, and gain righteousness: for judgment thou canst not yet have. Thou shouldest gain righteousness first; but that very righteousness of thine shall turn unto judgment. The Apostles had righteousness here on earth, and bore with the wicked. But what is said unto them? “Ye shall sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Expositions on the Book of Psalms 101.9
9. And whence wast thou fed? And what pleased thee, when he did not eat with thee? “Mine eyes,” he saith, “were upon such as are faithful in the land, that they might sit with me” ( ver. 6 ). That is, that with Me they might be seated. In what sense are they “to sit”? “Ye shall sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Expositions on the Book of Psalms 111.2
… And for this reason let us consider the place where he confesseth unto the Lord with all his heart. “In the counsel,” he saith, “of the upright, and in the congregation:” I suppose, of those who shall “sit upon the twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Expositions on the Book of Psalms 113.5
… there is also another interpretation, which, Beloved, ye may consider with me. I believe that those are now meant by heavens who shall sit upon twelve thrones, and shall judge with the Lord;
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Expositions on the Book of Psalms 113.6
… 8 ). Let not then the heads of the exalted disdain to be humble, beneath the Lord’s right hand. For though the faithful steward of the Lord’s money be placed together with the princes of the people of God, although he be destined to sit on the twelve seats, and even to judge angels;
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Expositions on the Book of Psalms 113.7
… yet considered by itself, it is abundant.…The Church then speaketh thus in that sense, wherein she seemeth to bear no offspring among those crowds who have not given up all things, that they might follow the Lord, and might sit upon the twelve thrones.
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Expositions on the Book of Psalms 122.9
… the throne of wisdom is the soul of the righteous; that is, wisdom sitteth in the soul of the righteous as it were in her chair, in her throne, and thence judgeth whatsoever she judgeth. There were therefore thrones of wisdom, and therefore the Lord said unto them, “Ye shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Expositions on the Book of Psalms 145.3
… For we are in this generation sons of God, we shall be in another generation sons of the Resurrection. Scripture hath called us “sons of the Resurrection;” the Resurrection itself it hath called Regeneration. “In the regeneration,” it saith, “when the Son of Man shall be seated in His Majesty.”
Giovanni Cassiano † 435 d.C. The Conferences of John Cassian 1.13
… “Ye shall sit upon twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel:”
Giovanni Cassiano † 435 d.C. The Conferences of John Cassian 3.10
… we shall not find that the Apostles had left anything of any value, or that the Lord had any reason for bestowing on them the blessing of so great glory, that they were allowed to hear from Him that “in the regeneration, when the Son of Man shall sit on the throne of His glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.”
Giovanni Cassiano † 435 d.C. The Seven Books of John Cassian on the Incarnation of the Lord, Against Nestorius 5.7
… Whence also the resurrection is actually spoken of as regeneration, according to the words of the Lord: “Verily I say unto you, that ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit on the throne of His glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.”
19:29
sant'Ireneo di Lione † 202 d.C. Against Heresies 5.33.2
… the poor, and thou shall be blessed, since they cannot recompense thee, but a recompense shall be made thee at the resurrection of the just.” And again He says, “Whosoever shall have left lands, or houses, or parents, or brethren, or children because of Me, he shall receive in this world an hundred-fold, and in that to come he shall inherit eternal life.”
san Cirillo di Gerusalemme † 386 d.C. The Catechetical Lectures of S. Cyril 18.30
… for He says, that He that reapeth receiveth wages, and gathereth fruit unto life eternal . At another time, by martyrdom and confession in Christ’s name; for He says, And he that hateth his life in this world, shall keep it unto life eternal . And again, by preferring Christ to riches or kindred; And every one that hath forsaken brethren, or sisters
sant'Ambrogio † 397 d.C. On the Duties of the Clergy 2.2
… “This is eternal life, to know Thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ Whom Thou hast sent.” About works He gives this answer: “Every one that hath forsaken house, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for My Name’s sake, shall receive an hundred-fold, and shall inherit everlasting life.”
sant'Ambrogio † 397 d.C. Concerning Repentance 1.16
… For men are led to the pursuit of anything either by rewards or results, and every pursuit grows slack by delay. And for this reason the Lord, in order that the devotion of His disciples might be increased, said that every one who had left all that was his, and followed God, should receive sevenfold more both here and hereafter.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 15
… nor again in promising such as are in our life, doth He limit his promise to that kind. For He saith, “Seek ye the kingdom of God, and all these things shall be added unto you.” And again: “Whosoever hath left houses or brethren, shall receive an hundred fold in this world, and in the future shall inherit everlasting life.”
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 61
For “every one,” He saith, “that hath forsaken brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, or house, for my name’s sake, shall receive an hundredfold in this world, and shall inherit eternal life.”
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 62
… “sell that thou hast:” and of virginity, “He that is able to receive, let him receive it:” and of humility, “For except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of Heaven:” and of a recompense of the things here, “For whoso hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, shall receive an hundredfold in this world:”
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 71
But art thou on fire with exceeding desire for riches. Have the possessions of all men instead of thine own. For indeed I give thee, He saith, more than thou seekest, in opening to thee the houses of the wealthy throughout the world. “For whosoever hath forsaken father or mother, or lands, or house, shall receive an hundredfold.”
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 86
… in Thy name we cast out devils;” although he was casting them out, but, “Behold, we have forsaken all and followed Thee what shall we have?” And Christ again, in answering this apostle, said not, “If any man raise up the lame,” but, “Whosoever hath forsaken houses or lands, shall receive an hundredfold in this world, and shall inherit everlasting life.”
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans 7
… but if there, tried gold. Still He does not even deprive thee of the goods of this life. For along with that promise He has placed another also, to the following effect, That every one that loveth the things of the world to come, shall receive “an hundred-fold in this life present, and shall inherit eternal life.” (
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Homilies on First Corinthians 7
… He raised up Lazarus by a single word merely, and shewed him alive. Again, He said, “The gates of Hades shall not prevail against the Church (St. Matt. xvi. 18 .) and, “He that forsaketh father or mother, shall receive an hundred-fold in this life, and shall inherit everlasting life.” (
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Epistle to the Hebrews 23
… For God from the beginning, knowing that the human race needs much condescension, bestows on us not only the things in the world to come, but also those here; as for instance, Christ said even to the disciples, “Whosoever hath left houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, shall receive an hundredfold and shall inherit everlasting life.” (
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Epistle to the Hebrews 25
… xii. 20 .) And again, that if thou despise riches, thou shalt then obtain them, hear Christ saying, “There is no man which hath left father, or mother, or house, or brethren, who shall not receive an hundredfold, and shall inherit everlasting life.” (
san Girolamo † 420 d.C. The Letters of St. Jerome 66.7
… and the shining robe of victory now envelops men who a little while ago were country boors. Thus we have received more than we have given. The things we have renounced are small; the things we possess are great. All that Christ promises is duly performed and for what we have given up we have received an hundredfold.
san Girolamo † 420 d.C. Against Jovinianus 2.10
19. Then, again, as regards the parable of the sower in the Gospel, we read that the good ground brought forth fruit, some a hundred fold, some sixty fold, and some thirty fold; and, on the other hand, that the bad ground admitted of three degrees of sterility: but Jovinianus makes only two classes, the good soil and the bad.
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. The Confessions 6.7
… whereupon all the filth of the Circensian pastimes flew off from him, and he did not approach them further. Upon this, he prevailed with his reluctant father to let him be my pupil. He gave in and consented. And Alypius, beginning again to hear me, was involved in the same superstition as I was, loving in the Manichæans that ostentation of continency
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. City of God 20.7
… the square on a plane superficies. But to give this superficies height, and make it a cube, the hundred is again multiplied by ten, which gives a thousand. Besides, if a hundred is sometimes used for totality, as when the Lord said by way of promise to him that left all and followed Him “He shall receive in this world an hundredfold;”
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Reply to Faustus the Manichæan 5.1
1. Faustus said: Do I believe the gospel? You ask me if I believe it, though my obedience to its commands shows that I do. I should rather ask you if you believe it, since you give no proof of your belief. I have left my father, mother, wife, and children, and all else that the gospel requires;
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Answer to the Letters of Petilian, the Donatist 2.100
… It is not then written, "Whosoever shall lose his substance," but "Whosoever shall lose his life for my sake." And the passage about substance is not, "Whosoever shall lose," but "Every one that hath forsaken;"
sant'Agostino d'Ippona † 430 d.C. Expositions on the Book of Psalms 79.16
… But in the number seven, that is, in sevenfold retribution, he would have the completeness of the punishment to be perceived, for with this number fulness is wont to be signified. Whence also there is this saying for the good, “He shall receive in this world seven times as much:”
Giovanni Cassiano † 435 d.C. The Conferences of John Cassian 21.9
… “And everyone that hath left house, or brethren or sisters or father or mother or wife or children for My name’s sake, shall receive an hundredfold and shall inherit eternal life.”
Giovanni Cassiano † 435 d.C. The Conferences of John Cassian 24.26
Further also that recompense of reward, wherein the Lord promises an hundredfold in this life to those whose renunciation is perfect, and says: “And everyone that hath left house or brethren or sisters or father or mother or wife or children or lands for My name’s sake, shall receive an hundredfold in the present time and shall inherit eternal life,”
19:30
sant'Ireneo di Lione † 202 d.C. Against Heresies 3.22.4
… And it has, in fact, happened that the first compact looses from the second tie, but that the second tie takes the position of the first which has been cancelled. For this reason did the Lord declare that the first should in truth be last, and the last first.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 26
… whereas the Ethiopian, barbarian as he was, and of them “from the east and west,” shall enjoy the crowns with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob. This takes place among us also now. “For many,” saith He, “that are first shall be last, and the last first.”
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 61
When He had then raised the spirit of all, and had persuaded them to feel confidence both with respect to themselves and to all the world, He added, that “Many that were first shall be last, and last first.”
san Girolamo † 420 d.C. The Letters of St. Jerome 46.10
… Differing in speech, they are one in religion, and almost every nation has a choir of its own. Yet amid this great concourse there is no arrogance, no disdain of self-restraint; all strive after humility, that greatest of Christian virtues. Whosoever is last is here regarded as first.
19:1
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Hom. lxii.
The Lord had before left Judæa because of their jealousy, but now He keeps Himself more to it, because His passion was near at hand. Yet does He not go up to Judæa itself, but into the borders of Judæa; whence it is said, And it came to pass when Jesus had ended all these sayings, he departed from Galilee.
Rabano Mauro † 856 d.C.
Here then He begins to relate what He did, taught, or suffered in Judæa. At first beyond Jordan eastward, afterwards on this side Jordan when He came to Jericho, Bethphage, and Jerusalem; whence it follows, And He came into the coasts of Judæa beyond Jordan.
Pseudo-Crisostomo
e. As the righteous Lord of all, who loves these servants so as not to despise those.
Rabano Mauro † 856 d.C.
It should be known, that the whole territory of the Israelites was called Judæa, to distinguish it from other nations. But its southern portion, inhabited by the tribes of Judah and Benjamin, was called Judæa proper, to distinguish it from other districts in the same province as Samaria, Galilee, Decapolis, and the rest. It follows, And great multitudes followed him.
Pseudo-Crisostomo
They were conducting Him forth, as the young children of a father going on a far journey. And He setting forth as a father, left them as pledges of His love the healing of their diseases, as it is said, And he healed them.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C.
It should be also observed, that the Lord is not either ever delivering doctrine, or ever working miracles, but one while does this, and again turns to that; that by His miracles faith might be given to what He said, and by His teaching might be shewed the profit of those things which He wrought.
Origene † 253 d.C.
The Lord healed the multitudes beyond Jordan, where baptism was given. For all are truly healed from spiritual sickness in baptism; and many follow Christ as did these multitudes, but not rising up as Matthew, who arose and followed the Lord,
sant'Ilario † 367 d.C.
Also He cures the Galileans on the borders of Judæa, that He might admit the sins of the Gentiles to that pardon which was prepared for the Jews.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C.
For indeed Christ so healed men, as to do good both to themselves, and through them to many other. For these men’s healing was to others the occasion of their knowledge of God; but not to the Pharisees, who were only hardened by the miracles; whence it follows; And the Pharisees came to him, tempting him,, and saying, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause?
san Girolamo † 420 d.C.
That they might have Him as it were between the horns of a syllogism, so that, whatever answer He should make, it would lie open to cavil. Should He allow a wife to be put away for any cause, and the marriage of another, he would seem to contradict Himself as a preacher of chastity. Should He answer that she may not be put away for any cause whatsoever, He will be judged to have spoken impiously, and to make against the teaching of Moses and of God.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C.
Observe their wickedness even in the way of putting their question. The Lord had above disputed concerning thus law, but they now ask Him as though He had spoken nothing thereof, supposing He had forgot what He had before delivered in this matter.
Pseudo-Crisostomo
But, as when you see one much pursuing the acquaintance of physicians, you know that he is sick, so, when you see either man or woman enquiring concerning divorce, know that that man is lustful and that woman unchaste. For chastity has pleasure in wedlock, but desire is tormented as though under a slavish bondage therein. And knowing that they had no sufficient cause to allege for their putting away their wives, save their own lewdness, they feigned many divers causes. They feared to ask Him for what cause, lest they should be tied down within the limits of fixed and certain causes; and therefore they asked if it were lawful for every cause; for they knew that appetite knows no limits, and cannot hold itself within the bounds of one marriage, but the more it is indulged the more it is kindled.
Origene † 253 d.C.
Seeing the Lord thus tempted, let none of His disciples who is set to teach think it hard if he also be by some tempted. Howbeit, He replies to His tempters with the doctrines of piety.
san Girolamo † 420 d.C.
But He so frames His answer as to evade their snare. He brings in the testimony of Holy Writ, and the law of nature, and opposing God’s first sentence to this second, He answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female? This is written in the beginning of Genesis. This teaches that second marriages are to be avoided, for He said not male and females, which was what was sought by the putting away of the first, but, male and female, implying only one tie of wedlock.
Rabano Mauro † 856 d.C.
For by the wholesome design of God it was ordained that a man should have in the woman a part of his own body, and should not look upon as separate from himself that which he knew was formed out of himself.
Pseudo-Crisostomo
If then God created the male and female out of one, to this end that they should be one, why then henceforth were not they born man and wife at one birth, as it is with certain insects? Because God created male and female for the continuance of the species, yet is He ever a lover of chastity, and promoter of continence. Therefore did He not follow this pattern in all kinds, to the end that, if any man choose to marry, he may know what is, according to the first disposition of the creation, the condition of man and wife; but if he choose not to marry, he shall not be under necessity to marry by the circumstances of his birth, lest he should by his continence be the destruction of the other who was not willing to be continent; for which same cause God forbids that after being joined in wedlock one should separate if the other be unwilling.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C.
But not by the law of creation only, but also by the practice of the law, He shews that they ought to be joined one and one, and never put asunder, And he said, For this cause shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave to his wife.
san Girolamo † 420 d.C.
In like manner He says his wife, and not wives, and adds expressly, and they twain shall be one flesh. For it is the reward of marriage that one flesh, namely in the offspring, is made of two.
La Glossa interlin.
Or, one flesh, that is in carnal connexion.
Pseudo-Crisostomo
If then because the wife is made of the man, and both one of one flesh, a man shall leave his father and his mother, then there should be yet greater affection between brothers and sisters, for these come of the same parents, but man and wife of different. But this is saying too much, because the ordinance of God is of more force than the law of nature. For God’s precepts are not subject to the law of nature, but nature bends to the precepts of God. Also brethren are born of one, that they should seek out different roads; but the man and the wife are born of different persons, that they should coalesce in one. The order of nature also follows the appointment of God. For as is the sap in trees, so is affection in man. The sap ascends from the roots into the leaves, and passes forth into the seed. Therefore parents love their children, but are not so loved of them, for the desire of a man is not towards his parents, but towards the sons whom he has begot; and this is what is said, Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C.
See the wisdom of the Teacher. Being asked, Is it lawful, He said not straight, It is not lawful, lest they should be troubled, but establishes it through a proof. For God made them from the beginning male and female, and not merely joined them together, but bade them quit father and mother; and not bade the husband merely approach his wife, but be joined to her, shewing by this manner of speaking the inseparable bond. He even added a still closer union, saying, And they twain shall be one flesh.
sant'Agostino † 430 d.C. Gen. ad lit. ix. 19.
Whereas Scripture witnesses that these words were said by the first man, and the Lord here declares that God spake them, hence we should understand that by reason of the ecstasy which had passed upon Adam, he was enabled to speak this as a prophecy.
Remigio † 908 d.C.
The Apostle says that this is a mystery in Christ and the Church (Eph. 5:32.); for the Lord Jesus Christ left His Father when He came down from heaven to earth; and He left His mother, that is, the synagogue, because of its unbelief, and clave unto His wife, that is, the Holy Church, and they two are one flesh, that is, Christ and the Church are one body.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C.
When He had brought forward the words and facts of the old law, He then interprets it with authority, and lays down a law, saying, Therefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. For as those who love one another spiritually are said to be one soul, And all they that believed had one heart and one soul, (Acts 4:32.) so husband and wife who love each other after the flesh, are said to be one flesh. And as it is a wretched thing to cut the flesh, so is it an unjust thing to put away a wife.
sant'Agostino † 430 d.C. Civ. Dei, xiv. 22.
For they are called one, either from their union, or from the derivation of the woman, who was taken out of the side of the man.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C.
He brings in God yet again, saying, What God has joined, let no man put asunder, shewing that it is against both nature and God’s law to put away a wife; against nature, because one flesh is therein divided; against law, because God has joined and forbidden to sunder them.
san Girolamo † 420 d.C.
God has joined by making man and woman one flesh; this then man may not put asunder, but God only. Man puts asunder, when from desire of a second wife the first is put away; God puts asunder, who also had joined, when by consent for the service of God we so have our wives as though we had them not. (1 Cor. 7:29.)
sant'Agostino † 430 d.C. Cont. Faust. xix. 29.
Behold now out of the books of Moses it is proved to the Jews that a wife may not be put away. For they thought that they were doing according to the purport of Moses’ law when they did put them away. This also we learn hence by the testimony of Christ Himself, that it was God who made it thus, and joined them male and female; which when the Manichæans deny, they are condemned, resisting the Gospel of Christ.
Pseudo-Crisostomo
This sentence of chastity seemed hard to these adulterers; but they could not make answer to the argument. Howbeit, they will not submit to the truth, but betake themselves for shelter to Moses, as men having a bad cause fly to some powerful personage, that where justice is not, his countenance may prevail; They say unto him, Why did Moses then command to give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away?
san Girolamo † 420 d.C.
Here they reveal the cavil which they had prepared; albeit the Lord had not given sentence of Himself, but had recalled to their minds ancient history, and the commands of God.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C.
Had the Lord been opposed to the Old Testament, He would not thus have contended in Moses’ behalf, nor have gone about to shew that what was his was in agreement with the things of old. But the unspeakable wisdom of Christ made answer and excuse for these in this manner, He saith unto them, Moses for the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives. By this He clears Moses from their charge, and retorts it all upon their own head.
sant'Agostino † 430 d.C. ubi sup.
For how great was that hardness! When not even the intervention of a bill of divorce, which gave room for just and prudent men to endeavour to dissuade, could move them to renew the conjugal affection. And with what wit do the Manichæans blame Moses, as severing wedlock by a bill of divorce, and commend Christ as, on the contrary, confirming its force? Whereas according to their impious science they should have praised Moses for putting asunder what the devil had joined, and found fault with Christ who riveted the bonds of the devil.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C.
At last, because what He had said was severe, He goes back to the old law, saying, From the beginning it was not so.
san Girolamo † 420 d.C.
What He says is to this purpose. Is it possible that God should so contradict Himself, as to command one thing at first, and after defeat His own ordinance by a new statute? Think not so; but, whereas Moses saw that through desire of second wives who should be richer, younger, or fairer, that the first were put to death, or treated ill, he chose rather to suffer separation, than the continuance of hatred and assassination. Observe moreover that He said not God suffered you, but, Moses; shewing that it was, as the Apostle speaks, a counsel of man, not a command of God. (1 Cor. 7:12.)
Pseudo-Crisostomo
Therefore said He well, Moses suffered, not commanded. For what we command, that we ever wish; but when we suffer, we yield against our will, because we have not the power to put full restraint upon the evil wills of men. He therefore suffered you to do evil that you might not do worse; thus in suffering this he was not enforcing the righteousness of God, but taking away its sinfulness from a sin; that while you did it according to His law, your sin should not appear sin.
Il testo latino
Chrysostomus in Matth
Dominus prius Iudaeam relinquens propter illorum aemulationem, nunc ibidem iam immoratur: quia passio in proximo futura erat. Non tamen ad Iudaeam interim ascendit, sed in terminos Iudaeae: unde dicitur et factum est, cum consummasset Iesus sermones istos, migravit a Galilaea
Rabano Mauro
Hic ergo incipit narrare quae in Iudaea fecit, docuit, sive passus est: et primo quidem trans Iordanem ad orientem; deinde etiam trans Iordanem, quando venit Iericho et Bethphage et Ierusalem: unde sequitur et venit in fines Iudaeae trans Iordanem
Chrysostomus super Matth
Quasi iustus dominus omnium, qui sic diligit alios servos, ut alios non contemnat
Remigio
Sciendum est autem, quod omnis illa Israelitarum provincia, generaliter Iudaea dicebatur, ad comparationem aliarum gentium. Verumtamen meridiana eius plaga in qua habitabat tribus Iuda, et tribus Beniamin, specialiter dicebatur Iudaea, ad distinctionem aliarum regionum, quae in ipsa provincia continebantur, idest Samaria, Galilaea, Decapolis, et reliquae aliae. Sequitur et secutae sunt eum turbae multae
Chrysostomus super Matth
Perducebant eum quasi parvuli filii patrem peregre longe proficiscentem. Ipse autem tamquam pater proficiens, pignora caritatis filiis reliquit remedia sanitatum: unde dicitur et curavit eos
Chrysostomus in Matth
Considerandum etiam, quod neque doctrinae verborum continue dominus insistit, nec signorum operationi; sed nunc quidem hoc, nunc quidem illud facit: ut a signis credibilis appareret in his quae dicebat; ex sermonum autem doctrina utilitas quae erat in signis ostenderetur
Origenes in Matth
Sanabat autem dominus turbas trans Iordanem, ubi Baptismus dabatur. Vere enim omnes a spiritualibus infirmitatibus salvantur etiam in Baptismo; et quidem multi sequuntur Christum sicut turbae, tamen non surgentes, ut Matthaeus, qui surgens secutus est dominum
Rabano Mauro
Curat etiam Galilaeos in Iudaeae finibus ut peccata gentium in eam veniam quae Iudaeae parabatur, admitteret
Chrysostomus in Matth
Curabat siquidem Christus homines, et illis benefaciens, et per eos multis aliis. Horum enim sanatio aliis erat occasio divinae cognitionis, sed non Pharisaeis qui ex signis duriores fiebant: unde sequitur et accesserunt ad eum Pharisaei tentantes eum, et dicentes: si licet homini dimittere uxorem suam quacumque ex causa?
Hieronymus in Matth
Ut quasi cornuto eum teneant syllogismo, et quodcumque respondeat, pateat captioni. Si dixerit dimittendam uxorem qualibet ex causa, et ducendam aliam: pudicitiae praedicator sibi videtur dicere contraria. Sin autem responderit non omnem ob causam debere dimitti, quasi sacrilegii reus tenebitur, et adversus doctrinam Moysi et Dei facere
Chrysostomus in Matth
Intuere autem ex modo etiam interrogationis malitiam. Dominus enim supra de lege hac disputaverat; ipsi autem quasi iam nullo dicto interrogant, scilicet opinantes quod oblitus esset eorum quae dixerat
Chrysostomus super Matth
Sicut autem si videas hominem assidue amicitias medicorum colentem, intelligis quia infirmus est, sic et cum videas virum sive mulierem de dimittendis uxoribus aut viris interrogantes, cognosce quia vir ille lascivus est, mulier illa meretrix est: nam in matrimonio castitas delectatur, libido autem quasi vinculo coniugii alligate torquetur. Sciebant autem quoniam nullam causam idoneam habebant circa dimittendas uxores, praeter solam turpitudinem, et alias atque alias sibi iungebant. Timuerunt autem interrogare ex quibus causis, ne seipsos infra angustias certarum causarum astringerent; sed interrogaverunt si ex omnibus causis licet: scientes, quia modum nescit nec infra terminos unius coniugii capit libido; sed quanto magis exercetur, magis accenditur
Origenes in Matth
Tentato autem domino, nullus discipulorum eius, qui positus est ad docendum, graviter ferat si tentatus fuerit a quibusdam: tamen et tentatoribus respondet dogmata pietatis
Hieronymus
Sic autem responsionem temperat ut decipulam eorum transeat, Scripturam sanctam adducens in testimonium, et naturalem legem, primamque Dei sententiam secundae opponens: unde sequitur qui respondens ait eis: non legistis, quia qui fecit hominem ab initio, masculum et feminam fecit eos? Hoc in exordio Genesis scriptum est. Dicendo autem masculum et feminam, ostendit secunda vitanda coniugia: non enim ait: masculum et feminas, quod ex priorum repudio quaerebatur; sed masculum et feminam, ut unius coniugii consortia necterentur
Rabano Mauro
Salubri autem consilio Dei factum est ut sui corporis portionem vir amplectetur in femina, nec a se putaret esse diversum quod de se cognosceret fabricatum
Chrysostomus super Matth
Si ergo ad hoc marem et feminam ex uno creavit ut sint unum, quare ergo et de cetero vir et mulier non ex uno utero nascuntur, sicut volatilia quaedam? Quia Deus masculum quidem creavit et feminam propter necessitatem filiorum generandorum; tamen semper fuit castitatis amator et continentiae auctor. Ideo illum typum non servavit in omnibus; ut si quidem vult homo nubere, secundum primam dispositionem creationis humanae, intelligat quid est vir et uxor; si autem noluerit nubere, non habebit necessitatem nubendi propter coniunctionem nativitatis, ne forte videatur per suam continentiam alterum perdere, qui nolebat esse continens; sicut dominus post coniunctum matrimonium iubet ne alter altero nolente se separet
Chrysostomus in Matth
Non solum autem ex modo creationis, sed etiam ex modo legislationis monstravit quoniam unum oportet uni coniungi, et numquam rescindi: unde sequitur et dixit: propter hoc relinquet homo patrem et matrem, et adhaerebit uxori suae
Hieronymus
Similiter ait uxori, non: uxoribus; et expresse subditur erunt duo in carne una. Praemium enim est nuptiarum ex duobus unam carnem, scilicet prolis fieri
Glossa
Vel in carne una, idest in carnali copula
Chrysostomus super Matth
Si ergo quia ex viro est uxor, et ex una carne sunt ambo, relinquet homo patrem suum et matrem; maior nunc caritas debet esse inter fratres et sorores: quia hi quidem ex eisdem parentibus exeunt, illi autem ex diversis. Sed hoc magnum est nimis, quia fortior est Dei constitutio quam virtus naturae. Non enim praecepta Dei naturae subiecta sunt; sed natura Dei praeceptis obtemperat. Deinde fratres ex uno nascuntur, ut diversas vias petant, vir autem et uxor ex diversis nascuntur, ut in unum conveniant. Ordo etiam naturae Dei ordinationem sequitur. Quod enim est in arboribus humor, hoc est in hominibus amor. Humor autem de radicibus ascendit in herbam et sursum transmittitur in semen. Ideo parentes quidem diligunt, sed non sic diliguntur a filiis: homo enim non ad parentes, sed ad procreandos filios transmittit affectum: et hoc est quod dicitur propter hoc relinquet homo patrem et matrem, et adhaerebit uxori suae
Chrysostomus in Matth
Vide etiam sapientiam doctoris. Interrogatus enim si licet, non confestim dixit: non licet, ut non turbarentur; sed per probationem hoc constituit. Deus enim a principio masculum et feminam fecit, et non simpliciter eos coniunxit, sed matrem iussit dimittere et patrem; et non simpliciter virum mulieri dixit advenire, sed coniungi; ex ipso modo locutionis indivisibilitatem ostendens. Sed et maiorem copulam adiunxit, cum dixit et erunt duo in carne una
Augustinus super Gen. ad Litt
Haec tamen verba cum primi hominis fuisse Scriptura testetur, dominus tamen hic Deum hoc dixisse declarat, ut hinc intelligeremus propter extasim quae praecesserat in Adam, hoc divinitus tamquam prophetam dicere potuisse
Remigio
Mysterium enim hoc esse apostolus dicit in Christo et Ecclesia; dominus enim Iesus Christus quasi patrem deseruit cum de caelis ad terram descendit, et matrem deseruit, idest synagogam, propter infidelitatem; et adhaesit uxori suae, sanctae scilicet Ecclesiae; et sunt duo in carne una, idest Christus et Ecclesia in uno corpore
Chrysostomus in Matth
Postquam vero veteris legis et verba et facta induxit, cum potestate iam et ipse interpretatur et legem inducit dicens itaque iam non sunt duo, sed una caro. Sicut enim qui spiritualiter se diligunt, una anima esse dicuntur, dicente Scriptura: omnium credentium erat cor unum et anima una, sic vir et uxor qui carnaliter se diligunt, una caro esse dicuntur. Quemadmodum igitur carnem incidere est sordidum, ita et mulierem dividere est iniquum
Augustinus de Civ. Dei
Unum etiam dicuntur, vel propter coniunctionem, vel propter originem feminae, quae de masculi latere creata est
Chrysostomus in Matth
Ulterius autem et Deus induxit, dicens quod ergo Deus coniunxit, homo non separet, demonstrans, quod et praeter naturam et praeter legem est uxorem dimittere: praeter naturam quidem, quia una caro dividitur; praeter legem autem, quoniam Deo copulante et iubente non dividi, uxor dimittitur
Hieronymus
Deus enim coniunxit, unam faciendo carnem viri et feminae: hanc ergo homo non potest separare sed solus Deus. Homo separat, quando propter desiderium secundae uxoris prima dimittitur: Deus separat, qui et coniunxerat, quando ex consensu propter servitutem Dei sic habemus uxores quasi non habentes
Augustinus contra Faustum
Ecce Iudaei ex libris Moysi convincuntur non esse uxorem dimittendam, qui secundum voluntatem legis Moysi arbitrabantur se facere cum dimitterent. Simul et illud hic, ipso Christo attestante, cognoscimus, Deum fecisse et coniunxisse masculum et feminam, quod Manichaei negando damnantur, Christi Evangelio resistentes
Chrysostomus super Matthaeum
Gravis est autem fornicariis interpretatio castitatis; sed contra rationem respondere non possunt; veritati tamen credere non acquiescunt. Conferunt ergo se ad patrocinium Moysi; sicut homines malam causam habentes confugiunt ad potentes viros, ut si per iustitiam non possunt, vincant per personam; unde sequitur dicunt illi: quid ergo Moyses mandavit dari libellum repudii, et dimittere?
Hieronymus
Aperiunt calumniam quam paraverant: licet dominus non propriam sententiam protulerit, sed veteris historiae et mandatorum Dei fuerit recordatus
Chrysostomus in Matth
Si autem dominus alienus esset a veteri testamento, non decertasset pro Moyse, neque quae sua sunt monstrasset veteribus convenire. Sed ineffabilis Christi sapientia et pro his excusando respondit: unde sequitur et ait illis: quoniam Moyses ad duritiam cordis vestri permisit vobis dimittere uxores vestras. In quo liberat Moysen ab accusatione, et totum in illorum caput convertit
Augustinus contra Faustum
Quanta enim erat duritia, quae nec per libelli interpositionem, ubi dissuadendi locus iustis et prudentibus tribuebatur, solvi et flecti posset ad recipiendam vel revocandam coniugii caritatem? Porro qua calliditate reprehendunt Manichaei Moysen, tamquam coniugia dirimentem per libellum repudii, et laudant Christum tamquam eius vinculum confirmantem? Cum secundum suam sacrilegam scientiam, Moysen laudare debuerint separantem quod coniunxerat Diabolus, et Christum vituperare Diaboli ligamenta solidantem
Chrysostomus in Matth
Denique quia grave erat quod dictum erat, statim reducit sermonem ad antiquam legem, dicens ab initio autem non fuit sic
Hieronymus
Quod dicit, huiusmodi est. Numquid potest Deus sibi esse contrarius, ut aliud ante iusserit, et sententiam suam novo frangat imperio? Non ita sentiendum est; sed Moyses cum videret propter desiderium coniugum secundarum, quae illis ditiores vel iuniores vel pulchriores essent, primas uxores interfici, aut malam vitam ducere, maluit indulgere dissidium, quam odia et homicidia perseverare. Simulque considera, quod non dixit propter duritiam cordis vestri permisit vobis Deus, sed Moyses; ut, iuxta apostolum, consilium esset hominis, non imperium Dei
Chrysostomus super Matth
Propterea bene dixit, quod Moyses hoc permisit, non praecepit. Quod enim praecipimus, semper volumus; quod autem permittimus, nolentes indulgemus; quia malam voluntatem hominum ad plenum prohibere non possumus. Permisit ergo vobis facere mala, ne faceretis peiora; ergo hoc vobis permittendo, non vobis Dei iustitiam demonstravit, sed a peccato abstulit culpam peccandi: ut quasi secundum legem agentibus vobis, peccatum vestrum non videatur esse peccatum
19:9
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C.
Having stopped their mouths, He now set forth the Law with authority, saying, But I say unto you, that whosoever shall put away his wife, except for fornication, and marrieth another, committeth adultery.
Origene † 253 d.C.
Perhaps some one will say, that Jesus in thus speaking, suffered wives to be put away for the same cause that Moses suffered them, which He says was for the hardness of the hearts of the Jews. But to this it is to be answered, that if by the Law an adulteress is stoned, that sin is not to be understood as the shameful thing for which Moses suffers a writing of divorcement; (Deut. 24:1.) for in a cause of adultery it was not lawful to give a writing of divorcement. But Moses perhaps calls every sin in a woman a shameful thing, which if it be found in her, a bill of divorcement is written against her. But we should enquire, If it is lawful to put away a wife for the cause of fornication only, what is it if a woman be not an adulteress, but have done any other heinous crime; have been found a poisoner, or to have murdered her children? The Lord has explained this matter in another place, saying, Whoso putteth her away, except for the cause of fornication, maketh her to commit adultery, (Mat. 5:32.) giving her an opportunity of a second marriage.
san Girolamo † 420 d.C.
It is fornication alone which destroys the relationship of the wife; for when she has divided one flesh into two, and has separated herself by fornication from her husband, she is not to be retained, lest she should bring her husband also under the curse, which Scripture has spoken, He that keepeth an adulteress is a fool and wicked. (Prov. 18:23.)
Pseudo-Crisostomo
For as he is cruel and unjust that puts away a chaste wife, so is he a fool and unjust that retains an unchaste; for in that he hides the guilt of his wife, he is an encourager of foulness.
sant'Agostino † 430 d.C. De Conjug. Adult. ii. 9.
For a reunion of the wedlock, even after actual commission of adultery, is neither shameful nor difficult, where there is an undoubted remission of sin through the keys of the kingdom of heaven; not that after being divorced from her husband an adulteress should be called back again, but that after her union with Christ she should no longer be called an adulteress.
Pseudo-Crisostomo
For every thing by whatsoever causes it is created, by the same is it destroyed. It is not matrimony but the will that makes the union; and therefore it is not a separation of bodies but a separation of wills that dissolves it. He then who puts away his wife and does not take another is still her husband; for though their bodies be not united, their wills are united. But when he takes another, then he manifestly puts his wife away; wherefore the Lord says not, Whoso putteth away his wife, but, Whoso marrieth another, committeth adultery.
Rabano Mauro † 856 d.C.
There is then but one carnal cause why a wife should be put away, that is, fornication, and but one spiritual, that is, the fear of God. But there is no cause why while she who has been put away is alive, another should be married.
san Girolamo † 420 d.C.
For it might be that a man might falsely charge an innocent wife, and for the sake of another woman might fasten an accusation upon her. Therefore it is commanded so to put away the first, that a second be not married while the first is yet alive. Also because it might happen that by the same law a wife would divorce her husband, it is also provided that she take not another husband; and because one who had become an adulteress would have no further fear of disgrace, it is commanded that she many not another husband. But if she do marry another, she is in the guilt of adultery; wherefore it follows, And whoso marrieth her that is put away, committeth adultery.
La Glossa ord.
He says this to the terror of him that would take her to wife, for the adulteress would have no fear of disgrace.
Il testo latino
Chrysostomus in Matth
Quia os illorum oppilaverat, iam cum auctoritate legis inducit, dicens dico autem vobis quia quicumque dimiserit uxorem suam nisi ob fornicationem, et aliam duxerit, moechatur
Origenes in Matth
Forte autem dicet aliquis, quoniam Iesus dicens quicumque dimiserit uxorem suam, nisi ob fornicationem, permisit uxorem dimittere, quemadmodum Moyses: quem retulit propter duritiam cordis Iudaeorum hoc praecepisse. Sed ad hoc respondendum, quoniam, si secundum legem adultera lapidatur, non secundum hoc intelligitur res turpis, propter quam Moyses permittit libellum repudii; nec enim in causa adulterii oportebat libellum dare repudii. Sed forsitan Moyses omnem culpam mulieris turpem rem appellavit; quae si inventa fuerit in uxore, scribitur ei libellus repudii. Quaerendum est autem: si propter solam causam fornicationis dimittere iubet uxorem, quid est, si mulier non fuerit fornicata, sed aliud quid gravius fecerit: puta venefica inveniatur, aut interfectrix filiorum? Sed dominus exponens rem, alibi dixit: qui dimiserit, excepta causa fornicationis, facit eam moechari, dans ei occasionem secundarum nuptiarum
Hieronymus
Sola ergo fornicatio est quae uxoris vincit affectum; immo cum illa unam carnem in aliam diviserit, et se fornicatione separaverit a marito, non debet teneri, ne virum quoque sub maledictione faciat, dicente Scriptura: qui adulteram tenet, stultus et impius est
Chrysostomus super Matth
Sicut enim crudelis est et iniquus qui castam dimittit, sic fatuus et iniquus qui retinet meretricem; nam patronus turpitudinis est qui crimen celat uxoris
Augustinus de adulterinis coniugiis
Non tamen erit turpis nec difficilis, etiam post patrata et purgata adulteria, reconciliatio coniugii, ubi per claves regni caelorum non dubitatur fieri remissio peccatorum: non ut post viri divortium adultera revocetur, sed ut post Christi consortium adultera non vocetur
Chrysostomus super Matth
Omnis autem res per quas causas nascitur, per ipsas solvitur. Matrimonium autem non facit coitus, sed voluntas: et ideo non solvit illud separatio corporis, sed separatio voluntatis. Ideo qui dimittit coniugem suam, et aliam non accipit, adhuc maritus est: nam etsi corpore iam separatus est, tamen adhuc voluntate coniunctus est. Cum ergo aliam acceperit, tunc plane dimittit: et ideo dominus non dicit: qui dimittit, moechatur; sed qui alteram ducit
Rabano Mauro
Una ergo solummodo carnalis est causa, idest fornicatio; una spiritualis, hoc est timor Dei, ut uxor dimittatur. Nulla autem causa est ut, vivente ea quae relicta est, alia ducatur
Hieronymus
Poterat autem accidere ut aliquis calumniam faceret innocenti uxori, et ob secundam copulam nuptiarum veteri crimen impingeret. Ideo sic priorem dimittere iubetur uxorem ut secundam, prima vivente, non habeat. Nec non quia poterat evenire ut, iuxta eamdem legem, uxor quoque marito daret repudium, eadem cautela praecipitur ne secundum accipiat virum: et quia meretrix, et quae semel fuerat adultera, opprobrium non timebat, secundo non nubere praecipitur viro. Quod si talem duxerit, sub adulterii crimine sit: unde sequitur et qui dimissam duxerit, moechatur
Glossa
Accipientem terret: quia adultera non timet opprobrium
19:10
san Girolamo † 420 d.C.
A wife is a grievous burden, if it is not permitted to put her away except for the cause of fornication. For what if she be a drunkard, an evil temper, or of evil habits, is she to be kept? The Apostles, perceiving this burden someness, express what they feel; His disciples say unto him, If the case of the man be so with his wife, it is not good to marry.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C.
For it is a lighter thing to contend with himself, and his own lust, than with an evil woman.
Pseudo-Crisostomo
And the Lord said not, It is good, but rather assented that it is not good. However, He considered the weakness of the flesh; But he said unto them, All cannot receive this saying; that is, All are not able to do this.
san Girolamo † 420 d.C.
But let none think, that wherein He adds, save they to whom it is given, that either fate or fortune is implied, as though they were virgins only whom chance has led to such a fortune. For that is given to those who have sought it of God, who have longed for it, who have striven that they might obtain it.
Pseudo-Crisostomo
But all cannot obtain it, because all do not desire to obtain it. The prize is before them; he who desires the honour will not consider the toil. None would ever vanquish, if all shunned the struggle. Because then some have fallen from their purpose of continence, we ought not therefore to faint from that virtue; for they that fall in the battle do not slay the rest. That He says therefore, Save they to whom it is given, shews that unless we receive the aid of grace, we have not strength. But this aid of grace is not denied to such as seek it, for the Lord says above, Ask, and ye shall receive.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C.
Then to shew that this is possible, He says, For there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men; as much as to say, Consider, had you been so made of others, you would have lost the pleasure without gaining the reward.
Pseudo-Crisostomo
For as the deed without the will does not constitute a sin; so a righteous act is not in the deed unless the will go with it. That therefore is honourable continence, not which mutilation of body of necessity enforces, but which the will of holy purpose embraces.
san Girolamo † 420 d.C.
He speaks of three kinds of eunuchs, of whom two are carnal, and one spiritual. One, those who are so born of their mother’s womb; another, those whom enemies or courtly luxury has made so; a third, those who have made themselves so for the kingdom of heaven, and who might have been men, but become eunuchs for Christ. To them the reward is promised, for to the others whose continence was involuntary, nothing is due.
sant'Ilario † 367 d.C.
The cause in one item he assigns nature; in the next violence, and in the last his own choice, in him, namely, that determined to be so from hope of the kingdom of heaven.
Pseudo-Crisostomo
For they are born such, just as others are born having six or four fingers. For if God according as He formed our bodies in the beginning, had continued the same order unchangeably, the working of God would have been brought into oblivion among men. The order of nature is therefore changed at times from its nature, that God the framer of nature may be had in remembrance.
san Girolamo † 420 d.C. cf. Orig. in loc.
Or we may say otherwise. The eunuchs from their mothers’ wombs are they whose nature is colder, and not prone to lust. And they that are made so of men are they whom physicians made so, or they whom worship of idols has made effeminate, or who from the influence of heretical teaching pretend to chastity, that they may thereupon claim truth for their tenets. But none of them obtain the kingdom of heaven, save he only who has become a eunuch for Christ’s sake. Whence it follows, He that is able to receive it, let him receive it; let each calculate his own strength, whether he is able to fulfil the rules of virginity and abstinence. For in itself continence is sweet and alluring, but each man must consider his strength, that he only that is able may receive it. This is the voice of the Lord exhorting and encouraging on His soldiers to the reward of chastity, that he who can fight might fight and conquer and triumph.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C.
When he says, Who have made themselves eunuchs, He does not mean cutting off of members, but a putting away of evil thoughts. For he that cuts off a limb is under a curse, for such an one undertakes the deeds of murderers, and opens a door to Manicheans who depreciate the creature, and cut off the same members as do the Gentiles. For to cut off members is of the temptation of dæmons. But by the means of which we have spoken desire is not diminished but made more urgent; for it has its source elsewhere, and chiefly in a weak purpose and an unguarded heart, For if the heart be well governed, there is no danger from the natural motions; nor does the amputation of a member bring such peacefulness and immunity from temptation as does a bridle upon the thoughts.
Il testo latino
Hieronymus
Grave pondus uxor est, si excepta causa fornicationis, eam dimittere non licet. Quid enim si temulenta fuerit, si iracunda, si malis moribus, tenenda erit? Videntes ergo apostoli grave uxorum iugum, proferunt motum animi sui: unde dicitur dicunt ei discipuli eius: si ita est causa hominis cum uxore, non expedit nubere
Chrysostomus in Matth
Levius enim est contra concupiscentiam praeliari et contra seipsum, quam ad mulierem malam
Chrysostomus super Matth
Non autem dixit dominus, quia expedit; sed magis consensit quod non expedit; sed infirmitatem carnis consideravit; unde sequitur qui dixit eis: non omnes capiunt verbum istud, idest, non omnes hoc possunt
Hieronymus
Nemo autem putet sub hoc verbo quod addit sed quibus datum est, vel fatum vel fortunam introduci: quod hi sunt virgines quos ad hoc casus adduxit. Sed his datum est a Deo qui petierunt, qui voluerunt, qui ut acciperent, laboraverunt
Chrysostomus super Matth
Ideo ergo non omnes capere possunt, quia non omnes volunt. Palma proposita est: qui concupiscit gloriam, non cogitet de labore. Nemo vinceret, si omnes periculum timerent. Ex eo ergo quod quidam a proposito continentiae cadunt, non debemus circa virtutem castitatis fieri pigriores; sicut et qui in pugna cadunt non exanimant ceteros. Quod ergo dicit quibus datum est, illud ostendit, quia nisi auxilium gratiae acciperemus, nihil nobis valeret. Hoc autem auxilium gratiae volentibus non denegatur: dicit enim dominus: petite et accipietis
Chrysostomus in Matth
Deinde possibile hoc esse ostendens, ait sunt enim eunuchi; quasi dicat: excogita: si ab aliis excisus esses, quid utique faceres? Voluptate quidem privatus esses, mercedem autem non haberes
Chrysostomus super Matth
Sicut enim peccatum opus sine voluntate non facit, ita et iustitia ex opere non consummatur, nisi et voluntas affuerit. Illa est ergo gloriosa continentia, non illa quam transgredi non potest necessitas debilitatis corporis, sed quam complectitur voluntas sancti propositi
Hieronymus
Triplex ergo genus eunuchorum posuit; quorum duo sunt carnales, et tertii spirituales. Alii enim sunt qui de utero matris sic nascuntur; alii quos vel captivitas facit, vel deliciae matronales; tertii sunt qui seipsos castraverunt propter regnum caelorum, et qui cum possint esse viri, propter Christum eunuchi fiunt. Istis promittitur praemium; superioribus autem, quibus necessitas castimonia est, non voluntas, nihil omnino debetur
Hilarius in Matth
In uno enim eorum posuit naturam, scilicet in eo qui nascitur; in altero necessitatem, scilicet in eo qui factus est; in tertio voluntatem, qui scilicet spe regni caelestis talis esse decrevit
Chrysostomus super Matth
Quod autem aliqui sic nascuntur, hac ratione fit sicut et nascuntur sex digitos habentes aut quatuor. Si enim Deus sicut ab initio constituit unamquamque naturam, sic dimitteret illam immutabiliter semper in suo ordine permanere, in oblivionem deduceretur coram hominibus operatio Dei. Ideo ergo interdum natura rerum convertitur contra suam naturam, ut semper Deus naturae opifex in memoriam reducatur
Hieronymus
Possumus et aliter dicere: eunuchi sunt ex matris utero qui frigidiores naturae sunt, nec libidinem appetentes, et alii qui ab hominibus fiunt, quos aut Pharisaei faciunt, aut propter idolorum cultum emolliuntur in feminas, vel persuasione haeretica simulant castitatem, ut mentiantur religionis veritatem. Sed nullus eorum consequitur regnum caelorum, nisi qui se propter Christum castraverit: unde sequitur qui potest capere, capiat; ut unusquisque consideret vires suas, utrum possit virginalia et pudicitiae implere praecepta. Per se enim castitas blanda est, et quemlibet ad se alliciens; sed considerandae sunt vires, ut qui potest capere, capiat. Quae hortantis domini vox est, et milites suos ad pudicitiae praemium concitantis, quasi, qui potest pugnare, pugnet, et superet ac triumphet
Chrysostomus in Matth
Cum autem dicit qui se castraverunt, non membrorum dicit abscissionem, sed malarum cogitationum interemptionem: maledictioni enim est obnoxius qui membrum abscindit: etenim quae homicidarum sunt talis praesumit; et Manichaeis, qui detrahunt creaturis, tribuit occasionem, et eadem cum gentibus membra detruncantibus inique agit; abscindere enim membra daemoniacae tentationis est. Cum his autem quae dicta sunt neque concupiscentia mansuetior ita fit, sed molestior: aliunde enim habet fontes sperma quod in nobis est, et praecipue a proposito incontinenti, et mente negligente; et si ipsa sobria fuerit, naturalium motuum nullum est nocumentum; nec ita abscissio membri comprimit tentationes et tranquillitatem facit, ut cogitationis frenum
19:13
Pseudo-Crisostomo
The Lord had been holding discourse of chastity; and some of His hearers now brought unto Him infants, who in respect of chastity are the purest; for they supposed that it was the pure in body only whom He had approved; and this is that which is said, Then were brought unto him little children, that he should put his hands on them, and pray.
Origene † 253 d.C.
For they now understood from His previous mighty works, that by laying on of His hands and by prayer evils were obviated. They bring therefore children to Him, judging that it were impossible that after the Lord had by His touch conveyed divine virtue into them, harm or any demon should come nigh them.
Remigio † 908 d.C.
For it was a custom among the ancients that little children should be brought to aged persons, to receive benediction by their hand or tongue, and according to this custom little children are now brought to the Lord.
Pseudo-Crisostomo
The flesh as it delights not in good, if it hear any good readily forgets it; but the evil that it has it retains ever. But a little while before Christ took a little child and said, Except ye become as this child, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven, (Matt. 18:3.) yet His disciples, presently forgetting this innocence of children, now forbid children, as unworthy to come to Christ.
san Girolamo † 420 d.C.
Not because they liked not that they should have benediction of the Saviour’s hand and mouth; but forasmuch as their faith was not yet perfect, they thought that He like other men would be wearied by the applications of those that brought them.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C.
Or the disciples would have thrust them away, from respect to Christ’s dignity1. But the Lord teaching them holy thoughts, and to subdue the pride of this world, took the children into His arms, and promised to such the kingdom of heaven; But Jesus saith unto them, Suffer little children and forbid them not to come unto me, for of such is the kingdom of heaven.
Pseudo-Crisostomo
For who were worthy to come to Christ, if simple infancy were thrust away? Therefore he said, Forbid them not. For if they shall turn out saints, why hinder ye the sons from coming to their Father? And if sinners, why do ye pronounce a sentence of condemnation, before you see any fault in them?
san Girolamo † 420 d.C.
And He said distinctly, Of such is the kingdom of heaven, not Of these, to shew that it was not years, but disposition that determined His judgment, and that the reward was promised to such as had like innocence and simplicity.
Pseudo-Crisostomo
The present passage instructs all parents to bring their children to the priests, for it is not the priest who lays his hands on them, but Christ, in whose name hands are laid. For if he that offers his food in prayer to God eats it sanctified, for it is sanctified by the word of God, and by prayer, as the Apostle speaks, how much rather ought children to be offered to God, and sanctified? (1 Tim. 4:5.) And this is the reason of blessing of food, Because the whole world lieth in wickedness; (1 John 5:19.) so that all things that have body, which are a great part of the world, lie in wickedness. Consequently infants when born, are as respects their flesh lying in wickedness.
Origene † 253 d.C.
Mystically; We call them children who are yet carnal in Christ, having need of milk. They who bring the babes to the Saviour, are they who profess to have knowledge of the word, but are still simple, and have for their food children’s lessons, being yet novices. They who seem more perfect, and are therefore the disciples of Jesus, before they have learnt the way of righteousness which is for children, rebuke those who by simple doctrine bring to Christ children and babes, that is, such as are less learned. But the Lord exhorting His disciples now become men to condescend to the needs of babes, to be babes to babes, that they may gain babes, says, For of such is the kingdom of heaven. For He Himself also, when He was in the form of God, was made a babe. These things we should attend to, lest in esteeming that more excellent wisdom, and spiritual advancement, as though we were become great we should despise the little ones of the Church, forbidding children to be brought to Jesus. But since children cannot follow all things that are commanded them, Jesus laid His hands upon them, and leaving virtue in them by His touch, went away from them, seeing they were not able to follow Him, like the other more perfect disciples.
Remigio † 908 d.C.
Also laying His hands upon them, He blessed them, to signify that the lowly in spirit are worthy His grace and blessing.
La Glossa non occ.
He laid His hands upon them while men held them, to signify that the grace of His aid was necessary.
sant'Ilario † 367 d.C.
The infants are a type of the Gentiles, to whom salvation is rendered by faith and hearing. But the disciples, in their first zeal for the salvation of Israel, forbid them to approach, but the Lord declares that they are not to be forbidden. For the gift of the Holy Ghost was to be conferred upon the Gentiles by laying on of hands, as soon as the Law had ceased.
Il testo latino
Chrysostomus super Matth
Dominus de castitate sermonem fecerat; audientes autem quidam obtulerunt ei infantes castitate mundissimos: putabant enim quia dominus corpore mundos tantum laudaret; et hoc est quod dicitur tunc oblati sunt ei parvuli, ut manus eis imponeret, et oraret
Origenes in Matth
Iam enim ex praecedentibus virtutibus eius experti erant quoniam per impositionem manuum eius, et orationem repelluntur mala. Offerunt ergo ei pueros, considerantes quoniam impossibile est ut postquam per tactum dominus dederit eis divinam virtutem, ruina aut Daemonium aliquod tangere eos possit
Remigio
Consuetudo etiam fuit apud veteres ut parvuli offerrentur senioribus, quatenus eorum manu vel ore benedicerentur; et iuxta hanc consuetudinem parvuli oblati sunt domino
Chrysostomus super Matth
Caro autem, quia non delectatur in bono, facile obliviscitur bonum; malum autem quod audierit, retinet semper. Ante modicum autem tempus Christus accipiens puerum, dixit: nisi facti fueritis sicut parvulus iste, non intrabitis in regnum caelorum; et ecce statim obliti discipuli puerilis innocentiae, vetabant pueros ad Christum quasi indignos accedere; unde sequitur discipuli autem increpabant eos
Hieronymus
Non quia nollent eis salvatoris et manu et voce benedici; sed quod nondum habentes plenissimam fidem, putarent eum, in similitudinem aliorum hominum, offerentium importunitate lassari
Chrysostomus in Matth
Vel discipuli expellebant pueros, causa dignitatis Christi. Dominus autem docens eos moderata sapere et tumorem conculcare mundanum, accepit parvulos, et in ulnis tenuit eos: et talibus regnum caelorum promittit: unde sequitur Iesus autem ait eis: sinite parvulos, et nolite prohibere eos ad me venire: talium est enim regnum caelorum
Chrysostomus super Matth
Quis enim mereatur appropinquare Christo, si repellitur ab eo simplex infantia? Ideo dixit nolite prohibere eos. Nam si sancti futuri sunt, quid vetatis filios ad patrem venire? Si autem peccatores futuri sunt, ut quid sententiam condemnationis profertis, antequam culpam videatis?
Hieronymus
Signanter autem dixit talium est regnum caelorum, non istorum, ut ostenderet, non aetatem regnare, sed mores; et his qui similem haberent innocentiam et simplicitatem praemium repromitti. Sequitur et cum imposuisset eis manus, abiit inde
Chrysostomus super Matth
Praesens locus instruit omnes parentes, ut filios suos sacerdotibus offerant; non enim sacerdos manus imponit, sed Christus, in cuius nomine manus imponitur. Si enim qui escas suas per orationem offert Deo, sanctificatas eas manducat: sanctificatur enim per verbum Dei et orationem, ut apostolus dicit, quanto magis pueros offerri Deo et sanctificari necesse est? Causa autem sanctificandarum escarum haec est, quoniam totus mundus in maligno positus est; unde et res corporales quae sunt magna pars mundi, in maligno positae sunt. Consequenter infantes quando nascuntur, et ipsi quantum ad carnem in maligno positi sunt
Origenes in Matth
Pueros autem mystice dicimus qui in Christo adhuc carnales sunt, et lacte opus habentes. Qui autem profitentur verbi doctrinam, simpliciores quidem, et quasi puerilem sermonem habentes quo nutriuntur, adhuc novitii sunt, qui offerunt salvatori pueros et infantes. Qui autem videntur esse perfectiores, et ideo sunt discipuli Iesu, priusquam discant rationem iustitiae de pueris, reprehendunt eos qui per simplicem doctrinam pueros et infantes, idest minus adhuc eruditos, offerunt Christo. Dominus autem hortans discipulos suos iam viros constitutos condescendere utilitatibus puerorum, ut fiant pueris quasi pueri, ut pueros lucrentur, dicit talium est enim regnum caelorum. Nam et ipse, cum in forma Dei esset, factus est puer. Haec ergo debemus attendere, ne aestimatione sapientiae excellentioris et profectus spiritualioris, contemnamus quasi magni pusillos Ecclesiae, prohibentes pueros venire ad Iesum. Quoniam autem pueri non omnia quae dicuntur, sequi possunt, imposuit eis manum Iesus, et virtutem relinquens in eis per tactum, abiit ab eis, quasi non potentibus sequi Christum, sicut ceteri discipuli eius perfecti
Remigio
Manibus etiam impositis benedixit pueris, significans quod humiles spiritu sunt digni eius gratia et benedictione
Glossa
Imposuit etiam eis manus, viris continentibus, ut gratiam sui auxilii conferendam significaret
Hilarius in Matth
Infantes etiam gentium forma sunt, quibus per fidem et auditum salus redditur. Verum ex affectu primo salvandi Israel, a discipulis inhibentur accedere, quos dominus ait non oportere prohiberi. Munus enim spiritus sancti per impositionem manus, et precationem, cessante legis opere, erat gentibus largiendum
19:16
Rabano Mauro † 856 d.C. e Bed. in Luc. Mat. 18:3.
This man had, it may be, heard of the Lord, that only they who were like to little children were worthy to enter into the heavenly kingdom; but desiring to know more certainly, he asks to have it declared to him not in parables, but expressly, by what merits he might attain eternal life. Therefore it is said And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do that I may have eternal life?
san Girolamo † 420 d.C.
He that asks this question is both young, rich, and proud, and he asks not as one that desires to learn, but as tempting Him. This we can prove by this, that when the Lord had said unto him, If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments, he further insidiously asks, which are the commandments? as if he could not read them for himself, or as if the Lord could command any thing contrary to them.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Hom. lxiii.
But I for my part, though I deny not that he was a lover of money, because Christ convicts him as such, cannot consider him to have been a hypocrite, because it is unsafe to decide in uncertain cases, and especially in making charges against any. Moreover Mark removes all suspicion of this kind, for he says that he came to Him, and knelt before Him; (Mark 10:17.) and that Jesus when He looked on him, loved him. And if he had come to tempt Him, the Evangelist would have signified as much, as he has done in other places. Or if he had said nothing thereof, Christ would not have suffered him to be hid, but would either have convicted him openly, or have covertly suggested it. But He does not this; for it follows, He saith unto him, Why askest thou me concerning good?
sant'Agostino † 430 d.C. de Cons. Ev. ii. 63.
This may seem a discrepancy, that Matthew here gives it, Why askest thou me concerning good? whereas Mark and Luke have, Why callest thou me good? For this, Why askest thou me concerning good? may seem rather to be referred to his question, What good thing shall I do? for in that he both mentioned good, and asked a question. But this, Good Master, is not yet a question. Either sentence may be understood thus very appropriately to the passage.
san Girolamo † 420 d.C.
But because he had styled Him Good Master, and had not confessed Him as God, or as the Son of God, He tells him, that in comparison of God there is no saint to be called good, of whom it is said, Confess unto the Lord, for he is good; (Ps. 118:1.) and therefore He says, There is one good, that is, God. But that none should suppose that by this the Son of God is excluded from being good, we read in another place, The good Shepherd layeth down his life for his sheep. (John 10:11.)
sant'Agostino † 430 d.C. de Trin. i. 13.
Or, because he sought eternal life, (and eternal life consists in such contemplation in which God is beheld not for punishment, but for everlasting joy,) and knew not with whom he spake, but thought Him only a Son of Man, therefore He says, Why askest thou me concerning good, calling me in respect of what you see in me, Good Master? This form of the Son of Man shall appear in the judgment, not to the righteous only, but to the wicked, and the very sight shall be to them an evil, and their punishment. But there is a sight of My form, in which I am equal to God. That one God therefore, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, is alone good, because none see Him to mourning and sorrow, but only to salvation and true joy.
san Girolamo † 420 d.C.
For Our Saviour does not reject this witness to His goodness, but corrected the error of calling Him Good Master apart from God.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C.
Wherein then was the profit that He answered thus? He leads him by degrees, and teaches him to lay aside false flattery, and rising above the things which are upon earth to cleave to God, to seek things to come, and to know Him that is truly good, the root and source of every good.
Origene † 253 d.C.
Christ also answers thus, because of that He said, What good thing shall I do? For when we depart from evil and do good, that which we do is called good by comparison with what other men do. But when compared with absolute good, in the sense in which it is here said, There is one good, our good is not good. But some one may say, that because the Lord knew that the purpose of him who thus asked Him was not even to do such good as man can do, that therefore He said, Why askest thou me concerning good? as much as to say, Why do you ask me concerning good, seeing you are not prepared to do what is good. But after this He says, If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments. Where note, that He speaks to him as yet standing without life; for that man is in one sense without life, who is without Him who said, I am the life. Otherwise, every man upon earth may be, not in life itself, but only in its shadow, while he is clad in a body of death. But any man shall enter into life, if he keep himself from dead works, and seek living works. But there are dead words and living words, also dead thoughts and living thoughts, and therefore He says, If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.
sant'Agostino † 430 d.C. Serm. 84, 1.
And He said not, If thou desirest life eternal; but, If thou wilt enter into life, calling that simply life, which shall be everlasting. Here we should consider how eternal life should be loved, when this miserable and finite life is so loved.
Remigio † 908 d.C.
These words prove that the Law gave to such as kept it not only temporal promises, but also life eternal. And because the hearing these things made him thoughtful, He saith unto him, Which?
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C.
This he said not to tempt Him, but because he supposed that they were other than the commandments of the Law, which should be the means of life to him.
Remigio † 908 d.C.
And Jesus, condescending as to a weak one, most graciously set out to him the precepts of the Law; Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder; and of all these precepts follows the exposition, And thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. For the Apostle says, Whoso loveth his neighbour has fulfilled the Law? (Prov. 13:10.) But it should be enquired, why the Lord has enumerated only the precepts of the Second Table? Perhaps because this young man was zealous in the love of God, or because love of our neighbour is the step by which we ascend to the love of God.
Origene † 253 d.C.
Or perhaps these precepts are enough to introduce one, if I may say so, to the entrance of life; but neither these, nor any like them, are enough to conduct one to the more inward parts of life. But whoso transgresses one of these commandments, shall not even come to the entrance in unto life.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C.
But because all the commandments that the Lord had recounted were contained in the Law, The young man saith unto him. All these have I kept from my youth up. And did not even rest there, but asked further, What lack I yet? which alone is a mark of his intense desire.
Remigio † 908 d.C.
But to those who would be perfect in grace, He shews how they may come to perfection, Jesus saith unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go, and sell all that thou hast, and give to the poor. Mark the words; He said not, Go, and consume all thou hast; but Go, and sell; and not some, as did Ananias and Sapphira, but All. And well He added, that thou hast, for what we have are our lawful possessions. Those therefore that he justly possessed were to be sold; what had been gained unjustly were to be restored to those from whom they had been taken. And He said not, Give to thy neighbours, nor to the rich, but to the poor.
sant'Agostino † 430 d.C. de. Op. Monach. 25.
Nor need it be made a scruple in what monasteries, or to the indigent brethren of what place, any one gives those things that he has, for there is but one commonwealth of all Christians. Therefore wheresoever any Christian has laid out his goods, in all places alike he shall receive what is necessary for himself, shall receive it of that which is Christ’s.
Rabano Mauro † 856 d.C.
See two kinds of life which we have heard set before men; the Active, to which pertains, Thou shalt not kill, and the rest of the Law; and the Contemplative, to which pertains this, If thou wilt be perfect. The active pertains to the Law, the contemplative to the Gospel; for as the Old Testament went before the New, so good action goes before contemplation.
sant'Agostino † 430 d.C. cont. Faust. v. 9.
Nor are such only partakers in the kingdom of heaven, who, to the end they may be perfect, sell or part with all that they have; but in these Christian ranks are numbered by reason of a certain communication of their charity a multitude of hired troops; those to whom it shall be said in the end, I was hungry, and ye gave me to eat; (Mat. 25:35.) whom be it far from us to consider excluded from life eternal, as they who obey not the commands of the Gospel.
san Girolamo † 420 d.C. cont. Vigilant. 15.
That Vigilantius asserts that they who retain the use of their property, and from time to time divide their incomes among the poor, do better than they who sell their possessions and lavish them in one act of charity, to him, not I, but God shall make answer, If thou wilt be perfect, Go and sell. That which you so extol, is but the second or third grade; which we indeed admit, only remembering that what is first is to be set before what is third or second.
Pseudo-Agostino Gennadius, de Eccles. Dogm. 36.
It is good to distribute with discrimination to the poor; it is better, with resolve of following the Lord, to strip one’s self of all at once, and freed from anxiety to suffer want with Christ.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C.
And because He spake of riches warning us to strip ourselves of them, He promises to repay things greater, by how much heaven is greater than earth, and therefore He says, And thou shalt have treasure in heaven. By the word treasure He denotes the abundance and endurance of the reward.
Origene † 253 d.C.
If every commandment is fulfilled in this one word, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, and if he is perfect who has fulfilled every command, how is it that the Lord said to the young man, If thou wilt be perfect, when he had declared, All these have I kept from my youth up. Perhaps that he says, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, was not said by the Lord, but added by some one, for neither Mark nor Luke have given it in this place. Or otherwise; It is written in the Gospela according to the Hebrews, that, when the Lord said, Go, and sell all that thou hast, the rich man began to scratch his head, being displeased with the saying. Then the Lord said unto him, How sayest thou, I have kept the Law, and the Prophets, since it is written in the Law, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself? For how many of thy brethren sons of Abraham, clothed in filth, perish for hunger? Thy house is full of many good things, and nothing goes thereout to them. The Lord then, desiring to convict this rich man, says to him, If thou will be perfect, go and sell all that thou hast, and give to the poor; for so it will be seen if thou dost indeed love thy neighbour as thyself. But if he is perfect who has all the virtues, how does he become perfect who sells all that he has and gives to the poor? For suppose one to have done this, will he thereby become forthwith free from anger, desire, having every virtue, and abandoning all vice? Perhaps wisdom may suggest, that he that has given his goods to the poor, is aided by their prayers, receiving of their spiritual abundance to his want, and is made in this way perfect, though he may have some human passions. Or thus; He that thus exchanged his riches for poverty, in order that he might become perfect, shall have assistance to become wise in Christ, just, chaste also, and devoid of all passion; but not so as that in the moment when he gave up all his goods, he should forthwith become perfect; but only that from that day forward the contemplation of God will begin to bring him to all virtues. Or again, it will pass into a moral exposition, and say, that the possessions of a man are the acts of his mind. Christ then bids a man to sell all his evil possessions, and as it were to give them over to the virtues which should work the same, which were poor in all that is good. For as the peace of the Apostles returns to them again, (Mat. 10:13.) unless there be a son of peace, so all sins return upon their actors, when one will no longer indulge his evil propensities; and thus there can be no doubt that he will straightway become perfect who in this sense sells all his possessions. It is manifest that he that does these things, has treasure in heaven, and is himself become of heaven; and he will have in heaven treasure of God’s glory, and riches in all God’s wisdom. Such an one will be able to follow Christ, for he has no evil possession to draw him off from so following
san Girolamo † 420 d.C.
For many who leave their riches do not therefore follow the Lord; and it is not sufficient for perfection that they despise money, unless they also follow the Saviour, that unless having forsaken evil, they also do what is good. For it is easier to contemn the hoard than quit the propensityb; therefore it follows, And come and follow me; for he follows the Lord who is his imitator, and who walks in his steps. It follows, And when the young man had heard these words, he went away sorrowful. This is the sorrow that leads to death. And the cause of his sorrow is added, for he had great possessions, thorns, that is, and briars, which choked the holy leaven.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C.
For they that have little, and they that abound, are not in like measure encumbered. For the acquisition of riches raises a greater flame, and desire is more violently kindled.
sant'Agostino † 430 d.C. Ep. 31, 5.
I know not how, but in the love of worldly superfluities, it is what we have already got, rather than what we desire to get, that most strictly enthrals us. For whence went this young man away sorrowful, but that he had great possessions? It is one thing to lay aside thoughts of further acquisition, and another to strip ourselves of what we have already made our own; one is only rejecting what is not ours, the other is like parting with one of our own limbs.
Origene † 253 d.C.
But historically, the young man is to be praised for that he did not kill, did not commit adultery; but is to be blamed for that he sorrowed at Christ’s words calling him to perfection. He was young indeed in soul, and therefore leaving Christ, he went his way.
Il testo latino
Rabano Mauro
Audierat forsan homo iste a domino, tantum eos qui volunt parvulis similes esse, dignos introitu regni caelestis; et ideo certior cupiens esse, non per parabolas, sed aperte postulat exponi, quibus meritis vitam aeternam consequi possit. Et ideo dicitur et ecce unus accedens ait illi: magister bone, quid boni faciam ut habeam vitam aeternam?
Hieronymus
Iste qui interrogat, et adolescens et dives erat et superbus, et non voto discentis sed tentantis interrogat: quod ex eo probare possumus quod dicente sibi domino si vis ad vitam ingredi, serva mandata, rursum fraudulenter interrogat, quae sunt illa mandata; quasi non et ipse legere, aut dominus posset eidem haec iubere contraria
Chrysostomus in Matth
Ego autem avarum quidem eum et pecuniarum amatorem nequaquam recuso dicere, quia et Christus talem eum esse redarguit; simulatorem autem nequaquam, quia non est securum de incertis iudicare, et maxime accusando. Marcus autem hanc suspicionem destruit: dicit enim, quod occurrens, et genuflectens rogabat eum, et quoniam inspiciens eum Iesus, amavit eum. Si etiam eum tentans accessisset, demonstrasset nobis hoc Evangelista, sicut in aliis facit. Si autem et ipse siluisset, Christus eum non permisisset latere, sed redarguisset manifeste, aut occulte insinuasset. Hoc autem non facit: sequitur enim qui dicit ei: quid me interrogas de bono?
Augustinus de Cons. Evang
Potest autem videri distare aliquid, quod hic secundum Matthaeum dicitur quid me interrogas de bono? Secundum alios autem: quid me dicis bonum? Nam quid me interrogas de bono? Ad illud magis referri potest quod ait ille quaerens: quid boni faciam? Ibi enim et bonum nominavit, et interrogatio est. Magister autem bone, nondum est interrogatio. Commodissime ergo intelligitur utrumque dictum: quid me dicis bonum? Et interrogas de bono?
Hieronymus
Quia vero magistrum vocaverat bonum, et non Deum vel Dei filium confessus erat, dixit quemvis sanctum hominem comparatione Dei non esse bonum: de quo dicitur: confitemini domino, quoniam bonus. Et ideo dicit unus est bonus Deus. Ne quis autem putet in eo quod bonus Deus dicitur, excludi a bonitate filium Dei, legimus in alio loco: pastor bonus ponit animam suam pro ovibus suis
Augustinus de Trin
Vel quia ille vitam aeternam quaerebat (vita autem aeterna est in illa contemplatione, qua non ad poenam videtur Deus, sed ad gaudium sempiternum) et non intelligebat cum quo loquebatur, quoniam tantummodo eum filium hominis arbitrabatur; ideo dicit quid me interrogas de bono, et vocas me, secundum quod vides, magistrum bonum? Haec forma filii hominis apparebit in iudicio, non tantum iustis, sed et impiis; et ipsa visio malum eis erit, quia poenalis erit. Est autem visio formae meae, in qua aequalis sum Deo. Ille ergo unus Deus, pater, filius et spiritus sanctus, ipse est solus bonus; quia nemo videt eum ad luctum et planctum, sed tantum ad salutem et laetitiam veram
Hieronymus
Salvator etiam noster bonitatis testimonium non renuit, sed magistri absque Deo exclusit errorem. Quae autem utilitas est ut ita responderet? Reducit enim eum paulatim, et erudit liberari ab omni adulatione; et ab his quae sunt super terram eum abducens, Deo adhaerere suadet, et futura quaerere, et nosse eum qui vere est bonus, et radix et fons universorum bonorum
Origenes in Matth
Respondet etiam sic Christus, propter eum qui dixit: quid boni faciam? Quando enim declinamus a malo et facimus bonum, quantum ad comparationem ceterorum hominum, dicitur bonum quod facimus: quantum autem ad veritatem secundum quod hic dicitur unus est bonus, bonum nostrum non est bonum. Dicere autem potest quis quoniam sciens dominus propositum interrogantis non esse ut faciat vel humanum bonum, dixit quid me interrogas de bono? Ac si dicat: cum sis imparatus ad ea quae dicuntur bona, cur me interrogas de bono? Post hoc autem dicit si vis ad vitam ingredi, serva mandata. Ubi considera, quoniam adhuc quasi extra vitam constituto respondit si vis ad vitam ingredi: secundum enim unum modum homo est extra vitam, qui est extra eum qui dixit: ego sum vita. Alias autem omnis qui super terram est, quamvis iustissimus, potest quidem in umbra esse vitae, non autem in ipsa vita, cum sit corpore mortis circumdatus. Introibit autem quis in vitam, abstinens se ab operibus mortuis, appetens autem opera viva. Sunt autem et verba mortua et verba viva, et cogitationes mortuae et cogitationes vivae: et ideo dicit si vis ad vitam ingredi, serva mandata
Augustinus de Verb. Dom
Nec etiam dixit: si vis venire ad vitam aeternam; sed si vis ingredi ad vitam, eam definiens vitam quae fuerit aeterna vita. Hic ergo considerandum est, quemadmodum amanda sit aeterna vita, quando sic amatur misera ista et quandoque finienda vita
Remigio
Demonstratur autem his verbis quia lex suis impletoribus non solum bona temporalia dabat, sed et vitam aeternam. Et quia hoc audierat, sollicitus factus interrogavit: unde sequitur dicit illi: quae?
Chrysostomus in Matth
Hoc autem non tentans dixit; sed aestimans alia quaedam praecepta esse praeter legalia quae vitae causa fierent ei
Remigio
Iesus vero quasi infirmo condescendens, clementissime legis praecepta exposuit: unde sequitur Iesus autem dixit: non homicidium facies: quorum praeceptorum expositio est sequens sententia, qua dicitur et diliges proximum tuum sicut teipsum. Etenim apostolus dicit: qui diligit proximum, legem implevit. Quaerendum est autem: quare dominus tantum secundae tabulae praecepta commemoravit? Idcirco scilicet quia forte iste studiosus erat in dilectione Dei; sive quia dilectio proximi gradus est ascendendi ad dilectionem Dei
Origenes in Matth
Forsitan autem ista praecepta sufficiunt ut in principium, ut ita dicam, vitae ingrediatur quis; non autem sufficiunt haec vel alia similia istis ad interiora vitae introducere quemquam. Qui autem praeterierit unum istorum mandatorum, nec in principium vitae intrabit
Chrysostomus in Matth
Quia ergo dominus ea praecepta commemoraverat quae erant in lege, ideo sequitur dicit illi adolescens: haec omnia servavi a iuventute mea. Et neque hic stetit; sed rursus interrogat quid adhuc mihi deest? Quod et ipsum signum est vehementis desiderii
Remigio
Illis autem qui in gratia perfecti esse volunt, ostendit qualiter ad perfectionem venire possunt: unde sequitur ait illi Iesus: si vis perfectus esse, vade et vende omnia quae habes, et da pauperibus. Notanda sunt ista verba: non enim ait: vade et manduca omnia quae habes; sed vade et vende. Et non ait: aliqua, sicut Ananias et Saphira; sed omnia. Et pulchre subiungit quae habes: illa enim habemus quae iuste possidemus. Illa ergo quae iuste possidentur, vendenda sunt; quae vero iniuste, sunt eroganda illis quibus fuerant ablata. Nec ait: da proximis aut divitibus a quibus accipies similia; sed da pauperibus
Augustinus de operibus monachorum
Nec attendendum in quibus monasteriis, vel in quo loco indigentibus fratribus hoc quod habebat aliquis impenderit: omnium enim Christianorum una respublica est. Et ideo quisquis Christianus necessaria ubilibet erogaverit, ubicumque etiam ipse quod necessarium est sibi, accipit, de eo quod est Christi accipit
Rabano Mauro
Ecce duas vitas hominibus propositas audivimus: activam, ad quam pertinet non occides, et cetera legis mandata; et contemplativam, ad quam pertinet si vis perfectus esse. Activa ad legem pertinet, contemplativa ad Evangelium: quia sicut vetus novum praecessit testamentum, ita bona actio praecedit contemplationem
Augustinus contra Faustum
Nec tamen illi soli qui ut sint perfecti vendunt vel dimittunt omnia sua, pertinent ad regnum caelorum; sed huic militiae Christianae, propter quoddam commercium caritatis, subiungitur etiam quaedam stipendiaria multitudo; cui dicetur in fine: esurivi et dedistis mihi manducare: quo absit ut istos a mandatis evangelicis alienos a vita aeterna separandos iudicemus
Hieronymus contra Vigilantium
Quod autem Vigilantius asserit, eos melius facere qui utantur rebus suis, et paulatim fructus possessionum pauperibus dividant, quam illos qui possessionibus venumdatis semel omnia largiantur: non a me ei, sed a Deo respondebitur si vis perfectus esse, vade et vende. Iste, quem tu laudas, secundus, aut tertius gradus est; quem et nos recipimus, dummodo sciamus prima secundis et tertiis praeferenda
Gennadius de Eccles. Dogmat
Bonum est enim facultates cum dispensatione pauperibus erogare: melius est pro intentione sequendi dominum insimul donare, et absolutum sollicitudine egere cum Christo
Chrysostomus in Matth
Et quia de pecuniis erat sermo, a quibus denudari admonuit, ostendit quod ampliora his retribuet quanto terra maius est caelum: et ideo dicit et habebis thesaurum in caelo. In thesauro enim copiam et permanentiam retributionis ostendit
Origenes in Matth
Si autem omne mandatum in hoc verbo impletur: diliges proximum tuum sicut teipsum, perfectus autem est qui impleverit omne mandatum, quomodo dominus dicenti adolescenti: haec omnia servavi a iuventute mea, quasi nondum perfecto, dicit si vis perfectus esse? Forte autem quod ait: diliges proximum tuum, non a domino positum est, sed ab aliquo additum, quia nec Marcus nec Lucas hunc locum exponentes hoc addiderunt. Vel aliter. Scriptum est in Evangelio secundum Hebraeos, quod cum dominus dixisset ei vade et vende omnia quae habes, coepit dives scalpere caput suum, et non placuit ei. Et dixit ad eum dominus: quomodo dicis: feci legem et prophetas? Quoniam scriptum est in lege: diliges proximum tuum sicut teipsum? Et ecce multi fratres tui filii Abrahae amicti sunt stercore morientes prae fame; et domus tua plena est multis bonis, et non egreditur omnino aliquid ex ea ad eos. Volens ergo dominus arguere divitem illum, dicit si vis perfectus esse, vade et vende omnia quae habes et da pauperibus. Sic enim apparebit si diligis proximum tuum sicut teipsum. Sed si perfectus est qui habet omnes virtutes, quomodo fit perfectus qui vendit omnia sua, et pauperibus dat? Ponamus enim aliquem hoc fecisse, quomodo statim erit sine ira, sine concupiscentia, suscipiens omnes virtutes, et deponens malitiam universam? Sapienti ergo videbitur forsan dicere, quoniam qui pauperibus tradidit bona sua, ipsorum orationibus adiuvatur, accipiens ad suam spiritualem inopiam illorum spiritualem abundantiam, et fit hoc modo perfectus, quamvis aliquas humanas habuerit passiones. Aut ita: iste qui mutavit pro divitiis paupertatem ut fiat perfectus, credens sermonibus Christi, adiuvabitur, ut sapiens fiat in Christo, iustus et castus et absque omni passione; non tamen sic ut in ipso tempore quo tradidit bona sua pauperibus, fiat omnino perfectus; sed ex illo die incipiet speculatio Dei adducere eum ad omnes virtutes. Aliter autem ad expositionem moralem transibit, dicens substantiam esse uniuscuiusque actus animae eius. Imperat ergo Christus vendere omnem substantiam malam, et quasi tradere eam virtutibus operantibus eam quae ab omni bono pauperes sunt. Sicut enim pax apostolorum revertitur ad ipsos, nisi fuerit filius pacis, sic universa peccata revertuntur ad actores eorum, cum non fuerit quis utens malis eorum: et sic neque dubitatio erit, quin statim erit perfectus qui sic vendidit omnes proprias facultates. Manifestum est autem quod qui talia agit, habet thesaurum in caelo, et ipse factus caelestis. In suo enim caelo habebit thesaurum gloriae Dei, et divitias in omni sapientia Dei. Talis autem poterit sequi Christum, quia non distrahitur ab aliqua mala possessione quo minus Christum sequatur
Hieronymus
Multi etiam divitias relinquentes, dominum non sequuntur; nec hoc ad perfectionem sufficit, nisi post contemptas divitias salvatorem sequantur: idest, relictis malis, faciant bona. Facilius enim sacculus contemnitur quam voluntas: et ideo sequitur et veni, sequere me; sequitur enim dominum qui imitator est eius, et per vestigia illius graditur. Sequitur cum autem audisset adolescens verba haec, abiit tristis. Haec est tristitia quae ducit ad mortem. Causaque tristitiae redditur: erat enim habens multas possessiones; idest spinas et tribulos, qui sementem dominicam suffocaverunt
Chrysostomus in Matth
Non enim similiter detinentur qui pauca habent, et qui multis abundant: quoniam abiectio divitiarum maiorem accendit flammam, et violentior fit cupido
Augustinus ad Paulinum et Therasiam
Nescio autem quomodo cum superflua terrena diliguntur, arctius adepta quam concupita constringunt; nam unde iuvenis iste tristis discessit, nisi quia magnas habebat divitias? Aliud est enim iam nolle incorporare quae desunt, aliud iam incorporata divellere: illa enim velut extranea repudiantur, ista velut membra praeciduntur. Secundum historiam autem, iste adolescens laudabilis quidem est, quia non occidit, non adulteratus est; vituperabilis autem, quia contristatus est in verbis Christi vocantibus eum ad perfectionem. Adolescens quippe erat secundum animam et propterea, relinquens Christum, abiit
19:23
La Glossa ap. Anselm.
The Lord took occasion from this rich man to hold discourse concerning the covetous; Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, &c.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C.
What He spoke was not condemning riches in themselves, but those who were enslaved by them; also encouraging His disciples that being poor they should not be ashamed by reason of their poverty.
sant'Ilario † 367 d.C.
To have riches is no sin; but moderation is to be observed in our havings. For how shall we communicate to the necessities of the saints, if we have not out of what we may communicate?
Rabano Mauro † 856 d.C.
But though there be a difference between having and loving riches, yet it is safer neither to have nor to love them.
Remigio † 908 d.C.
Whence in Mark the Lord expounding the meaning of this saying, speaks thus, It is hard for them that trust in riches to enter into the kingdom of heaven (Mark 10:24.) They trust in riches, who build all their hopes on them.
san Girolamo † 420 d.C.
Because riches once gained are hard to be despised, He saith not it is impossible, but it is hard. Difficulty does not imply the impossibility, but points out the infrequency of the occurrence.
sant'Ilario † 367 d.C.
It is a dangerous toil to become rich; and guiltlessness occupied in increasing its wealth has taken upon itself a sore burden; the servant of God gains not the things of the world, clear of the sins of the world. Hence is the difficulty of entering the kingdom of heaven.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C.
Having said that it was hard for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of heaven, He now proceeds to shew that it is impossible, And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of heaven, (Is. 60:6.)
san Girolamo † 420 d.C.
According to this, no rich man can be saved. But if we read Isaiah, how the camels of Midian and Ephah came to Jerusalem with gifts and presents, and they who once were crooked and bowed down by the weight of their sins, enter the gates of Jerusalem, we shall see how these camels, to which the rich are likened when they have laid aside the heavy load of sins, and the distortion of their whole bodies, may then enter by that narrow and strait way that leads to life.
Pseudo-Crisostomo
The Gentile souls are likened to the deformed body of the camel, in which is seen the humpback of idolatry; for the knowledge of God is the exaltation of the soul. The needle is the Son of God, the fine point of which is His divinity, and the thicker part what He is according to His incarnation. But it is altogether straight and without turning; and through the womb of His passion, the Gentiles have entered into life eternal. By this needle is sewn the robe of immortality; it is this needle that has sewn the flesh to the spirit, that has joined together the Jews and the Gentiles, and coupled man in friendship with angels. It is easier therefore for the Gentiles to pass through the needle’s eye, than for the rich Jews to enter into the kingdom of heaven. For if the Gentiles are with such difficulty withdrawn from the irrational worship of idols, how much more hardly shall the Jews be withdrawn from the reasonable service of God?
La Glossa ap. Anselm.
It is explained otherwise; That at Jerusalem there was a certain gate, called, The needle’s eye, through which a camel could not pass, but on its bended knees, and after its burden had been taken off; and so the rich should not be able to pass along the narrow way that leads to life, till he had put off the burden of sin, and of riches, that is, by ceasing to love them.
san Gregorio Magno † 604 d.C. Mor. xxxv. 16.
Or, by the rich man He intends any one who is proud, by the camel he denotes the right humility. The camel passed through the needle’s eye, when our Redeemer through the narrow way of suffering entered in to the taking upon Him death; for that passion was as a needle which pricked the body with pain. But the camel enters the needle’s eye easier than the rich man enters the kingdom of heaven; because if He had not first shewn us by His passion the form of His humility, our proud stiffness would never have bent itself to His lowliness.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C.
The disciples though poor are troubled for the salvation of others, beginning even now to have the bowels of doctors.
sant'Agostino † 430 d.C. Quæst. Ev. 1, 26.
Whereas the rich are few in comparison of the multitude of the poor, we must suppose that the disciples understood all who wish for riches, as included in the number of the rich.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C.
This therefore He proceeds to shew is the work of God, there needing much grace to guide a man in the midst of riches; But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible, but with God all things are possible. By the word beheld them, the Evangelist conveys that He soothed their troubled soul by His merciful eye.
Remigio † 908 d.C.
This must not be so understood as though it were possible for God to cause that the rich, the covetous, the avaricious, and the proud should enter into the kingdom of heaven; but to cause him to be converted, and so enter.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C.
And this is not said that you should sit supinely, and let alone what may seem impossibilities; but considering the greatness of righteousness, you should strive to enter in with entreaty to God.
Il testo latino
Glossa
Occasione huius avari, de quo praedictum est, habuit sermonem dominus de avaro; unde dicitur Iesus autem dixit discipulis suis: amen dico vobis
, et cetera. Chrysostomus in Matth
Quod quidem dixit, non pecuniis quidem detrahens, sed eis qui detinentur ab ipsis; et discipulos pauperes existentes monens non verecundari ob inopiam
Hilarius in Matth
Habere enim divitias criminis non est; sed modus in habendo retinendus est. Nam quomodo communicandum est necessitatibus sanctorum, si communicanda materia non relinquitur?
Rabano Mauro
Sed inter pecunias habere et pecunias amare nonnulla distantia est; tutius autem est nec habere nec amare divitias
Remigio
Unde dominus exponens huius loci sensum, dixit: difficile est confidentibus in divitiis intrare in regnum caelorum. Illi enim in divitiis confidunt qui omnem suam spem in divitiis collocant
Hieronymus
Quia vero divitiae habitae difficile contemnuntur, non dixit quod impossibile est divitem intrare in regnum caelorum, sed difficile. Ubi difficile ponitur, non impossibilitas praetenditur, sed raritas demonstratur
Hilarius
Periculosa enim cura est velle ditescere, et grave onus innocentia subiit incrementis opum occupata; rem enim saeculi famulatus Dei non sine saeculi vitiis assequetur. Hinc difficile est divitem regnum caelorum adire
Chrysostomus in Matth
Quia vero dixerat difficile divitem intrare in regnum, procedit ad ostendendum quod est impossibile: unde sequitur et iterum dico vobis: facilius est camelum per foramen acus transire, quam divitem intrare in regnum caelorum
Hieronymus
Secundum hoc nullus divitum salvus erit. Sed si legamus Isaiam, quomodo cameli Madian et Epha veniant ad Ierusalem cum donis atque muneribus, et qui quondam curvi erant et vitiorum gravitate distorti ingrediantur portas Ierusalem, videbimus quomodo et isti cameli, quibus divites comparantur, cum deposuerint gravem sarcinam peccatorum et totius corporis pravitatem, intrare possunt per angustam et arctam viam quae ducit ad vitam
Chrysostomus super Matthaeum
Gentium etiam animae assimilatae sunt tortuosis camelis, in quibus erat gibbus idololatriae: quoniam cognitio Dei erectio est animarum. Acus autem est filius Dei, cuius prima pars subtilis est secundum divinitatem, alia vero crassior secundum incarnationem eius. Tota autem recta est et nullam habet deflexionem, per cuius vulnus passionis gentes ingressae sunt in vitam aeternam. Hac acu consuta est immortalitatis tunica: ipsa est acus quae spiritui consuit carnem: haec acus Iudaicum populum iunxit et gentium: haec acus amicitiam Angelorum et hominum copulavit. Facilius est ergo gentiles transire per foramen acus, quam divites Iudaeos intrare in regnum caelorum. Si enim gentes cum tanto labore divelluntur ab irrationabilibus idolorum culturis, quanto magis Iudaei divelluntur a rationabilibus Dei culturis?
Glossa
Aliter dicitur, quia Hierosolymis quaedam porta erat, quae foramen acus dicebatur, per quam camelus, nisi deposito onere et flexis genibus, transire non poterat: per quod significatur, divites non posse transire viam arctam quae ducit ad vitam, nisi sordibus peccatorum et divitiis depositis, saltem non amando
Gregorius Moralium
Vel nomine divitis quemlibet elatum, cameli appellatione propriam condescensionem significat. Camelus autem per foramen acus transiit, cum redemptor noster usque ad susceptionem mortis, per angustias passionis intravit, quae passio velut acus extitit, quia dolore corpus pupugit. Facilius autem camelus foramen acus quam dives regnum caelorum ingreditur: quia nisi ipse prius per passionem suam formam nobis humilitatis ostenderet, nequaquam se ad humilitatem ipsius superba nostra rigiditas inclinaret
Chrysostomus in Matth
Discipuli autem inopes existentes turbantur, pro salute aliorum dolentes, et doctorum iam viscera assumentes: unde sequitur audientes autem discipuli, mirabantur dicentes: quis ergo poterit salvus esse?
Augustinus de quaest. Evang
Cum autem pauci sint divites in comparatione multitudinis pauperum, intelligendum est, quod omnes qui divitias cupiunt, in divitum numero haberi discipuli animadvertunt
Chrysostomus in Matth
Dei autem opus hoc esse consequenter ostendit, quoniam multa opus est gratia ut homo in divitiis dirigatur; unde sequitur aspiciens autem Iesus dixit eis: apud homines hoc impossibile est: apud Deum autem omnia possibilia sunt. Per hoc quod dicit aspiciens, significat Evangelista quod mansueto oculo timidam eorum mentem mitigavit
Remigio
Non autem hoc sic intelligendum est quod possibile sit apud Deum quod dives cupidus, avarus et superbus intret in regnum caelorum; sed ut convertatur, et sic intret
Chrysostomus in Matth
Neque etiam hoc ideo dicitur ut resupinus iaceas, et sicut ab impossibilibus abstineas; sed magnitudinem iustitiae considerans insilias, Deum rogans
19:27
Origene † 253 d.C.
Peter had heard the word of Christ when He said, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell all that thou hast. Then he observed that the young man had departed sorrowful, and considered the difficulty of riches entering into the kingdom of heaven; and thereupon he put this question confidently as one who had achieved no easy matter. For though what he with his brother had left behind them were but little things, yet were they not esteemed as little with God, who considered that out of the fulness of their love they had so forsaken those least things, as they would have forsaken the greatest things if they had had them. So Peter, thinking rather of his will than of the intrinsic value of the sacrifice, asked Him confidently, Behold, we have left all.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C. Hom. lxiv.
What was this all, O blessed Peter? The reeds, your net, and boat. But this he says, not to call to mind his own magnanimity, but in order to propose the case of the multitude of poor. A poor man might have said, If I have nought, I cannot become perfect. Peter therefore puts this question that you, poor man, may learn that you are in nothing behind. For he had already received the kingdom of heaven, and therefore secure of what was already there, he now asks for the whole world. And see how carefully he frames his question after Christ’s requirements: Christ required two things of a rich man, to give what he had to the poor, and to follow Him; wherefore he adds, and have followed thee.
Origene † 253 d.C.
It may be said, In all things which the Father revealed to Peter that the Son was, righteousness, sanctification, and the like, in all we have followed Thee. Therefore as a victorious athlete, he now asks what are the prizes of his contest.
san Girolamo † 420 d.C.
Because to forsake is not enough, he adds that which makes perfection, and have followed thee. We have done what thou commandedst us, what reward wilt thou then give us? What shall we have?
san Girolamo † 420 d.C.
He said not only, Ye who have left all, for this did the philosopher Cratesh, and many other who have despised riches, but added, and have followed me, which is peculiar to the Apostles and believers.
sant'Ilario † 367 d.C.
The disciples had followed Christ in the regeneration, that is, in the laver of baptism, in the sanctification of faith, for this is that regeneration which the Apostles followed, and which the Law could not bestow.
san Girolamo † 420 d.C.
Or it may be constructed thus, Ye which have followed me, shall in the regeneration sit, &c.; that is, when the dead shall rise from corruption incorrupt, you also shall sit on thrones of judges, condemning the twelve tribes of Israel, for that they would not believe when you believed.
sant'Agostino † 430 d.C. de Civ. Dei, xx. 5.
Thus our flesh will be regenerated by incorruption, as our soul also shall be regenerated by faith.
Pseudo-Crisostomo
For it would come to pass, that in the day of judgment the Jews would allege, Lord, we knew Thee not to be the Son of God when Thou wast in the flesh. For who can discern a treasure buried in the ground, or the sun when obscured by a cloud? The disciples therefore will then answer, We also were men, and peasants, obscure among the multitude, but you priests and scribes; but in us a right will became as it were a lamp of our ignorance, but your evil will became to you a blinding of your science.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C.
He therefore said not the Gentiles and the whole world, but, the tribes of Israel, because the Apostles and the Jews had been brought up under the same laws and customs. So that when the Jews should plead that they could not believe in Christ, because they were hindered by their Law, the disciples will be brought forward, who had the same Law. But some one may say, What great thing is this, when both the Ninevites and the Queen of the South will have the same? He had before and will again promise them the highest rewards; and even now He tacitly conveys something of the same. For of those others He had only said, that they shall sit, and shall condemn this generation; but He now says to the disciples, When the Son of Man shall sit, ye also shall sit. It is clear then that they shall reign with Him, and shall share in that glory; for it is such honour and glory unspeakable that He intends by the thrones. How is this promise fulfilled? Shall Judas sit among them? By no means. For the law was thus ordained of the Lord by Jeremiah the Prophet, I will speak it upon my people, and upon the kingdom, that I may build, and plant it. Bui if it do evil in my sight, then will I repent we of the good which I said I would do to them; (Jer. 18:9.) as much as to say, If they make themselves unworthy of the promise, I will no more perform that I promised. But Judas shewed himself unworthy of the preeminence; wherefore when He gave this promise to His disciples, He did not promise it absolutely, for He said not, Ye shall sit, but, Ye which, have followed me shall sit; at once excluding Judas, and admitting such as should be in after time; for neither was the promise confined to them only, nor yet did it include Judas who had already shewn himself undeserving.
sant'Ilario † 367 d.C.
Their following Christ in thus exalting the Apostles to twelve thrones to judge the twelve tribes of Israel, associated them in the glory of the twelve Patriarchs.
sant'Agostino † 430 d.C. ubi sup.
From this passage we learn that Jesus will judge with His disciples; whence He says in another place to the Jews, Therefore shall they be your judges. (Mat. 12:27.) And whereas He says they shall sit upon twelve thrones, we need not think that twelve persons only shall judge with Him. For by the number twelve is signified the whole number of those that shall judge; and that because the number seven which generally represents completeness contains the two numbers four and three, which multiplied together make twelve. For if it were not so, as Matthias was elected into the place of the traitor Judas, the Apostle Paul who laboured more than they all should not have place to sit to judge; but he shews that he with the rest of the saints pertains to the number of judges, when he says, Know ye not that we shall judge Angels? (1 Cor. 6:3.)
sant'Agostino † 430 d.C. Serm. 351. 8.
In the number of judges therefore are included all that have left their all and followed the Lord;
san Gregorio Magno † 604 d.C. Mor. x. 31.
For whosoever, urged by the spur of divine lore, shall forsake what he possesses here, shall without doubt gain there the eminence of judicial authority; and shall appear as judge with the Judge, for that he now in consideration of the judgment chastens himself by a voluntary poverty.
sant'Agostino † 430 d.C. de Civ. Dei, xx. 5.
The same holds good, by reason of this number twelve, of those that are to be judged. For when it is said, Judging the twelve tribes, yet is not the tribe of Levi, which is the thirteenth, to be exempt from being judged by them; nor shall they judge this nation alone, and not also other nations.
Pseudo-Crisostomo
Or, by that, In the regeneration, Christ designs the period of Christianity that should be after His ascension, in which men were regenerated by baptism; and that is the time in which Christ sate on the throne of His glory. And hereby you may see that He spake not of the time of the judgment to come, but of the calling of the Gentiles, in that He said not, When the Son of Man shall come sitting upon the throne of his majesty; but only, In the regeneration when he shall sit, which was from the time that the Gentiles began to believe on Christ; according to that, God shall reign over the heathen; God sitteth upon his holy throne. (Ps. 47:8.) From that time also the Apostles have sat upon twelve thrones, that is, over all Christians; for every Christian who receives the word of Peter, becomes Peter’s throne, and so of the rest of the Apostles. On these thrones then the Apostles sit, parcelled into twelve divisions, after the variety of minds and hearts, known to God only. For as the Jewish nation was split into twelve tribes, so is the whole Christian people divided into twelve, so as that some souls are numbered with the tribe of Reuben, and so of the rest, according to their several qualities. For all have not all graces alike, one is excellent in this, another in that. And so the Apostles will judge the twelve tribes of Israel, that is, all the Jews, by this, that the Gentiles received the Apostles’ word. The whole body of Christians are indeed twelve thrones for the Apostles, but one throne for Christ. For all excellencies are but one throne for Christ, for He alone is equally perfect in all virtues. But of the Apostles each one is more perfect in some one particuar excellence, as Peter in faith; so Peter tests upon his faith, John on his innocence, and so of the rest. And that Christ spake of reward to be given to the Apostles in this world, is shewn by what follows, And every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, &c. For if these shall receive an hundred fold in this life, without doubt to the Apostles also was promised a reward in this present life.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C.
Or; He holds out rewards in the future life to the Apostles, because they were already looking above, and desired nothing of things present; but to others. He promises things present.
Origene † 253 d.C.
Or otherwise; Whosoever shall leave all and follow Christ, he also shall receive those things that were promised to Peter. But if he has not left all, but only those things in special here enumerated, he shall receive manifold, and shall possess eternal life.
san Girolamo † 420 d.C.
There are that take occasion from this passage to bring forward the thousand years after the resurrection, and say that then we shall have a hundred fold of the things we have given up, and moreover life eternal. But though the promise be in other things worthy, in the matter of wives it seems to have somewhat shameful, if he who has forsaken one wife for the Lord’s sake, shall receive a hundred in the world to come. The meaning is therefore, that he that has forsaken earnal things for the Saviour’s sake, shall receive spiritual things, which in a comparison of value are as a hundred to a small number.
Origene † 253 d.C.
And in this world, because for his brethren after the flesh he shall find many brethren in the faith; for parents, all the Bishops and Presbyters; for sons, all that have the age of sons. The Angels also are brethren, and all they are sisters that have offered themselves chaste virgins to Christ, as well they that still continue on earth, as they that now live in heaven. The houses and lands manifold more suppose in the repose of Paradise, and the city of God. And besides all these things they shall possess eternal life.
sant'Agostino † 430 d.C. De Civ. Dei, xx. 7.
That He says, An hundred fold, is explained by the Apostle, when he says, As having nothing, and yet possessing all things. (2 Cor. 6:10.) For a hundred is sometimes put for the whole universe.
san Girolamo † 420 d.C.
And that, And every one that hath forsaken brethren, agrees with that He had said before, I am come to set a man at variance with his father. (Mat. 10:35.) For they who for the faith of Christ and the preaching of the Gospel shall despise all the ties, the riches, and pleasures of this world, they shall receive an hundred fold, and shall possess eternal life.
san Giovanni Crisostomo † 407 d.C.
But when He says, He that has forsaken wife, it is not to be taken of actual severing of the marriage tie, but that we should hold the ties of the faith dearer than any other. And here is, I think, a covert allusion to times of persecution; for because there should be many who would draw away their sons to heathenism, when that should happen, they should be held neither as fathers, nor husbands.
Rabano Mauro † 856 d.C.
But because many with what zeal they take up the pursuit of virtue, do not with the same complete it; but either grow cool, or fall away rapidly; it follows, But many that are first shall be last, and the last first.
Origene † 253 d.C.
By this He exhorts those that come late to the heavenly word, to haste to ascend to perfection before many whom they see to have grown old in the faith. This sense may also overthrow those that boast to have been educated in Christianity by Christian parents, especially if those parents have filled the Episcopal see, or the office of Priests or Deacons in the Church; and hinder them from desponding who have entertained the Christian doctrines more newly. It has also another meaning, the first, are the Israelites, who become last because of their unbelief; and the Gentiles who were last become first. He is careful to say, Many; for not all who are first shall be last, nor all last first. For before this have many of mankind, who by nature are the last, been made by an angelic life above the Angels; and some Angels who were first have been made last through their sin.
Remigio † 908 d.C.
It may also be referred in particular to the rich man, who seemed to be first, by his fulfilment of the precepts of the Law, but was made last by his preferring his worldly substance to God. The holy Apostles seemed to be last, but by leaving all they were made first by the grace of humility. There are many who having entered upon good works, fall therefrom, and from having been first, become last.
Il testo latino
Origenes in Matth
Audiverat Petrus verbum Christi dicentis: si vis perfectus esse, vade et vende omnia quae habes; deinde consideravit adolescentem cum tristitia abeuntem, et difficultatem divitum ingrediendi in regnum caelorum; ideo quasi qui non facilem rem consummaverat, fiducialiter quaesivit. Etsi enim minima cum fratre reliquit; sed non minima aestimata sunt apud Deum, considerantem quoniam ex tanta plenitudine dilectionis illa minima reliquerunt, ut etiam si multas habuissent possessiones, omnia reliquissent. Et puto quod magis Petrus confidens de affectu suo quam de ipsa quantitate rerum relictarum, fiducialiter interrogavit; unde dicitur tunc respondens Petrus dixit ei: ecce nos reliquimus omnia
Chrysostomus in Matth
Qualia omnia, o beate Petre? Arundinem, rete, navigium. Omnia quidem haec dicit, non propter munificentiam, sed ut per interrogationem hanc inopem inducat plebem. Quia enim dominus dixerat: si vis perfectus esse; ne dicat aliquis inopum: quid igitur? Si non habuero, non possum esse perfectus? Interrogat Petrus, ut tu inops discas quoniam in nullo hinc diminutus es. Qui enim claves regni caelorum acceperat, pro his quae ibi sunt iam confidit, et pro orbe terrarum universo interrogat. Intuere autem et qualiter respondet diligenter, sicut Christus inquisivit: etenim Christus duo a divite expetiit: dare pauperibus quae habebat, et sequi se: propter hoc ipse addidit et secuti sumus te
Origenes in Matth
Potest dici secundum omnia quae pater revelavit Petro esse filium suum, secuti sumus te, iustitiam, sanctificationem, et huiusmodi. Propter hoc quasi victor athleta interrogat quae sint praemia certaminis
Hieronymus
Quia ergo non sufficit tantum relinquere, iungit quod perfectum est: et secuti sumus te. Fecimus quidem quod iussisti; quid ergo nobis dabis praemii? Et hoc est quod dicitur quid ergo erit nobis? Sequitur Iesus autem dixit illis: amen dico vobis quod vos qui secuti estis me
, et cetera. Hieronymus
Non dixit: qui reliquistis omnia; hoc enim et Socrates fecit philosophus, et multi alii divitias contempserunt, sed qui secuti estis me; quod proprie apostolorum est atque credentium
Hilarius in Matth
Secuti sunt quidem discipuli Christum in regeneratione, idest in lavacro Baptismi, in fidei sanctificatione: haec enim illa regeneratio est quam apostoli sunt secuti, quam lex indulgere non potuit
Hieronymus
Vel aliter debet construi: vos qui secuti estis me, sedebitis in regeneratione; idest quando mortui ex corruptione resurgent incorrupti, sedebitis et vos in soliis iudicantium condemnantes duodecim tribus Israel: quia vobis credentibus, illi credere noluerunt
Augustinus de Civ. Dei
Sic enim caro nostra regenerabitur per incorruptionem, quemadmodum anima nostra regenerabitur per fidem
Chrysostomus super Matth
Futurum enim erat ut in die iudicii responderent Iudaei: domine, non te cognovimus filium Dei in corpore constituti. Quis hominum videre poterat thesaurum in terra absconditum, solem nube celatum? Responderunt ergo discipuli: et nos homines fuimus, rustici et obscuri in plebe; vos sacerdotes et Scribae: sed in nobis bona voluntas facta est quasi lucerna rusticitatis nostrae; in vobis autem malitia facta est quasi caligo scientiae vestrae
Chrysostomus in Matth
Propter hoc autem non dixit: et gentes et orbem terrarum, sed tribus Israel; quia in eisdem erant educati et legibus et consuetudinibus apostoli et Iudaei. Cum ergo dixerint Iudaei quoniam propter hoc non potuimus credere in Christo, quia lex prohibuit, discipuli in medium inducentur qui eamdem susceperunt legem. Sed dicet aliquis: quid magnum promisit eis, si id quod Ninivitae habent et regina Austri, hoc et ipsi habebunt? Maxima quidem alia praemia ante et post eis promittit; sed et hic occulte insinuat aliquid plus illis. De illis enim simpliciter dixit, quod surgent, et condemnabunt generationem hanc; de his autem: cum sederit filius hominis, sedebitis et vos. Manifestum est ergo quod conregnabunt et communicabunt in gloria illa: honorem enim et gloriam ineffabilem significavit per thronos. Qualiter autem haec promissio completa est? Numquid enim et Iudas sedebit? Nequaquam. Lex a domino posita est per Ieremiam prophetam: loquar super gentem et regnum, ut aedificem et plantem illud. Sed si fecerit malum in conspectu meo, poenitebo et ego de bonis quae locutus sum ut facerem eis; quasi dicat: si indignos seipsos promissione faciant, non adhuc faciam quod promisi. Indignum autem seipsum principatu Iudas ostendit; et propter hoc tunc loquens discipulis, non simpliciter eis promisit: neque enim dixit: vos sedebitis; sed adiunxit qui secuti estis me: ut et hinc Iudam excludat, et eos qui postea futuri erant attraheret: non enim ad illos solos dictum est, neque ad Iudam iam indignum effectum
Hilarius in Matth
Sequela ergo Christi apostolos super duodecim thronos iudicandis duodecim tribubus Israel in duodecim patriarcharum gloriam copulavit
Augustinus de Civ. Dei
Ex hoc enim loco discimus, cum suis discipulis iudicaturum Iesum: unde et alibi Iudaeis dicit: ideo iudices vestri erunt. Nec quoniam super duodecim sedes sessuros esse ait, duodecim solos homines cum ipso iudicaturos putare debemus. Duodenario quippe numero universa quaedam significata est iudicantium multitudo, propter duas partes numeri septenarii quo significatur plerumque universitas; quae duae partes, idest tres et quatuor, altera per alteram multiplicatae duodecim faciunt: alioquin quoniam in locum Iudae traditoris, apostolum Matthiam legimus ordinatum, apostolus Paulus, qui plus illis omnibus laboravit, ubi ad iudicandum sedeat non habebit: qui profecto cum aliis sanctis ad numerum iudicum se pertinere demonstrat, cum dicit: nescitis quia Angelos iudicabimus?
Augustinus in Lib. de poenitentia
In hoc ergo numero iudicantium omnes intelliguntur qui propter Evangelium sua omnia dimiserunt, et secuti sunt dominum
Gregorius Moralium
Quisquis enim stimulo divini amoris excitatus hic possessa reliquerit, illic proculdubio culmen iudiciariae potestatis obtinebit: ut simul tunc iudex cum iudice veniat qui nunc consideratione iudicii sese spontanea paupertate castigat
Augustinus de Civ. Dei
De ipsis quoque iudicandis, in hoc numero duodenario similis causa est: non enim quia dictum est iudicantes duodecim tribus Israel, tribus levi quae decimatertia est, ab eis iudicanda non erit; aut solum illum populum, non etiam gentes ceteras iudicabunt
Chrysostomus super Matth
Vel per hoc quod dicit in generatione, praemittit Christus tempus Christianitatis futurum post ascensionem suam, quando scilicet homines regenerantur per Baptismum, et illud est tempus quando Christus sedet in sede maiestatis suae. Et vide, quia non de tempore futuri iudicii dicit, sed de vocatione gentium universarum: non enim dixit: cum venerit filius hominis sedens super sedem maiestatis suae; sed in regeneratione cum sederit in sede maiestatis suae: quod ex tunc fuit ex quo gentes credere coeperunt in Christum: secundum illud: regnabit dominus super gentes, Deus sedet super sedem sanctam suam. Et ex tunc apostoli sederunt super duodecim thronos, idest in omnibus Christianis: omnis enim Christianus qui suscipit verbum Petri, thronus fit Petri: et sic de aliis apostolis. Sedent ergo apostoli in his thronis, idest in duodecim partes distinctis, secundum differentias animarum et diversitates cordium, quas solus Deus cognoscit. Sicut enim Iudaeorum populus in duodecim tribus fuit divisus, sic et universus populus Christianus dividitur in duodecim tribus, ut quaedam animae sint de tribu Ruben, et sic de aliis, propter diversas virtutes. Non enim omnes gratiae in omnibus aequaliter sunt; sed unus praecedit in ista, alius in illa. Et sic apostoli iudicabunt duodecim tribus Israel, idest omnes Iudaeos, per hoc quod verbum apostolorum est a gentibus receptum. Omnes autem Christiani sunt quidem duodecim sedes apostolorum, sed una sedes Christi. Christi enim omnes virtutes sunt quasi una sedes; quia in omni virtute aequaliter ipse solus perfectus est. Unusquisque etiam apostolorum in aliquo bono speciali fit perfectior, ut Petrus in fide: et ideo Petrus requiescit in fide, Ioannes in innocentia; et sic de aliis. Et quod de retributione apostolis in hoc mundo danda Christus loquatur, demonstrat quod sequitur: et omnis qui reliquerit domum vel fratres. Si enim in hoc saeculo centuplum recipiunt, sine dubio et apostolorum etiam in hoc saeculo merces futura promittebatur
Chrysostomus in Matth
Vel discipulis promittit futura, quia excelsiores erant iam, et nihil praesentium quaerebant; aliis autem quae sunt hic repromittit
Origenes in Matth
Vel aliter. Si quis reliquerit omnia, et secutus fuerit Christum, quae promissa sunt Petro, et ipse recipiet. Si autem non omnia reliquit, sed quaedam, quae specialiter referuntur, hic multiplicia recipiet, et vitam possidebit aeternam
Hieronymus
Ex occasione autem huius sententiae, quidam introducunt mille annos post resurrectionem, dicentes, tunc nobis centuplum omnium rerum quas dimisimus et vitam aeternam esse reddendam; quod si in ceteris digna sit promissio, in uxoribus appareat turpitudo, ut qui unam pro domino dimiserit, centum recipiat in futuro. Sensus igitur iste est: qui carnalia pro salvatore dimiserit, spiritualia recipiet; quae comparatione et merito sui quasi parvo numero centenarius numerus compararetur
Origenes
Sed in hoc saeculo, quia pro fratribus carnalibus multos inveniet fratres secundum fidem: sic et parentes, omnes episcopos et presbyteros: et filios, omnes aetatem filiorum habentes. Sunt autem et Angeli fratres, et sorores omnes quae exhibuerunt se Christo virgines castas; tam istae quae nunc habentur in terris, quam illae quae iam vivunt in caelis. Agros autem et domos multiplices intellige in requie Paradisi et civitate Dei. Super haec autem omnia possidebunt vitam aeternam
Augustinus de Civ. Dei
Hoc etiam quod hic dicitur centuplum accipiet, exponens quodammodo apostolus ait: quasi nihil habentes et omnia possidentes. Centum enim pro ipsa universitate ponuntur aliquando
Hieronymus
Quod autem dicit et omnis qui reliquerit fratres, congruit illi sententiae qua dixerat: veni separare hominem a patre suo. Qui enim propter fidem Christi ac praedicationem Evangelii omnes affectus contempserint atque divitias et saeculi voluptates, isti centuplum accipient et vitam aeternam possidebunt
Chrysostomus in Matth
Cum autem dicit qui reliquerit uxorem, non hoc ait ut simpliciter nuptiae divellantur, sed ut omnibus praeferamus fidei pietatem. Videtur autem mihi et persecutionis tempus occulte insinuare: quia enim multi futuri erant filios ad impietatem trahentes, cum hoc acciderit, neque pro patribus neque pro viris habeantur
Rabano Mauro
Verum, quia multi virtutum studia, non eadem qua incipiunt intentione pietatis consummant; sed vel tepescunt, vel accelerate labuntur, sequitur multi autem erunt primi novissimi, et novissimi primi
Origenes
Per hoc exhortatur eos qui nuper accedunt ad verbum divinum, ut festinent ad perfectum ascendere prae multis qui videntur senuisse in fide. Potest etiam hic sensus destruere eos qui gloriantur eo quod Christianis parentibus sunt enutriti in ipsa Christianitate; neque pusillanimes fiant, quod Christianitatis dogmata novissime receperint. Habet etiam alium intellectum, ut sint primi Israelitae, qui facti sunt novissimi propter infidelitatem; gentes autem novissimae, primi. Caute autem dicit multi; non enim omnes primi erunt novissimi, nec omnes novissimi primi. Adhuc autem multi hominum qui natura novissimi sunt, efficiuntur per vitam angelicam quibusdam Angelis superiores; et quidam Angeli qui fuerunt primi, facti sunt novissimi propter culpam
Remigio
Potest etiam specialiter referri ad tristitiam divitis, qui primus videbatur, legis praecepta implendo; sed quia terrenam substantiam praetulit Deo, novissimus factus est. Sancti vero apostoli novissimi videbantur; sed relinquendo omnia, per humilitatis gratiam facti sunt primi. Sunt etiam plurimi qui post studia bonorum operum a bonis operibus deficiunt; et cum fuerint primi, fiunt novissimi
19:1
1. ET FACTUM EST, CUM CONSUMMASSET JESUS SERMONES ISTOS, MIGRAVIT A GALILAEA, ET VENIT IN FINES JUDAEAE TRANS JORDANEM. — Eadem est haec historia cum ea quam narrat Marcus, X, 1, et Lucas, IX, 51, et, ut videtur, cum ea quam narrat Joannes, VII, 1. Ita Jansenius, Franciscus Lucas et alii, licet de illa Joannis neget Maldonatus, cujus argumenta ex ipsa contextus explicatione solventur. Ex Joanne liquet haec contigisse sub festum Scenopegiae sive Tabernaculorum, quod celebrabatur in septembri; ad illud enim tendebat Christus, ut sensim pararet se ad mortem; sequenti enim martio Hierosolymae fuit crucifixus. Vide Chronotaxin. Addit Lucas Christum per Samariam iter fecisse: unde sequitur Christum ex Samaria, relicta via recta ducente Hierosolymam et in fines Judaeae ab Aquilone, profectum Jordanem versus, eoque trajecto, petivisse per Peraeam fines Judaeae ab ortu, ubi cum haesisset minimum, turba populi sanata ac dimissa, profectum Hierosolymam ad mediam jam Scenopegiam, quod habet Joannes, VII, 14. Ita Franciscus Lucas. Hinc intelliges quid sit τὸ «trans Jordanem.» TRANS JORDANEM. — Tam Judaea, quam Galilaea, non trans, sed citra Jordanem erat, sed dicta est «trans Jordanem» a primo ejus trajectu, quo Israelitae profecti ex Aegypto transierunt Jordanem, veneruntque in Judaeam et Galilaeam, vel certe trans, id est cis Jordanem: vide dicta cap. IV, 15; ita Maldonatus; aut potius, quia Christus, relicta recta Hierosolymae via, perrexit ad Jordanem, eumque trajecit et venit in Peraeam sive transamnanam regionem, uti jam dixi: τὸ enim «trans Jordanem» referendum est ad τὸ «venit,» non autem ad fines Judaeae, ut patet ex Marco. Christus enim circa fines Judaeae trajecit Jordanem, ut longius abesset ab oculis et auribus Pharisaeorum, cum turbas doceret et sanaret. Peraea enim erat trans Jordanem, unde a Guilielmo Tyrio, Adrichomio et aliis passim, Peraea vocatur regio trans Jordanem, vel regio transamnana.
19:2
2. ET SECUTAE SUNT EUM TURBAE MULTAE, ET CURAVIT EOS IBI. — «Secutae sunt,» non tam ex Galilaea, ibi voluit enim iter suum latere, ut ait Marcus et Joannes, quam ex aliis regionibus quas pertransibat, vel quae vicinae erant; secutae sunt autem excitae fama Christi, ut eum praedicantem audirent et ab eo a morbis suis sanarentur. «Ibi,» scilicet in finibus Judaeae, ibique eos domum remisit: noluit enim cum tanta populi turba Hierosolymam ingredi, ne Pharisaeorum animos jam sibi necem machinantes magis irritaret, neve eis occasionem daret accusandi se de commotione et seditione populi excitata; hoc enim illi coram Pilato objecerunt.
19:3
3. ET ACCESSERUNT AD EUM PHARISAEI, TENTANTES EUM, ET DICENTES: SI LICET HOMINI DIMITTERE UXOREM SUAM QUACUMQUE EX CAUSA? — Nam aliqua gravi de causa id licere non dubitabant ex Deuteron. XXIV, 1. Ita Origenes, S. Hieronymus et Beda. «Accesserunt,» non tunc cum Jesus ex finibus Judaeae perrexit Hierosolymam ad celebrandum festum Tabernaculorum, ut ait Joannes, VII, 1, sed cum, celebrato ibi festo, rediit ad fines Judaeae, et Jordanem rursum trajecit, uti patet Joan. X, 40. Matthaeus enim silet tam abitum Christi in Jerusalem, quam inde reditum. Porro, Joannes sic habet: «Et abiit iterum trans Jordanem in eum locum, ubi erat Joannes baptizans primum,» scilicet in Aennon juxta Salim, Joan. III, 23, ut nimirum ex hoc loco refricaret turbis memoriam testimonii, quod Joannes ibidem Christo perhibuerat, scilicet ipsum esse Messiam verumque Dei Filium. Videtur haec quaestio de dimissione uxoris tempore Christi, uti et jam, valde fuisse controversa, ac cornuta et captiosa, ideoque eam Christo proposuerunt Pharisaei, ut eum tentarent, caperent et carperent. Si enim Christus diceret non licere uxorem dimittere, in multorum divitum et carnalium, qui contrarium faciebant, invidiam incurrebat; si vero diceret id licere, suggillassent doctrinam ejus velut imperfectam et carnalem: ejus, inquam, qui perfectionis et spiritus volebat esse magister, quasi doctor e caelo missus. Sic etiamnum Aethiopes sive Abyssini crebro dimittunt uxores aliasque ducunt, imo eas habent subinde annuas vel menstruas duntaxat. Vide Damianum Goes in Ethiop.
19:4
4. QUI RESPONDENS, AIT EIS: NON LEGISTIS, QUIA QUI FECIT HOMINEM, AB INITIO MASCULUM ET FEMINAM FECIT EOS? — Nonnulli ex hoc loco putant Adamum a Deo creatum esse hermaphroditum, ac utrumque habuisse sexum, ut simul esset masculus et femina: sed apage has nugas. Sensus ergo est, q. d. Cum sancta Scriptura, Gen. I, 27, in aliis animalibus non dicat Deum fecisse masculum et feminam, sed in solo homine, hoc ipso significat conjugium solius hominis a Deo esse institutum, idque inter unum masculum tantum et unam feminam, puta inter Adamum et Evam, ut ille hanc dimittere et aliam ducere non posset. Ita S. Chrysostomus, Hieronymus, Theophylactus, Euthymius. Rursum ex eo quod ex uno Adamo facti sunt duo, scilicet Adam et Eva, atque ex eo quod Eva ex Adamo sit formata, ostenditur eadem monogamia, scilicet uxorem non debere separari a viro, cum ejus sit quasi pars et membrum; quia, ut ait Plato, Dial. De amore, ex viro uno et muliere una, quasi ex duabus imperfectis partibus unus perfectus fit homo. Ita S. Augustinus, lib. XIV De Civit., cap. XXII. Sicut ergo membrum, v. g. caput, non potest separari ab homine origine et formatione, matrimonium unius viri et unius feminae debet esse perpetuum et insolubile, ita ut solvi nequeat nisi per mortem, sicut in homine anima vel caput a corpore solvi nequit nisi per mortem. Unde explicans, subdit: «Propter hoc dimittet homo patrem et matrem, et adhaerebit uxori suae.» Addit Plato, et ex eo S. Basilius, lib. De Virginit., post initium, hac de causa virum adeo appetere mulierem, tanquam partem a se praecisam, ut sicut magnes ad se trahit ferrum, sic femina attrahat virum.
19:5
5. ET DIXIT: PROPTER HOC DIMITTET HOMO PATREM ET MATREM, ET ADHAEREBIT UXORI SUAE. ET ERUNT DUO IN CARNE UNA. — «Et dixit» scilicet Deus, per os Adae, quasi prophetae, instituens matrimonium in Adamo et Eva, ejusque stabilitatem sanciens, Genes. II, 24. Vide ibi dicta. «Propter hoc,» quod scilicet mulier formata ex viro, puta Eva ex Adamo, sit caro de carne ejus, et os de ossibus ejus, uti in Genesi praecessit; «dimittet homo patrem et matrem, et adhaerebit,» Graece προσκολληθήσεται, id est agglutinabitur, id est intime, indivulse adhaerebit uxori suae, quasi arctissimo matrimonii glutino cum ea copulatus, ut relicta societate et saepe domo patris et matris, cohabitet uxori suae. Quare impertinens, imo ineptus est sensus Hugonis, qui sic explicat, q. d. «Dimittet homo patrem et matrem,» id est, excepto patre et matre, cum reliquis omnibus poterit quis matrimonium inire. Talis quoque est aliorum, qui sic exponunt, q. d. Plus diliget homo uxorem, quam patrem et matrem, uti dicitur Esdrae IV, 25. Hoc enim, licet subinde verum sit, huic tamen loco non convenit. ET ERUNT DUO IN CARNE UNA. — Graece sic εἰς σάρκα μίαν, id est in unam carnem, ut scilicet sint una caro, ut explicat Christus vers. sequenti: vulgo per corporum commixtionem hoc fieri censent; purius et simpliciori Hebraismo vir et uxor sunt una caro, ut vertit Syrus, id est sunt unus homo et una persona civilis, caro enim per synecdochen notat totum hominem, q. d. Sicut ergo pars corporis, v. g. cor, vel venter, non debet separari a corpore, ita nec vir ab uxore. Hinc moraliter sequitur, quod vir et uxor se mutuo amare debeant, sicut cor et anima amat suum corpus, et corpus suum cor et animam, Ephes. V, 28. Rursum hinc sequitur una et communis utriusque corporis potestas, quod scilicet vir habeat jus in corpus uxoris quasi suum, et vice versa, uti docet Apostolus, 1 Cor. VII, 4. Plura de hoc loco dixi Genes. II, 24. Symbolice et metonymice S. Hieronymus, Beda et S. Thomas: Vir et uxor, inquiunt, sunt una caro, quia generant eumdem filium, qui una utriusque parentis communis est caro.
19:6
6. ITAQUE JAM NON SUNT DUO, SED UNA CARO (id est unus homo, una persona civilis, uti jam dixi): QUOD ERGO DEUS CONJUNXIT, HOMO NON SEPARET. — Pro «conjunxit,» Graece est συνέζευξε, id est conjugavit, sive in unum jugum conjunxit: unde σύζυγοι dicuntur conjuges, quia sicut duo equi ad unum jugum copulantur in curru, ut eum protrahant, sic duo conjuges copulantur ad idem jugum matrimonii, ut illud sustineant ex eoque proles procreent et educent. Duplex est hic ratio, qua Christus probat viro non licere dimittere uxorem. Prior, q. d. Dimissio uxoris et ab ea viri divortium est contra naturam, sicut contra naturam est, ut una caro et unus homo dividatur in duos; ergo id fieri non debet. Posterior, divortium hoc est contra Dei institutionem; ergo si fiat, impie fit: distrahitur enim id quod Deus conjunxit. Quis audeat temerare quod Deus sanxit? Quis audeat dividere quod Deus sociavit et conjunxit? Quis audeat opus Dei creatoris, puta unum hominem, discerpere, aut carne et membro suo truncare et mutilare? Perperam ergo Erasmus, in I Corinth. VII: Hoc, inquit, Deus conjunxit, quod recte conjungitur; hoc Deus dirimit, quod recte dirimitur: quasi possint separari conjugia male et inconsulte inita, suasore, non Deo, sed diabolo. Christus enim loquitur de natura, ac naturali et primaria matrimonii institutione, secundum quam matrimonium semel initum, quomodocumque vel cujuscumque suasu initum, est indissolubile. Hoc enim exigit natura, ut proles alia post aliam continuo ex matrimonio subnascens, commode ab utroque parente educari possit; quae educatio in homine difficilis est et lenta, duratque ad annum aetatis vigesimum et ultra: secus est in bestiis, quae statim intra paucos menses, imo hebdomadas, plane adolescunt et perficiuntur, ut educatione patris et matris amplius non indigeant, quare tunc solvitur eorum conjugium. Ratio ergo a priori, cur matrimonii insolubilitas sit juris naturae, et cur contra naturam sit fornicatio, pollutio, divortium et polygamia, est haec, quod Deus, qui est Dominus naturae, ac matrimonii et corporum nostrorum, ita primitus in Genesi et prima mundi rerumque omnium productione instituit, limitavit et sanxit, ac nobis ad copulam tantum conjugalem jus et usum corporum dedit; et si aliter iis utamur, contra voluntatem Dei, qui est summus Dominus, et contra jus ab eo datum, iis abutimur. Id ita esse liquet ex eo quod olim in lege naturae et Mosaica, Deo in jure hoc primitus a se sancito dispensante, et novum jus dante, licita fuerit polygamia et libellus repudii. Sic Osee, cap. I, jussu Dei uxorem duxit fornicariam. Sic et nunc Deus posset dare alicui uxorem tantum ad unum vel alterum actum copulae; ac consequenter facere, ut actus qui alias esset fornicatio, jam non sit fornicatio, sed usus conjugii. Vide dicta Osee, I. Porro finis et causa, cur Deus primitus sanxerit tantam matrimonii insolubilitatem, prima fuit, ut esset major unio et amor conjugum inter se. Secunda, quia natura in homine ordinarie hoc quasi exigit, ut proles commode ab utroque parente possint educari. Haec enim educatio in homine est ardua et longa, cum interim aliae et aliae proles subnascantur, quae similiter ab utroque educandae sunt. Tertia causa fuit allegorica, ut scilicet matrimonium insolubile esset typus et figura insolubilis conjugii et unionis Verbi divini cum carne nostra, et per eam cum Ecclesia, uti docet Apostolus, Ephes. V, 32: «Sacramentum hoc magnum est, inquit, ego autem dico in Christo et Ecclesia.» Vide ibi dicta.
19:7
7. DICUNT ILLI: QUID ERGO MOYSES MANDAVIT DARE LIBELLUM REPUDII, ET DIMITTERE? — Pharisaei «dicunt» et objiciunt «illi,» scilicet Christo: «Quid ergo Moyses mandavit?» Ut fortior sit objectio dicunt, «mandavit;» cum tamen, ut recte invertit Christus, vers. sequenti, Moyses hunc libellum repudii tantum permiserit. Erat tamen hic aliquod mandatum, non absolutum, sed conditionatum. Mandarat enim Moyses, ut si Judaei vellent dimittere uxores, id non facerent nisi dato libello repudii. De hoc libello, quis et qualis fuerit, ac quibus casibus et caeremoniis fuerit licitus, quisque fuerit finis et effectus, fuse dixi Deuter. XXIV, 1 et sequenti. Supple hic ex Marco, cap. X, vers. 2, Christum Pharisaeis rogantibus, an liceret uxorem dimittere, primo respondisse et dixisse: «Quid vobis hac de re praecepit Moyses? Qui dixerunt: Moyses permisit libellum repudii scribere, et dimittere.» Mox Christus, ut ait hic Matthaeus, vers. 14, primam matrimonii institutionem et insolubilitatem a Deo institutam explicuit. Replicarunt Pharisaei: «Quid ergo Moyses mandavit dare libellum repudii, et dimittere?» Respondit Jesus, Moysen id permisisse ob duritiem cordis eorum; ab initio autem non fuisse sic. Sic ergo praeponendo verba quae habet Marcus, ac subtexendo verba quae habet Matthaeus, eumdem cum Marco conciliat.
19:8
8. AIT ILLIS: QUONIAM MOYSES AD DURITIEM CORDIS VESTRI PERMISIT (ecce hic invertit τὸ «mandavit» in «permisit») VOBIS DIMITTERE UXORES VESTRAS; AB INITIO AUTEM NON FUIT SIC. — q. d. Moyses permisit dimittere uxores vobis exosas, ne eas occideretis, si eas non possetis dimittere: haec enim fuit duritia et carnalitas cordis vestri, ut malletis illas necare, quam carere voluptate novi et exoptati conjugii. AB INITIO AUTEM NON FUIT SIC. — Quia Deus ab initio mundi inter Adamum et Evam instituit sanxitque inviolabile et insolubile conjugium. Ab initio ergo naturae recte a Deo institutae sic fuit; vitiata vero hominis natura per peccatum, hanc Dei institutionem mutavit et corrupit, ac libellum repudii et polygamiam induxit.
19:9
9. DICO AUTEM VOBIS, QUIA QUICUMQUE DIMISERIT UXOREM SUAM, NISI OB FORNICATIONEM, ET ALIAM DUXERIT, MOECHATUR; ET QUI DIMISSAM DUXERIT, MOECHATUR. — «Dico:» bis hoc dixit Christus: Primo, publice hoc loco Judaeis et Pharisaeis: unde hic novam hanc legem promulgavit, per quam sustulit libellum repudii, ac matrimonium ad primaevam suam institutionem et insolubilitatem revocavit. Secundo, paulo post privatim idipsum dixit et repetiit coram discipulis, Marci cap. X, 10. «Dico,» — ergo, id est edico, et quasi novus novae legis legislator veterisque reformator sancio, ac matrimonium ad originalem suam rectitudinem et firmitatem reduco statuoque, ut qui uxorem suam dimiserit et aliam duxerit, habeatur et reipsa sit adulter. NISI OB FORNICATIONEM, — id est nisi ob adulterium: quae enim in solutis est fornicatio, in conjugatis est adulterium, quod solvit matrimonium quoad thorum, non quoad vinculum. Adulter enim non servat fidem, quam dedit conjugi: unde a conjuge potest dimitti, juxta illud: Frangenti fidem fides frangatur eidem. Ex hac exceptione Graeci, teste Guidone Carmelita, tract. De Haeresibus, ac moderni haeretici colligunt et concludunt: «Quicumque dimiserit uxorem suam, nisi ob fornicationem, et aliam duxerit, moechatur;» ergo a contrario, qui dimiserit uxorem suam ob fornicationem, et aliam duxerit, non moechatur. Unde censent ipsi per adulterium solvi matrimonium, non tantum quoad thorum, sed etiam quoad vinculum, ita ut aliam uxorem ducere, et aliud matrimonium contrahere liceat. Ita Lutherus, Calvinus, Erasmus ac passim Lutherani, Calvinistae, Anabaptistae, atque e Catholicis, Catharinus et Cajetanus; itaque in praxi faciunt haeretici et Graeci. Verum hic est error damnatus a continua traditione Ecclesiae et a S. Paulo, Rom. VII, 1, et 1 Cor. VII, 10 et 11, ac diserte a Concilio Tridentino, sess. 24, can. 6 et 7. Ad argumentum ergo a contrario petitum, respondet Paulus Burgensis hic, Additione II ad Lyranum (quem sequitur noster Ribera in Malachia II, num. 36), admittendo sequelam; sed addit Christum loqui duntaxat de lege veteri, in qua, ob fornicationem, licitum erat dare libellum repudii, per quem matrimonium solvebatur, ut liceret aliam uxorem ducere: sed huic responsioni obstat quod Christus hic aeque ac Matthaei V, diserte sua dicta, id est legem Evangelicam opponit Moysi et legi veteri, imo libellum repudii quem Moyses praemiserat, aufert, vers. 8 et 9: «Moyses, inquit, ad duritiem cordis vestri permisit vobis dimittere uxores vestras, etc. Dico autem vobis, quia quicumque dimiserit uxorem suam, nisi ob fornicationem, et aliam duxerit, moechatur.» Ecce hic clare Christus Moysis permissioni in libello repudii opponit suum dictum suamque sanctionem, qua libellum hunc revocat, illoque utentem damnat adulterii. Dico ergo primo: Melius S. Augustinus, lib. I De Adult. conjug., cap. IX, primo, τὸ «nisi» accepit negative, ut τὸ «nisi ob fornicationem» idem sit, quod extra causam fornicationis. Favent Graeca et Syrus, quae habent: Non adulteram; quasi Christus tantum velit affirmare uxorem fidam et castam non posse dimitti; de infida vero, id est incesta et adultera, nil velit dicere, ad vitandam invidiam Pharisaeorum et populi, cui illo tempore licita et usitata erant adulterorum repudia et novae cum aliis nuptiae. Secundo, τὸ «nisi» accipi potest proprie exceptive, sed tunc non ad id quod sequitur, «et aliam duxerit,» sed tantum ad id quod praecessit. «Quicumque dimiserit uxorem suam,» referendum est, ut ab illo duntaxat excipiat casum fornicationis, q. d. Quicumque dimiserit uxorem, quod non licet, nisi ob fornicationem, et aliam duxerit, hic moechatur. Favet Aethiopic., qui vertit: Quicumque aliam ob causam, quam ob fornicationem, dimiserit uxorem et aliam duxerit, moechus est. Et Persicus: Omnis, qui dimittit uxorem suam, et non propter adulterium, et aliam ducit, moechus est. Tertio, planissime et aptissime cum Theophylacto et S. Augustino, lib. Contra Adimantum, cap. III, hanc exceptionem ad utrumque referas, tam ad id quod sequitur, quam ad id quod praecessit, q. d. Quicumque dimiserit uxorem, nisi ob fornicationem, et aliam duxerit, moechatur; moechatur, inquam, tum dimittendo uxorem, tum aliam ducendo, hoc est, bis moechatur: Christus enim utrumque respondet, quia utrumque quaesierant Pharisaei, et utrumque est verum. Nam etiamsi vir solum dimittat uxorem castam et innoxiam, nec aliam ducat, moechatur, tum quia violat jus matrimonii et uxoris suae, quod est quoddam moechari, moechia enim significat vitium directe repugnans matrimonio, quale est dimissio uxoris insontis; tum quia «moechatur,» id est facit eam moechari, uti explicat Christus, Matthaei cap. V, 32. Verba enim Hebraea conjugationis Qal saepe per Hiphil, id est activa simpliciter per duplicem actionem exponenda sunt, uti norunt Hebraice periti. Unde tantum a contrario sic inferas: «Quicumque dimiserit uxorem suam, nisi ob fornicationem, et aliam duxerit, moechatur;» ergo qui dimittit uxorem ob fornicationem, et aliam ducit, non moechatur quidem dimittendo fornicariam, moechatur tamen aliam ducendo. Simile est, si dicas: qui jejunium violat sine dispensatione, et se inebriat, hic peccat. Ergo qui non jejunat cum dispensatione non peccat, sed inebriando se peccat. Similis phrasis est Matthaei cap. V, 19, ut ibi dixi. Dico secundo: Christus concedit hic viro divortium, quoad thorum, ob fornicationem uxoris, non autem matrimonii solutionem, ita ut ei liceat aliam ducere; patet id primo, quia Marcus et Lucas generalem omnino habent sententiam (illaque vera esse debet), et hanc exceptionem omittunt: sic enim habet Lucas, cap. XVI, 18: «Omnis, qui dimittit uxorem suam, et aliam duxerit, adulterium committit super eam;» facit enim ei gravem injuriam, quia fidem ei datam violat. Dices: Cur ergo hanc exceptionem addit Matthaeus? Respondeo: Quia Pharisaei duas quaestiones tacite proposuerant Christo: Prima erat, an quacumque ex causa liceret uxorem dimittere? Secunda, an dimissa uxore, per libellum repudii solutum esset matrimonium, et posset aliud iniri? ideo enim dimittebant suam, ut ducerent aliam. Christus ergo utrique quaestioni respondit, idque, ut videtur, duabus propositionibus. Prima: Quicumque dimiserit uxorem nisi ob fornicationem, moechatur. Secunda: Quicumque aliam duxerit, moechatur: sustulit enim cum libello repudii etiam polygamiam, sive pluralitatem uxorum olim licitam. Itaque hic repetendum est τὸ «quicumque,» hoc modo: Quicumque dimiserit uxorem, nisi ob fornicationem, et quicumque aliam duxerit, moechatur; Matthaeus ergo hic, ut et alibi, brevitati studens, subintelligit τὸ «quicumque,» et utramque Christi responsionem in unam sententiam conflat; voluit enim utramque presse et concise una propositione complecti; unde hic verum est illud: Dum brevis esse laboro, obscurus fio. Simile ostendi, cap. IX, 18. Probatur idipsum secundo, ex praecedentibus, ubi Christus absolute ex natura et prima institutione matrimonii, quam non tollit fornicatio, probavit matrimonium plane esse insolubile. Tertio, quia in sequenti casu haec exceptio intelligi nequit, ut dicatur: «Et qui dimissam, nisi ob fornicationem, duxerit, moechatur.» Sic enim melioris conditionis esset dimissa ob fornicationem, utpote libera et potens aliud matrimonium inire, quam dimissa citra culpam suam; cum haec non possit alium maritum ducere. Quarto, quia ita explicat Paulus, I Cor. VII, 10 et 11, ac Patres passim: S. Hieronymus, Chrysostomus, Beda hic, S. Augustinus, libris duobus De Adulterinis Conjugiis, quos hac de causa scripsit; Innocentius I, epist. ad Exuper.; Concilium Milevitan., can. 17; Foro Juliense, can. 10; Nannetense, can. 10; Florentinum in Instruc. Armen., et Tridentinum, sess. 14, can. 6. Imo Origenes hic, tract. 7, acriter perstringit nonnullos sui aevi episcopos, tanquam indoctos, quod cum Tertulliano, lib. IV Contra Marc., et Ambrosiastro, in I Corint., concedebant uxoribus secundas nuptias ob virorum adulteria, dicentes conjugi insonti licere conjugem sontem et adulteratam dimittere, ac alteri copulari. Idem habetur in Concilio Eliberitano, sess. 31, Quaest. 1, cap. Si qua mulier, et in Concilio Aureliano I, X. Sed haec Conciliorum decreta aut apocrypha sunt, aut mutile et imperfecte citantur a Gratiano. Aliter respondet Maldonatus, scilicet Concilia haec permittere conjugi insonti secundas nuptias post mortem uxoris adulterae; uxori vero in poenam adulterii non permittere secundas nuptias post mortem viri. Verum cap. Si qua mulier expresse agit de uxore adhuc vivente. Vide Thomam Sanchez, lib. X De Divortio, disp. II et sequent. Reliqua huc pertinentia audivimus cap. V, 32, ubi ea explicui.
19:10
10. DICUNT EI DISCIPULI: SI ITA EST CAUSA HOMINIS (viri) CUM UXORE, NON EXPEDIT NUBERE. — «Causa,» id est res et negotium, ut vertit Syrus, q. d. Si ita se res habet conjugum, si tanta est conjugii insolubilitas, si tam arcte vir alligatus est uxori, ut nulla nisi fornicationis causa possit eam dimittere, sed cum ea, licet odiosa, rixosa, deformi, spurca, etc., debeat vivere et assidue conversari usque ad mortem, «non expedit nubere,» id est uxorem ducere, ut vertit Syrus. Graecum enim γαμῆσαι, tam viris, quam mulieribus competit. Forte Noster vertens nubere allusit ad servitutem et subjectionem, qua vir astringitur mulieri, ac non raro, si velit habere pacem, debet ei quasi se subdere, atque patienter ferre ejus ineptias, querelas, jurgia, rixas, etc. Unde Comicus ait: Uxori nubere nolo meae. Causam dat S. Chrysostomus: «Levius enim est, inquit, contra concupiscentiam praeliari, et contra seipsum, quam contra mulierem malam.» Viderunt idipsum Gentiles. Unde Cato: «Mulier, ait, est malum necessarium,» et vere infidelibus malum hoc fuit necessarium; fidelibus vero est liberum et voluntarium, quia hi per Christi gratiam possunt colere virginitatem et caelibatum, qui infidelibus, Christi fide et gratia destitutis, datum his qui petunt ut oportet.» Theophylactus: «Hoc loco, ait, datum est, valet, quibus cooperatur Deus. Illis autem datum est, qui petunt: petite enim, inquit,» etc. Auctor Operis Imperfecti: «Quod autem dicit: Quibus datum est, non hoc significat, quoniam quibusdam datur, quibusdam non datur; sed illud ostendit, quia nisi auxilium gratiae acceperimus, nihil ex nobis valemus. Quoniam autem volentibus gratia non denegatur, in Evangelio Dominus dicit: Petite,» etc. S. Chrysostomus: «Sed si electionis opus est id, inquies, quomodo incipiens statim dixit: Non omnes capiunt, sed quibus datum est? Ut singulare id esse certamen perdiscas, non ut sorte datam necessitatem suspiceris. His enim datum est, qui sponte id eligunt: quod ideo dixit, ut ostenderet superiori nobis auxilio esse opus (quod quidem omnibus illud expetentibus paratum est), si volumus in hac lucta superiores evadere.» Addit S. Chrysostomus, licet aliqui a continentia excidant, non debemus in proposito castitatis fieri pigriores: sicut milites, qui in pugna cadunt, non exanimant ceteros, sed potius ad fortius pugnandum acuunt et accendunt. Denique idem Chrysostomus considerationem suggerit, per quam caelibatus cuique non tantum possibilis, sed et facilis ostenditur: «Cogita tecum, inquit, si aut a natura eunuchus esses, aut injuria hominum effectus, quid faceres, cum et hujusmodi voluptate careres et nullam carendo mercedem consequereris? Gratias igitur Deo agas, quia magna praemia rutilantesque coronas accipies, si ita vives, quemadmodum sine aliquo illi praemio: imo vero multo facilius, tutius atque jucundius, tum quia spe retributionis roboraris, tum quia conscientia virtutis gaudes et ad haec non ita ingentibus cupiditatis fluctibus jactaris. Non enim sic amputatio membri, quemadmodum rationis frenum, imo vero sola ratio hujusmodi fluctus comprimit. Non enim a cerebro, aut a lumbis illum inquietissimum aestum proficisci dixerim, sed a lascivia mentis et cogitationis neglectu.» Porro, Auctor lib. De Castitate, qui falso S. Sixto Pontifici inscribitur (fuit enim Auctor hic Pelagianus), τὸ «datum» refert non ad castitatem, sed ad verbum, q. d. Non omnes capiunt verba mea, sed ii quibus datum est audire me ea explicantem; nam castitas, inquit, non est donum Dei, sed virtus proprii arbitrii et voluntatis. Si enim esset donum Dei, fatalis esset castitas iis quibus hoc donum Deus dat, aliis vero impossibilis. Rursum quomodo castitate meremur regnum caelorum, si esset donum Dei, et non electio liberi arbitrii? Ita hic Pelagianus, sed imperite. «Verbum» hoc non est aliud quam consilium castitatis, ut patet intuenti. Castitatem esse donum Dei, patet I Corinth. VII, 7, et Sapient. VIII, 21. Vide S. Augustinum, lib. VI Confess., cap. XI, cujus celebre est illud: «Domine, da quod jubes, et jube quod vis. Jubes continentiam, da continentiam.»
19:12
12. SUNT ENIM EUNUCHI, QUI DE MATRIS UTERO SIC NATI SUNT; ET SUNT EUNUCHI, QUI FACTI SUNT AB HOMINIBUS; ET SUNT EUNUCHI, QUI SEIPSOS CASTRAVERUNT PROPTER REGNUM COELORUM. QUI POTEST CAPERE, CAPIAT. — Qui cum possint esse viri, propter Christum fiunt eunuchi, ait S. Hieronymus. Triplices hic eunuchos, id est castratos et impotentes ad generandum, assignat Christus, scilicet primo, qui a natura sunt tales; secundo, qui ab arte, qui scilicet sunt exsecti, ut custodiant reginas et matronas nobiles a stupro; tertio, qui «seipsos castraverunt propter regnum caelorum.» Alludit Christus ad Isai. LVI, 3, ubi eunuchos hos sub Christo futuros praedicit, eisque promittit nomen melius a filiis et filiabus, nomen, inquam, sempiternum. Vide ibi dicta. CASTRAVERUNT. — Haec vox duo significat: Primo, nostri arbitrii esse cum Dei gratia nos castrare, id est castos et caelibes efficere, idque perpetuo voto firmare et servare. Hoc enim significat vox «eunuchi,» et vox «castraverunt,» scilicet impotentiam moralem ad generandum, alioqui enim dixisset: Sunt qui se castrant, vel castrare nituntur; jam dicit, «castraverunt,» id est potentiam sibi abstulerunt, seque quasi exsecuerunt et inhabiles ad generandum effecerunt, scilicet per votum continentiae. Ita S. Epiphanius, haeresi 58; S. Fulgentius, lib. De fide ad Petrum, cap. III; S. Augustinus, lib. De Sancta Virgin., cap. XXX. Secundo, τὸ «castraverunt» significat continentiam hanc in continente non fieri sine ingenti carnis lucta et dolore, perinde ac si ei genitalia exsecarentur. Ita Nazianzenus, orat. 31. Porro, Origenes hoc ad litteram accepit. Unde reipsa castitatis amore ipse seipsum castravit et membrum exsecuit, sed perperam; tum quia non licet se castrando mutilare; tum quia libido castratione non restinguitur, sed acuitur. Audi Chrysostomum: «Cum autem dicit, qui se castraverunt, non membrorum dicit abscissionem, sed malarum cogitationum interemptionem; maledictioni enim obnoxius est, qui membrum abscindit, etc., neque concupiscentia mansuetior ita fit, sed molestior.» Eunuchi enim peccant cogitatione et desiderio libidinis, dolentque se illam non posse experiri et explere. Vide dicta Eccli. XX, 2, et XXXIX, 21. PROPTER REGNUM COELORUM, — per virtutem continentiae promerendum. Ita Origenes, Hilarius, Chrysostomus, Euthymius hic et S. Augustinus, De S. Virgin., cap. XXIII. Perperam ergo haeretici sic exponunt, «propter regnum caelorum,» scilicet praedicandum, q. d. Sunt eunuchi, qui se castrant, id est continent ab uxore, ut expeditiores sint ad praedicandum Evangelium, aut ut careant molestiis quas parit res uxoria: non enim solum hisce de causis laudanda et optanda est continentia, sed etiam praecise in se, quia ipsa ingens est virtus, suique victoria, qua homo vincit libidinem, mentemque attollit ad caelestia meditanda et prosequenda: quare ipsa ex hominibus facit Angelos. Vide S. Augustinum, S. Basilium, S. Chrysostomum et alios, qui de Virginitate scripserunt, ubi miris eam encomiis celebrant. QUI POTEST CAPERE, CAPIAT. — Arabicus: Qui potest portare, portet. Nota hic consilium Evangelicum caelibatus a Christo promulgatum et omnibus propositum, imo consultum, sed non praeceptum. Haec enim verba: «qui potest capere, capiat,» sunt hortantis et animantis ad caelibatum, ait S. Hieronymus et Chrysostomus, ac proinde significant illum a Christo consuli, ideoque eumdem esse in nostro arbitrio et potestate, si gratiam Dei invocare illique strenue cooperari velimus. Nec obstat quod dicit, «qui potest;» hoc enim significat duntaxat caelibatum esse rem arduam, q. d. Qui vult sibi vim inferre, qui vult libidini generose resistere, qui vult ad arduum continentiae culmen conscendere, ille eamdem amplectatur, «capiat» et capessat. Sic adolescens, nolens ducere quamdam sibi displicentem, apud Comicum ait: «Non possum, mater,» id est nolo eam ducere, hoc enim mihi valde difficile est, ideoque quasi impossibile: omnes ergo fideles habent potentiam non proximam, sed remotam ad continendum. Ita Patres citati vers. 11. Audi unum ex omnibus et pro omnibus S. Chrysostomum: «Ideo non omnes capere possunt, quia non omnes volunt; palma proposita est: qui concupiscit gloriam, non cogitat de labore. Nemo vinceret, si omnes timerent periculum.» Audi et S. Hieronymum, lib. I Contra Jovin.: «Proponit agonotheta praemium, invitat ad cursum, tenet in manu virginitatis bravium, ostendit purissimum fontem et clamat: Qui sitit, veniat ad me et bibat; qui potest capere, capiat.» Hinc liquet, quam carnalis et bruta sit Calvini expositio, quae talis est, q. d. Vos, o Apostoli, censetis bonum esse sine uxore vivere, sed ego prohibeo, ne quis ita facere conetur, nisi certus sit se id facere posse, id est sine uxore vivere. Christus enim non prohibet, sed hortatur ad caelibatum; nec quis de eo certus esse potest, nisi aut revelationem a Deo habeat, quod est paucissimorum, vel suam constantiam continendo experiatur et probet: prius ergo continentiam experiri quis debet, antequam de ea certus sit; quomodo ergo prius de ea certus esse debet, antequam eam experiatur? ut vult Calvinus. Pejus Lutherus docuit tam impossibile esse homini carere uxore, quam cibo et potu; nimirum ipsis et haereticis, hoc est impossibile, at non orthodoxis, Christi fide et gratia roboratis.
19:13
13. TUNC OBLATI SUNT EI PARVULI, UT MANUS EIS IMPONERET, ET ORARET. DISCIPULI AUTEM INCREPABANT EOS; — quod Christum rebus majoribus, puta viris docendis adeo occupatum, ad parvulos, rationis usu carentes, avocarent, quasi vile et indignum Christo tanto Propheta esset cum pueris agere. Ita S. Chrysostomus, Theophylactus, Euthymius, Jansenius, Maldonatus et alii. «Parvuli,» Graece παιδία, id est pueruli. Lucas, XVIII, 15, habet βρέφη, id est infantes; infantia autem durat usque ad septennium. Moraliter: discant hic principes a Christo, qui est «Rex regum et Dominus dominantium,» omnibus etiam pauperibus, feminis, pueris ad se facilem dare aditum, eorumque preces et vota benigne audire et exaudire. Hoc fecere prae aliis e Romanis Imperatoribus, licet Gentilibus: Primo, Adrianus, de quo Spartianus: «In colloquiis, inquit, etiam humillimorum civilissimus fuit, detestans eos qui hanc voluptatem humanitatis, quasi servantes fastigium principis, sibi inviderent.» Secundo, Titus Vespasianus cujus, teste Suetonio, haec erat vox: «Non oportere quemquam a sermone Principis tristem discedere;» et quo die nulli benefecerat, gemens aiebat: «Diem perdidi.» Tertio, Trajanus, de quo Plinius in Panegyr.: «Non tu, inquit, civium amplexus ad pedes tuos deprimis, nec osculum manu reddis: haeret lateri tuo quisquis accessit, finemque sermoni suus cuique pudor, non tua superbia facit.» Et paulo inferius: «Nulla in audiendo difficultas, nulla in respondendo mora; audiuntur statim, dimittuntur statim.» Et de eodem Eutropius: «Culpantibus, ait, amicis quod nimis circa omnes comis esset, respondit: Talem debere Imperatorem esse privatis, quales esse sibi Imperatores privatus optasset.» Quarto, Alexander Severus, de quo Lampridius: «Moderationis, inquit, tantae fuit, ut nemo unquam ab ejus latere submoveretur: ita se omnibus blandum affabilemque praebebat, ut amicos non solum primi et secundi loci, sed etiam inferioris aegrotantes inviseret.» Denique, e Christianis Theodosius Senior Imperator: «Creber egressu, ait Pacatus in ejus Panegyr., expectantibus populis te fateris, nec videri modo patiens, sed facilis adiri: e proximo accipis vota omnia tuorum.» UT MANUS EIS IMPONERET. — Ut manuum impositione eis benediceret, ac benedicendo divinam gratiam eis imprecaretur et imploraret; itaque pro eis oraret, ut in viros sapientes et sanctos adolescerent. Hanc priscam Hebraeorum fuisse consuetudinem, colligitur ex Gen. XLVIII, 14, ubi Jacob, cancellatis in formam crucis manibus, benedixit Ephraim et Manasse, parvulis Josephi filiis. Et ex Eccli. III, 11, ubi ait: «Benedictio patris firmat domos filiorum, maledictio autem matris eradicat fundamenta.» Vide ibi dicta. A Christo mos hic derivatus est ad Christianos, ut laici, maxime pueri, a senioribus et sacerdotibus petant et obtineant benedictionem etiam extra Ecclesiam, uti fit in Belgio, ubi pueri certatim ad sacerdotes et viros religiosos transeuntes accurrunt, ab eisque petunt cruce se signari et benedici: itaque facere docentur a Catechistis, aeque ac a parentibus; quam consuetudinem laudat hic Auctor Imperfecti. Addit Remigius hanc consuetudinem apud Judaeos fuisse ante Christum. Magnus ille Thomas Morus, Angliae decus et martyr, existens regni Cancellarius, publice a patre sene postulavit benedictionem, teste Stapletonio in ejus Vita. Porro, hanc caeremoniam impositionis manuum, exemplo Christi usurpat Ecclesia in Baptismo, Ordine, Poenitentia, et quandocumque haeretici in Ecclesiam recipiuntur: est enim ipsa quasi imprecatio et collatio Spiritus Sancti.
19:14
14. JESUS VERO AIT EIS: SINITE PARVULOS, ET NOLITE EOS PROHIBERE AD ME VENIRE: TALIUM EST ENIM REGNUM COELORUM. — Causam cur Christus adeo amet parvulos, quinque naturales eorum dotes assignat hic Victor Antiochenus, scribens in cap. X Marci, 13: «Est enim parvuli, ait, anima candida, et ab omnibus vitiosis affectibus libera: quandoquidem puerulus tristia passus, aut injuria a quopiam affectus, neque injuriarum reminiscitur, neque vindictam meditatur: verum quasi nihil incommodi tulerit, ad eum qui laeserat tanquam ad amicum ultro accedit. Pari modo, licet graviter a matre caedatur, accurrit nihilosecius prae ceteris ad ipsam, unamque illam aliis omnibus mulieribus potiorem ducit. Et si reginam diademate redimitam ostenderis, non anteponit eam matri quantumlibet vilibus pannis indutae, avetque magis illam videre pannis obsitam, quam reginam splendido corporis cultu ornatam. Ad haec nihil prorsus plus exigit, quam naturae necessitas deposcit. Quare ut primum mammarum succu sese explevit, statim materna ubera deserit. Praeterea de earum rerum jactura, quas nos maximi facere consuevimus, ut sunt pecuniae, gemmae aliaque ejusmodi, nihil prorsus movetur aut contristatur. Denique non stupet, nec rapitur ob corporum venustatem, ut ceteri mortalium solent. Propter haec ergo Dominus dixit: Talium est regnum caelorum: nempe per hoc nos admonens, ut studio certaque voluntatis electione talia faciamus, talemque affectum induamus, qualem ipsi ex naturae suae qualitate induti sunt.» Sic Christus S. Edmundum, Cantuarensem postea episcopum; S. Nicolaum, S. Catharinam Senensem et alios eminentes sanctos a puero sibi selegit, et benedixit. Gelasius, puer Placentinus, cum S. Opilium fraterculum suum in cubiculo orantem invenisset, Angelorum multitudinem cum eo colloquentem propriis oculis vidit, vocemque audivit: «Sinite parvulos venire ad me: talium enim est regnum caelorum.» Cum autem aetate cresceret, vitae quoque sanctitate crescebat, ac tanquam oliva fructifera in domo Domini, uberes bonorum operum fructus proferebat: sicque tenera adhuc aetate migravit ad Christum. Ita habet officium Ecclesiae Placentinae Romae approbatum, et ex eo Philippus Ferrarius in Catalogo Sanctorum Italiae, ad diem 4 februarii. S. Babylas, Patriarcha Antiochenus et martyr illustris sub Numeriano Imperatore, ab eo ad mortem damnatus, tres pueros, quos in fide et pietate educarat, voluit ante se capite plecti, ne a quopiam seducerentur, sed eos Christo offerens velut innocentes victimas, aiebat: «Ecce ego et pueri mei, quos dedit mihi Dominus in signum et portentum,» uti habetur in Vita sancti Artemii apud Surium. Vide dicta Isaiae VIII, 18, et Hebr. II, 14. Plura exempla amoris et curae Christi ac B. Virginis erga parvulos, censet noster Philippus Berlemontius in Paradiso puerorum. Moraliter: disce hic quanta cura pueri educandi sint, docendi et catechizandi, ut puri permaneant. Nam Quo semel est imbuta recens, servabit odorem Testa diu. Fecit hoc studiose Joannes Gerson, existens Cancellarius Parisiensis, qui et librum hac de re conscripsit, ex quo nonnulla navi, Galat. VI. Vide Petrum Ribadeneiram in Vita S. Ignatii, lib. III, cap. XXIV, ubi multas et graves affert causas et utilitates, ob quas Societas Jesu complexa sit scholas et instructionem puerorum. Imo S. Basilius idipsum faciendum esse ex hisce Christi verbis probat. Nam in Regulis brevior. disp., interrog. 292, quaerit: «An conveniat, ut inter fratres magister sit puerorum secularium?» ac respondet affirmative: «Servetur, inquit, quod praeceptum est a Domino, qui dixit: Sinite parvulos venire ad me: talium est enim regnum caelorum.» Parvuli enim in viros et cives evadunt, et quod didicerunt pueri, hoc retinent grandaevi. Parvuli ergo sunt seminarium Ecclesiae et reipublicae. TALIUM (Syrus, eorum qui sunt sicut isti) ENIM EST REGNUM COELORUM. — «Talium,» scilicet qui parvulis humilitate, simplicitate, candore, innocentia sunt similes, uti jam dixi ex Victore Antiocheno. Unde Lucas addit: «Quicumque non acceperit regnum Dei ut puer, non potest intrare in illud.» Ita Origenes, S. Hieronymus, Theophylactus et Euthymius. Sensus est, q. d. Christus: mea dignitate non est indignum pueris benedicere, quia per benedictionem meam apti fiunt regno caelorum, cum vos, o Judaei adulti, qui toties me docentem audistis, ob superbiam aliaque vitia in quibus occalluistis, ad illud adhuc sitis inepti. Quare ut apti fiatis, parvulos hosce vobis imitandos statuo. Omnis enim animi volentis se praeparare ad regnum caelorum Christi gratia obtinendum, exemplum et idea est puerilis simplicitas. Audi S. Ambrosium, lib. VIII in cap. XVIII Luc.: «Aetas haec, inquit, infirma est viribus, invalida ingenio, immatura consilio. Non igitur pueritia, sed aemula puerilis simplicitatis bonitas designatur.» Et mox symbolice: «Quis ergo puer imitandus est Apostolis Christi? Ille de quo Isaias dicit: Puer natus est nobis, filius datus est nobis. Ipse enim tibi puer dicit: Tolle crucem tuam, et sequere me. Et ut agnoscas puerum: cum malediceretur, non maledixit; cum percuteretur, non repercussit: haec est enim perfecta virtus. Itaque et in pueritia est venerabilis morum senectus, et in senectute innocens pueritia.» Hinc patet perperam Anabaptistas arcere parvulos a baptismo, ac consequenter a Christo et regno caelorum, eo quod parvuli non utantur ratione, nec possint credere: licet enim actu non credant, habitu tamen credunt, quia in baptismo infunditur eis habitus fidei, gratiae et charitatis; credunt quoque actu in fide Ecclesiae, id est parentum et fidelium Ecclesiae qui crebro actus fidei eliciunt pro se et suis omnibus.
19:15
15. ET CUM IMPOSUISSET EIS MANUS, ABIIT INDE. — Manus Christi erant vivificae et salvificae. Unde Lucas, cap. IV, 40, ait: «At ille singulis (infirmis et aegris) manus imponens, curabat eos.» Ratio est, quia manus est organum organorum: quare divinitas Christi per manus divinam suam vim et gratiam exerebat in eos quos tangebat, salutem eis corporis animique dans, vel in circumcisione aliasve datam adaugens, ac occulta sua virtute eos sanctificans, Deoque offerens et quasi consecrans. Unde non est dubium, hos parvulos a Christo benedictos evasisse in viros sapientes et sanctos, qui deinde Ecclesias erexerunt et fidem Christi propagarunt. Ita Franciscus Lucas.
19:16
16. ET ECCE UNUS ACCEDENS, AIT ILLI: MAGISTER BONE, QUID BONI FACIAM, UT HABEAM VITAM AETERNAM? — «Unus;» S. Hieronymus putat fuisse legisperitum de quo Lucas, X, 25; ideoque tentandi animo ad Christum accessisse. Melius S. Chrysostomus censet hunc alium esse ab illo Lucae, qui candido corde, ut pueris se similem redderet, juxta Christi praeceptum, ab eo animo sincero petiit, qua ratione vitam aeternam parvulis eorumque similibus paulo ante a Christo promissam, consequi posset; unde hic est ille cujus meminit Lucas, XVIII, 18. Id ita esse patet utrumque conferenti. Idipsum magis patebit ex sequentibus, praesertim ex vers. 22, ubi dicitur quod audita Christi doctrina de perfectione: «Si vis perfectus esse, vade, vende quae habes, et da pauperibus,» abierit tristis, eo quod esset dives; quod signum est eum sincero salutis suae animo et studio haec postulavisse a Christo. MAGISTER BONE. — Est haec simplex salutandi et compellandi phrasis Hebraeorum, qua benevolentiam doctoris et prophetae captant, q. d. Rabbi, scio te esse bonum, tum virum, tum doctorem, tum prophetam, qui me et alios optime doceas ea, quae vere bona sunt et ad beatitudinem ducunt. Dic ergo mihi quid boni prae ceteris faciam, ut summum bonum in caelo consequar? Ludit enim in voce «bonum.»
19:17
17. QUI DIXIT EI: QUID ME INTERROGAS DE BONO? — Legit Interpres: Τί με ἐρωτᾷς περὶ ἀγαθοῦ, sic quoque legunt S. Augustinus et S. Hieronymus in Comment.; jam vero legunt: Τί με λέγεις ἀγαθόν, id est quid me dicis, vel vocas bonum? Utramque lectionem ponit Origenes. Causam subdit, dicens: UNUS EST BONUS, DEUS, — scilicet natura sua et per essentiam. Retorquet Christus humiliter laudem et bonitatem suam in Deum, ut nos idem doceat facere: quia hic interrogans non habebat plenam de Christo fidem, nec credebat eum esse Deum. Ad hanc ergo fidem eum quasi objurgando attollere et exstimulare voluit Christus, q. d. Si me vocas bonum, crede me esse Deum; nemo enim per se bonus, nisi Deus. Ita S. Hieronymus, Theophylactus, Euthymius. Porro, Deus solus per essentiam est bonus, quia sicut ipse solus verum, solidum et plenum habet esse (unde ipse ait, Exodi III: «Ego sum qui sum,» q. d. Vos ergo, o angeli et homines, non estis, si mecum comparemini, quia meum esse tantum et tam plenum est, vestrum vero tam exile et diminutum, ut mei respectu potius non esse quam esse videamini), ita pariter solus Deus est bonus, sapiens, potens, justus; quia ab eo omnes angeli et homines participant guttam, vel potius umbram quamdam bonitatis, sapientiae, potentiae, justitiae. Vide dicta Amos VI, 13, et Exodi III, 14. Porro, bonum idem est quod perfectum, et bonitas ejus rei est perfectio. Deum autem perfectum esse pluribus probat S. Dionysius, De Divin. Nomin., cap. XIII. In Deo enim est immensa perfectio tam naturae quam sapientiae, potentiae, sanctitatis et virtutis. Est ergo in eo summa bonitas, tum naturalis, tum moralis, tum supernaturalis. Quocirca ipse est fons omnis bonitatis, in qua omnia creaturarum bona sunt collecta, et infinities meliora quam sint in creaturis. Quare in Deo eminenter est auri decor, gemmarum splendor, deliciarum sapor, musicae harmonia, hortorum amoenitas, et quidquid in creaturis est pulchrum, amabile, jucundum, deliciosum. Hinc a Deo mel haurit suam dulcedinem, sol suos radios, stellae suum lumen, caeli suum decus, angeli suam scientiam, homines suam virtutem, animalia suum sensum, plantae suam vitam, cetera omnia quidquid habent boni, imo totum suum esse a Dei bonitate et essentia, velut guttam e pelago emendicant. In Deo igitur est omne bonum, idque in perfectissimo et immenso gradu; in Deo est omnis amoris illicium, omnis desiderii consummatio, omnis appetitus satietas: cur ergo, o miser homo, per exilia haec bona creata vagaris, ideoque non satiaris? Quaere bonum in quo omne bonum, ama et ambi Deum; hic solus tuam sitim et appetitum plane et plene exsatiabit, tum in hac vita per gratiam, tum magis in futura per gloriam, imo per seipsum; in caelo enim Deus seipsum quasi summum bonum Beatis videndum, gustandum et fruendum exhibet. SI AUTEM VIS AD VITAM INGREDI, SERVA MANDATA. — Calvinus stolide aeque ac impie censet Christum hic per ironiam irridere adolescentem, suis legalibus operibus confisum: nec enim viam in caelum esse observationem mandatorum, utpote homini impossibilem, sed fidem. Quot hic sunt verba, totidem errores sunt et haereses, imo blasphemiae, quae Christi sensui et sententiae ex diametro adversantur, eamque funditus subvertunt. Unde liquet Calvinum agi spiritu non Christi, sed Antichristi. Vide nostros Maldonatum et Adamum Contzen, qui ex professo in Evangelia commentantur ut Calvinum et Novantes confutent: nos ad alia Orthodoxis utiliora pergamus. Docet ergo hic Christus, non solam fidem justificare et salvare, sed et opera bona requiri, quibus legem implendo, mereamur bravium aeternae vitae et gloriae, legem implentibus a Deo promissum. Instat Calvinus: Saltem Christus per mandata Dei hic excludit praecepta et traditiones Ecclesiae, puta Pontificum et Praelatorum. Respondeo ea contineri quarto Dei mandato: «Honora patrem et matrem,» scilicet tam spiritalem, uti sunt Pontifices et Praelati, quam carnalem.
19:18
18. DICIT ILLI: QUAE? JESUS AUTEM DIXIT: NON HOMICIDIUM FACIES, NON ADULTERABIS, NON FALSUM TESTIMONIUM DICES: 19. HONORA PATREM TUUM ET MATREM TUAM, ET DILIGES PROXIMUM TUUM SICUT TE IPSUM. — Syrus, sicut animam tuam. Haec mandata exposui Deuteron. cap. V, vers. 6 et seq. Porro, Christus proponit hic duntaxat praecepta secundae tabulae proximum spectantia, quia in illis includuntur praecepta primae tabulae Deum concernentia. Nam amor Dei producit amorem proximi, hunc enim amamus propter Deum: quare amor proximi manat ex amore Dei. Rursum difficilius est amare proximum quam Deum. Quis enim non amet Deum praesertim religiosus, qualis erat hic juvenis?
19:20
20. DICIT ILLI ADOLESCENS: OMNIA HAEC CUSTODIVI A JUVENTUTE MEA (Syrus et Arabicus, a pueritia mea; q. d. A puero in lege Dei educatus et gratia Dei praeventus, servavi studiose omnia praecepta Dei; rarum hoc est juventutis exemplum): QUID ADHUC MIHI DEEST? — (Syrus, in quo defectuosus sum) boni et bonitatis? ut in ea perficiar et «habeam vitam aeternam,» (uti petiit vers. 16) non quomodocumque, uti habent omnes qui servant praecepta, sed secure et certo ac in magno, imo in primo perfectoque felicitatis et gloriae gradu. Tu enim, o Christe, quasi caelestis virtutis magister, videris illius altiorem prae nostris Scribis tradere semitam et doctrinam: dic ergo mihi quaenam illa sit; ego enim salutis et perfectionis avidus, cupio illam capessere. Porro, S. Hieronymus censet juvenem adolescentem hic esse mentitum: Si enim, inquit, dilexisset proximum suum sicut seipsum, omnia sua vendidisset et dedisset pauperibus. Verum haec ratio non plane convincit; quia diligere proximum sicut seipsum, est praecepti; sed dare omnia sua pauperibus, est consilii. Unde Christus, ait Marcus, intuitus eum dilexit, et consilium hoc de dando sua pauperibus, ut eum ad perfectionem subveheret, suggessit.
19:21
21. AIT ILLI JESUS: SI VIS PERFECTUS ESSE, VADE, VENDE QUAE HABES, ET DA PAUPERIBUS, ET HABEBIS THESAURUM IN COELO, ET VENI, SEQUERE ME. — Est hoc Evangelicum non praeceptum, sed consilium. Unde ait, «si vis,» q. d. Non jubeo, sed consulo et ad summum perfectionis culmen te exstimulo. Ita S. Hieronymus, Augustinus, Hilarius, Chrysostomus et alii passim. Vide S. Augustinum, serm. 61 De Tempore, et cap. XIV De Sancta Virgin., ubi pulchre contra haereticos consilia a praeceptis distinguit. Marcus, cap. X, 21, addit: «Jesus autem intuitus dilexit eum, et dixit ei: Unum tibi deest: vade, quaecumque habes vende, et da pauperibus.» Hanc Christi vocem in missa legi audiens S. Antonius, reliquit omnia, Christumque nudus secutus est, ait S. Athanasius. Idem plane fecit S. Prosper, Regiensis postea episcopus, tempore S. Leonis, ut habet ejus Vita apud Surium die 23 junii. Sic et S. Franciscus. Audi S. Bonaventuram in Vita ejus, cap. III: «Primus, inquit, qui se socium S. Francisci adjunxit fuit Bernardus. Hic enim servi Christi paupertate comperta, ipsius exemplo disponens perfecte contemnere mundum, ab eodem, qualiter id perficeret, requisivit consilium. Quo audito, Dei famulus pro propriae prolis conceptu Sancti Spiritus consolatione repletus: A Deo est, inquit, hoc consilium requirendum. Intraverunt proinde ecclesiam S. Nicolai mane jam dicto; et oratione praemissa, cultor Trinitatis Franciscus ter Evangeliorum librum aperuit, trino a Deo exposcens testimonio sanctum Bernardi propositum confirmari. In prima libri apertione illud occurrit: Si vis perfectus esse, vade et vende omnia quae habes, et da pauperibus. In secunda: Nihil tuleritis in via. In tertia vero: Qui vult venire post me, abneget semetipsum, et tollat crucem suam, et sequatur me. Haec est, ait vir sanctus, vita et regula nostra, omniumque qui nostrae voluerint Societati conjungi. Vade igitur, si vis perfectus esse, et perfice quae audisti.» Merito ergo S. Bernardus in Declamat., sub initium: «Haec sunt verba, ait, quae contemptum mundi in universo mundo et voluntariam hominibus persuasere paupertatem. Prae sunt, quae monachis claustra replent, deserta anachoretis. Haec, inquam, sunt verba, quae Aegyptum spoliant, et optima quaeque ejus vasa diripiunt. Hic sermo vivus et efficax convertens animas, felici aemulatione sanctitatis et veritatis promissione fideli. Dixit enim Simon Petrus ad Jesum: Ecce nos reliquimus omnia.» Quocirca S. Hieronymus hac Christi voce quasi tuba suos passim, et nos omnes ad studium paupertatis exstimulat. Unde, epist. 150 ad Hedibiam: «Vis, inquit, esse perfecta, et in primo stare fastigio dignitatis? fac quod fecerunt Apostoli. Vende quae habes, et da pauperibus, et sequere Salvatorem, et nudam solamque crucem virtute nuda sequaris.» Idem S. Hieronymus, in epist. 8 ad Demetriadem: «Apostolici fastigii est, ait, perfectaeque virtutis, vendere omnia et pauperibus distribuere, et sic levem atque expeditum cum Christo ad caelestia subvolare.» Luculentius idem, epist. 24 ad Julian.: «Et hoc hortor, ait, si vis esse perfectus, si Apostolicae dignitatis culmen cupis, si sublata cruce Christum sequi, si apprehenso aratro non respicere post tergum, si in sublimi tecto positus pristina vestimenta contemnis, et ut evadas Aegyptiam dominam, saeculi pallium derelinquis. Unde et Elias ad caelorum regna festinans, non potest ire cum pallio, sed mundo immunda vestimenta dimittit. Sed hoc, ais, Apostolicae dignitatis est, et ejus qui velit esse perfectus. Cur autem et tu nolis esse perfectus? cur qui in saeculo primus es, non in Christi familia primus sis?» Idemque paulo post: «Quod si teipsum, inquit, Domino dederis, et Apostolica virtute perfectus sequi coeperis Salvatorem, tunc intelliges ubi fueris, et in exercitu Christi quam extremum tenueris locum.» Nota: perfectio Christiana primo et primario consistit in charitate; in paupertate tamen et consiliis Evangelicis a Christo collocatur, tanquam in mediis et instrumentis appositis ad charitatem acquirendam. Vide S. Thomam, II II part., Quaest. CLXXXIV, art. 3. Hanc perfectionem sectantur omnes religiosi, qui omnia bona abdicant, ut nudum Christum nudi sequantur: non tamen omnes initio statim perfectionem hanc adipiscuntur, sed sensim eo tendunt et assidue proficiendo tandem ad eam perveniunt. Hinc sapienter Climacus, Gradu 26, tres eorum gradus constituit, scilicet incipientium, proficientium et perfectorum. Incipientibus hoc alphabetum 24 non litterarum, sed virtutum, ediscendum mentique imprimendum tradit: «Optimum, inquit, omnium elementorum alphabetum hoc est, obedientia, jejunium, cilicium, cinis, lacrymae, confessio, silentium, humilitas, vigiliae, fortitudo, frigus, labor seu fatigatio, aerumna, contemptus, contritio, injuriarum oblivio, fraterna charitas, lenitas, fides simplex et incuriosa, mundi neglectus, parentum odium minime odiosum, liber ab omnibus rebus affectus, simplicitas cum innocentia conjuncta, voluntaria vilitas.» Proficientibus deinde haec majorum virtutum dogmata assignat: «Proficientium vero sors et ratio est, de inani gloria et iracundia victoria, bona spes salutis, quies animi, discretio, firma et fixa judicii extremi memoria, misericordia, hospitalitas, modesta objurgatio, oratio omni vitioso carens affectu.» Perfectis denique hos plenae sanctitatis apices tradit: «Cor ab omni captivitate liberum, perfecta charitas, fons humilitatis, mentis e mundi vanitate emigratio, Christi immigratio, pacis et orationis divinae thesaurus a praedonibus securus, illustrationis divinae copia, mortis desiderium, odium vitae, corporis fuga.» Addit deinde virum perfectum adeo sanctum Deoque gratum esse debere, ut sit «legatus seu patronus et advocatus mundi, qui Deum quodammodo cogere possit; Angelorum collega et symmystes, profundissima scientiae altitudo, caelestium mysteriorum domicilium, custos divinorum arcanorum, sive Deo ab secretis, hominum salus, daemonum Deus, vitiorum dominus, imperator corporis.» VADE, VENDE OMNIA. — Quaeres, cur paupertas est propria via et instrumentum perfectionis Evangelicae? Respondet S. Bonaventura in Apologia pauperum, quia radix omnium malorum est cupiditas: haec igitur est fundamentum civitatis Babylonicae, ex ea enim nascitur ambitio, gula caeteraque vitia: hanc cupiditatem Christus succidit per paupertatem; paupertas ergo primo succidit et tollit opes, honores, delicias, quae sunt materia et fomes omnium vitiorum. Deliciae enim effeminant animos, et mulieres decent, non viros. Virile ergo robur abhorret a deliciis. Secundo, paupertas parit humilitatem, quae est fundamentum sanctitatis. Unde S. Franciscus, ait S. Bonaventura, rogatus a suis quaenam virtus nos maxime Christo Domino commendaret gratosque faceret, insolito quodam affectu respondit: Paupertas; ea enim est via salutis, humilitatis fons, perfectionis radix, et ab ea multiplices fructus existunt, licet occulti et paucissimis cogniti. Tertio, pauper spiritu, cum non habeat alias curas, totus studet virtutibus congerendis, quasi apis melli suo. Ita S. Antonius ab opum cupiditate liber, insatiabile habebat desiderium virtutum, ideoque ab hoc discebat patientiam, ab illo silentium, ab alio abstinentiam, ab alio constantiam, orationem, etc. Hinc prisci religiosi pauperes vocabantur ascetae, id est exercitatores, quia toti erant in edomanda ira, gula aliisque passionibus, in exercitatione arduarum et heroicarum virtutum: unde aliqui biduo, alii triduo semel tantum sumere cibum assuescebant; alii vix dormire, ut illi qui versabantur in monasterio Acoemetarum, id est vigilantium, non dormientium. Quarto, quia perfectio consistit in charitate Dei et proximi; ad hanc autem dirigit paupertas: tollit enim meum et tuum, ex quo omnes lites et bella oriuntur inter proximos, ait Chrysostomus; eadem avellit animum ab omni cura et amore rerum terrenarum, itaque eum totum in Deo defigit; quod enim ait de conjugato Apostolus, I Corinth. VII: «Qui cum uxore est, cogitat quae mundi sunt, quomodo placeat uxori, et divisus est;» hoc congruit et diviti. Hic enim divisus est, dividit enim curas et cogitationes inter Deum et mammonam, sive opes suas. Paupertas ergo facit hominem superiorem mundo et carne, quasi angelum versantem cum Angelis, suspirantem ad caelum, facitque illud Apostoli: «Quae sursum sunt sapite, non quae super terram,» ut totam mentem, amorem, cogitationem, curam transferat in Deum fiatque cum eo quasi unus spiritus. Perfectio igitur consistit in eo, ut mens plane avellatur a rebus caducis et figatur in bono aeterno, id est Deo, quod praestat paupertas. Dices: Ad hoc sufficit relinquere omnia affectu, non reipsa et effectu, uti fecit Abraham. Respondeo cum S. Hieronymo Contra Vigilant.: Iste unus est gradus paupertatis, sed inferior; nam summus est, relinquere etiam effectu, tum quia hic dat totum, puta affectum et effectum; tum quia non potest plane affectu relinquere, nisi et effectu. Sicut enim qui cubans in lecto vel sedens in sede, si quis secreto eum sedi alliget, nescit se ligatum donec surgat: ita qui habent opes, occultum habent affectum quo eis colligantur, quem non sentiunt, nisi dum illas perdunt vel relinquunt. Ita S. Gregorius, epist. ante lib. Moral., se in saeculo deceptum esse narrat: «Aperiebatur, ait, mihi jam tunc de aeternitatis amore quod quaererem, sed inolita consuetudo me devinxerat, ne exteriorem cultum mutarem. Cumque adhuc me cogeret animus praesenti mundo quasi specie tenus deservire, coeperunt multa contra me ex ejusdem mundi cura succrescere, ut in eo non jam specie, sed, quod est gravius, mente retinerer.» Vide Hieronymum Platum, lib. III De Bono status relig., cap. XXII. Vide ea quae annotavi Actor. IV, 32. VADE, VENDE QUAE HABES. — Hinc Pelagiani docebant nullum divitem posse salvari, nisi sua divenderet daretque pauperibus, ac fieret pauper: contra quos scribit S. Augustinus, epist. 89 ad Hilarium, docens hoc esse consilium, non praeceptum: unde hunc suum errorem revocare coactus est Pelagius, teste S. Augustino, epist. ad Paulinum. Exstant tres libelli nuper recusi nomine S. Sixti Pontificis. Primus est de divitiis, quo ex hoc loco probat fidelem non posse salvari, nisi eas relinquat, et fiat pauper. Secundus, de operibus fidei, in quo docet ea requiri ad salutem; sed esse opera liberi arbitrii, non gratiae Dei. Tertius, de castitate, in quo asserit castitatem esse opus liberi arbitrii, non donum Dei. Ex quibus liquet auctorem hujus libri non fuisse S. Sixtum, sed Pelagianum, quemquam, uti recte adverterunt Doctores Lovanienses, Lindanus, Baronius, Possevinus, et Parisienses in tomo V Biblioth. SS. Patrum, ubi hos libellos inseruerunt cum censura jam dicta. «Vende quae habes, et da pauperibus.» Marcus, X, 16, et Lucas, XVIII, 22, addunt: «Omnia quaecumque habes vende, et da pauperibus.» Unde hic arguitur error Vigilantii et Calvini, qui docent melius et perfectius esse suas opes retinere et uti, ac pro loco et tempore dare eleemosynas, quam simul omnia relinquere, quem confutat S. Hieronymus, lib. Contra Vigilant. Nam, ut ait S. Anselmus: «Plus est dare arborem cum fructibus, quam solos fructus.» Rursum asceta, qui partem opum suarum dat pauperibus, partem vero sibi retinet, nec piscis est, nec caro, id est nec renuntians saeculo, nec saecularis, sed amphibium quid. Unde S. Basilius cuidam capessenti vitam religiosam, sed quaedam sibi reservanti dixit: «Senatorem perdidisti, et monachum non fecisti,» teste Cassiano et aliis. Ad haec talis non plene fidit Deo, sed partim Deo, partim opibus quas sibi reservat. Unde non vere et plene est pauper spiritu, nec se liberat cura, distractione et tentatione quam ingerere solent divitiae. Qua de causa S. Antonius cuidam sic saeculo renuntiare volenti, ut aliqua in tempus necessitatis sibi reservaret, jussit ut nudo corpori suo carnes a se emptas imponeret, quod cum ille fecisset, certatim canes et aves ad carnem hanc rapiendam accurrentes, totum ejus corpus lacerarunt. Tunc Antonius: «Qui non renuntiant omnibus, sic, inquit, lacerantur a daemonibus,» uti refert Ruffinus in Vitis Patrum, lib. III, num. 68. Quocirca S. Hilarion, teste S. Hieronymo in ejus Vita, opes sibi ab Orione, a quo legionem daemonum expulerat, oblatas, ut eas in pauperes distribueret, respuens: «Multis, inquit, nomen pauperum occasio avaritiae est, misericordia vero artem non habet: nemo melius erogat, quam qui sibi nihil reservat.» Nam, ut sapienter in simili re ait S. Leo, serm. 12 De Quadragesima: «Per licitos usus ad immoderatos transitur excessus, dum per curam salutis irrepit delectatio voluptatis, et non sufficit concupiscentiae, quod potest satis esse naturae.» Rationem a priori dat S. Gregorius, hom. 20 in Ezechiel., longius ante finem: «Cum enim, inquit, quis suum aliquid Deo vovet, et aliquid non vovet, sacrificium est. Cum vero omne quod habet, omne quod vivit, omne quod sapit, omnipotenti Deo voverit, holocaustum est. Nam sunt quidam, qui adhuc mente in hoc saeculo retinentur, et tamen ex possessis rebus subsidia egentibus ministrant, oppressos defendere festinant: isti in bonis quae faciunt sacrificium offerunt, quia et aliquid de actione sua Deo immolant, et aliquid sibimetipsis reservant. Et sunt quidam qui nihil sibimetipsis reservant, sed sensum, vitam, linguam atque substantiam quam perceperunt, omnipotenti Domino immolant. Quid isti nisi holocaustum offerunt? imo magis holocaustum fiunt.» Idem docent S. Augustinus, Diadochus, Cassianus et alii, quos citat noster Hieronymus Platus, lib. III De Bono status relig., cap. II, et S. Thomas II II part., Quaest. LXXXVI, art. 3. DA PAUPERIBUS. — Non dicit Christus, da cognatis, vel amicis divitibus, ait Remigius, hic enim est actus amoris naturalis et parentelae, quo a te opes non abdicas, sed tuis quasi asservandas tradis: quare sic saeculum non relinquis, sed illi te magis immergis. Excipe, nisi cognati pro sua conditione et statu iis indigeant; tunc enim in suo gradu censentur pauperes. Sed «da pauperibus,» a quibus nil retributionis expectas, sed a solo Deo: quare hic est actus purus eleemosynae, aeque ac paupertatis et abdicationis opum. Addit Origenes: Qui pauperibus, inquit, tradidit bona sua, ipsorum orationibus adjuvatur. Quocirca S. Hieronymus, S. Paulino, postea Nolae episcopo, saeculo renuntiare volenti ita praecipit, epist. 13: «Tu considera, ne Christi substantiam imprudenter effundas, id est, ne immoderato judicio rem pauperum tribuas non pauperibus, et secundum dictum prudentissimi viri, liberalitate pereat. Noli respicere ad phaleras, et nomina vana Catonum. Quid tibi cum splendore familiae, qui saeculi pompis renuntiasti?» ET HABEBIS THESAURUM IN COELO. — «In thesauro, ait S. Chrysostomus, copia et permanentia retributionis ostenditur.» Et S. Hilarius: «Jactura substantiae terrenae, ait, caelorum opes emuntur.» Praeclare S. Augustinus, serm. 28 De Verbis Apostoli: «Felicitas, inquit, magna Christianorum, quibus datum est, ut paupertatem faciant pretium regni caelorum. Non tibi displiceat paupertas tua: nihil ea potest ditius inveniri. Vis nosse quam locuples sit? caelum emit. Quibus thesauris conferri possit quod videmus paupertati indultum? Ut ad regnum caelorum veniret dives possessione sua obtinere non potest, nunc obtinet ut contempta perveniat.» Vende ergo caenum, et eme caelum; da obolum, et compara thesaurum. ET VENI, SEQUERE ME, — in paupertate peregrinantem et evangelizantem regnum Dei: «Multi enim, ait S. Hieronymus, etiam divitias relinquentes Dominum non sequuntur, nec hoc ad perfectionem sufficit, nisi post contemptas divitias Salvatorem sequantur, id est, relictis malis, faciant bona. Facilius enim sacculus contemnitur, quam voluntas. Et ideo sequitur: Et veni, sequere me.» Idem S. Hieronymus ad Rusticum: «Christum nudum, inquit, nudus sequere.» Rursum «sequere me,» ut vitam activam jungas contemplativae. Triplex enim est vitae sanctae genus: primum et imum est vita activa; secundum est vita contemplativa; tertium et perfectissimum est jungere actionem contemplationi, ut quod in contemplatione a Deo hausimus, id deinde doceamus alios. Talem enim vitam egit Christus et Apostoli. Ita S. Thomas, II II p., Quaest. CLXXXVI, art. 6. Causam dat S. Ambrosius in explicatione tituli Psal. XXXVIII: «Christus, inquit, est finis omnium quae pia mente deposcimus. Sive enim sapientiam quaeras, sive virtuti studeas, sive veritati, sive viae atque justitiae, sive resurrectioni, in omnibus tibi sequendus est Christus, qui est virtus Dei atque sapientia, veritas, via, justitia, resurrectio. Ad quem igitur contendas, nisi ad perfectionem omnium summamque virtutem? Et ideo tibi dicit: Veni, sequere me, hoc est, ut ad consummationem virtutum pervenire merearis. Ergo qui sequitur Christum, ipsum pro possibilitate sua debet imitari, ut praecepta ejus secum ipse meditetur et divinorum exempla factorum.» Nota, hoc capite Christus proponit tria praecipua consilia Evangelica, scilicet caelibatus et continentiae, vers. 12, paupertatis, vers. 21, dicens: «Vende quae habes, et da pauperibus;» obedientiae, cum ait: «Sequere me,» id est mihi meoque instituto obedi teque accommoda, ac meam obedientiam ad mortem usque imitare.
19:22
22. CUM AUDISSET AUTEM ADOLESCENS VERBUM, ABIIT TRISTIS: ERAT ENIM HABENS MULTAS POSSESSIONES. — Sapienter S. Augustinus, epist. 43 ad Paulinum et Therasiam: «Nescio, ait, quomodo cum superflua terrena diliguntur, arctius adepta, quam concupita constringunt. Nam unde juvenis iste tristis discessit, nisi quia magnas habebat divitias? Aliud est enim nolle incorporare quae desunt, aliud jam incorporata divellere. Illa enim velut extranea repudiantur: ista velut membra praeciduntur.» Porro, in Evangelio S. Matthaei secundum Hebraeos, quod citat Origenes, plura hic adduntur: sic enim habet: «Dixit ad eum alter divitum: Magister, quid bonum faciens vivam? Dixit ei: Homo, leges et prophetas fac. Respondit ad eum: Feci. Dixit ei: Vade, vende omnia quae possides, et divide pauperibus, et veni, sequere me. Caepit autem dives scalpere caput suum, et non placuit ei. Et dixit ad eum Dominus: Quomodo dicis, legem feci et prophetas? Quoniam scriptum est in lege: Diliges proximum tuum sicut teipsum, et ecce multi fratres tui filii Abrahae amicti sunt stercore, morientes prae fame, et domus tua plena est multis bonis, et non egreditur ex ea omnino aliquid ad eos. Et conversus, dixit Simoni discipulo suo sedenti apud se: Simon, fili Jonae, facilius est camelum intrare per foramen acus, quam divitem in regnum caelorum.»
19:23
23. JESUS AUTEM (occasione accepta ex tristitia adolescentis divitis) DIXIT DISCIPULIS SUIS: AMEN DICO VOBIS: QUIA DIVES DIFFICILE INTRABIT IN REGNUM COELORUM; — tum quia cupido divitiarum facit eas coacervari per fas et nefas; tum quia eadem ita mentem auro alligat, ut nequeat cogitare de caelo; tum quia divitiae sunt materia et stimulus ad superbiam, gulam, luxuriam omniaque scelera, juxta illud: Effodiuntur opes, irritamenta malorum. Audi S. Augustinum, serm. 28 De Verbis Apostoli: «Aurum, quod Pruina perquirit, quod avaritia cupit, quod sollicitudo custodit; aurum materia laborum, periculosa res possidentium; aurum enervatio virtutum, aurum malus dominus, proditor servus, etc.; aurum, quod in perniciem domini fulget; aurum, cujus inquisitio damnatos habet, cujus amor Judam facit,» etc. Denique avaritia est idolorum servitus, Coloss. cap. III. Paupertas ergo opumque contemptus pandit caelum, quod opulentia et cupiditas occludunt.
19:24
24. ET ITERUM DICO VOBIS, FACILIUS EST CAMELUM PER FORAMEN ACUS (Arabicus: Ingressio cameli in foramen acus facilior est) TRANSIRE, QUAM DIVITEM INTRARE IN REGNUM COELORUM. — «Et iterum,» Graece πάλιν δὲ, id est iterum autem. Christus enim adaugendo quasi corrigit id quod dixit, q. d. Dixi, difficile esse divitem salvari, nunc addo, quod amplius est, facilius esse camelum per foramen acus transire, quam divitem in caelum intrare. Per «divitem» Remigius accipit confidentem in divitiis, qui in iis omnem spem suam collocat, quod multi divites faciunt. Simplicius tamen quemlibet divitem accipias. Quaeres quis sit hic camelus, et quomodo possit per foramen acus transire? Aliqui apud Theophylactum in graeco per camelum intelligunt funem nauticum, qui graece dicitur κάμιλος, id est camelus. Alii cum Glossa intelligunt portam Hierosolymitanam, quae, quia erat valde humilis et demissa, dicta sit camelus, eo quod ingredienti per eam opus fuerit sese demittere et curvare instar cameli. Verum dico intelligi hoc animal gibbosum et altum, quod vulgo camelus dicitur. Ita Syrus, Arabicus, Origenes, S. Hilarius, Hieronymus, Chrysostomus et alii passim. Ubi nota apud Judaeos hoc fuisse proverbium, ut volentes significare rem esse impossibilem, dicerent: Facilius transibit camelus per foramen acus, quam ista res fiat. Unde hoc proverbio utuntur etiamnum Thalmudistae, teste Caninio in Nom. Hebr. novi Testamenti. Similia proverbia significantia rem esse impossibilem sunt haec: facilius testudo leporem praeverterit: prius lupus ovem ducat uxorem: citius locusta bovem pariet: aquilam testudo vincet: terra volat: sursum flumina: citius elephantem sub ala celes: prius sine pennis volabis: scarabeus citius faciet mel: prius caelum ruat: mare facilius vitem tulerit, salsedo enim frugibus adversa est, sed vitibus inimicissima: citius mulieri verba deerunt: facilius ventos pasces. Porro hic est hyperbole; impossibile enim dicitur id quod est valde difficile: unde divitem salvari, quod hic Christus ait esse impossibile, versu praecedenti dixit esse difficile. Ita S. Hieronymus: «Non, inquit, impossibilitas praetenditur, sed raritas demonstratur.» Ita quoque Jansenius, Maldonatus et alii. Sic, vers. 12, dixit: «Qui potest capere, capiat,» significans nonnullos non posse capere, id est difficulter capere consilium caelibatus. Et Jeremias, XIII, 23, ait: «Si mutare potest Aethiops pellem suam, aut pardus varietates suas; et vos poteritis benefacere, cum didiceritis malum,» et tamen hoc fieri potest, sed aegre et difficulter. Sic impossibile, id est difficile est divitem salvari, aeque ac camelum per foramen acus transire: absolute tamen id fieri potest, si, v. g., camelus in minutissimas partes et quasi atomos concidatur, quorum singuli per foramen acus sensim, sed lente et operose traducantur; aut si acus quaepiam fiat tam magna et crassa, ut sit instar turris et pyramidis; tunc enim foramen in ea tantum fieri potest, ut per illud transeat integer camelus. Denique Emmanuel Sa foramen acus exponit, quod habet acus, aut quod facit acus; potest enim ipsa sensim facere ingens et magnum foramen. Rursum impossibile hic proprie capias; nam divitem salvari impossibile est apud homines, Deo autem est possibile, ut ait Christus, vers. 26, quia scilicet id viribus naturae est impossibile, sed viribus gratiae a Deo datis est possibile, aeque ac camelum per foramen acus transire; hoc enim Deo esse possibile patet ex simili, scilicet ex quantitate corporis Christi, quae in Eucharistia est tota in parva hostia, imo in quolibet ejus puncto: si enim Deus potest corpus Christi totum ponere in puncto hostiae consecratae; ergo potest camelum per foramen acus traducere. Illustratur id exemplo circuli; nam a quolibet circuli puncto possunt lineae rectae et diametrales duci ad centrum, sive medium circuli punctum. Centrum igitur continet in se, et terminando excipit omnes hasce lineas: ergo ipsum solum respondet, et quasi aequatur omnibus circuli punctis, a quibus lineae ducuntur ad centrum; et consequenter respondet, et quasi adaequatur ipsi toti circulo ejusque peripheriae: simili enim modo punctum hostiae in Eucharistia capit omnes lineas corporis Christi, omnemque ejus quantitatem et peripheriam. Apposite vero et eleganter, ait Franciscus Lucas, dives turgens ac tumens opibus, cujus dorso longae lataeque divitiarum sarcinae incumbunt, quae frequenter oneri sunt ipsi magis quam usui, ut quas bajulet aliis potius quam sibi, camelo comparatur; et angusta porta, qua intratur ad vitam, foramini acus, ut intelligas eos quibus divitiae affluunt, superbia fastuque magis turgere, quam ut se ad angustias, in quibus Deus continet suos, redigi sinant. Plures cameli et divitis analogias recensui Eccli. XIII, 11. Hac ergo cameli et acus similitudine significat Christus, opes diviti non tam commodo esse, quam oneri et impedimento ad virtutem et ad regnum caelorum; quare sapienter se adolescenti consilium dedisse, ut eas daret pauperibus, et se pauperem pauper sequeretur. Hinc, Mystice: camelos, id est divites hosce opibus tumidos et superbos, per gratiam Christi deposito superbiae gibbo, ingressuros in Ecclesiam quasi per foramen acus, id est per angustias humilitatis et legis Evangelicae, praedixit Isaias, LX, 6, dicens: «Inundatio camelorum operiet te, dromedarii Madian et Epha.» Ita S. Hieronymus, Theophylactus, Procopius ibidem. Audi S. Hieronymum: «Talis fuit sanctae memoriae mater tua, Paula, fraterque Pammachius, qui per foramen acus, id est arctam angustamque viam, quae ducit ad vitam, transierunt, latamque viam cum sarcinis relinquentes, quae ducit ad tartarum, quidquid habebant, in Domini dona portarunt, implentes illud: Redemptio viri propriae divitiae; quae enim apud homines impossibilia, apud Deum possibilia sunt.» Allegorice: S. Augustinus, lib. II Quaest. Evang., cap. XLVII, et S. Gregorius, lib. XXXV Moral., cap. XVI, per camelum accipiunt Christum; per acum, passionem, q. d. Facilius est Christum pati pro dilectoribus saeculi, quam dilectores saeculi ad Christum posse converti. Audi S. Gregorium: «Camelus per foramen acus transit, cum Redemptor noster usque ad susceptionem mortis per angustias passionis intravit, quae passio velut acus extitit, quia dolore corpus pupugit: facilius autem camelus foramen acus, quam dives regnum caelorum ingreditur, quia nisi ipse prius per passionem suam formam nobis humilitatis ostenderet, nequaquam se ad humilitatem superba nostra rigiditas inclinaret.» Symbolice et anagogice: Auctor Imperfecti apud S. Chrysostomum, homil. 33: «Gentium animae, inquit, assimilatae sunt tortuosis camelis, in quibus erat gibbus idololatriae: quia cognitio Dei erectio est animarum. Acus autem est Filius Dei, cujus prima pars subtilis est secundum divinitatem, alia vero crassior secundum incarnationem ejus. Tota autem recta est, et nullam habet deflexionem, per cujus vulnus passionis Gentes ingressae sunt in vitam aeternam. Hac acu consuta est immortalitatis tunica; ipsa est acus, quae spiritui consuit carnem. Haec acus Judaicum populum junxit et Gentium; haec acus amicitiam Angelorum et hominum copulavit. Facilius est ergo Gentiles transire per foramen acus, quam divites Judaeos intrare in regnum caelorum.»
19:25
25. AUDITIS AUTEM HIS, DISCIPULI MIRABANTUR VALDE, DICENTES: QUIS ERGO POTERIT SALVUS ESSE? — Quia pauci, et vix ulli tunc erant, qui non cuperent esse divites: omnes enim inhiabant lucro, uti et nunc multi inhiant. Nam, ut ait S. Augustinus in Quaest. Evang. hic: «Omnes qui divitias cupiunt, in divitum numero habentur.»
19:26
26. ASPICIENS AUTEM JESUS, DIXIT ILLIS: APUD HOMINES HOC IMPOSSIBILE EST, APUD DEUM AUTEM OMNIA POSSIBILIA SUNT, — imo facilia. Graece ἐπιβλέψας, id est intuitus; addit Syrus eos, scilicet discipulos, q. d. Jesus benigno suo intuitu aspiciens Apostolos, timidam et anxiam discipulorum mentem mitigavit et pacavit: ita Chrysostomus. «Apud homines,» q. d. Humanis naturae viribus impossibile est diviti, opibus suis intricato, salutem consequi, eo quod salus haec sit beatitudo supernaturalis, quam proinde sine similibus supernaturalibus gratiae viribus consequi non possumus. Deo autem omnia possibilia sunt, quia Deus est auctor et fons uti naturae, sic et gratiae ac gloriae, facitque ut per gratiam omnes naturae difficultates et remoras generose et facile superemus, et, quod ad rem praesentem pertinet, facit ut divites divitiis suis non afficiantur, iisque recte utantur, imo ut non pauci iis relictis ambiant et sequantur Evangelicam Christi paupertatem: hoc enim fecere primi omnes Christiani, quia omnia habebant communia, ut patet Actor. IV, 32.
19:27
27. TUNC RESPONDENS PETRUS, DIXIT EI: ECCE NOS RELIQUIMUS OMNIA, ET SECUTI SUMUS TE: QUID ERGO ERIT NOBIS? — Arabicus: Quid ergo prope erit ut sit nobis? «Quid,» scilicet praemii in caelo, et gloriae in vita aeterna. Petrus sequens consilium paupertatis Christi, quod adolescens spreverat, animosior factus animat Apostolos, quod ipsi fere soli secuti sint consilium paupertatis datum a Christo; ac, ut magis eos exhilaret, rogat, quae et quanta eum ceterosque Apostolos Christum pauperem sequentes in evangelizando regno caelorum, merces et gloria in eo maneat, ut in proposito sancto se et socios confirmet, promoveat et accendat. RELIQUIMUS OMNIA, — quae habebamus, scilicet navim et retia, quibus piscando victum quaerebamus, quae, licet in se pauca et parva forent, tamen, ut ait S. Gregorius, homil. 5 in Evang., et ex eo S. Bernardus, tract. in haec Christi verba: «Multum deseruit, qui voluntatem habendi derelinquit: a sequentibus Christum tanta relicta sunt, quanta a non sequentibus desiderari potuerunt.» Pauper enim spiritu, licet censu sit inops, tamen sensu est dives, quia amore Christi omnia quae habere, sperare et consequi posset per omnem vitam in mundo, imo totum mundum et omnia quae in eo sunt, reliquit, ut totum se tradat Deo, qui est actus heroicus paupertatis aeque ac charitatis et religionis, qua homo se totum Deo in holocaustum offert, imo fit ipse animatum et juge Dei holocaustum. Audi S. Augustinum in Psal. CIII, conc. 3: «Petrus non solum dimisit quidquid habebat, sed etiam quidquid habere cupiebat. Quis autem pauper non turgescit in spe saeculi hujus? quis non quotidie cupit augere quod habet? Ista cupiditas praecisa est. Ibat in immensum, accepit modum; et nihil dimissum est? Prorsus totum mundum dimisit Petrus, et totum mundum Petrus accepit. Quasi nihil habentes, et omnia possidentes.»
19:28
28. JESUS AUTEM DIXIT ILLIS: AMEN DICO VOBIS, QUOD VOS QUI SECUTI ESTIS ME, IN REGENERATIONE, CUM SEDERIT FILIUS HOMINIS IN SEDE MAJESTATIS SUAE, SEDEBITIS ET VOS SUPER SEDES DUODECIM, JUDICANTES DUODECIM TRIBUS ISRAEL. — «In regeneratione,» id est in baptismo: hic enim est regeneratio spiritualis, qua morientes peccatis, nascimur vitae spirituali, caelesti et divinae. Ita S. Hilarius, q. d. Vos, qui secuti estis me per regenerationem baptismi, sedebitis mecum quasi judices duodecim tribuum Israel. Verum omnes alii passim per regenerationem accipiunt resurrectionem communem futuram in die judicii: hanc enim, quia corporis totiusque hominis, aeque ac mundi erit renovatio, et quasi secunda ad gloriam generatio, hinc recte hic et alibi regeneratio vocatur. Unde Syrus vertit, in saeculo novo; Arabicus, in generatione ventura; tunc enim erit novum caelum et nova terra, Isaiae LXV, 17; Apocal. XXI, 1, et II Petri III, 13. CUM SEDERIT FILIUS HOMINIS IN SEDE MAJESTATIS SUAE. — Arabicus, gloriae suae. S. Chrysostomus, Theophylactus et Euthymius per sessionem censent significari potestatem judiciariam. Judicum enim est sedere, ut sedate et tranquille, sine perturbatione et praecipitatione judicent. Hoc verum est, sed insuper «sederit» et «sedebitis,» significat proprie Christum in judicio sessurum, et cum eo Apostolos eorumque similes, idque in thronis nubium aereis et splendidissimis, sed quemque juxta suum meritum et dignitatem. Unde sacra Scriptura passim Christo judicaturo sedem et sessionem tribuit; sessio enim est communis apud omnes gentes, et quasi naturalis judicum situs. Ita Maldonatus, licet id neget Jansenius et nonnulli, qui censent corporis gloriosi, quale habet Christus, proprium situm esse stare potius quam sedere. Verum uterque hic glorioso competit, scilicet stare ad pugnandum, et sedere ad judicandum. SEDEBITIS ET VOS SUPER SEDES DUODECIM. — Richardus de S. Victore, tract. De Potestate judiciaria, Maldonatus et nonnulli alii putant haec a Christo solis promitti duodecim Apostolis, quia illi primi fuerunt Christi asseclae, q. d. Quisque vestrum duodecim suam sedem in judicio habebit, etiam Judas, ait Chrysostomus, si in sua vocatione persistat. Verum melius alii passim censent haec promitti etiam Apostolorum sequacibus et posteris, puta Religiosis, qui omnia relinquentes, Christum et Apostolos regnum Dei evangelizantes proxime sequentur. Ponitur ergo hic numerus definitus pro indefinito, scilicet duodecim pro omnibus; Christus enim loquitur duodecim Apostolis, sed ita ut in eis eorum asseclas alloquatur: qui enim parem suscipiunt cum Apostolis laborem, parem cum eis merentur honorem. Christus ergo sedes hasce judiciarias promittit iis qui relinquunt omnia, et ipsum evangelizantem sequuntur. Hoc autem faciunt Religiosi, praesertim qui animarum lucro se dedicant. Unde S. Bernardus, sermone De Ingrat.: «Apostolicam, ait, omnes nos vitam professi sumus.» Hinc Nazianzenus, oratione I in Julianum, ostendit monachorum esse sedere super thronos. Idem diserte docent Origenes hic, tract. 8; S. Augustinus, lib. XX Civit., cap. V; Cyrillus in cap. LX Isaiae; S. Hieronymus, epist. 28; S. Gregorius, lib. X Moral., cap. XVII; S. Anselmus, epist. 10; Abulensis hic, Quaest. CCV; S. Bernardus in illud: «Ecce nos reliquimus omnia.» Probat id S. Augustinus, in Psal. LXXXVI: «Nam si duodecim tantum sellae ibi futurae sunt, non erit ubi sedeat tertius decimus Paulus Apostolus; et non erit quomodo judicet, qui tamen judicaturum se dixit non homines modo, sed et Angelos. Non solum ergo, inquit, illi duodecim et Apostolus Paulus, sed quotquot judicaturi sunt, propter significationem universitatis ad sedes duodecim pertinent.» Et S. Bernardus, serm. De S. Benedicto: «Justa prorsus, inquit, retributio, ut qui hic pro Christo humanae gloriae celsitudinis neglexerunt, illic a Christo judices glorificati singulariter cum eo assideant. Nemo autem putet duodecim tantum apostolos, quia pro Juda praevaricante, Matthias electus est, tunc esse judicaturos, sicut nec duodecim solae sunt tribus Israel judicandae, alioquin tribus Levi, quae tertia decima est, injudicata recedet; et Paulus, qui tertius decimus est Apostolus, judicandi sorte privabitur, cum ipse dicat: Nescitis, quia Angelos judicabimus? Sciendum namque est omnes, qui ad exemplum Apostolorum sua reliquerunt omnia, et secuti sunt Christum, judices cum eis venturos, sicut etiam omne mortalium genus esse judicandum: quia enim duodenario saepe numero solet in Scripturis universitas designari, per duodecim sedes Apostolorum omnium universitas judicantium, et per duodecim tribus Israel universitas eorum qui judicandi sunt, ostenditur.» Idem fuse demonstrat S. Thomas, tract. Contra retrahentes a Religione, cap. VI et VII, ubi docet hanc sessionem promissam esse paupertati Evangelicae, indeque evincit, quam sublimis grataque Deo sit haec paupertas, utpote quae prae aliis virtutibus hoc judiciariae potestatis culmen et thronum mereatur. Causam dat S. Gregorius, lib. XXVI Moral., XX, ubi interpretans illud Job, XXXVI: Judicium pauperibus tribuit: «Quia, inquit, quanto huic mundo magna humilitate despecti sunt, tanto tunc acceptis sedibus majore culmine potestatis excrescunt.» Dignum enim est primo, ut Religiosi, qui superiores mundo vixerunt, de mundo judicent; secundo, ut qui in mundo quasi aquilae aspectu caelestium bonorum et despectu terrestrium ceteros transcenderunt, ceterorum sint judices et principes; tertio, ut qui doctores fuerunt mundi, mundum examinent et judicent, an juxta hanc suam doctrinam vixerit; quarto, ut qui fatui judicati sunt a mundo, mundum fatuum judicent, eumque fatuitatis arguant et condemnent, Sap. V, 4. Quocirca merito horum excellentiam admirans exclamat S. Bernardus, serm. 8 in Psal. Qui habitat: «O familiaritatis gratiam, o honoris culmen, o fiduciae privilegium, o praerogativam securitatis perfectae! Quid enim tam pavendum, quid tam plenum anxietatis et vehementissimae sollicitudinis excogitari potest, quam judicandum adstare illi tam terrifico tribunali, et incertam adhuc expectare sub tam districto judice sententiam?» Et mox: «Felix plane, quae tam securos, imo gloriosos faciat in illo singulari fragore elementorum, in illo tremendo examine meritorum, in illo tanto discrimine judiciorum.» Porro, gloriosa haec sessio judiciaria coram toto mundo, imo de toto mundo a Christo promittitur singulis illis qui, relictis omnibus, Christum pauperem pauperes ferventi et perfecta (ita S. Augustinus et Gregorius jam citati: unde ex eis S. Antonius et Franciscus Suarez, III part., Quaest. LIX, disp. LVII, sect. 4, negant hoc praemium dandum Religiosis imperfectis, sed tantum perfectis, idque merito) imitatione secuti fuerint, ejusque Evangelium et regnum propagaverint. Cum enim, ut ait S. Bernardus in illud: Ecce nos reliquimus omnia, «in paupertate duo insint incommoda, primum humilitas, et deinde etiam multorum laborum perpessio, merito hoc esse a Domino institutum, ut pro laboribus sessio, pro contemptu celsitudo tantae potestatis redderetur.» Vox ergo «sedebitis» significat primo, pauperum Evangelicorum securitatem; secundo, munus judicandi; tertio, dignitatem et eminentiam prae ceteris; quarto, locum Christo proximum, summamque cum eo conjunctionem; quinto, principatum gratiae, felicitatis et gloriae, utpote qui quasi principes regni caelorum jus habeant judicandi ceteros, ac dignos in illud admittendi, et indignos ab eo excludendi. Tropologice: Auctor Imperfecti per hanc sessionem et potestatem judiciariam censet promitti iis qui relinquunt omnia, et sequuntur Christum, dominium cordium, ut scilicet dominentur cordibus mentibusque hominum, in iisque collocent thronum et regnum Christi, in quo ipsi sedeant, ut quasi reges cordibus hominum imperent, illaque per omnia faciant obsequentia Christo. Unde Apostoli et viri Apostolici, relinquentes omnia, quales fuere viri religiosi et monachi, amore Dei flagrantes, converterunt orbem, uti fuse ostendit Hieronymus Platus, lib. II De Bono status religiosi, cap. XXX: «Quicumque enim, ait Auctor Imperfecti, Christum credendo (et perfecte imitando) in se suscipiunt, sedes sunt majestatis ejus.» Et: «Quicumque susceperint verbum Petri, fit thronus Petri, et Petrus sedet in eo.» JUDICANTES DUODECIM TRIBUS ISRAEL. — «Judicantes,» non tantum, «nolite vestri cum impiis,» uti exponit S. Hieronymus, Chrysostomus, Euthymius et eleganter Auctor Imperfecti, quomodo regina Austri et Ninivitae dicuntur in die judicii condemnaturi Judaeos, scilicet suo facto et exemplo, eo quod, praedicante Jona, poenitentiam egerunt, cum Judaei, praedicante Christo, poenitere noluerint, Matth. XII, 40 et 41. Nec etiam approbatione sententiae Christi duntaxat, quomodo omnes sancti judicabunt: approbabunt enim justam Christi in pios, aeque ac impios de caelo et inferno sententiam; sed multo honorificentius et gloriosius, quasi regni caelestis primores et principes, doctores et judices, et quasi assessores Christi judicis cum eo in suis thronis considentes, sicut Cardinales cum Papa, proprie judicabunt, et sententiam ferent eamdem quam Christus, qua probos caelo, improbos inferno, adjudicabunt, arguentes et increpantes eos qui suam doctrinam vitaeque sanctae exemplum neglexerint, et probantes laudantesque eos qui utrumque coluerint, et imitando expresserint. Illos enim decet haec judicii aureola. Ita Jansenius, Maldonatus, Suarez et alii. DUODECIM TRIBUS ISRAEL. — Non quasi Apostoli virique Apostolici in die judicii judicaturi sint solos Judaeos, uti exponunt Theophylactus et Euthymius; sed quod, sub duodecim tribubus, omnes gentes intelligat. Ubi nota, duodecim dici tribus Israel: licet enim tribus Joseph bipartita esset, ac divisa in Ephraim et Manasse, duos Josephi filios, utpote quos sibi in filios adoptavit, ceterisque suis filiis in successione et haereditate aequavit Jacob, communis omnium tribuum pater (ipse enim genuit duodecim filios, quorum quisque cum posteris ex se prognatis unam constituit tribum, unde omnes simul junctae sunt duodecim), Genes. XLVIII, 16, ac consequenter juxta hunc computum tribus Levi esset non duodecima, sed decima tertia; tamen ad ipsam primam tribuum originem respiciendo, scilicet ad duodecim Patriarchas, Jacobi filios, non nisi duodecim erant tribus; quia totidem erant Patriarchae, sive Jacobi filii. Nota secundo, has duodecim tribus dici Israel, quia ab Israele, id est Jacobo patriarcha, per duodecim ejus filios sunt prognatae et propagatae. Porro, hae duodecim tribus olim erant populus fidelis et electus, puta Ecclesia Dei, etiam tempore Christi, imo hoc erat regnum Israelis Messiae promissum: unde gentes, quae Christo crediderunt, in hanc Ecclesiam et populum Judaicum, puta in duodecim tribus Israelis, quasi insertae sunt, et quasi civitate donatae, ut non jam Gentes, sed Judaei, id est confitentes credentesque; ac Israelitae, id est dominantes Deo, appellentur, uti docet Apostolus, Rom. II, 17 et seq. Hinc S. Joannes, Apoc. XXI, 12, in portis caelestis Jerusalem, ait se vidisse inscripta nomina duodecim tribuum Israel. Omnes ergo Christiani omnium gentium in duodecim tribus Israelis jam dictas divisi et distributi sunt, ut alii censeantur esse de tribu Juda, alii de tribu Joseph, alii de tribu Levi, etc., secundum diversitates animarum et virtutum: ad Juda enim pertinent magistratus, reges et principes; ex Juda enim nati sunt reges et principes Israelis, juxta oraculum Jacob, Genes. XLIX, 10. Ad Joseph pertinent virgines, casti et caelibes; talis enim fuit Joseph ante principatum Aegypti. Ad Levi pertinent sacerdotes, diaconi, religiosi; tales enim erant Levitae, et sic de ceteris. Nota tertio: Gentes infideles proprie non pertinent ad duodecim tribus Israel, utpote fideles: quare tacite hac infidelium omissione hic significatur, ipsos in die judicii non fore judicandos; quia: «Qui non credit, jam judicatus est,» Joan. III, 18; quod intellige de judicio dubii examinis, hoc enim solo judicabuntur fideles: de his enim dubium esse potest, an sint damnandi, an salvandi, quod dubium resolvetur examine operum cujusque: nam alioqui infideles quosque in die judicii comparituros, et similiter judicandos esse, ac cuique pro demeritis majorem vel minorem in gehenna poenam decernendam esse, apud omnes in confesso est, et patet ex Joelis III, 2, et Matth. XXV, 32.
19:29
29. ET OMNIS, QUI RELIQUERIT DOMUM, VEL FRATRES, AUT SORORES, AUT PATREM, AUT MATREM, AUT UXOREM, AUT FILIOS, AUT AGROS, PROPTER NOMEN MEUM, CENTUPLUM ACCIPIET, ET VITAM AETERNAM POSSIDEBIT. — Nota in singulis hisce membris poni conjunctionem disjunctivam aut, quia loquitur Christus non de iis qui ipsum sequentes relinquunt omnia, sed de iis qui aliqua duntaxat abdicant propter se et Evangelium, ait Marcus, ut scilicet Evangelii doctrinam, leges et sanctiones observent: ita Origenes, S. Hieronymus, Maldonatus et alii; licet S. Chrysostomus secus sentiat, putetque hic idem a Christo promitti ceteris fidelibus, quod paulo ante promisit duodecim Apostolis, q. d. Omnes fideles, qui idem fecerunt quod duodecim Apostoli, scilicet ut, omnibus relictis, me sequantur, eumdem honorem recipient, ac sedem unam e duodecim inter Apostolos nanciscentur, ac in ea judicabunt duodecim tribus Israel. Verum prius, quod dixi, verius est, idque exigit disjunctio aut. QUI RELIQUERIT DOMUM, — vel quia domo spoliatur, agiturque in exilium a tyranno, vel quia sponte domum relinquit ob scandala et tentationes quas in ea reperit; vel quia relicta domo, confugit ad monasterium vel templum, ut totum se Dei obsequio mancipet. Idem dico de fratribus, sororibus, patre, matre, uxore, filiis: nam et hi, cum sunt infideles et improbi, fidelem a fide vel probitate avocare satagunt: unde si uxor virum a fide et pietate avocet, suadet Christus ut vir ab ea faciat divortium, satius enim est deserere uxorem, quam Christum; sponte vero eosdem relinquet, qui perfectioris vitae studio ad religionum castra confugiunt. Et hoc significat τὸ «propter nomen meum,» id est propter me, mei amore et reverentia, ut mihi melius et plenius serviat, seseque totum mancipet. CENTUPLUM ACCIPIET. — Graece ἑκατονταπλασίονα, id est centuplicia, scilicet singula, ut pro una domo, quam Christi causa relinquit, recipiat centum; pro uno fratre, sorore, filio, patre, matre, recipiat centum fratres, sorores, filios, patres, matres. Syrus, unum in centum, scilicet auctum, et cum centuplo foenore multiplicatum. Sic et Aegyptius, Arabicus, Aethiopicus, Persicus, qui fere inter se consentire solent, praesertim Aethiopicus cum Persico, et Aegyptius cum Arabico, ut hic ex illo traductus videatur. Aegyptii enim primitus a S. Marco, S. Petri discipulo, conversi, Evangelium acceperunt. «Centuplum» ergo, id est plura, et multis partibus majora. Unde Lucas habet «multiplicia;» ponitur enim numerus definitus pro indefinito, ut magnitudo et multitudo mercedis significetur. Quaeres, quodnam sit hoc «centuplum» iis qui sua pro Christo relinquunt, ab ipso promissum? Primo, Chiliastae, sive Millenarii, per centuplum intelligunt mille annos, quibus hi Sancti post communem resurrectionem in terra hac deliciabuntur, omnique voluptate fruentur. Verum hic est error, quem confutavi Apoc. XX, illique repugnat Marcus, X, 31, dicens: «Accipiat centies tantum nunc in tempore hoc.» Audi S. Hieronymum: «Ex occasione hujus sententiae, quidam introducunt mille annos post resurrectionem, dicentes: Tunc nobis centuplum omnium rerum quas dimisimus, et vitam aeternam esse reddendam; non intelligentes, quod si in ceteris digna sit repromissio, in uxoribus appareat turpitudo, ut qui unam pro Domino dimiserit, centum recipiat in futuro.» Secundo, S. Gregorius, hom. 18 in Ezech.: «Centuplum, inquit, recipiet, quia Deus faciet, ut talis multo magis gaudeat paupertate, aut rerum suarum abdicatione, utpote amore Christi facta, quam divites gaudeant omnibus suis opibus et commodis.» Idque revera ita fieri experiuntur ii qui pro Christo suis se abdicant. Tertio, S. Hieronymus, Beda et alii centuplum accipiunt in bonis non temporalibus, sed spiritualibus, puta in pace, gaudio, consolationibus divinis, ceterisque donis et gratiis, quibus Deus eos mulcet et cumulat, quae longe magis superant omnia terrena bona et gaudia, quam numerus centenarius superat unitatem. Verum quia Marcus particulatim explicans τὸ «centies tantum,» subdit «domos, et fratres, et sorores, et matres, et filios, et agros;» hinc: Quarto, et magis genuine, Origenes, Theophylactus, Euthymius, Cassianus et Franciscus Lucas centuplum exponunt sic, quod relinquens sua et suos propter Christum, Christo procurante, inveniat alios centum, id est plurimos, qui illi amorem, opem et curam fratrum, uxorum et matrum longe majori charitate et suavitate impendant, ita ut non res suas amisisse, vel reliquisse, sed in Christi providentia deposuisse, ibique magno foenore multiplicasse videatur. Suaviores enim sunt affectus spiritus, quam naturae; et magis amat pollens amore caelesti, quem conciliavit pietas, quam imbutus amore terreno, quem adjunxit nativitas. Quare, qui unam domum pro Christo relinquit, centum et plures piorum domos inveniet ipsi paratas et apertas; quae ipsum amanter et gaudenter excipiant. Experiuntur hoc sacerdotes, et qui e domo sua fugiunt ob persecutionem in Japone, Anglia, Scotia: hi enim omnium fidelium domos ad hospitium promptas reperiunt, ac de domo in domum crebro commigrant. Sic religiosus, qui unam patris domum pro Christo relinquit, centum invenit non domos, sed collegia et monasteria maxima et pulcherrima, quae ipsum ex affectu materno excipiant. Sic, qui unum agrum pro Christo reliquerit, centum Christi cultorum agros inveniet, e quibus alatur, idque sine suo labore et cultura, cum suum colere debuerit. Similiter, pro uno fratre relicto, plurimi erunt Christiani instar fratrum fraterno ipsum amore prosequentes, et spiritali glutino suavius adhaerentes; pro una sorore, plurimae adolescentulae caste diligent, observabuntque ut fratrem; pro uno patre, senes plurimi tanquam filium fovebunt; pro una matre, matronae plurimae affectu materno necessitatibus illius prospicient; pro una uxore, centum aliorum uxores, casto spiritu ipsi conjunctae, paratae erunt per se aliosque servire valetudini commoditatibusque illius, non secus quam si forent uxores illius; denique pro filio aut filia una, innumeri reverebuntur eum ut patrem, et ab ejus doctrina sana consiliisque pendebunt, ex quibus majorem illius animus accepturus est voluptatem, quam acciperet ex germanis liberis. Hoc est quod ex Salomone ait S. Augustinus, epist. 89, Quaest. IV: «Fideli totus mundus divitiarum est.» Audi Cassianum, Collat. ult., cap. ult.: «Centuplum fratrum, patrumque, parentumque recipiet quantitatem. Quisque patris unius, vel matris, seu filii pro Christi nomine charitate contempta, in omnium qui Christo serviunt dilectionem sincerissimam transit, pro uno scilicet tot patres, fratresque ferventiore ac praestantiore sibi affectu devinctos. Multiplicata etiam domorum atque agrorum possessione ditabitur, quisquis una domo pro Christi dilectione rejecta, innumera monasteriorum habitacula, tanquam propria possidebit in quacumque orbis parte, velut in suae domus jure succedens. Quomodo enim non centuplum, et si Domini nostri sententiae superadjici aliquid fas est, plusquam centuplum recipit, qui decem vel viginti servorum ministeria infida et coactata derelinquentes, tot ingenuorum atque nobilium spontaneo fulcitur obsequio?» Experti sunt hoc centuplum Apostoli, et primi Christiani in fervore primitivae Ecclesiae, de quibus ait Paulus: «Nihil habentes, et omnia possidentes;» et Lucas, Actor. IV, 32: «Nec quisquam, inquit, eorum quae possidebat aliquid suum esse dicebat, sed erant illis omnia communia;» et mox: «Neque enim quisquam egens erat inter illos. Quotquot enim possessores agrorum aut domorum erant, vendentes afferebant pretia eorum quae vendebant, et ponebant ante pedes Apostolorum: dividebatur autem singulis, prout cuique opus erat.» Id etiamnum experiuntur boni religiosi; quod si quando secus accidat, et cuiquam aliquid corpori necessarium desit, tunc Deus defectum hunc corporalium supplet, et compensat copia spiritualium donorum et gaudiorum. Exemplum illustre est in Peregrino philosopho, qui finxit se esse Christianum, ac ut talem in persecutione obtulit se Praesidi et carceri, ut ope et opibus Christianorum ei succurrentium frueretur: nec eum fefellit opinio, ibi enim certatim Christianis illi sua offerentibus, suffarcinatus auro impostor in patriam rediit, uti fuse narrat Lucianus in Peregrino, et ex eo Baronius, anno Christi 75, cap. VII. Denique S. Ambrosius in Psal. CXVIII, littera Cheth, sive octonario 8, per centuplum accipit ipsum Deum, ac consequenter totum mundum, qui est Dei peculium. Deus enim iis qui omnes et omnia propter se relinquunt, est pater, mater, uxor, frater, soror et omnia, Matth. XII, 49: «Quoniam, inquit Ambrosius, qui omnia reliquerit, Deum possidere incipit, et ipse merces utique perfecta virtutum, qui non centupli enumeratione, sed perfectae virtutis aestimatione censetur.» Affert etiam exemplum Leviticae tribus, quae quia Domini jussu nullam inter alias tribus terrae partem habuerat, ideo Dominus ipse ita promisit et saepius confirmavit se ejus partem et possessionem fore. Unde hac aurea gnome concludens, subjicit: «Cui portio Deus est, totius possessor est naturae. Pro agris ipse sibi satis est, habens bonum fructum, qui non possit perire. Pro domibus satis est sibi, ut sit habitatio Dei et templum Dei, qua nihil potest esse pretiosius. Quid enim pretiosius Deo? Ea est portio quam terrenae partes aequare non possunt. Quid magnificentius hospite caelesti? quid beatius possessione divina?» Et Cassianus, Collat. ult., cap. ult.: «Pro laetitia, inquit, illa, quam in unius agri ac domus possessione quis habuit, centuplo majore divitiarum gaudio perfruetur, qui in adoptionem transiens filiorum Dei, universa, quae aeterni sunt Patris, ut propria possidebit, et affectu atque virtute ad imitationem veri illius filii proclamabit: Omnia quae habet Pater, mea sunt, nec jam cum ulla poenali distensionis aut sollicitudinis cura, sed securus ac laetus velut in propriis ubique succedit, audiens quotidie ab Apostolo sibi praedicari: Omnia vestra sunt, sive mundus, sive praesentia, sive futura; et a Salomone: Fidelis viri totus mundus divitiarum est.» Haec ergo est congrua et condigna merces paupertatis, ut nihil habens, nihil ei desit, sed omnia possideat. Id expertus S. Franciscus, suosque ad eam exhortans: «Filii, inquit, charissimi, magna et inenarrabilia sunt erga nos Dei nostri beneficia, qui adeo flectit erga humiles et inutiles servos suos corda fidelium. Ex acceptis quotidie accipienda speremus: si parva videntur concessa, adjiciet majora, dum in divinorum mandatorum observantia perstiterimus. Jactate ergo cogitatum vestrum in Domino, et ipse vos enutriet in monte hoc (Alverniae), qui Eliam in deserto, Antonium et Paulum in eremo nutrivit. Illud certissime scitote, nullum nobis relevandae necessitati securius esse refugium, quam nullum habere. Si enim veri et Evangelici fuerimus pauperes, mundus nostri miserebitur et affluenter nos pascet. Si autem a paupertate defecerimus, mundus nos fugiet et indigentias illicito modo repellentes, majores patiemur penurias.» Ita refert Waddingus in Annal. Minorum, anno Christi 1212, numer. 14. Addit Marcus, X, 30, centuplum hoc reddendum «cum persecutionibus:» quod quomodo fiat, ibidem dicam. Tropologice: Cassianus, loco jam citato, centuplo majus gaudium conversorum esse asserit de virtute, quam fuerit antea de cupiditate et vitio: «Si, inquit, pro irae et furoris perturbatione, jugem animi lenitatem; pro sollicitudinis ac distensionis angore, securitatis quietem; pro infructuosa hujus saeculi poenalique tristitia, salutaris tristitiae fructum; pro vanitate laetitiae temporalis, gaudii spiritualis pependeris ubertatem, retributionem in horum affectuum commutatione centuplam pervidebis.» Anagogice: S. Antonius, teste S. Athanasio in ejus Vita, per centuplum accipit regnum caelorum, in quo centuplo majora sunt bona, quam sint in terra: «Qui totius orbis dominium reliquit, inquit, centuplum de melioribus praemiis in sublimi sede recipiet.» Pro caducis enim reddentur ei stabilia, pro vilibus eximia, pro parvis magna, pro terrenis caelestia, pro humanis divina, pro momentaneis sempiterna. ET VITAM AETERNAM POSSIDEBIT. — Syrus, haereditate possidebit; Arabicus, haeres fiet vitae aeternae; q. d. Qui suam haereditatem, aeque ac suos parentes, fratres, sorores, etc., Christi causa reliquerit, pro eis recipiet centuplum in hoc saeculo; et haereditatem vitae aeternae in futuro. Haec enim est amplissima haereditas, in qua Beati erunt haeredes Dei, ac cohaeredes Christi: ideoque non solum caelum et terram, et omnia quae in eis sunt, sed etiam Deum ipsum et omnem honorem, omnes opes, omnem gloriam, omnem suavitatem, omnes delicias, omnia gaudia, denique omnia bona in Deo possidebunt, non quasi usufructuarii, sed quasi haeredes et domini haereditate perpetua et in aeternum, quamdiu Deus erit Deus, duratura. Haec omnia significantur et involvuntur in vita aeterna. Porro, hanc vitam aeternam obtinebunt omnes qui servant Dei mandata, ut dixit Christus, vers. 17; plenius tamen et gloriosius eam obtinebunt, qui praeceptis addidere consilia: unde iis solis Christus hic illam promittit et assignat. Qua phrasi tacite innuit difficile esse vitam aeternam consequi per observationem solorum praeceptorum, sine observatione consiliorum; quia illa sine hac est difficilis: difficile est enim servare omnia Dei praecepta, nisi serventur et consilia praesertim paupertatis: nam, ut ait Christus, vers. 23, difficile et quasi impossibile est divitem salvari.
19:30
30. MULTI AUTEM ERUNT PRIMI NOVISSIMI, ET NOVISSIMI PRIMI. — Nota apposite Christum hanc sententiam praecedentibus a se dictis subjungere: nam ipse hoc capite pene toto opposuit se, suamque gratiam et consilia Evangelii, Pharisaeis et legi veteri; unde consequenter hic opponit praemium illius praemio hujus, ut patebit cap. sequenti; proprie autem respicit illa, quae immediate ante dixerat de sedibus duodecim judiciariis, de centuplo, de vita aeterna dandis suis sequacibus; ac videtur occurrere tacite objectioni Apostolorum. Poterant enim ipsi intra se cogitare: Qui fieri poterit, ut nos viles, pauperes, ignorantes, ignobiles sedeamus super duodecim thronis, judicantes duodecim tribus Israel? in quibus sunt viri plurimi dignitate, opibus, nobilitate, scientia, fama, auctoritate eminentes, uti sunt Scribae et Pharisaei, et adolescens ille dives et splendidus, simul ac legis observator, de quo vers. 13. Occurrit Christus, asseritque illos quidem in hoc saeculo esse eminentes et primos, sed in caelo et vita aeterna fore novissimos, id est nullo loco habendos, sed ab ea rejiciendos et excludendos (simili phrasi dixit, cap. V, 19: «Qui solverit unum de mandatis istis minimis, etc., minimus, id est nullus, vocabitur in regno caelorum;» ac novissimos hic vocari a regno caelorum remotissimos, patet ex Luca, XIII, 30), eo quod Christum quasi pauperem aspernati sint; Apostolos vero aliosque similes, qui relictis omnibus secuti Christum in hoc saeculo videbantur esse pauperrimi et novissimi hominum, in vita aeterna fore primos, utpote Christo caelorum regi charissimos, et in vita ac moribus, praesertim in paupertate et zelo praedicandi simillimos. Ita S. Hieronymus, Beda, S. Thomas, Franciscus Lucas et alii, ac Victor Antiochenus in cap. X Marci. Dicit autem «multi,» non «omnes,» quia aliqui hic sunt primi, qui et in caelo erunt primi, uti sunt sancti reges, principes, doctores, Episcopi, Pontifices, qui, licet opibus abundent, tamen pauperes sunt affectu et spiritu; ac vicissim aliqui hic sunt novissimi, qui et in caelo erunt novissimi, ut sunt pauperes et mendici; qui furtis, rapinis aliisque sceleribus incumbunt, ut suam inopiam levent, fiantque divites et opulenti. Summa hac gnome significat Christus divites et eos qui bonis terrenis inhiant, a caelo excludendos; pauperes vero, qui caelestia ambiunt, in caelo fore primos. Respicit enim ad id quod dixit adolescenti diviti, vers. 21: «Si vis perfectus esse, vade, vende quae habes, et da pauperibus, et habebis thesaurum in caelo.» Et, vice versa, ad illud vers. 23: «Dives difficile intrabit in regnum caelorum.» Et ad illud Petri, vers. 27: «Ecce nos reliquimus omnia, et secuti sumus te, quid ergo erit nobis?» Sic Christus in caelo est primus, quia in terra fuit novissimus, juxta illud Isaiae, LIII: «Vidimus eum, et non erat aspectus; et desideravimus eum, despectum et novissimum virorum.» Vide ibi dicta. Proxima Christo est B. Virgo, quia post Christum inter homines fuit novissima; sequuntur Apostoli, de quibus ait Paulus: «Puto quod Deus nos novissimos ostendit, tanquam morti destinatos; quia spectaculum facti sumus mundo, angelis et hominibus.» Et mox: «Tanquam purgamenta hujus mundi facti sumus, omnium peripsema usque adhuc,» I Cor. IV, 9 et 13. Sic de S. Martino, cujus hodie festum celebramus, canit Ecclesia: «Martinus Abrahae sinu laetus excipitur, Martinus pauper et humilis caelum dives ingreditur, hymnis caelestibus honoratur.» Visa est cuidam viro sancto sedes sublimis et gloriosa in caelo, ac miranti cujusnam illa foret, audivit: «Haec sedes humili servatur Francisco.» Ita habet ejus Vita. Denique multi Patres et Doctores Scholastici, quos citabo cap. seq., vers. 1, «novissimi et primi» praecise accipiunt in ipsa vita aeterna, q. d. Divites, qui in hac vita honestam sed commodam egere vitam, servantes duntaxat praecepta Dei (qualis fuit adolescens ille, vers. 21), in caelo erunt novissimi; pauperes vero, qui praeceptis adjunxere consilia Evangelica, ac in paupertate evangelizando secuti sunt Christum, hi in caelo erunt primi: de quo plura cap. sequenti. Amplior et plenior, omniaque, quae in sequenti parabola dicuntur, adaequans erit sensus, si tu «novissimi» utroque modo accipias, scilicet ut significet tam excludendos a caelo, quam novissimos in caelo. Nam Apostoli, qui quasi primi judicabunt duodecim tribus Israel, quasi novissimos, multos ex iis, utpote justos, adjudicabunt caelo, plures tamen, utpote injustos, inferno. Porro hanc gnomen: «Multi erunt primi novissimi, et novissimi primi,» Christus explicat per sequentem parabolam operariorum ad vineam excolendam conductorum, capite sequenti. Haec ergo gnome est proparabola, id est titulus et argumentum illius parabolae, cui subnectitur ista postparabola, sive scopus et applicatio parabolae, cap. XX, vers. 16: «Sic erunt novissimi primi, et primi novissimi: multi enim sunt vocati, pauci vero electi.» Unde liquet postparabolam respondere ex aequo proparabolae, imo unum idemque cum illa esse; «electi» ergo vocantur primi, «vocati» vero duntaxat, nec electi, vocantur novissimi.
19:1
Supra ostensum est quomodo veniendum est ad vitam aeternam per communem viam; hic docet quomodo veniendum est per viam perfectionis, quae tangitur quantum ad duo: quantum ad continentiam, et quantum ad paupertatem voluntariam. Circa primum duo facit. Primo agit de adventu; secundo de continentia, ibi dicunt ei discipuli eius et cetera. Circa primum tria facit. Primo ponitur tentatio Pharisaeorum; secundo solutio Christi; tertio obiectio contra solutionem. Secunda qui respondens ait eis; tertia quid ergo Moyses mandavit dari libellum repudii? Circa primum tria: primo describitur locus; secundo occasio ad tentandum; tertio tentatio. Dicit ergo et factum est, quia dictum eius est factum. Ipse enim dixit, et facta sunt: ipse mandavit, et creata sunt, Ps. XXXII, 9. Cum consummasset sermones istos, scilicet de vitando scandalum, migravit a Galilaea in fines Iudaeae trans Iordanem. Iudaea aliquando sumitur pro tota terra, quam habitant Iudaei: aliquando pro terra, quae in dotem tribus Iudae cessit, et sic dividitur contra alias, et sic hic accipitur. Oportebat enim transire per Iudaeam, qui volebat ire in Ierusalem, quae erat in tribu Beniamin in finibus Iudaeae. Sed quare migravit a Galilaea? Propter tria. Ut daret praedicatoribus exemplum, quod non est solum in uno loco praedicandum, sed in multis; unde Lc. IV, 43: quia aliis civitatibus oportet me evangelizare regnum Dei. Item quia iam imminebat tempus passionis, ideo accedere volebat ad locum ubi pati debebat. Ad Eph. V, 2: tradidit semetipsum pro nobis oblationem et hostiam Deo in odorem suavitatis et cetera. Vel voluit redire ad Iudaeos, ut significaret quod in fine convertetur ad convertendum Iudaeos. Et secutae sunt eum turbae. Signum est devotionis turbarum, quia secutae sunt eum, sicut filii patrem peregrinantem. Io. X, 27: oves meae vocem meam audiunt et curavit eos. Osee I, 2: percutiet et sanabit nos. Aliquando dominus curabat, aliquando signa faciebat. Signa ut confortaret, in Act. c. I, 1: coepit Iesus facere et docere.
19:2
Posset aliquis credere, quia transivit ad Iudaeos, quod dereliquerit gentes; ideo ad designandum, quod non dereliquit, dicit secutae sunt eum turbae, idest ad salutem, quia cum essent oleaster, inserti sunt et facti sunt olivae, ad Rom. XI, 17. Vel quod sunt secutae trans Iordanem, significatur quod per Baptismum peccata remittuntur. Et accesserunt ad eum Pharisaei tentantes. Et in hoc reprehenduntur: quia cum turbae sequerentur, Pharisaei insidiabantur. Ier. V, 5: ibo ad optimates, et loquar eis.
19:3
Unde accesserunt dicentes si licet homini dimittere uxorem suam quacumque ex causa? Apparet in istis primo malitiosa astutia, quia venerunt ad Christum, ut Christo calumniam inferrent; quia aut diceret quod esset dimittenda, aut non. Si diceret quod sic, videretur sibi contrarius, quia ipse erat praedicator castitatis. Si diceret quod non, accusabimus eum, quia hoc est contra Moysen legislatorem. Sicut dicit Chrysostomus, arguuntur, de incontinentia, quia si aliquis libenter audiat loqui de separatione uxori incontinens est. Unde quia isti de divortio loquebantur, ostendebant se incontinentes. Dominus dederat causam propter quam dimitteretur, scilicet propter turpitudinem; sed isti non solum ex hac causa petebant, sed utrum ex quacumque causa. Unde volebant habere potestatem liberam dimittendi uxorem.
19:4
Ideo sequitur responsio qui respondens ait eis. Dominus dat optimum modum respondendi: quia quando quaerit aliquis ut addiscat, statim dicenda est veritas; sed ei qui quaerit ut calumnietur, non statim dicenda est veritas, sed primo dicenda sunt aliqua quae negari non possunt. Ideo primo dominus interrogat de lege; unde primo assumit verba Scripturae; secundo dicit, quomodo ad propositum facit; tertio principale propositum concludit. Et circa primum tria facit. Primo ostendit societatem maris et foeminae, quam Deus instituit; secundo affectum quem indidit; tertio modum quo coniunxit. Intendit probare quod coniunctio maris et foeminae est a Deo instituta. Non legistis quod qui fecit hominem, ab initio masculum et foeminam fecit eos? Hoc enim legitur Gen. I, 27: et creavit Deus hominem ad imaginem et similitudinem suam. Non est hoc intelligendum, ut aliqui intellexerunt quod primo fecerit hominem masculum, et post foeminam, et post separavit eos; sed primo fecit unum hominem, et in illo fecit unde fieret mulier. Sed quare voluit dominus sic fieri, scilicet ex viro et muliere multitudinem hominum? Respondeo, ut significatur quod forma matrimonii ex Deo esset. Item ut magis se diligerent. Sed tunc quaerit Chrysostomus, quare non semper sic facit, ut simul nascatur vir et mulier. Respondet, quia si ita esset, videretur necessitas utendi matrimonio. Et quia dominus vult esse licitum uti matrimonio, vel non uti, et non esse necessarium, primo creavit masculum et foeminam, ad significandum quod licitum erat matrimonium; post, vero ut sine muliere nasceretur masculus, et e converso, ut liberam habeant facultatem et utendi matrimonio, et non utendi. Secundum hoc excluditur duplex error. Quidam enim dicebant matrimonium non esse a Deo: et hoc excludit, quia si masculum et foeminam fecit eos, et constat quod nihil frustra fecit: ergo nec aliquid horum, et non nisi ad societatem matrimonii. Alii dixerunt quod si non peccasset homo, Deus foeminam non fecisset, immo alio modo multiplicarentur homines; sed hoc nihil est, quia ante peccatum creati sunt. Et singulariter dicit masculum et foeminam, ut unus unam habeat. Propter quod relinquit homo patrem et matrem. Hic ponitur quem affectum indidit. Et dixit. Quis dixit? Ille qui fecit. Sed hoc non videtur, quia videtur quod Adam dixerit. Augustinus dicit quod immisit dominus soporem in Adam, et tulit unam de costis eius. Sopor iste fuit extasis; unde ibi revelavit multa bona; unde dominus ei revelavit etiam quod hic dicitur; unde supra X, 20 dictum est: non enim vos estis qui loquimini, sed spiritus patris vestri qui loquitur in vobis. Quia ergo Adam dixit, Deo imperante, ideo dicitur quod Deus dixerit; unde Esdrae II, 4: homo reliquit patrem, qui nutrivit eum. Et adhaeret uxori. Quae est ratio? Frater et soror nascuntur ex uno, et dividunt se; sed vir et uxor ex diversis, et tamen non dividunt se. Dicit Chrysostomus, quod hoc est ex ordinatione divina. Item, naturaliter omnis causa habet reductionem ad effectum, ut succus a radice ad ramos, unde patres magis diligunt filios, quam e converso; ideo vir et uxor, etsi sint ex diversis, uniuntur tamen in effectum unum.
19:5
Et erunt duo in carne una. Hieronymus: scilicet in carne prolis. Et hic est fructus matrimonii. Chrysostomus exponit: in una carne, idest in uno carnali affectu, sicut et in spirituali affectu fit unitas, ut in Act. IV, v. 32: erat autem credentium cor unum et anima una. Vel erunt duo in carne una, idest in uno carnali opere. Philosophus dicit quod homo et mulier in opere illo sic semper se habent, quod sicut virtus activa et passiva semper in effectum coniunguntur, sic in actu illo actio et passio coniunguntur. Itaque iam non sunt duo, sed una caro.
19:6
Deinde principale intentum concludit quod ergo Deus coniunxit, homo non separet, quia ex Dei voluntate actum est. Si est ex Deo, non potest homo separare; quia si Deus coniunxit, Deus separet. Potest enim separatio fieri a Deo, vel ab homine: et hoc vel propter voluptatem, vel ut aliquam aliam habeat, et non valet: vel propter consensum mutuum, ut Deo liberius serviat, et sic est a Deo.
19:7
Dicunt illi: quid ergo Moyses mandavit dari libellum repudii et dimittere? Hic ponitur obiectio eorum contra generalem legem: aperiunt enim quod erat in mente. Quid ergo Moyses mandavit dari libellum repudii et dimittere? Non mandavit Moyses dimittere, sed indirecte prohibere voluit, quia Moyses voluit quod non dimitteretur, nisi daretur libellus repudii. Et hoc magis pertinebat ad prohibitionem, quia libellus non fiebat nisi per manum communem; unde remittebat ad sapientes, ut viderent si haberent causam, quare deberent dimittere eas. Et ait illis. Hic obiectioni respondet. Et primo ponit responsionem; secundo confirmationem quia dominus probat non esse dimittendam ex auctoritate Dei quae maior est; ideo contra Dei auctoritatem non est auctoritas Moysi. Sed contra. Nonne dominus dedit legem per Moysen? Videte, sicut dicit apostolus I ad Cor. VII, 25: de virginibus praeceptum domini non habeo, consilium autem do. Unde aliquando dicebat quod a domino acceperat, aliquando ex industria sibi inspirata: sic et Moyses. Istud autem permisit, non quod audisset a domino, sed ab inspiratione divina, non tamen auctoritate firmata.
19:8
Ad duritiam cordis vestri permisit vobis dimittere uxores vestras. Ipsi dixerant quod Moyses mandavit; sed non mandavit, sed permisit. De duritia eorum habetur Act. VII, 51: dura cervice, et incircumcisis cordibus et auribus, vos semper spiritui sancto restitistis. Hic solet esse quaestio, utrum illi peccent mortaliter, qui uxores dimittunt. Quidam dixerunt quod dimittentes peccabant mortaliter. Permissio enim quatuor modis accipitur. Dicitur permitti aliquid, quando contrarium non praecipitur, ut minus bonum permittitur, quia maius bonum non praecipitur, ut apostolus dicit I Cor. VII, 6: secundum indulgentiam dico vobis. Item quandoque per privationem prohibitionis; et sic peccata venialia sunt permissa. Quandoque autem per privationem impedimenti: et sic omnia mala, quae fiunt in praesenti, dicuntur aliquando etiam permissa, quia poena non adhibetur. Ideo Iudaeis quaedam permissa fuerunt, quae erant mortalia peccata, quia poena non fuit eis inflicta. Sed istud habet locum in mundanis rebus: sic enim videmus, quod secundum leges humanas non punitur fornicatio simplex; unde si lex vetus solum inspiciat ad vitam praesentem, sic solutio est bona. Sed quia quamvis secundum corticem ad vitam pertineat praesentem, tamen secundum medullam pertinet etiam ad vitam aeternam Ex. XV, 25: dedi eis praecepta mea; et dominus dicit iuveni, infra eodem: si vis ad vitam ingredi, serva mandata ideo dicunt alii quod male provisum esset populo illi, si quod esset peccatum ignoraret, cum tamen scriptum sit, Is. LVIII, 1: nuntia populo peccata eorum. Ideo dicit Chrysostomus, quod a peccato abstulit peccati culpam. Et licet inordinatum quid esset, noluit tamen quod eis imputaretur ad culpam, ut dominus Osee praecepit, ut faceret filios fornicationis: unde permissio non fuit ex praecepto, sed ad vitandum maius malum. Ab initio autem non fuit sic. Unde actuale fuit, non ab initio institutum: unde post multos annos nullus dimisit uxorem. Dico autem vobis et cetera. Hic inducit legem. Primo pro viro; secundo pro muliere.
19:9
Dicit ergo quicumque dimiserit uxorem suam et cetera. Sed excipitur fornicatio. Sed videte quod duplex est fornicatio, scilicet corporalis et spiritualis. Unde propter utrumque potest dimittere, ut habetur I ad Cor. VII, 11: si unus infidelis, alter fidelis, potest dimittere fidelis infidelem. Notandum, quod per nullum impedimentum sequens potest dissolvi vinculum matrimonii, quia significat unionem Christi et Ecclesiae: unde cum unio Christi et Ecclesiae dissolvi non possit, nec unio matrimonii. Sed propter fornicationem potest a consortio separari, et non debet eam secum retinere, ne videatur esse conscius turpitudinis; sed pro aliis turpitudinibus non potest, ut pro ebrietate. Item si vult hominem inducere ad infidelitatem, potest dimittere eam. Sed quare fit mentio magis de fornicatione corporali, quam de spirituali? Quia est contra fidem matrimonii: et fidem frangenti fides non est servanda. Alia ratio est quam ponit Origenes, quia supra V, 32 dixit dominus qui dimiserit uxorem, excepta causa fornicationis, facit eam moechari, et ideo dat ei occasionem moechandi; sed postquam ipsa peccavit, non dat ei occasionem moechandi, ideo post potest dimittere, non ante. Et qui aliam duxerit, moechatur. Sed quare non, nisi aliam ducat? Quia eadem res per ea quae solvitur, ligatur. Unde quando homo habet uxorem separatam, et non aliam, adhuc spes remanet quod uniri possint, vel per consimile peccatum, vel per animorum consensum; sed quando aliam duxit, tunc cor totaliter separavit, et assensum ab ea. Alia ratio, quia si praeter fornicationem posset dimittere uxorem suam, aliquando accideret quod homo imponeret uxori suae crimen, ut ab ea separaretur, et alii coniungeretur; ideo dominus voluit quod non haberet aliam. Unde expresse prohibet, quod non habeat homo diversas uxores, quia, una dimissa, et alia accepta, moechatur. Et qui dimissam duxerit, moechatur. Hic ponit legem quantum ad mulierem: unde non vult quod uxor dimissa habeat virum. Sed quare prohibet viro ne contrahat cum ea, et non mulieri? Respondeo, quod mulieres magis ad malum praecipites sunt. Ier. III, 3: frons mulieris meretricis facta est tibi. Ideo per istam prohibitionem praecipitaretur ad mala maiora. Ideo praecipit viro, quod non contrahat, non autem prohibet mulieri. Sed quid? Nonne licebat ei, quae repudiata erat, accipere alium? Dicunt quidam quod non, quia adhuc manebat vinculum: et inducunt illud quod habetur Deut. XXIV, quod non poterit reverti ad priorem, quia polluta est; sed nisi peccasset, redire posset. Alii dicunt quod poterat alteri nubere, sed non isti, quia si posset ad eum redire, facilius repudiaret eam. Quid ergo dicis, quod polluta est? Dico quod est polluta isti, quia ad eum redire non potest. Vel potest intelligi de immunditia legis, quia sacerdos non poterat eam habere. Dixerunt ei discipuli: si ita est causa hominis cum uxore, non expedit nubere. Postquam dominus egit de insolutione matrimonii, hic tractat de perfectione continentium: et circa hoc duo facit. Primo ponit sententiam discipulorum; secundo sententiam Christi, ibi qui dixit illis et cetera.
19:10
Dicit ergo dixerunt discipuli: si ita est causa hominis cum uxore, non expedit nubere. Moti sunt ad hoc dicendum, quia audierant quod non poterat uxor dimitti nisi ob unam causam, cum tamen multae aliae causae reddant matrimonium onerosum, ut aliqua immunditia, ut lepra et huiusmodi; ita quod impleatur illud quod in Eccli. XXV, v. 23 dicitur: commorari leoni et urso melius est quam cum muliere nequam. Item multam affert sollicitudinem; I Cor. VII, 34: si virgo nubat, cogitat quae sunt mundi. Ideo ex hoc arguunt quod expedit cuilibet homini non nubere; ideo dominus temperat, quia contingit esse aliquid melius dupliciter: vel simpliciter, vel secundum quid; sic continere aliquibus competit, aliquibus non: quia, ut dicit apostolus I ad Cor. VII, 9, melius est nubere, quam uri. Qui dixit illis approbat sententiam discipulorum. Et primo dictis; secundo factis, ibi tunc oblati sunt ei parvuli. Et primo approbat continentiam; secundo assignat differentias continentium ibi sunt enim eunuchi etc.; tertio difficultatem, ibi qui potest capere capiat.
19:11
Dicit ergo qui dixit illis: non omnes capiunt istud verbum. Ita dicitis quod non expedit nubere: verum est aliquibus, sed non est verum quoad omnes, quia non omnes, habent tantam virtutem, quod abstineant; sed quibus datum est, quia aliquibus datum est non ex proprio facto, sed dono gratiae. Sap. c. VIII, 21: scivi quod aliter non possum esse continens, nisi Deus det. Quod enim homo in carne vivat praeter carnem, non hominis est, sed Dei; I ad Cor. VII, 7: volo omnes homines esse sicut meipsum, sed unusquisque proprium donum habet ex Deo, alius quidem sic, alius vero sic. Et quia possent credere quod omnes continere possent, ideo dicit sunt enim eunuchi et cetera. Unde distinguit, quod est continentia in aliquibus ex natura, aliquando ex violentia, aliquando ex voluntate. Ideo tria genera eunuchorum tangit: quia quidam per naturam qui a matris utero sic nati sunt. Sicut aliqui monstruose nascuntur propter defectum manus, sic et aliqui sine genitalibus: et hoc ex Dei providentia, quia si omnia secundum communem cursum naturae acciderent, attribueretur totum naturae, et non divinae providentiae; unde Sap. VIII, 8: signa et monstra scit antequam fiant. Item quidam per violentiam, ut illi qui castrantur a tyrannis vel barbaris, vel qui castrantur propter custodiam mulierum. Qui sunt facti ab hominibus, quos scilicet vel crudelitas hominum castravit, vel conservantia mulierum. Et hoc dicit Hieronymus quod scit, quia pueri acciperentur, et castrarentur, et ponerentur in domo Nabuchodonosor. Quidam vero voluntate, ut dicit et sunt eunuchi, qui castraverunt seipsos propter regnum caelorum. Quidam male intellexerunt verbum istud, dicentes scindenda esse genitalia, et leguntur hoc quidam fecisse, de quibus dicitur fuisse Origenes. Sed istud reprobatum est, et separari debent a clero, capit. ex parte, et capitul. significavit, extra de corp. Vit. Unde datur occasio errori Manichaeorum, qui creaturam corporalem dixerunt esse causam mali. Item datur occasio errori gentilium, quia quidam in sacrificiis suis eunuchantur. Item hoc factum non est in utilitatem, quia tales, etsi actum non habent, a concupiscentia tamen non sunt immunes. Unde Eccli. XX, v. 2. Concupiscentia spadonis devirginabit iuvenculam. Ideo melius est quod homo sibi fraenum imponat, quam membrum abscindat, ut malas cogitationes et desideria refraenet. Is. I, 16: auferte malas cogitationes a cordibus vestris. Qui castraverunt seipsos, continuae castitati se dederunt, et hoc propter regnum caelorum. Aliquando enim membrum per actum intelligitur, ut supra c. XVIII, 9: si oculus tuus scandalizat te, erue eum, et proiice abs te. Sic hic membra genitalia pro actu accipiuntur. Unde ille se castrat, qui castitati se dedicat. Vel, secundum Hieronymum, quod continentiam servantes sic nati sunt frigiditate, scilicet naturae, ita quod non moventur ad actum illum. Unde dicuntur eunuchi propter actum eunuchorum, quem habent propter naturam quam ex utero habent. Quia aliqui habent aliquam dispositionem ad aliquam virtutem naturaliter, sicut Iob ad misericordiam, qui dicit cap. XXXI, 18: ab infantia mecum crevit miseratio. Quidam vero ex voluntate, vel propter simulationem; vel doctus ab haereticis, est factus ab hominibus. II Tim. III, 5: habentes quidem speciem pietatis, virtutem autem eius abnegantes. Quidam vero propter praemium vitae aeternae. Primi duo, scilicet qui vel naturaliter, vel violenter castrantur, non habent meritum vitae aeternae, sed solum tertii. Sed numquid est verum de primis, quod non mereantur? Dico quod merentur quantum ad voluntatem, licet non mereantur quantum ad actum; quia licet non possint facere, possunt tamen velle posse facere. Qui potest capere capiat. Posita differentia continentiae, hic ponitur exhortatio, ut dicit Hieronymus. Facit dominus sicut facit dux in exercitu, qui quando est capienda civitas, dicit: qui intrabit civitatem, dabitur ei hoc, vel illud, sicut dicit David Ioab. Sic qui potest capere et continere, capiat, et non retrahat se. Apostolus I Cor. XII, v. 31: aemulamini charismata meliora. Sed quid est quod dicit? Nonne tenetur quisque ad virginitatem servandam? Videtur quod sic, quia homo ad meliora tenetur. Dicendum, quod non est praeceptum, sed consilium, sicut dicit apostolus I ad Cor. c. VII, 25: de virginibus praeceptum domini non habeo, consilium autem do. Sed quid est? Nonne tenetur homo ad meliora? Dico quod distinguendum est, quod melius est quantum ad actum, vel quantum ad affectum. Non tenetur ad meliora quoad actum, sed quoad affectum, quia omnis regula et omnis actus determinatur ad finitum et certum: et si tenetur ad melius, tenetur ad incertum. Unde quantum ad actus exteriores, quia non tenetur ad incertum, non tenetur ad meliora; sed quantum ad affectum, tenetur ad meliora. Unde qui non semper vellet esse melior, non posset sine contemptu velle.
19:12
Sed quid est quod dicit qui potest capere capiat? Aut enim potentia naturali; et sic nullus potest: aut potentia gratiae; et sic quilibet potest, quia dicitur Lc. XI, v. 9: petite et accipietis. Item gratia Dei omnia potest. Dico quod ly potest includit potestatem voluntatis: est enim voluntas firma et infirma. Constat autem quod homo cum habet voluntatem firmam, non timet multos impulsus; sed quando non, ex facili impulsu labitur. Unde qui potest per firmitatem voluntatis capere, capiat, et non a natura, sed a Deo. Unde qui hoc a Deo habet, consulimus quod hoc capiat et contineat. Vel qui potest secundum opportunitatem temporis, vel conditionis temporis, ut Abraham: unde caelibatus Ioannis non praefertur coniugio Abrahae. Item secundum conditionem; quia qui coniugatus est, non potest continere; unde excluduntur vel ratione temporis, vel conditionis. Tunc oblati sunt ei parvuli. Hic ostendit quod dixit, facto. Et primo ponitur parvulorum oblatio; secundo zelus discipulorum; tertio satisfactio Christi. Secunda ibi discipuli autem increpabant eos; tertia ibi Iesus autem ait eis et cetera.
19:13
Dicit ergo tunc oblati sunt ei parvuli. Dominus commendaverat castitatem, et quia in parvulis est castitas et puritas, ideo videntes quod puritas placeret ei, obtulerunt ei parvulos ut manus eis imponeret, et oraret. Notandum quod consuetudo erat quod pueri offerebantur antiquis, et benedicebant, et orabant, in signum quod benedictio est a Deo. Item experti quod tactum haberet salutarem, quia leprosum curaverat et multos alios, ideo et cetera. Item parvulos offerebant, quia credebant quod qui tangeretur ab eo, de caetero a Daemonibus non infestaretur; ideo Ecclesia accepit in consuetudinem, quod parvulis exhibeantur sacramenta Ecclesiae, ut magis confirmentur. Discipuli autem increpabant eos. Hic tangitur zelus discipulorum. Sed quare increpabant? Quia credebant eum ut verum hominem fatigari ex frequentia hominum; ideo volentes parcere labori eius et cetera. Alia ratio, quia magnam opinionem habebant de Christo; ideo videbatur eis quod inhonestum erat quod parvuli accederent ad eum. Origenes: quia per hoc significatur, quod in Ecclesia sunt quidam parvuli rudes. Per discipulos perfecti significantur; unde tales dedignantur cum vident parvulos, scilicet istos rudes, venire ad Christum, ignorantes quod omnes homines vult salvos fieri. Apostolus, Rom. I, 14: Graecis et barbaris debitor sum. Consequenter utrisque satisfacit. Et primo zelo iustitiae; secundo satisfacit devotioni offerentium.
19:14
Dicit ergo sinite parvulos venire ad me, idest humiles, sive paucos; I ad Cor. XIV, 20: nolite parvuli esse sensibus, sed malitia parvuli estote. Et nolite prohibere, scilicet paucos propter innocentiam. Non enim sunt prohibendi imperfecti venire ad perfectionem. Talium est enim regnum caelorum. Dicit talium, non horum, scilicet qui ita sunt puri per innocentiam. Supra XVIII, 3: nisi efficiamini sicut parvulus iste, non intrabitis in regnum caelorum. Iob XXII, 29: qui humiliatus fuerit, erit in gloria.
19:15
Consequenter devotioni satisfacit cum imposuisset eis manus. Per quod virtutes confortat. Is. XL, 29: qui dat lasso virtutem. Abiit inde. Aliquando Christus apponit manus, et non abiit inde: aliquando apponit, et abiit, quia aliqui ita fortes sunt, quod non retrocedunt. Et vocavit Petrum et Andream, et mansit cum eis, Io. I, 38 ss. Quia igitur isti adhuc imperfecti erant, nec habiles ad sequendum, ideo abiit inde. Et ecce unus accedens et cetera. Hic agit de perfectione paupertatis; et quia duplex est via, via communis, et specialis, ut est continentia: via prima est via salutis, secunda perfectionis: ideo primo de prima, secundo de secunda. Et primo ponitur interrogatio; secundo Christi responsio; tertio responsionis expositio.
19:16
Interrogatio ponitur et ecce unus accedens ait illi: magister bone. De isto diversa est opinio, quia Hieronymus dicit quod erat perversus corde: et hoc patet, quia abiit tristis; unde si bono corde accessisset, non abiisset tristis. Chrysostomus dicit quod a passione avaritiae detinebatur; ideo ferre non potuit: et hoc patet, quia non causa tentandi venit; quia quando aliqui veniebant ad Iesum causa tentandi, dominus semper respondebat eorum malitiae: ut quid me tentatis? Vel huiusmodi; sed nullum ponit hic. Unde patet, quod non tentator erat, sed imperfectus, qui ad Deum accedebat, ut perficeretur; Ps. XXXIII, 6: accedite ad eum et illuminamini. Magister bone et cetera. Vocat eum magistrum, quasi scientem: talis enim debet esse magister, qui sciat. Item vocat bonum: de ratione boni est se communicare; unde Sap. VII, 13: sine invidia communico. Ipse enim vere bonus est; Ps. CXVIII, 68: bonus es tu, et in bonitate tua doce me iustificationes tuas. Quid boni faciam, ut habeam vitam aeternam? Audierat multa de vita aeterna. Bene audierat, Ps. XXXVI, 27: declina a malo, et fac bonum; sed in lege non audierat promitti vitam aeternam, sed temporalia tantum. Is. I, 19: bona terrae comedetis. Qui dicit ei, quid me interrogas? Hic ponit responsionem. Primo respondet, ut in Marco habetur, quid me dicis bonum? Hic autem quid me interrogas? Utrumque potest intelligi. Sed quod Matthaeus dicit quid me interrogas? Non habet calumniam; secundum vero id quod dicit Marcus, assumpserunt Ariani errorem, dicentes quod pater est bonus per essentiam, filius per participationem; ideo ponebant filium inaequalem patri. Sed notandum quod dicit: unus est bonus Deus. Sed nomine Dei pater, et filius, et spiritus sanctus intelligitur: unde ab hoc excluditur alia creatura, quia non per essentiam bona est. Sed quare respondet sic? Dicit Hieronymus quod respondet ad mentem ipsius, qui illam bonitatem commendabat, quae solet esse in homine; quia magis adhaerebant traditionibus hominum quam Dei, sicut supra XV, 6 dicitur: irritum fecistis mandatum Dei propter traditiones vestras. Ideo reprehendit eum, quia petebat ab eo tamquam ab homine bono, non autem tamquam a Deo.
19:17
Sed quid est quod dicit quid me interrogas de bono? Hoc dicit tamquam cognoscens eius affectum, quia non habebat animum ad obediendum bono, et omne bonum temporale est imperfectum et umbra respectu boni divini; Is. LXIV, 6: omnes iustitiae vestrae tamquam pannus menstruatae. Unde omnia ista bona sunt a Deo; ideo si vis habere ea, pete ab eo: ipse enim solus est bonus; Ps. CXXXV, v. 1: confitemini domino, quoniam bonus. Ideo recurre ad Deum. Si vis ad vitam ingredi, serva mandata. Quidam enim habent vitam imperfectam, quidam perfectam et quidam totaliter extra vitam sunt, ut qui in peccato sunt, vel infideles, quia iustus ex fide vivit, Hebr. X, 38. Quidam igitur habent vitam inchoatam et imperfectam, ut iusti in hoc mundo; illi vero perfectam, qui iam sunt in vita aeterna; unde si vis ad vitam ingredi, serva mandata, quia introducitur homo per mandata. Ez. XX, 11: dedi eis mandata mea, et iudicia mea ostendi eis. Sed numquid mandata sufficiebant ad salutem? Dico quod non, nisi ex fide mediatoris, et caritate; unde apostolus ad Gal. II, 21: si ex lege est iustitia, ergo frustra mortuus est Christus. Item Prov. VII, 2: serva mandata mea, et vives. Dicit illi, quae? Sequitur responsionis expositio, in qua mandata replicat. Et primo ponit mandata; secundo radicem, ibi diliges proximum tuum sicut teipsum.
19:18
Dicit ergo Iesus autem dixit: non homicidium facies et cetera. Et quare non facit mentionem de mandatis primae tabulae? Quia pronum videbat ad dilectionem Dei, ideo non fuit necesse. Item haec sunt praevia ad dilectionem. Et primo ponit negativum; secundo affirmativum. Primo incipit a maiori non homicidium facies, quod est contra vitam in actu; non adulterabis, quod est contra vitam in potentia; non furtum facies, quod est contra bona personae; non falsum testimonium dices, quod est contra personam. Item affirmativum ponit: honora patrem.
19:19
Deinde ponit radicem diliges proximum tuum sicut teipsum. Rom. XIII, 8: qui diligit proximum, legem implevit.
19:20
Dicit ei adolescens: omnia haec custodivi a iuventute mea. Postquam dominus tradidit doctrinam communis salutis, hic tradit doctrinam perfectionis. Et primo tradit doctrinam; secundo necessitatem huius doctrinae; tertio praemium observationis. Secunda ibi Iesus autem dixit discipulis suis; tertia ibi respondens Petrus et cetera. Et primo ponitur occasio doctrinae dandae; secundo promulgatio; tertio effectus. Secunda ibi dicit ei Iesus etc.; tertia ibi cum audisset adolescens verbum, abiit tristis. Occasio promulgandi hanc doctrinam est petitio adolescentis. Et primo confitetur se observatorem legalium; secundo petit quae sit perfectio, ad quam pervenire possit, ibi quid adhuc mihi deest? Dicit ergo omnia haec custodivi a iuventute mea; et dicit omnia, quia non sufficit unum facere tantum, nisi omnia serventur; Iacob. II, 10: qui offenderit in uno, factus est omnium reus. Item dicit a iuventute; Prov. XXII, 6: adolescens iuxta viam suam, et cum senuerit, non recedet ab ea. Unde conveniebat ei quod dicitur Iob XXIII, 12: a via labiorum non recessi. Utrum autem verum dixerit, est quaestio. Hieronymus dicit quod mentitus est: quod patet, quia ante hoc immediate praecedit, diliges proximum tuum sicut teipsum. Si sic dilexisset, non abiisset tristis, cum dominus dixit vade, et vende omnia quae habes, et da pauperibus. Chrysostomus dicit quod verum dixit quod legalia servaverat; et confirmatur per illud quod habetur in Marco X, 21, quod cum intuitus esset eum Iesus, dilexit eum, quod non fecisset, nisi bonus esset. Est enim duplex via. Una sufficiens ad salutem; et haec est dilectio Dei et proximi cum sui beneficio, sine suo gravamine, secundum quod habetur I Cor. VIII, 3: qui diligit Deum, cognitus est ab eo, et hanc servaverat. Alia est perfectionis, ut diligere proximum cum sui detrimento; et hanc non servaverat; ideo cum nuntiata fuit ei abiit tristis. Prima non fuit contentus; ideo petiit quid mihi deest adhuc? Quilibet tenetur facere hanc quaestionem, secundum quod dicitur: notum fac mihi, domine, finem meum, et numerum dierum meorum quis est, ut sciam quid desit mihi. Ipse enim solus scit quid desit nobis. Imperfectum meum viderunt oculi tui, Ps. CXXXVIII, 16.
19:21
Dicit ei Iesus: si vis perfectus esse, vade et cetera. Primo ponitur studium; secundo via; tertio, quia difficilis, ponitur praemium; quarto consummatio perfectionis. Dicit ergo si vis perfectus esse, vade, et vende omnia quae habes, et da pauperibus. Debemus enim niti ad perfectionem; Hebr. VI, 1: intermittentes inchoationis Christi sermonem, ad perfectum feramur. Sed quaerit Origenes: perfectio legis est dilectio; sed dixerat diliges proximum tuum sicut teipsum, quare ergo dixit si vis perfectus esse, cum iam perfectus esset? Dicunt quidam quod in quibusdam libris non ponitur illud diliges proximum tuum sicut teipsum. Et hoc patet, quia in Marco non ponitur. Aliter potest dici quod illud dixit, sed non hoc ordine, quia in Evangelio Nazaraeorum ita est, dominus dixit, non homicidium facies etc., usque ad illud de dilectione. Et post sequitur, haec omnia etc., et deinde sequitur, diliges proximum et cetera. Tamen plana est solutio, quia duplex est dilectio proximi, scilicet dilectio secundum viam communem, et dilectio perfectionis. Unde dicit vade, et vende omnia etc., non partem, sicut fecerunt Ananias et Saphira, ut habetur in Act. V, 2. Et da pauperibus, non divitibus. I ad Cor. XIII, 3: si distribuero facultates meas in cibos pauperum. Ps. CXI, 9: dispersit, dedit pauperibus. Et non uni, sed pluribus. Sed quid est? Nonne statim talis esset perfectus? Videtur quod non, quia adhuc passiones sunt in eo; ergo non est perfectus in virtute. Origenes dicit quod statim perfectus est, sicut illi perfecti sunt quibus bona sua distribuit. II ad Cor. VIII, 14: vestra abundantia inopiam illorum suppleat; et illorum abundantia inopiae vestrae sit supplemento. Unde perfectio illorum transit in illum, sicut qui recipit prophetam in nomine prophetae, mercedem prophetae accipiet etc. supra X, 41. Unde via perfectionis non est vade et vende omnia quae habes; sed tantum hoc quod sequitur et da pauperibus. Alia responsio est si vis perfectus esse, non quod statim sis perfectus, sed quoddam principium habebis perfectionis, quia exoneratus istis, poteris facilius contemplari caelestia. Augustinus dicit quod vigiliae et huiusmodi sunt instrumenta perfectionis; sed in hoc quod sequitur est perfectio et sequere me. Unde supra IV, 20: Petrus et Andreas, relictis omnibus, secuti sunt eum. Et sic etiam Matthaeus supra IX, 9. Sed cum dimittis haec omnia, melior usus est dare pauperibus, et in hoc considerandus est proximus. Unde si non est in illis perfectio, in quo consistit? Dicendum quod in perfectione caritatis; Col. III, 14: super omnia caritatem habentes, quae est vinculum perfectionis. Unde dilectio Dei est perfectio, sed dimissio rerum est via ad perfectionem. Et quomodo? Augustinus in libro LXXXIII quaest. dicit quod augmentum caritatis est diminutio cupiditatis; perfectio caritatis, nulla cupiditas. Ille ergo perfectus est in caritate, qui diligit Deum usque ad contemptum sui et suorum. Unde difficile et quasi impossibile est quod aliquis possideat divitias, quin eis alliciatur: et hoc patet de Gregorio, de quo legitur, quod cum cogitasset melius se famulaturum Christo sub specie saeculari, coeperunt contra eum tot succrescere, ut non iam specie tantum, sed etiam mente retineretur. Ideo nihil est quod animum tam liberum faciat sicut quod non occupetur circa divitias: et haec est via perfectionis. Unde aliud est esse perfectum, et habere statum perfectionis. Quicumque habet caritatem perfectam usque ad contemptum sui et suorum, perfectionem habet. Status perfectionis duplex est, praelatorum et religiosorum; sed aequivoce, quia status religiosorum est ad acquirendum perfectionem; unde isti dictum est: si vis esse perfectus, et si vis ad perfectionis statum venire. Status autem praelationis non est ad acquirendum sibi, sed ad habitam communicandam: unde dominus, Io. ult., 17, dixit Petro: Petre, si diligis me, pasce oves meas; et non dixit si vis perfectus esse et cetera. Unde talis est differentia inter perfectionem religiosorum et praelatorum, qualis inter discipulum et magistrum. Unde discipulo dicitur: si vis addiscere, intra scholas ut addiscas. Magistro dicitur: lege, et perfice. Unde securior est status religiosorum, quia ignorantia non imputatur eis sicut praelato. Unde sicut ridiculum esset magistro quod nihil sciret, sic et cetera. Sed dato quod uterque faciat quantum ad eum pertinet, et bene utatur officio suo, dico quod non est comparatio, nisi sicut inter discipulum et magistrum: unde in statu perfectiori est praelatus, etiam si des Eliam, vel quemcumque. Sed est quaestio: si praelatus est perfectus, nonne tenetur omnia vendere? Dico quod istud sequeretur, si in hoc quod est vade, et vende omnia quae habes, esset perfectio; sed non est, sed est via et praeambulum ad acquirendum perfectionem; ideo non oportet quod vendat ea quae habet. Sed quia hoc raro contingit, quod quis perfectionem cum divitiis habeat, ab eo qui venit ad perfectionem, relinquenda sunt omnia; ideo dat dominus quod facilius est. Unde si praelatus esset idoneus, et curam bene ministraret, dico quod esset perfectior; sicut aliquis potest dicere: volo intrare scholas ut addiscam, sed praesumptuosum est dicere, cum nihil sciat, velle se esse magistrum. Unde Augustinus de Civit. Dei: status superior, sine quo populus regi non potest, etsi decenter administretur, indecenter tamen appetitur. Item est aliud esse praelatum, et in statu praelati. Numquid in statu perfectionis sunt sacerdotes plebei, vel curati? Dico quod non sunt in statu, quia non faciunt statum. Omnis status cum solemnitate datur, ut ordo episcopatus et religio. Cum autem datur plebania, non datur cum solemnitate, unde statum non habent perfectionis: quod patet, quia aliquibus committitur cura et administratio, et si non sit promotus, potest dimittere et uxorari, et aliquando factus est religiosus. Episcopus autem non dimitteret episcopatum, nisi de licentia superioris; curatus potest intrando religionem. Si autem esset in statu perfectiori, iam caderet a statu, et sic peccaret: unde perfectionem potest habere secundum actum, sed non statum; quia non datur status, nisi cum solemnitate. Vade ergo et vende omnia quae habes, et da pauperibus, quia per istud magnum habebis praemium, quia praemium respondet merito. Et habebis thesaurum in caelo. In thesauro duo sunt, stabilitas et abundantia. Habebis thesaurum et abundantiam spiritualium. Ps. CXI, 3: gloria et divitiae in domo eius. Is. XXXIII, 6: et erit fides in temporibus tuis, divitiae salutis, sapientia et scientia. Et veni, sequere me. Hic est finis perfectionis. Unde illi sunt perfecti, qui toto corde sequuntur Deum. Unde Gen. XVII, v. 1: ambula coram me, et esto perfectus. Et sequere me, idest imitare vitam Christi; unde supra XVI, 24: si quis vult venire post me, abneget semetipsum. Imitatio enim est in sollicitudine praedicandi, docendi, curam habendi. Unde Chrysostomus: dictum est Petro, sequere me, scilicet in suscipiendo curam totius mundi. Iob XXIII, 11: vestigia eius custodivit pes meus. Cum autem audisset adolescens verbum, abiit tristis. Ostenditur affectus, quia abiit tristis. Hoc accidit cum desideramus aliquid, et non possumus habere ut optamus; unde iste desiderabat perfectionem, et audivit quid per hoc debebat habere. Et quia cupidus erat, abiit tristis. Et quare?
19:22
Erat enim habens multas possessiones. Augustinus: ille qui dimisit voluntatem habendi, est magni meriti, quia imputatur ei quod habere potuit; sed maioris meriti est dimittere quod iam acquisivit, quia difficilius est quod evellantur quae iam sunt unita, quam quae non sunt unita. Et hoc patet, quia iste, qui habebat, separari non poterat. Iesus autem dixit discipulis suis. Hic ponitur ratio praedictae doctrinae. Et primo assignatur ratio; secundo satisfacit admirationi discipulorum, ibi auditis autem his, discipuli mirabantur valde.
19:23
Dicit ergo Iesus autem dixit discipulis suis et cetera. Occasio dicendi verbum istud fuit, quia ille abiit tristis, quia dixerat, vade, vende quae habes et cetera. Quia difficile dives intrabit in regnum caelorum: non dicit impossibile. Et dicit dives, non qui habet divitias: quia quidam habent, et non amant eas, quidam autem habent, et amant, et confidunt in eis. Hi qui habent, et non amant, possunt ingredi in regnum caelorum. Si enim hoc non esset, non diceret Paulus: divitibus huius saeculi praecipe non sublime sapere, neque sperare in incerto divitiarum. Sed qui habet et amat, difficile est et cetera. Supra XIII, 22: sollicitudo saeculi huius, et fallacia divitiarum suffocant verbum. Prov. c. XXVIII, 20: qui festinat ditari non erit innocens. Eccli. XXXI, 8: beatus dives, qui inventus est sine macula, qui post aurum non abiit et cetera. Sed hoc est difficile; ideo sequitur: quis est hic, et laudabimus eum? Fecit enim mirabilia in vita sua.
19:24
Addit aliquid quod ad impossibilitatem videtur pertinere; unde dicit et iterum dico vobis, facilius est camelum per foramen acus transire, quam divitem intrare in regnum caelorum. Supra dominus dixerat quod divitem erat difficile intrare in regnum caelorum; hic quod impossibile, sicut impossibile est quod camelus per foramen acus transeat: unde accipite divitem, qui habet divitias, et non amat, difficile est; illum autem qui amat, et in eis confidit, impossibile est intrare in regnum caelorum. Quod enim camelus non possit intrare per foramen acus, hoc est ex natura; quod autem dives qui amat divitias non possit intrare in regnum caelorum, hoc est ex divina iustitia; sed prius possent omnia subverti, quam divina iustitia immutari. Alii, sicut Hieronymus: non designatur impossibilitas, sed difficultas. In quadam Glossa invenitur, cuius auctor ignoratur, quod Ierosolymis erat porta quae vocabatur foramen acus, per quam non poterant cameli onerati transire: ita non potest dives intrare in regnum caelorum, nisi exoneret se ex affectu divitiarum. Sed facilius est quod camelus exoneretur, quam dives hunc affectum deponat. Chrysostomus mystice exponit: per camelum significantur gentes, qui peccato idololatriae onerati sunt, per divites Iudaei; acus autem Christus, foramen acus est passio. Unde facilius fuit gentilem populum transire per passionem Christi, quam Iudaeos, quia non poterant venire nisi dimittendo caeremonias legis, et hoc ipsi non facerent. Unde quaesitum est a Daemone, quod est gravius peccatum, et dixit habere de alieno; cui responsum est, tu mentiris. Immo, dicit, quia alios peccatores saepe amitto, istos autem non amitto. Vel sic facilius est etc., ut per divitem intelligamus superbum; per camelum Christum; per foramen acus Christi passionem: ideo facilius fuit camelum transire per foramen acus, quam superbum humiliari. Auditis autem his, discipuli mirabantur valde, dicentes: quis poterit ergo salvus esse? Supra dominus assignavit rationem suae doctrinae, hic satisfacit admirationi discipulorum. Et primo ponitur admiratio; secundo satisfactio, ibi aspiciens autem Iesus dixit illis.
19:25
Dicit ergo auditis autem his, discipuli mirabantur valde, dicentes: quis poterit salvus esse? Sed hic est quaestio litteralis. Cum plures sint pauperes quam divites, et divites difficile sit salvari, quomodo dicunt quis poterit salvus esse? Respondetur quod intellexerunt quod intelligeret etiam de pauperibus qui sunt divites voluntate; quia plures sunt pauperes, qui voluntate sunt divites. Item ipsi iam erant effecti solliciti pro toto mundo: ideo ingruebat eis illa sollicitudo, quae habetur II ad Cor. XI, 28, ut solliciti erant rectores omnium creaturarum. Aspiciens autem Iesus dixit eis: apud homines hoc impossibile est et cetera.
19:26
Hic satisfacit admirationi dicens: apud homines hoc impossibile est, apud Deum autem omnia possibilia. Sed quid est quod dicit? Videtur enim quod perit liberum arbitrium, si impossibile est apud homines. Verum est quod homo a se habet ut possit peccare; sed resurgere, et opera salutis facere, hoc non habet a se sine auxilio gratiae Dei: ipse enim Deus est qui ista potest. Ad Rom. IX, 16: non est currentis, nec volentis, sed miserentis Dei. Unde Iob c. XLII, 1: scio quod omnia potes, et apud te non est impossibile. Unde secundum potentiam humanam impossibile est hominem salvum fieri, quia potentia humana non immutat voluntatem; sed solius Dei est immutare eam, sicut habetur Phil. II, 13: qui operatur in nobis velle et perficere. Consequenter determinat de praemio perfectorum. Et primo ponitur interrogatio; secundo responsio, ibi Iesus autem dixit illis. Petrus audierat paupertatem laudari, et audierat: vade, et vende omnia quae habes, et da pauperibus.
19:27
Audierat etiam quod difficile est divites intrare in regnum caelorum, ideo reputabat Petrus magnum fecisse, quia omnia dimiserat; unde dicit tunc respondens Petrus dixit ei: ecce nos reliquimus omnia. Et quia non solum illud audierat, vade, et vende, sed ulterius, et sequere me etc.; ideo addit Petrus et secuti sumus te. Relinquere omnia non facit perfectionem, sed relinquere omnia et sequi Christum, quia multi philosophi reliquerunt omnia. Sed reliquerat Petrus navem et rete. Sed Petrus magis de affectu suo laudatur quam de eo quod reliquit, quia ita prona voluntate dimisit, quod etiam totum dimisisset, si habuisset. Item sciebat quod Christus sciebat suam voluntatem, ideo dicit ecce nos et cetera. Per quod dedit exemplum, quod non reputentur pauca dimisisse qui dimiserunt quod habebant, etiamsi pauca haberent. Et dicit Hieronymus, quod dimittere non facit perfectionem, sed sequi dominum. Et multipliciter aliquis sequitur Deum. Mente per contemplationem; Osee VI, 3: sciemus sequemurque, ut cognoscamus dominum. Unde illi Deum sequuntur, qui Deum habent prae oculis, et Deum cognoscunt per modum contemplationis. Item sequitur dominum per observantiam mandatorum; Io. X, v. 17: oves meae vocem meam audiunt, et sequuntur me. Item per imitationem operis; Iob XXXIII, 11: vestigia eius secutus est pes meus. Item per contemptum sui et suorum; supra XVI, 24: si quis vult venire post me, abneget semetipsum, et tollat crucem suam, et sequatur me. Item per puritatem mentis et corporis; Apoc. XIV, 4: hi sunt qui cum mulieribus non sunt coinquinati; virgines enim sunt, et sequuntur agnum quocumque ierit. Ad istam sequelam disponit voluntaria paupertas. Iesus autem dixit illis, amen dico vobis et cetera. Hic agit de praemio perfectionis. Et primo ponit praemium perfectionis apostolorum; secundo perfectionis aliorum; tertio excludit quamdam obiectionem. Secunda ibi et omnis qui reliquerit etc.; tertia ibi multi autem erunt primi novissimi et cetera. Dicit ergo amen dico vobis et cetera. Quia enim voluit esse certum quod dixerat, ideo veritatem dixisse profitetur dicendo amen.
19:28
Et ut ostenderet quod perfectio non est in hoc vade, et vende omnia quae habes, sed in hoc sequere me; ideo dicit quod vos qui secuti estis me, in regeneratione (...) sedebitis super sedes duodecim et cetera. Regeneratio duplex est. Una quae est spiritus, quae fit per gratiam in Baptismo, de qua I Petr. I, 3: regeneravit nos in spem vivam. Item est regeneratio corporis: sicut enim spiritus per gratiam regeneratur, sic et in resurrectione, resuscitabit corpora nostra. Ad Philip. III, 21: reformabit corpus humilitatis nostrae configuratum corpori claritatis suae. Quidam exponunt de prima regeneratione, et punctant sic vos qui secuti estis me in regeneratione, idest regenerati estis per gratiam, sedebitis et cetera. Chrysostomus eodem modo, sed non punctat sic; unde dicit quod promisit eis praemium in praesenti sic vos qui secuti estis me (...) sedebitis. Praesens Ecclesia est fides Christi. In Ecclesia ista sunt diversi status hominum. Et quamvis omnes virtutes necessariae sint ad salutem, tamen unus laudabilior est in actu unius virtutis quam alterius: alii in fide, alii in castitate, alii in caritate. Et sicut in diversis fidelibus, sic et in apostolis, quia Petrus ferventissimus zelator fidei fuit, sed Ioannes in castitate polluit; sic qui fervent in fide sunt sedes Petri, in castitate Ioannis, et sic de aliis. Sed omnes sunt sedes Christi, quia omnes virtutes fuerunt in eo; ideo promisit eis quod ipsi essent futuri pastores Ecclesiae. Aliter, secundum Augustinum, accipitur de regeneratione, scilicet pro resurrectione amen dico vobis in regeneratione, idest in resurrectione, cum revocabuntur secundum corpus et animam, sedebitis, scilicet in sede maiestatis, idest iudiciariam potestatem habebitis, iudicantes duodecim tribus Israel, quia sicut dedit Deus filio iudicium, sic et datur his qui secuti sunt eum. Sed quid est quod dicit super tribus Israel? Numquid alios non iudicabunt? Quare ergo plus dicit super duodecim tribus Israel? Intelligitur tota plebs fidelium totius mundi, quia intravit gentilitas in pinguedinem olivae, et facta est consors promissionis factae patribus. Illi autem qui sunt infideles, non iudicabuntur: nam dicit Gregorius quod quidam damnantur, et non iudicantur, ut infideles: quidam autem damnantur, et iudicantur, ut qui crediderunt et perversi fuerunt. Et, ut ponit Hieronymus, aliter condemnantur hostes, aliter qui in fide permansit; quia hostes condemnantur absentes, alii vero praesentes. Ideo iudicabitis duodecim tribus Israel. Quia apostoli conversati sunt cum Iudaeis; ideo dicitur quod iudicabunt duodecim tribus. Et quomodo? Comparatione, quia eos monuerant. Possent dicere: quomodo crederemus quod tu esses Deus, qui eras mortaliter vivens inter nos? et cetera. Sed dicet dominus: vos eratis sapientes in lege, et non credidistis; isti erant piscatores, et crediderunt. Chrysostomus quaerit quid magnum datum sit apostolis. Nonne hoc datum etiam est Ninivitis et reginae Austri? Supra XII, 41. Dicit Chrysostomus quod ipse modus ostendit auctoritatem iudicandi esse datam apostolis, quia iudicantes auctoritate iudicant sedendo, advocati et accusatores condemnant stando; ideo ad designandum quod apostoli iudicabunt auctoritate, dicit sedebitis. De Ninivitis vero dicit viri Ninivitae surgent in iudicio cum generatione ista, et condemnabunt eam. Sed hic est quaestio, quia aliqui damnabuntur et non iudicabuntur: sic aliqui salvabuntur et non iudicabuntur, ut apostoli et apostolici viri; alii vero salvandi iudicabuntur, et merita eorum discutientur. Et qualiter iudicabunt? Dicunt aliqui per comparationem. Sed hoc non sufficit, quia sic etiam regina Austri iudicabit. Quidam dicunt quod per iudicium Christi. Sed hoc non sufficit, quia sic omnes sancti approbabunt. Ps. LVII, 11: laetabitur iustus cum viderit vindictam. Item dicunt quidam per quamdam venerabilem iustitiam, quia elevabuntur iusti in aera Christo obviam, et erunt assessores Christi. Sed hoc etiam non sufficit, quia dicit sedebitis et vos iudicantes. Dicunt quidam quod iudicabunt sicut liber iudicat: iudicat enim, quia ibi scriptae sunt leges, quae illum iudicant; sicut corda apostolorum et iustorum, qui custodierunt mandata Dei, erunt liber eos condemnans. Mortui iudicati sunt, libris apertis, Apoc. XX, v. 12. Sed plus est, quia aliud exercebunt. Unde in Ps. CXLIX, 6: gladii ancipites in manibus eorum. Quomodo ergo iudicabunt? Videte. Erit iudicium mentale, quia virtute divina fiet quod singulis ad memoriam omnia peccata sua reducantur. Unde deceptus fuit Lactantius qui ponit resurrectionem fieri ante iudicium per mille annos. Istud ergo erit mentale iudicium, quia per virtutem divinam reducentur ad memoriam ea, quae fecit unusquisque. Sed non est inconveniens quod aliquis recipiat ab aliquo lumen aliquod, quia Angeli a Deo recipiunt, et homines ab Angelis; ideo non est mirum quod homines illuminentur ab apostolis qui pleni erunt; ideo non solum iudicabunt, sed etiam quoddam lumen ab eis alii iusti recipient. Sed differenter Christus et apostoli, quia Christus auctoritate, illi vero sicut promulgatores: sicut lex per Angelos data est, sic et executio iudicii fiet per Angelos, quia ecce Angeli dicuntur (Iob XXXVI, 6: pauperibus iudicium dabitur) qui iustitiam secuti sunt, et omnia dimiserunt. Et quare iudicabunt? Una ratio, quia peccata de mundo sunt. Unde illi qui debent iudicare, debent esse de extra mundum, et tales sunt apostoli et apostolici viri; unde Io. XV, 9: elegi vos de mundo. Item dicit philosophus quod virtuosus est iudex omnium hominum, sicut gustus omnium gustabilium. Sicut ergo qui vult aliquid gustare, dat ad gustandum ei qui habet gustum sanum: sic cum virtuosus habeat gustum sanum, ideo ipse regula est omnium actuum; ideo perfecti viri ut regula iudicabunt. Item alia ratio, quia sunt alieni a mundo, ideo magis ferventer sequuntur Christum. Isti ergo debent magis iudicare, quia de rebus contemplandis incalescunt; Ps. XXXVIII, 4: concaluit cor meum intra me, et in meditatione mea exardescet ignis. Ideo etiam quia magis assueti, sunt magis ferventes. Item quia erant pauperes et magis abiecti, sed meritum abiectionis est exaltatio; ideo exaltabuntur. Ideo dicit sedebitis iudicantes et cetera. Sed numquid Iudas iudicabit? Non, quia istae promissiones semper sunt sub conditione; ideo dominus dicit vos qui secuti estis me et cetera. Unde qui secutus fuerit, et perseveraverit, iudicabit et cetera. Sed si isti iudicant, quid faciet Paulus? Si iam sedes plenae sunt, ubi ergo Paulus? Augustinus dicit quod per duodecim significatur universitas, quae per septem volvitur. Numerus ergo duodenus fit ex multitudine septem, quia septenarius numerus consistit ex tribus et quatuor, et ter quatuor sunt duodecim, vel quater tria; ideo per istum numerum significatur universitas electorum. Et omnis qui reliquerit domum vel fratres et cetera. Posito praemio apostolorum, hic ponitur aliorum: et sunt hic quaestiones. Prima quare apostolis nihil temporale promisit, aliis vero aliquod temporale, quia centuplum accipiet et cetera. Et hoc patet, quia in Marco habetur quod centuplum in praesenti. Secundum Chrysostomum promissum fuit apostolis aliquod temporale, quia iudicium in Ecclesia Dei, ut prius dictum est. Vel aliter, quia allicitur unusquisque secundum illud ad quod afficitur. Unde qui dimisit mundum et ea quae sunt in mundo, non alliciunt eum ea quae sunt in mundo; sed alii, qui alligati sunt rebus saecularibus, alliciuntur per eas. Ideo apostolis, quia totum dimiserant, nihil temporale promisit; sed aliis, quia habent affectum ad temporalia; ideo apostolis iudicium promisit. Vel, secundum Origenem, quod dictum est, in regeneratione, hoc est praemium eorum, qui omnia reliquerunt propter Christum. Sed posset aliquis dicere: nolo omnia propter te dimittere, sed dimittam unam domum, vel unum agrum et cetera. Dico quod si aliquid relinquis, aliquid habebis; sed si omnia, iudex eris. Sed est alia quaestio.
19:29
Dixit domum, et de hoc non est dubium; sed dicit patrem aut matrem et cetera. Qui iubet dimitti patrem aut matrem, iubet peccatum. Item ipse praecepit quod non dimittatur uxor, quod honorentur parentes. Dicendum quod in istis duo considerantur: naturalis affinitas, et haec non est contemnenda, sed bene faciendum est eis si indigent. Aliquando vero retrahunt a servitio Dei: unde tunc sunt sicut membrum scandalizans et tunc abscindendum est illud membrum; et ideo praecepit haec relinquere. Item alia ratio, quia dominus praevidit tempus futurae persecutionis, quod insurgeret frater contra fratrem; ideo vult hominem separari ab eis. Alia quaestio est cum dicit centuplum accipiet etc., quomodo intelligatur. Quidam dixerunt quod sancti resurgent ante iudicium per mille annos, et tunc Christus habebit regnum completum: et tunc qui dimisit domum, habebit centuplum. Hieronymus improbat, quia non habebit centum patres et cetera. Item turpitudo significatur, quia non habebit centum uxores. Ideo dicit Augustinus quod intelligitur quoad spiritualia. Unde nos elegit dominus pauperes in hoc mundo et haeredes regni: unde intelligitur gratia Dei, quae ponderat omni eo quod dimittis, et in infinitum; ideo ponit finitum pro infinito. Unde centuplum accipiet, idest aliquid quod valet centuplum. Origenes dicit quod etiam ad litteram est intelligendum. Tu dimittis agrum, ex providentia Dei erit quod invenies multos ad servitium tuum; unde conveniet eis illud II Cor. VI, 10: tamquam nihil habentes, et omnia possidentes. Item fratres invenies, idest omnes viros spirituales. Item praeter hanc vitam aeternam; Io. X, 27: oves meae vocem meam audiunt, et ego cognosco eas, et sequuntur me, et ego vitam aeternam do eis.
19:30
Consequenter introducit incidens multi autem erunt primi novissimi, et novissimi primi. Illi qui relinquunt aliquid propter Christum, vel omnia, si negligenter vivant, habebuntne istud praemium? Dico quod non, quia imperfecte assumpserunt, et non erunt primi, sed novissimi. Vel aliter, quia possent dicere vos qui reliquistis omnia etc. iudicabimus sic. Qui per superbiam elati erant primi, sunt novissimi. Origenes dicit quod potest intelligi de his qui veniunt ad Christum, et tepide vivunt; post veniunt alii ferventes, et fervore suo transcendunt alios. Vel primos vocat qui ex Christianis nati sunt, qui novissimi facti sunt respectu aliorum qui fuerunt ex gentibus vel Iudaeis. Vel potest referri ad homines, vel Angelos; quia qui primi sunt in ordine Angelorum, facti sunt novissimi per culpam; et novissimi, idest homines, fient primi et superiores.
19:1
When Jesus had ended these words. EITHER when He had finished the whole conversation, or more probably, perhaps, the parable concluded in the last chapter.
He departed from Galilee. S. Hilary reads "into Galilee" with an opposite meaning. It is certain that Christ was at this time in Galilee, and therefore could not depart into it. Besides, S. Luke says (ix. 51), that He departed thence that He might go to Jerusalem. S. Hilary probably thinks that He came not into Judaea but into its confines. It has been questioned whether this is the history of the same events as those in 5. Mark x. I ; 5. Luke ix. 51 ; 5. John vu. 10. All agree that S. Matthew and S. Mark speak of the same event. The doubt is of the other two ; for each relates many things afterwards which could not have happened subsequently to this arrival of Christ in Judaea. There seems no doubt that S. Luke relates the same history : 1. Because it appears that this was the last journey of Christ into Judaea. 2. Because the Evangelists do not mention any journey after this one. 3. Because Christ signified this, saying (xvi. 21, xvii. 22), that He would go up to Jerusalem and there suffer, speaking as if His death were near at hand. S. Luke also speaks of it as the last journey. That he afterwards relates many things which took place subsequently to this departure need not seem extraordinary, as we continually see that the Evangelists do not observe the order of events. Many think that S. John also describes the same events. This hardly seems credible because — 1. Christ says (vu. 6) that His time had not yet come, but in vS*. Matthew He twice declares the contrary : that the time of His Passion was at hand. 2. He is said in S. John (vu. 9, 10) to have gone up to Judaea alone ; while it is said here that not only the disciples but also a great multitude followed Him. 3. Lastly, the departure of which S. John there speaks was not the last : as he says afterwards (xi. 7) that Christ came into Judaea again to raise Lazarus.
And came into the coasts of Judcea. S. Hilary, as before said, thinks that Christ did not come into Judaea, but only to the confines of that country and Galilee ; and S. Chrysostom and Euthymius agree with him. Some think, on the contrary, but apparently with no good reason, that He came to Jerusalem first, and then returned again to the regions of Judaea and Galilee. For the Evangelist declares plainly that He came directly from Galilee to the confines of Judaea, and that great multitudes followed Him. He came then into the confines of Judaea that He might come to Jerusalem. The Evangelist mentioned that place to describe exactly the scene of the miracle which he was about to relate : " And," he says, " He healed them there ".
19:2
And He healed them there. This does not mean that Christ healed all who followed Him, but all who were sick, and perhaps not all these, but only such as were worthy, as supra, xiv. 14. S. Mark (x. i) writes that He taught those who followed Him, which S. Matthew passes over. But even if S. Mark had not said this, we might have inferred it from Christ's custom. He rarely performed a miracle without teaching. For He always united acts with His words ; as S. Chrysostom and Euthymius have observed.
There. That is, on the confines of Galilee and Judaea : for He would not have the Galileans who had followed Him come out of their own country ; or, as The Author supposed, that the Jews, who were slanderers, might not say that He led a great multitude after Him for the sake of His own glory.
19:3
And there came to Him. It is not said whether the Pharisees came to Christ in the same place, but it is most likely that they did so, for the order of the history both in S. Matthew and 5. Mark seems to imply as much. And this is the opinion of S. Chrysostom and Theophylact.
For every cause. They do not say "for any cause," but "for every cause". For they had no doubt about some causes, as Origen ( Tract, vu. on S. Matt?), S. Jerome, and Bede say. CH.XIX. 4.] PHARISEES' QUESTION OF DIVORCE. lip There has been a doubt on what occasion the Pharisees put this question. Some think that it was because of what Christ had said : " All the Prophets and the Law prophesied until John" (xi. 13), as if He meant that the Law was now abrogated ; and the Pharisees wished to know whether He would say this, in answering their question. But this reason seems very remote and not very applicable to the subject ; both because Christ had long since declared such to be the case, and as they might have raised many other questions with the same object. Theophylact thinks that the question was caused by Christ's words (chap. v. 32). The Author, that the Pharisees raised the question of marriage as being themselves carnal ; as they who are in ill-health talk continually of medicines. It may have been, as has been suggested, that the question was being agitated at the time by the Jews, like that of paying tribute to Caesar (xxii. 17). Men ask different questions at different times. It is a conjecture worthy of the minds of the Pharisees that they asked this question rather than any other, because, as it concerned all men, it was full of invidiousness.
19:4
Have you not read. Christ, in reply, exposed their ignorance of the Law, on the knowledge of which they especially prided themselves. Christ had done the same thing before (xii. 3-5), as Euthymius observes. S. Mark says that Christ asked them what Moses had commanded, which seems opposed to the passage. S. Augustin (u. 62, De Consens. Evang.) says that S. Mark wished to express, not the words, but the will of Christ. It is probable that Christ said what both S. Matthew and S. Mark relate, but that He first asked the Pharisees, " What did Moses command you ? " and they answered, " Moses permitted us to write a bill of divorce and put her away ". Then Christ replied, " Have you not read that He who made them in the beginning?" &c. (verse 4). To this the Pharisees objected again, " Why then did Moses command to give a bill of divorce and to put her away?" (verse 7). Christ did not answer them directly, but cited the testimony of Scripture, and caused God, or Moses, of whose doctrine the Pharisees boasted themselves followers, to answer tacitly for Him, as say S. Chrysostom and Euthymius. These two authors observe that Christ answered His opponents both by facts and bywords : by facts, when He said, " Have you not read that He who made man from the beginning made them male and female ? " and by words, when He said, " For this cause shall a man leave father and mother," &c. (verses Male and female. Questions have been raised as to where the force of these words lies. Some think it to be in the sex, as if Christ would teach that from the difference of sex one man ought to have only one wife, that from each as from two imperfect parts, as Plato says, one perfect man might be produced. This seems the opinion of S. Augustin (De Civit., xiv. 22). All others put it, not in the sex, but in the number : as if Christ had said, " If God had intended one man to have more wives than one He would not have made only one woman in the beginning, but more ". This is the opinion of S. Chrysostom, Jerome, The Author, Bede, Theophylact, Euthymius, and Strabus. To this it may be objected that the same argument would avail to prove that if the first wife died it would be unlawful to marry another. The first and second are accounted to be one, because they are both one flesh.
And He said. He, that is, God, of whom Christ speaks. S. Hilary doubts how Christ said that God said this, when it was not God but Adam who said it (Gen. u. 24 ; S. Augustin, De CH.XIX. 5.] PHARISEES' QUESTION OF DIVORCE. 121 Gen. ad Litt., ix. 19). Theophylact and Euthymius (in Comment?] say that Adam spoke as a prophet by the Spirit of God, and that God spoke through his lips.
19:5
For this cause shall a man leave father and mother. The Latins here put hominem for virum, as the Greeks read avOpwirov for avbpa ; so verse IO.
And will cleave to his wife. S. Chrysostom tells us that there are three chief points to be observed here. i. To leave his father and mother. 2. To cleave to his wife, that is, not in any chance manner, but so as to be wholly conjoined, co-united, agglutinated. The Greek is rco\\r]0ijvai,, the Hebrew pl"T* 3. To be one flesh.
And they two shall be in one flesh. Ek crap/ca piav, in carnem imam, "into one flesh ". The Hebrew "THN "W17 ad carnem unarn, that is, that they be one flesh, as explained in the verse following. (So Gen. u. 7.) Adam is said to have been created in animam viventem, that is, " a living man ". " And the Lord God built the rib which He took from Adam into a woman, ntl^N / that is, that she should be a woman. But how man and woman are said to be one flesh has been matter of question. S. Jerome, Bede, and S. Thomas (in Catena and Comment?) think that it refers to the children, which are the one common flesh of the husband and wife. Others explain like S. Paul (i Cor. i. 16). Others of mutual love, as S. Paul in Ephes. v. 28 ; or of the power which the husband has over the wife as over his own flesh, as i Cor. vu. 4. Others, whose opinion seems preferable to that of the rest, say that one flesh means one person (homo) ; for " flesh " is often used by the Hebrews for the whole individual. Christ, then, means that man and wife are not two homines, but one homo — the wife being as the body, the man as the spirit and soul. The man, therefore, ought no more to be separated from the wife than the soul from the body.
19:6
What, therefore, God hath joined together, let no man put asunder. Christ does not say " whom," but " what," as speaking not of two but one flesh, as a little before He had said, " They are not two but one flesh ". S. Chrysostom has observed that Christ proved the bond of marriage both by natural and divine law : by the natural in the fact that God has made one woman for one man ; by the divine in the words, " A man shall leave father and mother and cleave to his wife ". In these words God seems to have inseparably united the wife to the husband, as the Wise Man says (Prov. xix. 14).
19:7
Why then did Moses command. S. Mark (x. 4) does not say that the Pharisees answered that Moses " commanded," but Moses " permitted ". S. Matthew, on the contrary, says that Christ said that Moses did not command, but permitted ; but S. Mark writes that Christ said, " What did Moses command you ? " This is easily explained from what was said before. i. It is probable that Christ had asked them what Moses had commanded, and that they replied that Moses permitted them to put away their wives. 2. That Christ explained the origin of marriage, and brought forward the testimony of Scripture to prove that the wife was not to be put away. That the Pharisees further objected that Moses had commanded, using the word "commanded," not "permitted," to add force to their words. Christ again answered, not using the word *' commanding," but " permitting " : " Moses, by reason of the hardness of your hearts, permitted you ". In this way there is no divarication between the Evangelists.
19:8
Moses, by reason of the hardness of your hearts, permitted you. Christ corrects the expression of the Pharisees. They had said " commanded " ; Christ said " permitted ". Why did Christ say that Moses, rather than God, permitted this, when in verse 5, on the contrary, He said that neither Moses nor Adam, but God said, " For this cause," &c. ? Christ desired to add force to His words, and therefore, when asserting that it was not lawful to put away a wife, He said, not that Adam or Moses, but God had said, " For this cause shall a man leave," &c., though both Adam spoke and Moses wrote those words. When Christ answered the Pharisees, He would not say that God but Moses permitted, though God also permitted it This is how these many authors are to be understood who explain this passage as if Christ signified that it was not God, but Moses, who permitted this divorcement ; as if Christ wished to oppose God, whom He cited, to Moses, whom the Pharisees cited. Such is the opinion of S. Jerome, Bede, Strabus, S. Thomas, Hugo. There are many questions on the passage. i. For what reason was divorce permitted under the Old Testament ? Tertullian (w., Cont. Marc.) thinks that it was only lawful then, as now, for fornication ; for he so explains Deut. xxiv., but with the only difference that when a wife was put away for that reason, it was allowed the husband to marry another, and now it is not. Origen, S. Chrysostom, and others think that divorce was lawful for many other reasons than this, and this seems much more probable ; because — (i) If fornication were the only reason, there would have been no room for the question of the Pharisees. For it would have been great insolence in them to ask if a man might put away his wife for every cause, if it had only been permitted for fornication. But when they ask whether it were lawful to put away a wife for every cause, we cannot doubt that they knew of many other reasons. This is seen from Christ's reply. He desired to narrow the licence given by Moses, and, as it had before been lawful to put away a wife for many reasons, He now permitted it for fornication alone. This is shown also from the above words of Deut. xxiv. I, in which it is plain that Moses did not speak of fornication : for which the wife was not to be put away, but stoned. (2) It was signified in the libel of divorcement that the woman had not com mitted adultery, chiefly that her honour might be preserved, and she herself be at liberty, if she wished, to be married to another husband. She might be put away, then, for other reasons than those of adultery. What these were is not certain. De Lyra, in his Comment, on Dent, xxiv., gives two opinions : i. For contagious disease or the like before the marriage. 2. Causes opposed to marriage, even if supervening after it, as if the woman were a witch or a child-murderer ; which Origen in his Tract. vu. on S. Matt, seems to approve, though speaking rather of the Evangelical than of the Mosaic Law. 2. The second question is : How the Jews were allowed to put away their wives, so as in putting them away they might not sin, or so as that they sinned indeed, but were not punished by the Law. That great divine, S. Thomas, has specified four ways in which a thing can be permitted : (1) Because it is good, but not commanded ; as the selling of all we have, and giving to the poor, which is not commanded. (2) Because it is a less good, when the greater good is not commanded ; as marriage is allowed because virginity, which is a greater good, is not commanded. (3) As it is evil, but not forbidden ; as God is said to permit all sins, because while He is able to prevent them, He does not please to do so. (4) Or because the thing is evil indeed, but is not punished by the Law ; as God permitted the Jews to practise usury with Gentile nations, because He had not appointed any punishment in the Law against those who did it. In one other way a thing is said to be permitted : when it is evil, if it is permitted by Him who has given the power of dispensation, it ceases to be evil. So it was permitted the Prophet Osee to have children of fornication (Osee i. 2). Some think that either in this last manner, or as a less good, it was permitted the Jews for certain reasons to put away their wives ; others that it was not as a less good, but as a less evil, so that they sinned indeed in putting them away, but would not be punished. Either opinion is probable, and each has good authorities in its support. The former, The Author and S. Thomas ; the latter, Tertullian (De Monog^}, Origen (On S. Matt), S. Jerome, and others. It seems a hard saying that, after so ample a permission from God, the Jews sinned in putting away their wives ; especially as before the explanation by Christ it could not certainly be discovered from the words of Deuteronomy whether it were a precept or a permission ; and if a permission, it did not appear to have been permitted as an evil, which would seem sufficient to free those who took advantage of the permission, from blame. The words of Christ, that it was permitted from the hardness of their hearts, can easily be explained. It was permitted for this reason, that they might thus have no sin. 3. The third question is : With what ceremonies and precautions the bill of divorce was given. Ten are mentioned by the Hebrews : (1) That the wife shall not go away without the permission of the husband. This was explained in the bill of divorcement. (2) That the bill shall be given into the wife's own hand,, as directed in Deuteronomy. (3) That it should be executed under the hand and seal of at least two witnesses. (4) That there should be three generations of the husband. (5) That it should be written legibly, clearly, and distinctly ; and so that no error might be found in the text. (6) That if any spot of ink fell upon the page, the document should have no authority, but another copy should be prepared- (7) That there should be no vestige of erasure, to avoid all possible suspicion as to its genuineness. (8) That the document should be longer than broad. (9) That all the witnesses present should seal with his own seal. (10) That the husband on giving it should say : " Receive this bill of divorce from me, and be cast out from me, and be given to some other man ". The form of the document was as follows : " I, Rabbi N., son of Rabbi N., son of Rabbi N., on the first day of the second month of the year N. from the creation of the world, have, of my own free will, without compulsion, repudiated N., the daughter of Rabbi N., the son of Rabbi N., the son of Rabbi N., and have given her a libel of Repudiation in her hand, a paper of cutting off, and a sign of division, that she may be cut off from me and go wherever she will, and that no one be able to prohibit her, according to the constitutions of Moses and Israel".
19:9
And I say to you. S. Mark (x. 10) says that Christ spoke these words to the disciples alone, when they had come into the house. Euthymius observes that He probably said them twice. First, to all in common, as S. Matthew states, then privately to the disciples in the house ; and it is very probable that, as he relates (verse 10), the disciples said to Christ: If the case of a man with his wife be such, it is not expedient to marry ; not speaking publicly before all the people, but privately and in some secret place, as they used to do when they had any doubt about anything in His conversations. Then, when asked by the disciples, Christ repeated the same words, although S. Matthew does not relate it, and He added what S. Matthew says about eunuchs and S. Mark omits. The sum of the question is, whether the words of Christ, that it is lawful to put away a wife for fornication, are to be so taken as to allow both the husband who puts away and the wife who is put away to enter on a second marriage ? There are apparently three opinions on the point : 1. That it is lawful, an opinion common to the followers of Luther and Calvin, and which is also found even among some Catholics. 2. The second opinion is that it is lawful for the innocent person, not for the guilty one. Some of the Ancients we find held this opinion, as Tertullian (w., Against Marciori] and S. Ambrose, or Remigius (On I Cor. vu.). Origen (in loc.) also says that some Catholic bishops of his time permitted those husbands whose wives had committed adultery to put them away and marry others. This was allowed in the Council of Elvir. 3. The third is that which the Church has followed, and which is so confirmed by the Council of Trent in our own times, that it cannot be a matter of doubt to any Catholic : that Christ so permitted the adulterous wife to be put away, that it should be lawful neither for the adultress nor the husband to marry as long as either lived. This opinion seems so binding, both from the authority of the Church, which alone ought to satisfy a Christian man, and also from the weight of the arguments by which it is supported, that the only wonder is that anyone can be found to dispute it. It has, firstly, the best and most ancient authorities in its support In xlviii. Can. Apost., whoever puts away his wife and marries another is absolutely, and in all cases without exception, if only he had put her away for fornication, excommunicated. This reason would certainly have been produced if it had been lawful, when a wife was put away for this cause, to marry another. So Evaristus (in his Epist. u.) and Clement (Alex. Strom., u.) teach without any exception. Origen (Tract, vu. on S. Matt.) blames those bishops who allowed this in his time, as being ignorant of the custom of the Church. So S. Chrysostom (Horn. xvii. on S. Matt.), S. Jerome (in loc., and in his Epitap. Fabiolce], Innocent I. (Ep. to Exuperius, Bishop of Toulouse, chap, w.), S. Augustin (To Polluentius), Isidore (De Officiis, u. 19), and Bede (Comm. on S. Mark x.). So the early councils ruled — Milevis (Can. xvii.), Africa (if it is a different one), and others. The decrees of Elvir and Aries, therefore, cited above, to the contrary effect, are either spurious or apocryphal, or are to be so understood that it is not lawful for a man who has put away his wife for adultery to marry another in her lifetime, but only after her death. It may be asked why this should be granted when no one doubts that it was lawful ? The answer may be that it was expressed to show the difference between the husband and the adulterous wife, who, even after her husband's death, was sometimes ordered for penance to abstain from marriage. Lest, then, any should understand the same of the husband, it allowed him to marry another wife, but, by ordinary ecclesiastical law, only after her death. Besides, by this reason which Christ gives, either nothing is proved or this is proved. He first declared that God in the beginning created not more than one woman, but one only for one man, and therefore that it was not lawful to have more wives than one — that is, to put away one and marry another. This also avails to prove that if a wife is put away, even for fornication, it is not lawful to marry another. For it does not matter why she was put away, the same reason for not marrying another always remaining — namely, that one woman was made for one man. Besides that Christ not only reduced all the many reasons of the Jews for putting away their wives to one only — fornication, He also took away entirely the writing of divorcement, which He said was only given them because of the hardness of their hearts. After Christ, a writing of divorcement was not heard of among Christians. But the giving a writing of divorce, and a man's being able to marry another wife, and a wife to marry another husband, was the same thing ; and thus Christ took away the power of a husband marrying another wife, and of a wife being married to another husband, by taking away the writing of divorce ment. This one reason alone, if there were no other, would be enough and more than enough to confirm this decision. Again, if a wife who had been put away for fornication were allowed to be married to another husband, it would follow that her condition would be better than that of a woman who had been put away because of some disease or something that was not her own fault ; for the adul tress would be allowed to be married to another husband, while her husband was yet alive, and he would not be allowed to marry another wife. It can hardly be doubted that Christ allowed the putting away of an adulterous wife, that the husband might not be compelled to pass a life of unhappiness, as the wife had proved herself unworthy of her husband's living with her. But this reason does not extend so far as to allow the husband to marry another wife. It is sufficient for him to be freed from the first. The assertion of heretics, therefore, that Christ gave nothing to the husband, if He only allowed him so to put away his adulterous wife, as to be obliged to live without a wife all his life, is senseless, and shows that these valued the body more than honour and tranquillity. For good men count it a great gain to be free from a wicked wife, although not allowed to marry another. Nay, the wisest even consider this a benefit, as they who have once suffered shipwreck think it wrong to tempt the sea a second time. It is a greater good to miss finding a bad wife, than to find a good one. But a man cannot miss a bad wife unless he is unable to marry. The reasoning of S. Jerome certainly has much weight. That if husbands who have put away adulterous wives were allowed to marry others, it would be a daily occurrence that men who desired new wives would invent charges of adultery against their present ones, that they might put them away and take others. Christ, therefore, did not increase the strictness of the old Law, but loosed it. For not even in the old Law was there so much room for the desire for putting away wives, since the adultress was not to be put away but stoned. But, as these heretics falsify the matter, Christ gave permission to husbands to change their wives daily. For how easy is it to discover either true or probable adultery in a wife ! How easy to invent it ! They who explain the words of Christ thus do not appear to understand His Spirit, or to see that when He desired to restrain evangelical discipline, and to teach that marriage was indissoluble, He ought not only not to have given power to husbands when they had put away their adulterous v/wes to marry others, but rather to have put the compulsion upon them, if they would not be without wives, of enduring the adultress, and endeavouring to convert, and not repudiate her. For it was the will of Christ that the husband should not put away even the adulterous wife, but, to console his suffering, He permitted, not commanded, him to put her away. Cn.xix.g.] MARRIAGE INDISSOLUBLE. 13! S. Jerome greatly confirms this view, namely, that Christ did not say that the woman who has been put away and is married to another commits adultery, but he who takes her does so. The only reason of this must be that Christ was speaking of the wife who had, in fact, been put away for adultery, of whom, because she had actually committed the sin already, He would not say that she was guilty of it, for this would have been to say nothing new, but He said that the man who married her was guilty, to show that it was unlawful either for a woman who had been put away to be married to another man or for another man to marry her. And we should explain this passage of Scripture by others, in which the same subject is treated of. In these it is always absolutely said that it is not lawful for a woman who has been put away to be married to another man, as in 5. Matt. v. 32 : "I say to you that whosoever shall put away his wife, except by the cause of fornication, maketh her to commit adultery ; and he that shall marry her that is put away committeth adultery " ; on which it has been shown that the word " whosoever " is to be understood without limitation. Again, SS. Mark and Luke, when relating the same history, said without any exception that whoever married a woman who has been put away committeth adultery : " Whosoever shall put away his wife and marry another committeth adultery against her" (S. Mark x. n). No other reason can be given why S. Matthew excepted fornication and S. Mark did not, except that S. Mark wished to explain that it was sometimes lawful for a man to put away his wife ; that is, if she had committed adultery. But S. Mark wished to teach that it was never lawful to marry another wife even if the former had been put away on account of adultery. In these words S. Mark uses the word super earn, that is, by a Hebraism, contra, the word ;$ in Hebrew meaning both super and contra. S. Mark means to show that it was not more lawful for the husband of an adultress to marry another woman than, when his wife had committed adultery against him, he should do the same against her ; for it is not lawful, in this kind facereparia. S. Luke (xvi. 8), however, says generally: "Everyone that putteth away his wife and marrieth another committeth adultery, and he that marrieth her that is put away from her husband com mitteth adultery ". Supposing for a moment that S. Matthew had not written his Gospel, we could have gathered no other meaning from SS. Mark and Luke than that it was never lawful for a husband who had put away his wife, for any cause whatever, to marry another ; and that it was never lawful for a wife, for whatever cause put away, to be married to another man. There would have been no room for doubt. Now S. Matthew has written but obscurely, so that there has been a controversy about his meaning ; and we should explain the difficult words of S. Matthew by the clear and perspicuous ones of SS. Mark and Luke. These, it is supposed, wrote after S. Matthew, and it is probable that they would seek to say in clear and lucid terms, and without ambiguity, what S. Matthew had stated darkly. They said that it was never lawful for a man who had put away his wife to marry another woman. We must receive this, therefore, which was spoken without ambiguity, and as by the way of explanation. Again, S. Paul wrote his Epistles to the Romans and Corinthians after S. Matthew. In each of these he treats of this question, and brings up no exception ; but (in Rom. vu. 3) he says generally : " Whilst her husband liveth she shall be called an adultress if she be with another man, but if her husband be dead she is delivered from the law of her husband ; so that she is not an adultress if she be with another man " ; and (i Cor. vu. 10) S. Paul explains the words of Christ on the subject. Who doubts that he would have stated the exception, if there had been any, by which a woman put away was allowed to be married to another man ? As it is, he says generally, absolutely, and universally that she should either remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband. He speaks of a wife going away from her husband, because of adultery, for which cause alone she could do so ; otherwise he would not have left it in her own power that she should either remain separated from her husband, but continue unmarried ; or be reconciled to him ; but he would have directed her in other terms to return to him, as it was not lawful for her for any other cause than fornication to live separate from him. He gives this direction, not of his own opinion, but from the law of Christ, that she should either live unmarried or be reconciled to her husband. Again, if the meaning of the passage were what these heretics think, as if S. Matthew's words (verse 9) meant that whoever puts away his wife, except for fornication, and marries another, commits adultery, but whoever puts her away for that cause and marries another does not commit it ; and whoever marries a woman put away for any other reason commits adultery, but if she were put away for that one cause, does not commit it — if this were, indeed, the meaning, the sentence would be imperfect. Christ said simply : " Whoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery, and he that shall marry her that is put away committeth adultery". This in the judgment of the heretics is understood to mean, if he puts her away for any other cause than fornication but does not marry another. But Christ did not explain this, which should have been explained first of all. In our explanation the sense is full and perfect. If a man put away his wife for any other cause than fornication, although he do not marry another, he commits adultery, because he causes his wife to commit it, as explained on verse 32. But if he put her away for fornication and marry another, he also commits it, not because he put away the adultress, but because he married another woman. The word adultery therefore applies here both to him who puts away his wife for any other cause than adultery, and to him who, when he has put her away for this reason, marries another. That is, whoever puts away his wife, except for fornication, commits adultery, that is, causes her to do so ; and whoever marries another commits adultery, for whatever reason the first was put away : commits adultery, that is, against his former wife, as S. Mark explains it. It will be objected that if this is the meaning, the Evangelist ought to have said, Whoever puts away his wife except for fornication, and he who marries another, commits adultery. But he does not say, " and who marries another," but " and marries another ". From the Hebrew custom the relative preceding is to be repeated ; all else requisite to the understanding of the passage has been explained on chap. v. 32.
19:10
If the case be so. S. Ambrose (Exhort, ad Virg.\ S. Jerome, S. Chrysostom, and Euthymius understand these words to mean : If a man may not put away his wife except for the cause of adultery ; but S. Gregory Nazianzen, in the Oration in which he cites these words, thinks that they were those of the Pharisees, either from lapse of memory, or, as is perhaps more likely, signifying that they were those of the Apostles, speaking from the custom and meaning of the Pharisees. If it be so, the meaning apparently is : If it be not lawful when a wife has been put away for adultery to marry another, it is better not to marry. We can believe that what was especially new and more than commonly difficult may have the more moved the Apostles ; and not to be allowed to marry another wife when the former had been put away for adultery must have appeared much newer and more difficult than not being allowed to put a wife away for any other cause than adultery, especially as there was the question before them, whether she could be put away for any reason but this.
The case. (H atria, "the matter," or jus conjugate. The meaning is : " If it be so between man and wife, or if a man marry under this law and obligation, that if his wife be put away for adultery, he may not marry another, it is better not to marry. This is the view of Theophylact and others. The Greek word atria means properly " guiltiness ".
Of a man. Hominis in the Latin for viriy as the Greek has av0pa>7rov for avSpa, as in verse 5, as the antithesis, " with his wife," shows.
It is not expedient for a man to marry. The Latin here reads nubere for uxorem ducere, contrarily to the custom of the language, which uses uxorem ducere of the man and nubere of the woman. It follows the Greek, in which yafAijaai, is used of either the man or woman. In this case there is no question as to the application, as the Apostles spoke of the position of the man towards his wife.
19:11
All men take not this word. They seem in error who affirm that Christ neither allows nor disallows the assertion of the Apostles, that it is not expedient to marry. He approves it ; and in the highest degree desiring to bring them on to such a point of perfection, that what they had spoken in words they should carry out in deeds, He shows that, as we say, they had said more than they were aware of. His words, " All men take not this word," are very generally explained to mean : " Not all are able to do what you say — abstain from marriage, for all have not the gift of abstinence, but only they to whom it is given," as S. Paul would have the Corinthians "enlarged," that they might be capable of still greater gifts from God. The expression, then, here means that they are not capable of so much virtue as to be able to live without marriage. Origen (Tract vu. on S. Matt.), S. Gregory Nazianzen (Orat. in hczc Verba\ S. Ambrose (Ad Virg^}, follow this meaning. But it seems an erroneous view of the case, because when Christ said, " He that can take it, let him take it" (verse 12), He clearly meant by "take" " understand," as shall be shown on the passage. The meaning, therefore, clearly is, that not all under stand it ; not all receive it into their minds. The word verbum, although it sometimes signifies the whole matter, yet is naturally taken only for a discourse, nor should it be understood otherwise unless some reason compel us. Nothing in this passage does so, but it here means simply " to understand," as S. Epiphanius says, whom I have followed : " Not all understand my saying ". Christ was accustomed to speak in this manner, as in 6". John viii. 3 : " You seek to kill Me, because My word (sermo meus) hath no place in you ". It may be objected that from what follows, " But they to whom it is given," is to be understood not of comprehending, but of the gift of purity. Even to understand is a gift of God ; as Christ Himself declares : " No man can come to Me except the Father, who hath sent Me, draw him " (S. John vi. 44). For He was speaking against those who did not believe what He said, because they did not under stand.
19:12
For there are eunuchs. Christ, as S. Hilary says, describes three classes of eunuchs : those by nature ; who are made such by men ; who are self-made. The first class has neither merit nor blame ; the second has blame, if by their own consent; the third has merit.
Who have made themselves. There is a twofold force in these words : (i) They show, as S. Chrysostom has observed, freedom of will in the act ; (2) That it was not done without repugnance of the flesh.
For the kingdom of heaven. That is, that they may merit the kingdom of heaven, as Origen, S. Hilary, S. Chrysostom, The Author, and Euthymius agree in explaining it.
He that can take let him take it. Christ did not mean by these words that all can take it He alludes to the stadium, whence the metaphor is derived, in which all indeed run, but only one receives the prize. We have before observed that " take " means here " under stand ". Christ desired to say nothing else than what He said in other places, when treating of a subject of importance : "He that hath ears to hear let him hear" (xi. 15 ; xiii. 9, 43, &c.).
19:13
Then. After this, but it does not appear whether immediately after, for S. Luke relates many things in the meantime, and we should not narrow the history too much.
Were little children presented to Him. It is clear from vS. Luke xviii. 15 that there were not only young children, but even infants. For, when they saw the adult men and women who came to Christ loaded with benefits of different kinds, they began to bring their infants also, that, as far as their age allowed, they also might share in His gifts. They were not sent to be healed, like the men and women, but to receive some spiritual grace, as the Evangelist immediately explains. That He should impose hands upon them and pray. It was a custom of the Hebrews, for the elders and those who were especially gifted with divine grace, to bless the youngers, by the laying on of their hands upon them, as in Gen. xlviii. 14, 15. For these reasons parents brought their children to Christ Hence the custom arose of the laity, and especially children, being blessed by the priests and bishops, even outside the Church — a custom which The Author praises.
And the disciples rebuked them. That is, as Euthymius says, prohibited them. The Greek word ^TTITI^CLV also bears this meaning, as has been said before. It seems doubtful why the disciples should have rebuked these parents. S. Chrysostom, The Author, Euthymius, and Theophylact say that they thought them of an unbefitting age to be brought to Christ, and that His dignity would suffer if He were occupied in blessing children ; and, therefore, like servants who were jealous of the rank of their master, they sent them away. This is more probable than the opinion of S. Jerome and Bede ; not that they were unwilling that the children should be blessed by the hand and voice of the Saviour, but that, not yet having the fullest faith, they thought that He would be wearied by their importunities. The words of Christ, " Suffer the little children to come unto Me, for the kingdom of heaven is of such," seem to confirm the opinion of S. Chrysostom.
19:14
Suffer the little children to come to Me. Christ calls infants in age and simplicity children, as He immediately explains. For the kingdom of heaven is of such. He did not say " of these/' but "of such," to include not only children in age, but such as resembled them in disposition, as Origen, S. Jerome, S. Augustin (i. 19, De Peccat. Merit.\ Bede, Theophylact, and Eustathius have observed. S. Luke has expressed it more fully (xviii. 17) : "Amen, I say unto you, whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a child, he shall not enter into it ". The followers of Calvin have no other testimony in proof of the baptism of infants than this : " Suffer little children ". For they apply those most clear and powerful words (S. John iii. 3), which the Church has always produced as authority for the baptism of infants, not to baptism, but to doctrine ; and thus they are unable to oppose the Anabaptists, who deny that infants should be baptised at all. For although some argument may be built upon this passage, as S. Bernard has shown in his Epistle ccxl. it is not strong enough to form the foundation of a doctrine so necessary to salvation.
19:15
And when He had imposed hands upon them. The Evangelist said (verse 13), they brought children to Christ that He might lay hands upon them and pray. He now says that He laid His hands upon them, but does not say that He prayed. The reason of this Origen thinks to have been that the infants were capable of the imposition of hands, but not of prayers, for from their tender age they could not understand them. But there was no need that the children should understand the prayers to be made partakers of them, as there is no need now that they should understand the words of baptism to gain the effects of it. Prayer is continued in the laying on of hands ; and there is no laying on of hands alone without prayer and benediction. S.Mark (x. 16), has said this plainly: "And embracing them and laying His hands upon them, He blessed them ".
19:16
And behold one. S. Luke (xviii. 18) says that he was a ruler, that is, a chief man ; because, as S. Matthew (v. 22) says, he was very rich. Many of the Ancients seem to confuse him with the lawyer of whom S. Luke (x. 25) makes mention ; for they say that this man was also a lawyer, as S. Jerome, S. Ambrose (On S. Luke xviii.), and S. Cyril Alexand. (TJiesaur., u. i). More correctly S. Basil (Homil. cont. Divit. Avarit.) not only does not think him the lawyer, but opposes him to the lawyer of whom S. Luke wrote ; for the lawyer came to Christ to tempt Him : this man came to learn of Him. And if he had been a lawyer the Evangelists would rather have stated this than the other circumstances they mention so carefully ; namely, that he was a ruler, that he was rich, that he was young. The same author, as well as S. Epiphanius (Ancorat. and Her., Ixix.), says that this young man came to Christ, not with a guileless and honourable intention, but for the purpose of tempting Him, an opinion which S. Basil, as above, and S. Chrysostom and Euthymius in their commentaries on this passage, seem completely to refute. First, S. Mark (x. 17) says that he came very reverently, humbly kneeling, which the haughty, pride-inflated Scribes and Pharisees who came to tempt Christ were not used to do. Secondly, whenever anyone came to tempt Christ, the Evangelists always say so ; but they have not mentioned such a thing of this young man. Thirdly, he asked what he wanted yet, to obtain eternal life. Fourthly, when Christ said to him, " Go sell what thou hast and give to the poor," he departed sorrowfully, which he would not have done had he only come to Christ with a wicked and dissembling mind. S. Chrysostom appears therefore to argue much better for his opinion than S. Jerome. It may be added that they who came to tempt Christ were not accustomed to ask about themselves and their salvation, but about the law and controverted questions, such as whether it were lawful to give tribute to Caesar, to put away a wife for any reason, which was the greatest commandment, whose wife the woman would be in the resurrection, when the seven brothers had had her. But this young man asked no such questions, but only those which were necessary for himself : " What good shall I do that I may have eternal life ? "
Good Master. The young man addresses Christ thus to gain His good will ; others called Him Rabbi, when about to ask anything of Him. This man, to show a greater attraction of mind to Him, calls Him Good Master.
19:17
Why askest thou Me concerning good. The Greek in almost every copy has, " Why callest thou Me good, there is none good but only God?" and so Origen (Tract. Sept^ S. Matthew, with SS. Hilary, Chrysostom, and others. Our version reads : "Why askest thou Me?" as do some Greek copies, and S. Jerome (in loc.} and S. Augustin (De Trinit., i. 13). Origen adopts both readings. Their opinion, however, can hardly be admitted, as making Christ speak in a double manner. I . " Why callest thou Me good ? " Because he had said : " Good Master ". 2. " Why askest thou," &c. If we read it thus, the meaning is not, Why dost thou ask Me what good thou shouldst do, but Why dost thou ask Me, calling Me good.
One is good — God. The Arians objected this text to the Catholics, as proving that Christ was not God, because He appears by it to shut Himself out from goodness and divinity by these words : as say S. Epiphanius (Her., Ixix.) ; S. Cyril Alex andria (lib. u., Thess. i.) ; S. Basil (Ep. ad Ampkilock., Comment, on S. Luke xviii.) ; S. Ambrose ; S. Augustin (iii. 23, Cont. Maxim. Episc. Arian), and others passim. They all answer that Christ does not deny Himself to be good, and to be God. For men, and angels, and many other things than God, each in his own way, are evidently good, as S. Epiphanius proves at length from Scripture ; but He says that none is good but God, in the way in which God is good, that is,flerse, and in His own nature. So, too, says S. Paul (i Tim. vi. 16), that God alone has immortality, though it is certain that both the angels and our souls are immortal. But God alone is immortal in His own nature; that is, not by participation with another, as S. Justin has shown in his questions to the Christians. Even if Christ, therefore, had not been God, He would have been good ; and as He does not shut Himself out from goodness, by saying, " There is one good," so does He not shut Himself out from divinity, nay, He rather shows by these words, as shall shortly be explained, that He is God. But why did Christ so answer the young man ? The reason would appear to be, as The Author (Horn, xxx.), S. Jerome (Comment^, S. Augustin (De Trinit., xiii.J, Bede, Theophylact, Euthymius (in foe.), and others have said, that the young man, though he had a good faith in Christ, had not a sufficiently firm and perfect opinion of Him. It is clear that he endeavoured to honour Christ with the highest titles he knew of, to obtain His favour ; and yet we see that he called Him nothing more than " Good Master," as if he could think nothing greater of Him. For if He had believed Him to be God, he would have addressed Him either as his God, or most certainly Lord ; but Christ, knowing that he was honestly consulting Him about his salvation, wished to assist and perfect his faith, and by questioning to lead him on to the belief that He was not merely a " good master," but that He was the good God, and he therefore took his own words out of his mouth, to teach him that he needed to understand well what he had said. He had called Christ " Good Master". Christ teaches him that no one is good but God, to show that He was God Himself if He were good, as the young man, not knowing what He said, had called Him. There may be some ambiguity in the words, for in one sense He is called "Good Master," and in another "Good God"; but this very ambiguity adds force to the argument, for Christ speaks as if He did not know the difference between " Good Master" and "Good God". He has used a like ambiguity in other places (chap. viii. 22). It may be asked why Christ did not answer others in the same manner who may reasonably be supposed to have addressed Him either in the same or in similar terms ? The reason may be that this young man called Him " Good Master," as if he thought himself to be giving Him some singular title, such as others were not accustomed to give Him. Christ wished to correct this opinion, and to teach him that he had given Him a title not sufficiently noble and great ; for He was not only a " Good Master " but also the " Good God ".
But if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments. As here, when to keep the commandments is said to be the only cause of our salvation, faith is not excluded ; but the meaning is that, as among the things that are to be done^ it is enough to keep the commandments, so when faith only is named among the causes of justification and salvation, works are not excluded ; but again, the meaning is that (among the things that are not to be done but are to be known), it is enough to believe ; and that faith although dark, and knowledge although in some degree obscure, should be to us equal to all sciences and all doctrines.
19:18
Which? S. Jerome, as above, thinks that the young man came to Christ to tempt Him. But it is clear from the context that he asked the above question because he had come to Christ as to some supremely great teacher, to learn some thing above the Law ; but, as will be proved on verse 20, he not only knew but had lived in the practice of the Law. He, therefore, asked " which," as thinking that perhaps Christ would give him some precepts beyond the Law.
Thou shalt do no murder. Christ sets forth the precepts of the Decalogue, not all, but only those of the second table — nor these in their order, but as they suggested themselves ; for it was not His object to recite the whole memoriter, and to the letter, but to state what they contained. We may ask why He did not mention the commandments of the first table only ? Euthymius says that it was because the observance of these is a secret one, i.e., it lies hidden in the soul ; but the works of the second are manifest : not to kill, not to commit adultery, &c. This does not appear to be a good reason. For Christ did not desire, as some think, to convict the young man, but to teach him, and not to teach him how he might appear to be good, but how he might be both good and just ; for Christ desired to make him not a hypocrite but a Christian., The true reason seems to be that whoever keeps the second table keeps also the first, as S. Paul says (Rom. xiii. 9-10). Besides, Christ here, and S. Paul there, desiring the observance of the command ments, sets forth only the second table. It may be objected that by this reasoning S. Paul ought much more to have set forth the first table, for he who keeps the first table keeps the second also ; for he who loves God does all things that He commands ; and the first table is much shorter than the second, and ought to be set forth as a kind of summary of all the command ments. The answer may be : " It is so ; yet it is more easy to love our neighbour than God," as S. John says (i Ep. w. 20). It is the custom of Holy Scripture to lead us to the observation of the commandments of God through the second table, as by a more easy, full, and familiar way.
19:19
Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, This is in a manner a brief compendium comprehending in one word all the teaching of Christ, like that of S. Paul (Rom. xiii. 9, 10 ; Galat. v. 14). It is not one single precept, but the sum of all those in Levit. xix. 18.
19:20
All these have I kept from my youth. S. Hilary, S. Ambrose, S. Jerome, and others on this passage, think that the young man was speaking untruly ; but the opinion of S. Basil (Horn. cont. Divit. Avar.), S. Chrysostom, and Euthymius seems more probable, that he spoke the truth, and that when Christ heard it He loved him (S. Mark x. 21). This would not have been the case otherwise ; for no pretence could have deceived Christ, who knew all things. Christ, it is clear, had a singular love for the young man, because of his observance of the commandments — such a love as He not only had not for others who were sinners, but not even for this young man before. He heard his words, not that Christ was ignorant before or that He did not love the young man before, but that He might show Himself, after the manner of men, to have learnt by the answer what He did not know before, and to have begun to love him whom He had not loved before. Christ loved him, not only for his natural goodness, as He loves all men in common, but in a peculiar way, because of his having kept the commandments, to do which is not of nature.
19:21
Verse 2.\. If thou wilt be perfect, go, sell what thou hast, and give to the poor. That Christ in these words is giving, not a precept, but a counsel, is clearer than the sun at mid-day ; for who is so blind as not to see in what chosen words He carefully distinguishes between precepts and counsels. When He gives a precept He does not say, " If thou wilt be perfect," but " If thou wilt enter into eternal life ". When He gives a counsel He does not say, " If thou wilt enter into life," but " If thou wilt be perfect ". He gives eternal life as a reward for keeping the commandments ; but to the observance of counsels, not life eternal, but " treasure in heaven " : that is, He promises the greater riches of eternal life ; and not only the being blessed, but the being chief of the blessed, and their judge — "You shall sit upon twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel ". No better words can be used than those of S. Augustin (Serm. Ixi. de Temp?) either to prove or explain evangelical counsels. " Counsel," he says, " is one thing ; precept another. Counsel is given that virginity may be preserved, and that we may abstain from wine and flesh, and sell allthings and give to the poor ; but precepts are given that justice may be preserved, and that men may turn from evil, and do good." It is said of chastity, " He that can take it, let him take it " ; but not of justice, " He who is able to do it," but " Every tree that does not bring forth good fruit ". " He who hears counsel willingly and obeys it, will have the greater glory ; he who does not fulfil a precept, unless he afterwards repent, will not escape punishment." Again to the same purpose in many other of his writings.
And thou shalt have treasure in heaven. Christ alludes to the custom of merchants who give a less sum in present money, in the hope of receiving more in future. He calls eternal life a treasure because goods are laid up here that they may be found there with increase ; as treasure is apt to increase daily when it is put out (5. Matt. vi. 20). Christ also alluded to alms-giving, signifying that he who gives alms lays up, as it were, treasure in heaven, as Solomon says in Proverbs (xix. 27). Christ wished to meet the young man who was wealthy, and probably given to making money, on his own ground ; by the hope of still greater wealth, to entice him to the kingdom of heaven, as men of that stamp are apt to be led. He said, in a manner, " Even if you have great riches here, you shall have much greater if you will sell these and give them to the poor ". It was so far from the will of Christ to make allusion to the wealth which the young man thought himself to possess, that He rather wished to signify that he had nothing, if it were compared to the riches of the kingdom of heaven. For though wealthy, he had no riches at all if compared to such as kings, and not all of them, possess, but he should have a treasure in heaven. Christ therefore does not balance the riches of the kingdom of heaven with the wealth of the young man, but opposes the former to the latter, as if one should compare the vast wealth of the entire world to a very small property. Besides, Christ meant that he should have greater glory in heaven if he followed evangelical counsels, than if he only obeyed mere precepts. For they who follow the precepts receive each his penny, as shall be explained in the following chapter (verse 19). But he who adds besides counsels, as by giving all his goods to the poor, will receive not merely a penny but a greater treasure. From this it is clear that men, by alms-giving and all other good works, do merit the kingdom of heaven. The same meaning is found here as in 5. Luke xvi. 9 ; nay, even a greater. For there also Christ treats of alms, and "to make themselves friends" is nothing else than to merit their friendship and favour. And in this sense all the ancient authorities explain it (S. Cyprian, Lib. de Op. et Eleemos. ; S. Hilary ; S. Chrysostom, Horn. Ixiv. on S. Matthew; and others).
And come follow Me. There are three counsels that Christ gave the young man : I . To sell all his goods ; 2. To give the money to the poor ; 3. To follow Him. This was the last of all. For Socrates and many other philosophers, as S. Jerome says, held their wealth in contempt ; but because they did not follow Christ, this was of no advantage to them. It is less certain what Christ meant by " follow Me " than is commonly supposed. S. Clement Alexandria (Strom, w.), S. Jerome (in /<?£•.), and some others understand it of the imitation of Christ. S. Matthew seems to confirm this (x. 38), where some Greek copies read : " Take up thy cross ". But the word " come " shows that Christ spoke not of imitating Him alone, but of a bodily presence with Him, and of His inviting him to follow Him like the Apostles and disciples. But the words of S. Mark, if we admit them, are not opposed to this explanation. For the Apostles and disciples most especially carried the cross, following Christ not only with their hearts but also with their persons.
19:22
And he went away sad. He went away sad, not because, as some have heretically said, his conscience convicted him of not having kept the commandments as he boasted to have done (vide verse 20) ; but because he did not think that there could be anything so difficult as that which Christ had counselled him to do, in selling his goods and giving to the poor. The Evangelist tells us why he was sad : " for he had great posses sions ". It is easier to part with a few things than with many.
19:23
A rich man. S. Mark (x. 23) and S. Luke (xviii. 24) term rich men those who have, not unlimited wealth, as it were, but considerable property. Christ spoke, as S. Matthew explains it, of men with great possessions.
Shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven. S. Mark says that Christ looked round Him and said : " How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God ". This action applies both to the " commendation " and emphasis of the words. Christ seems to have looked round Him to demand attention when about to say a thing very important, and for the same reason to have used an expression of admiration. We may question how far Christ said this of the rich young man, and how far to the Apostles, when his riches kept the former, not from observance of the Law, nor from entering the kingdom of heaven, but only from the attain ment of evangelical perfection. We may reply that Christ took occasion, from the young man who was deterred by his wealth from evangelical counsels, to speak of riches at large, and how men are kept back by them from eternal life.
19:24
And again I say to you. S. Mark (x. 24) says that the Apostles, before Christ spoke these words, wondered at the meaning because of their hardness and severity. Christ answered with still greater severity ; for the above words, " Again, I say," are not a mere repetition, but an enlargement of the former aswell. " It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven."
It is easier for a camel. The inexplicability, or, rather, the wonderfulness, of this saying, has caused some to think that the word " camel " (tftt/aeXo?) should have been rendered "ship cable," as if it were against reason that such a huge and ill-shapen beast as a camel should go through the eye of a needle, whilst a cable has some affinity with a needle ; and Suidas tells us that fcdfjieXos carries both meanings. Theophylact understands it thus, and some others, probably Greek authors, as we learn from Euthymius. The reference has been thought, with less reason, to be to a certain gate in Jerusalem, which was so small that a camel, unless unloaded, could not pass through it. The supporters of this opinion do not observe that the more extraordinary the saying appears, the more likely it is to be true. Christ said that it was no more difficult for a camel to pass through a needle's eye than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven, because this was in the highest degree unreasonable and even impossible. Christ desired to show that it would be as much so for a rich man to enter heaven, as He added in verse 26. The reason, therefore, that induced these persons not to understand the passage of a camel should rather have influenced them to the contrary conclusion, as it did Origen, SS. Hilary, Chry sostom, and Jerome, The Author, Juvencus (Hist. Evangel., lib. iii.), and Sedulius (Carm., w.). The Syriac has fc^ft'lT' which can only be explained of the animal. It was, in fact, a proverb, and it meant when a thing was pronounced impossible that a camel could more easily pass through the eye of a needle than such a thing be done. The Talmudists frequently use the expression, as many of the learned have observed. It would appear to be or more importance to enquire why Christ said this of riches rather than of other things, so many of which hinder a man still more in this course ; such as ambition, lust, anger. The reason may be that other things, although they hinder some more, yet retard the greater number less ; but riches commonly hinder almost all men, because almost all give their minds up to avarice from the greater to the less (Isa. Wi. 1 1 ; Jerem. vi. 1 3 ; viii. 10). S. Paul himself, speaking of the preachers of the Gospel themselves, says : " All seek the things that are their own, not the things that are Jesus Christ's" (Philipp. u. 21). CH.XIX. 25-27.] RICHES AND THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN. 151
19:25
WJw, then, can be saved? It is as if they had said : " As all men so study wealth, and a rich man cannot enter into the kingdom of heaven, who can be saved ? " S. Mark says (x. 26) that the Apostles said this among themselves, that is, silently, so that they themselves alone might hear. This is to be understood through verse 26.
19:26
Beholding. Christ, it may be supposed, looked upon the disciples to show that He knew their thoughts and understood their words, though secret. S. Mark says that the Apostles murmured these things among themselves.
With men this is impossible. All the Evangelists agree in teaching that (i) Christ taught that it was difficult for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven ; (2) that it was impossible, which is a great proof that they have given us not merely the meaning but the actual words of Christ, and that He desired to confirm His doctrine more by strengthening it ; for (i) He simply said that it is difficult for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of heaven ; and (2) that it was easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle ; (3) that it was wholly impossible, but with men, not with God.
19:27
Then Peter answering. That is, began to speak ; a Hebraism, as before observed, when a person does not necessarily reply to a former speaker or answer a question. But S. Peter may appear in this place to have replied to the words of Christ.
Behold we have left all things. Some think the reason of Peter's having asked this question was the words of Christ to the young man, " Go, sell all thou hast " ; but Peter doubted, for himself and the other Apostles, what reward they should have. For, although they had left all things, they had not sold their goods, and given to the poor, so that they might not appear to have satisfied Christ's counsel, nor to be worthy of obtaining the treasure promised to the young man in heaven. Or it may be that Peter wished to signify that he and the other Apostles had already done what Christ required of the young man, as Origen, S. Jerome, and S. Chrysostom say, or why did he say doubtfully, "What shall we have?" Why did he not believe that he and the other Apostles would have that treasure in heaven, because Christ promised treasure to the young man if he would leave his great possessions ? But the Apostles had left little, or almost nothing, and therefore did not venture to hope for a treasure in heaven. But as they hoped for some position there, they asked what it should be ? It cannot bethought, as some say, that the Apostles had not sold their goods and given to the poor ; for although it is not expressly said in Scripture, yet this is credible, and it would have been in accordance with their virtue and perfection, that either all, or at least some of them, should have sold what they had, and given to the poor ; whilst they who had not sold it, no doubt gave it to their kindred who were poor. This is easily concluded from S. Peter's question ; for when he said, " We have left all things," although he did not say, " We have sold all things and given to the poor," he would have this understood, because he signified that he had done all that Christ commanded, as in the verse following Christ answered, " Amen, I say to you who have followed Me," although He did not say that they had left all things, this may surely be understood. It may be asked how S. Peter and the other Apostles had done what Christ required of the young man, for they had only left a few things of small value, but he was commanded to leave many possessions. S. Gregory (Horn, in Evangel?) shall answer this, and S. Bernard on his words on this passage. He leaves much who leaves the wish of having. Such things were left by His followers as would be desired by those who did not follow Him.
19:28
You who have followed Me. Christ did not say, "You have left all things," but in saying the greater, He understood the less, as S. Jerome has shown.
In the regeneration. S. Hilary and The Author think that this refers to our baptisms. But it is clear that the judgment of the last day is here called regeneration, whether because the whole world was then to be renewed, and in some degree regenerated, as say S. John (Apoc. xxi. i, 5), S. Peter (2 Ep. iii. 13) ; Isaiah (Ixv. 17 and Ixvi. 22), and S. Paul (Rom. viii. 21); or because men, having then put off mortality, and put on immortality, will be in some way regenerated, as S. Paul declares (2 Cor. v. 4; Philipp. iii. 21) ; so too S. Augustin (Cont. Pelag., iii. 3 ; w. II ; and Cont. Jul., u.), S. Gregory (Moral., w. 23), Theophylact and Euthymius (In Comment^}) and S. Bernard (in loc.).
When the Son of man shall sit. S. Hilary and The Author, who explain regeneration, as above, of our baptisms, take the sitting to be, not that of the Son of man on His tribunal in judgment, but the session at the right hand of the Father which He began to occupy shortly after His Resurrection and Ascension. But S. Chrysostom, Euthymius, and Theophylact, although they explain this of the judgment, do not take it to mean any session either of Christ or the Apostles, but only His glory and majesty, in which Christ and the Apostles will appear. It is clear that the allusion here is not to the session of Christ at the right hand of the Father ; and all the Fathers of the Church except S. Hilary and The Author say that when Christ speaks of the judgment, He says, "You shall sit ". What the seats of Christ and the Apostles will be is not certain, and it is perhaps curious to enquire, and rash to give any kind of definition. But it is not so to follow conjecture wherever it may probably lead us. It seems probable, then, that the clouds will be the seat of Christ and the Apostles, because Scripture everywhere says that Christ will come on a cloud (as xxiv. 30 ; xxvi. 64 ; Apoc. i. 7), and it is very probable that He will sit on the same cloud as that on which He will come. This may be gathered from another passage of the Apocalypse (xiv. 14). For S. John speaks of Christ when he calls Him " the Son of man," and of the judgment as a sickle in His hand. Christ signifies in this place that the seats of the Apostles will be like His own : " You also shall sit on the twelve seats ". As if He had said : " As I shall sit, so also shall you ". It may be a question how there will be twelve seats, when it is plain that Judas, one of the twelve, will not sit with the rest. If, therefore, there were only eleven to sit there, there would only be eleven seats ; and if S. Paul and Barnabas, who were afterwards extraordinarily called to be Apostles, are added, there would not be twelve, but thirteen. S. Augustin (De Civit, xx. 5) and Bede (in his commentary on this passage) say that a certain and definite number is put for an indefinite and uncertain one, as if it were said, "You shall sit each upon his own seat ". But because there were twelve Apostles, with whom He spoke, He said twelve seats, as if Judas also were to sit. Not that Christ thought that he would sit, but because if he had remained in his office like the others, he would have done so, as has been observed by S. Chrysostom. For Christ speaks, as theologians say, according to present justice, and not so much of persons as of the status of the persons. As if He said, " It is the officium of Apostles to have this reward proposed to them, that he who has rightly discharged it shall sit upon his seat in judgment and judge the rest".
Judging. It is the opinion of S. Jerome that "to judge" means here to condemn. There have been different opinions on the subject. 1. The common opinion is that the Apostles will only judge by comparison ; because, while they themselves believed, the other Jews did not ; as "the men of Nineveh shall rise in judgment with this generation and shall condemn it, because they did penance at the preaching of Jonas, and behold a greater than Jonas is here". But this generation at the preaching of Christ Himself will not repent. The Queen of the South will condemn the Jews, " because she came from the ends of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon, and a greater than Solomon is here ". This is the opinion of S. Jerome, The Author, and many others. 2. Others say that as Christ promised more to the Apostles in this place than to the men of Nineveh or the Queen of the South, the Apostles would judge not by comparison merely but as the ministers and, as it were, heralds of Christ to proclaim His sentence. 3. Others, again, are of opinion that they will be as assessors of Christ ; as they who sit with the judge are said to judge with him. This seems less probable, because the heretics put it prominently forward, referring to Rom. xi. 34 : "Who hath known the mind of the Lord, or who hath been His counsellor?" It may appear certain that the Apostles will not judge by comparison merely, but in some more honourable manner ; because, by comparison, not only all the just but many sinners also and unjust will judge those who are more unjust than themselves, as the men of Nineveh will judge the Jews ; and it is clear that something is here ascribed to the Apostles which is not only not given to the unjust, but not even to all the just. This may be that they will judge as Doctors of the Church and witnesses, to accuse those who would not receive their testimony and teaching. They will condemn these men, convincing them of unbelief, and showing that they did all they could that they might not believe and be saved. As Christ says of Moses (S. John v. 45) : " Think not that I will accuse you to the Father, there is one that accuseth you, Moses ". Christ says that Moses will accuse them, not that he will do so in v/ords, but because they would not believe in him, nor keep his Law. He says the same of the Apostles, because, as Moses was the Lawgiver and Doctor of the Old Testament, so were the Apostles of the New. As Christ then said in the former case, that Moses would condemn them, so He here uses the word "judge". But it \vill be asked, Will Moses sit upon his seat and judge the twelve tribes ? Possibly so ; and why not? But it is not a necessary consequence, because Christ does not give this honour to every teacher, but only to those who have left all things for the sake of the Gospel, and followed Him as poor men. Shall the Apostles, then, alone sit ? The opinion of Origen (Tract viii. on S. Matthew], S. Augustin (De Civitate, xx. 5), S. Cyril Alexandria (Comment, on Isaiah lx.), seems probable — that all who have done the same thing, that is, have sold their goods for the Gospel, and given to the poor, will have the same honour. But this honour may appear to have been promised, not merely because they were teachers of the Gospel, but because they were the first by whom it was published ; as not all shall possess it who taught the old Law, but he alone who taught it first.
The twelve tribes of Israel. A similar question rises here : Why are the Apostles said to be about to judge the twelve tribes only, if there were thirteen, as is the case if Levi be included, which is, without doubt, to be judged ? and the Gospel was preached not to the Jews only, but to the Gentiles also, of whom many were obstinate and would not believe. S. Augustin and Bede again reply that a certain number is put for an uncertain. This is probable ; but not so their reasoning, which is that the number twelve signifies perfection and universality, as if the meaning were that all men shall be judged. For why did they use the number twelve rather than seventeen or ten, which are also used to express universality ? The reason may be that Christ spoke to accommodate Himself to those to whom and to those of whom He spoke. He spoke to the Apostles who were twelve. He spoke of the Jews among whom He was, to whom He had first come, and with whom He desired to compare the Apostles. For, if He placed the latter before the Jews, He placed them before all men. But although there were in fact thirteen tribes of the Jews, yet, because Levi was exempt from the number, and was given by God in the place of the first-born, they were not numbered : as if they belonged no more to men but to God, and there were always said to be only twelve tribes. Christ, therefore, knew that not only twelve Apostles, but even thirteen, Paul and Barnabas being added, and Judas shut out, would judge not only the twelve tribes, but all the nations as well to whom the Gospel had been preached. There is another reason why twelve tribes are named. The Gentiles who believed the Gospel were, as it were, inserted among the Jews and gifted in a manner with citizenship so that that they were no longer Gentiles, but Jews ; that is, as believing and confessing, they were enrolled among the chosen people into the twelve tribes ; as S. Paul says to the Romans (xi. 17, 19, 24): "Thou wert a wild olive," that is, a Gentile grafted into the people of the Jews ; and again : " The branches were broken off," that is, the Jews who did not believe were accounted as Gentiles ; I, when a Gentile, was made a Jew by believing. This is why S. John in the Apocalypse (vu. 5) reduces the number of all the predestined to the twelve tribes of Israel ; and (xxi. 12) says that he saw the names of the twelve tribes of Israel written in the gates of the Heavenly Jerusalem. The opinion of Theophylact and Euthymius, therefore, that the Apostles would judge the Jews alone, seems one that cannot be received.
19:29
And everyone that hath left. S. Chrysostom, The Author, and Theophylact think the meaning to be, that everyone who has done the same thing shall receive the same reward. But Origen, whose opinion seems preferable, thinks that Christ spoke of another and inferior grade of men. He had spoken before of those who had sold all their goods, and given to the poor, and followed Him. He speaks now of those who have not sold all their goods, or given to the poor, or followed Him in the likeness of Apostles, but who have still left something for Him, either father or mother, brothers, sisters, wives, children, houses or land. To these no so great honour is promised as to the Apostles, but they would have a great reward, receiving a hundredfold and life eternal. It has been asked how a wife can be left for Christ, because marriage cannot be dissolved. S. Chrysostom and Euthymius reply that Christ spoke here of marriage as He said of life (x. 39) : " He that findeth his life, shall lose it, and he that shall lose his life for Me shall find it," and vid. xvi. 25. Christ would not, therefore, have the marriage dissolved, but He would be preferred to the wife, and if the wife hinder her husband from following Him, she should be left, not by the marriage being dissolved, but by a divorce. He wills that the husband should lose his wife, rather than Christ : that spiritual be preferred to carnal things ; as explained by Fulgentius (Ep. u. de Stat. Viduali). With regard to the marriage of Gentiles : if one have been made a Christian, and the other not, and this one cannot live with a Christian without injury to religion, the Christian can leave the non-Christian, dissoluto matrimonio, as S. Paul has laid it down in I Cor. vu. 15. But a general sentence ought not to be confined to one kind of case.
He shall receive an hundredfold. That is, more things, and better in an infinite degree. So says S. Paul (Rom. viii. 18). A finite number is here again put for an infinite, as in .S. Luke xviii. 30. He says not a hundredfold, but "much more". S. Luke and S. Mark (x. 30) add, "In this present time". The words, as we learn from S. Jerome, gave occasion to the Millenarians to support their heresy. They say that after the Resurrection there will be a thousand years in which the just, for everything they have left in this world, will receive a hundredfold. S. Jerome replies to them thus : " They do not understand that if in the other things there was a fitting promise of payment, in the case of a wife it would have been wickedness, that he who had put away one wife for his Lord should receive a hundredfold in the future ". Bede, who follows S. Jerome, and several other Moderns, think the meaning to be, to use the words of S. Jerome,, that " they who have put away carnal things for the Saviour shall receive spiritual ones, which will be in worth and comparison as if they received a hundred for one". But this is opposed to what S. Mark says. He says, not only that they shall receive a hundredfold in this life, but he explains in what these things will be received : " Houses, and brethren, and sisters, and mothers, and children, and lands ". Hence Origen, The Author, Theophylact, and Euthymius explain a hundredfold as meaning that love, in some measure, makes all things among Christians common. All men will be brothers, all women sisters ; all goods will be in common, as among the primitive Christians (Acts w. 34). But how will wives be in common, who among Christians are most especially proper? It may be said that they will be so, as that they will love all Christian men in the Lord as their own husbands. There seems another way of explaining these words : houses, brothers, mothers, children — not that they will receive these things, but that they will receive Christ, who is in the place of all things, and who ought to be to us father and mother, brother and sister, wife and children, house and lands, as Christ Himself has said (xii. 49, 50). S. Bernard, on this place, has observed that Christ did not say this to the Apostles, because they had not left house and land, which they did not possess. But they certainly left fathers and nets, which they had, and followed Christ at His first word of invitation (w. 22). He did not promise these things to them therefore, but because they had done greater things than these, He promised them greater rewards : " You shall sit upon twelve seats," &c.
19:30
And many that are first shall be last. It hardly appears with what object Christ added these words. S. Chrysostom and Euthymius think that He did it to incite men to the closer following of evangelical perfection, by offering them more valuable rewards. There may have been still another reason — that the Apostles might not rest in too great security because they were called the first of all, but should run not as in uncertainty (i Cor. ix. 26, 27). When Christ said, " Many first shall be last," it is clear that He did not call those first who are so, either in their own opinion, and dignity, and merits, or who think themselves so, but those who were called first, and came to the vineyard of the Lord, as the following parable declares (xx. 1 6). He does not say "all," but "many," showing that some who were first will, when their penny is paid, be first still. Lastly, Christ says (not) that many first shall be nothing (nullos) in the kingdom of heaven — that is, will be shut out of it, — but should be last — that is, less than many who came after them. He speaks of those who received every man a penny, but they who came last were in the first place, as the following parable explains. 2 — u
19:1
1 et factum est cum consummassct Iesus sermones istos, qua locutione ad alia transire saepius solet; cf. 7,28; 11,1; 13,53; migramt a Galilaea et venit in fines ludaeae trans lordanetn i. e. iter fecit in ludaeam per Peraeam; quare iunge venit trans lordanem; qua dictione via in ludaeam assignatur, uti iam Orig. explicat. Quae acceptio inde confirmatur quod 4,15. 25 quoque Peraea (trans lordanem) a ludaea distinguitur; aliqua quidem oppida in Peraea ditioni ludaeae accensebantur (Ptolem. 5,16,9), neque tamen probabile est evangelistam de iis loqui. Marc. 10,1 lectio longe probabilior fert Ip^erat ei; T<X opia T?ig 'lou&xias xat rcepav TOU 'lop&avou, qua ilia explicatio commendatur;
Christus pro suo regno matrimonium revocat ad primaevae institutionis rationem, ita sell, ut vinculum matrimonii ne adulterio quidem solvi declaret et proinde matrimonium esse indissoluble doceat. Dein docet de praestantia virginitatis quae propter regnum coelorum servatur. Quae duo doctrinae capita et eminentiam novi foederis prae vetere clare demonstrant et ad institutionem et eruditionem apostolorum necessario pertinent. Matthaeus quamvis de compluribus a Galilaea in ludaeam itineribus non explicite mentionem faciat, ea tamen fa eta esse 23,37 satis indicat. Hie tempus illud design at quo Christus praedicationi et migrationil?us in Galilaea finem imponit et relicta Galilaea in Peraea et ludaea moratur usque ad passionem (cf. Marc. 10,1. Luc. 9,51) y.
19:2
v. 2 etsecutae sunteum turbae multae et curamt eos ibiscil. in Peraea, trans lordanem (Orig.}. Quamvis enim Ghristus parum fidei inveniret apud turbas, tamen non destitit liberaliter'sua largiri beneficia, quibus animi praepararentur ad fidem amplectendam. Quam maligno animo in eum fuerint duces populi et aemulatores legis qui se iactabant, etiairi hie denuo patefit
19:3
v. 3 et accesserunt ad eum pharisaei, graece plerumque 01 <pap. ii soil, de quibus vel de quorate ordineiam saepe sermo fuit, qui itaque considerantur, licet solum aliqui pauci sint , tamquam totius classis pharisaeorum vicarii etlegati; tentantes eum, ut soil, eum in sermone caperent et quodcumque demum respondisset, in deteriorem partem interpretantes reprehenderent (Orig.} et pro responsionis ratione populum in eum concitarent (S. Chrys.} et dicentes : si licet homini dimittere uxorem suam quacumque ex causa? ponitur si loco particulae interrogations (cf. 12,10. Luc. 22,49; uti saepius in lingua vulgari ; vide Kaulen, Handbuch z. Vulg. p. 211 seq.). S. Matthaeus scribens pro ludaeis refert quaestionem, uti apud eos tempore Christi quoque disceptabatur ; discipuli enim Hillel docebant uxorem posse dimitti plurimis de causis. Illi enim verba legis Deut. 24,1 "UT niljr explicabant de re quaecumque displicuerit.viro. Intractatu mischnico de divortiis (gittin) legitur : schola -Schamai dicit : nemo repudiabit uxorem nisi in ea repertum fuerit quid inhonesti (miy im); schola Hillelis dicit : etiamsi combusserit decoctum eius 1 ; rabbi Aqiba dicit : etiamsi ilia pulchriorem inveniat aliam , uti scriptum est : si non invenerit gratiam in oculis eius (cap. 9,40; Surenhusius III p. 358). Sententiam scholae Hillel plerisque arrisisse quae iam erat morum depravatio nemo infitias ibit; vide ad 5,31; cf. losephus, Antiq. 16,7. 3; Vita 76. In Marci narratione illud quacumque ex causa omittitur, cum pro iis quibus scribit nee necessarium esset et potius admirationem crearet quia de ilia apud ludaeos disceptatiorie eos edoctos esse supponi nequit. Cum pharisaei quaestionem ponerent qui severam legis observantiam summamque reverentiam pf aetendere solebant , opinandum erit eos fuisse ex schola Schamai et exspectasse pro Christi de moribus doctrina earn negaturum esse. Qua tamen responsione ei invidiam creare potuissent apudplerosque. Insuper cum Christus versaretur in Peraea, , ditione Herodis Antipae , si negaret licere uxorem dimittere, id contra Herodem quoque dici illi facile poterant affirmare et inde calumniam inferre Iesu quod populum doctrina sua in principem concitaret. Quare non est improbabile eos voluisse Ghristo etiam apud Herodem insidias struere , ut Christum occideret , quippe qui propter illud non licet iam abstulisset loannem ' baptistam ; vide ad 14,1 seq. Opinatur Schanz asseclas Hillel interrogasse , quia qiiaestio ita ponatur, ut ex Christi doctrina illani iri negatum exspectari debuerit. Utut res sit, dicere possumus cum S. Hier. : quasi cbrnutd tenent eum syllogismo et quodcumque respondent captioni patet; si enim affirmaverit , pudicitiae praedicator sibi videbitur docere contraria ; si vero negaverit, quasi sacrilegii reus tenebitur et adversus doctrinam Moysi ac per Moysen Dei facere iudicabitur. S. Chrys. miratur de pharisaeorum stultitia quippe qui putarint se posse quaestionibus suis ipsi os clau- . dere quamvis iam baud semel didicissent quantum ea in re valeret. Igitur Dominus sic responsionem temperat, ut decipulam eorum transeat , Scripturam sanctam adducens in testimonium et naturalem legem primamque Dei sententiam secundae opponens quae non voluntate Dei sed peccantium necessitate concessa est (S. Hier.]
19:4
v. 4 qui respondens ait eis : non legistis quia qui fecit (hominem), ab initio masculum et feminam fecit eos? i. e. non legistis quod creator omnium return fecit eos in initio masculurn et feminam (lans.} et, ut idem monet, ab initio iungendum est cum subsequentibus ; arguit enim Christus a prima hominis creatione , a creatione quae ab initio facta est (Euth.}. In ipsa enim creatione iam exprimitur institutio matrimonii , quia si masculum et feminam fecit eos et constat quod nihil f rustra fecit , ergo nee aliquid horum et non nisi ad societatem matrimonii (S, Thorn.} et quidem earn matrimonii formam statim creatione expressit, ut unus imam haberet, prout Euth. adnotat. In graeco apcev %al Ovjlu i.e. sola sexuum significatione etiam distinctius Creatoris intentio matrimonii declaratur. Merito monentquam sapienter Christus respondeat (S. Hier. Bed. Euth.}. Neque enim in illas partium disputationes deseendit, sed quid a Deo institutum et ordinatum sit ipsa creatione et lege verbis lata exponit; quare pergit : et dixit : propter hoc dimittet homo patrem et matrem et adhaerebit (graece proprie agglutinabitur, qua voce hebr. pm bene exprimitur) uxori suae et erunt duo in (ad) carnem unam i. e. erunt una caro, erunt unum corpus (Euth.}\ locutio est hebraice et graece eadem ac in sententia : factus est Adam in animarn viventem (Gen. 2,7), uti fans, monet, pro : factus anima vivens. Dieuntur autem ima caro, unum quasi corpus, quia unum principium integrum ad finem matrimonii constituunt et propter imam et communem utriusque corporis potestatem (lans.J. Yerba deprompta sunt ex Gen. 2,24 et ibi dici vddentur ab Adam. Hie vero Deo attribuuntur, idque merito; nam kdam ea solum proferre poterat tamquain propheta edoetus de ea re a Deo, duiri sopore eestatico abreptus mente cerneret productionem Evae. Quare quae Adam dieit ad Dum auctorem referuntur. Porro iam eo ipso quod haee verba referuntur in s, Scriptura, licet arguere in illis peculiars Dei consilium exprimi, sictit eodem modo argumentatur Paulus : quid, dicifc Scriptura? eiice ancillam etfilium eius etc. (Gal. 4,30; G.en. 21,1<J). Geterum etiam assumi potest v.erba ilia addita esse ab auctore saero quibus consilium Dei in creatione Evae et eius ad Adam adductions manifestatum exprimit. P,aitefc autem ex notione inspirationis Deum esse auetorem primum. Atque revera nihil in textu deprehenditur quo haec ab Adam dicta esse (id quod communiter arbitrantur) evidenter demonstretur. Genset Orig. alium esse nexum illius propter hoc in Genesi et hie in evangelica narratione. At in utroque loco arguitur ex creatione ipsa innui et deelarari unionem matrimonialem. Discrimen si quod est in eo , solum reponi potest quod Gen. 2,22 ipse modus crcationis Evae clare assignatur, dum Ghristus solam enuntiat creationem. In ereatione viri unius imiusque mulieris etiam monogamiam indicari recte infenmt plerique; minus recte autem concludit S. Hier. : ostendit secunda vitanda coniugia; non enim ait masculum et feminas, quod ex priorum repudio quaerebatur, sed masculum et feminam, ut unius coniugis consortia necterentur ; sed rite solum effici potest polygamiam simultaueam excludi. Ex ea igitur s. Scripturae sententia infert Christus
19:6
v. 6 itaque. iam non sunt duo , sed una caro ; proinde non magis posse separari virum ab uxore, quampossit in duo .dividi una caro (Ians.}\ sicut ergo carnem secare scelestum est, ita et uxorem dirimere iniquum; neque hie stetit , sed Deum quoque attulit dicens ; quod ergo Deus coniunxit, homo non separet, ostendens illud et contra naturam et contra legem esse; contra naturam, quia una caro dissecatur; contra legem quia cum Deus coniunxerit et iusserit non separare vos id facere tentatis (S. Chrys.}. Unde Ghristus docet in ipsa institutione matrimonii etiam eius indissolubilitatem a Deo esse statutam neque homini ius competere matrimonium solveudi. Qua responsione iam continebatur, non quidem hominem , sed Deum posse separare ; proinde solum dispiciendum esse statueritne Deus quando et quibus conditionibus separationem velit permittere. Quare frustra pbarisaei opponunt
19:7
v. 7 quare ergo Moyses mandavit dare libellum repudii et dimittere? respondet Christus Deum aliquid concessisse naturae per peccatum lapsae et nondura per gratiam novi foederis reparatae
19:8
v. 8 ait illis : quoniam Moyses ad duritiem cordis vestri permisit vobis dimittere uxores vestras; ab initio autem non fuit sic; cr/Xv)po/capta est animi durities, pervicacia et indoles eius quisi semel iram conceperit iam non ad misericordiam et clementiam flectitur, sed animo duro, crudeli esse perseverat. Proinde id permissum est propter maliliam , ut mala maiora impedirentur, ne sell, uxores occiderent aut perpetua odia foverent casque pessime adliiberent (cf. 5. Hier. Br. Theoph. Euth. lans.) ; populus enim dura cervice erat. Quo sensu semel dicatur mandavit, deinpermmt, bene declarat Cai. : Moyses dimissionem uxoris permisit , sed libellum repudii dari mandavit , si dimitterent uxores et lans. : constitutio enim Moysis divortium spectans habebat aliquid permissionis et aliquid praecepti; nam permissionis fuit quod non prohiberet divortium facere, praecepti vero quod constitutum fuit non posse divortium fieri, nisi maritus uxori scriberet et traderet libellum repudii l . lam in vaticiniis messianis continue efiertur per Messiam inductum iri morum sanctitatem eximiam (cf. Is. 11,4-9; 54,10 seq. 65,18. Ez. 36,26 etc.) ; ipse Christus professus est ne iota qiiidem unum inlege iri neglectum et variis iam exemplis in sermone montano.declaravit quomodo a suis maiorem morum probitatem exigeret. Uncle cum mine de usuillo divortii prommtiet : ab initio non fuit sic, iam statim evidens reclditur illam permissionem tolli in novo foedere. Erat enim permissum solum propter cordis duritiem ; haec autem cordis durities sanatur in novo foedere gratia abundantiore , uti iam vaticinatus est Ezecliiel : auferam cor lapideum de carne vestra et dabo vobis cor carneum (11,19; 36,26) i. e. cor molle , tenerum, pium, quod facile obediat. Quare ilia permissio iam pugnat cum perfectione novi foederis et causa permissionis propter gratiam omnibus propositam ablata ipsa quoque cessat permissio. Unde ex hisce iam considerationibus elucet quo sensu Christi responsio capi debeat
19:9
v. 9 dico autem vobis , quibus verbis suam statuere soletlegem, quae sit vetere perfectior,* cf. 5,22. 28. 32. 34. 39. 44-; quia quicumque dimiserit uxorem suam nisi ob fornicationem et aliam duxerit moechatur et qui dimissam duxerit moechatur quod additur nisi ob fornicationem et apud Graecos et Latinos varie legitur (vide lect. var.), quare aliqui additamenturn ob 5,32 hie jnsertum suspicati sunt et alii verba haec delenda esse putarunt. At cum apud omnes testes aliquid eiusmodi reperiatur, retineri debent, quamvis accurata verborum forma certo definiri nequeat. Etiam altera pars et qui dimissam duxerit etc. satis testimoniis criticis commendatur. Christum autem non permittere , ut ipsum matrimonii vinculum solvatur, iam efficitur ex eo quod dicit divortium ab initio non fuisse concessum. Ex eius enim argumentation v. 4-6 quam opponit quaestioni de dimissioiie omnino sequitur, se velle respondere secundum eum modum quern Deus in ipsa creatione instituit et insuper ex responsione ad obiectionem ex libello repudii petitam clarum est eum etiam abolere pro novo foedere concessionem illani populo durae cervicis datam. Idem debet concludi ex sententia addita, quae saltern 5,32 certo consistit. Si enim propter adulterium vinculum solveretur et novae nuptiae iniri possent , exsisteret incitamentum ad scelus et mulier adultera esset in meliore conditione si repudiaretur a viro quam uxor innocens a viro eiecta. Proinde si de dimissione sermo est , ea debet intelligi quae fit manente vinculo. Ita S. Hier. : ubicumque est igitur fornicatio et fornicationis suspicio , libere uxor dimittitur. Et quia poterat accidere, ut aliquis calumniam faceret innocenti et ob secundam copulam nuptiarum veteri crimen impingeret, sic priorem dimittere iubetur uxorem , ut secundam prima vivente non habeat et Euth. quoque : sive non repudiatam ab alio, sive repudiatam duxerit, adulterium committit . Idem quoque intelligi debet ex eo quod alibi (Marc. 10,11 . Luc. 16,18. 1 Cor. 7,10) absolute dicitur omnem qui dimissa uxore alterant ducat moechari ; si autem Christus in casu adulterii permisisset solutionem matrimonii, id ab aliis omitti non potuit 1 . Idem aperte ostenditur magna admiratione discipulorum v. 10 eorumque sententia non expedire nubere, xjuae plane concipi non posset, si Christus nil aliud mandasset quam quod severiores inter ludaeos sequentes Schamai etiam tenendum esse affirmabant. Denotione uopveta? vide ad 5,32. Falso itaque docet Weiss, ipsa icopvefo coram Deo solvi matrimonium; melius cense t Holtzm. Luc. 16,18 optime exprimi Iesu sententiam. uxorem nisi cum adest d'bar ervah (AO'YO; TOPVEIOK;); tfbar ervah autem significare nullum adesse matrimonium, quia ervah nominetur femina lege a matrimonio prohibita. Haec explicatio doctrinam catholieam tuetur quidem , at vera esse interpretatio non videtur. Est enim sat subtilis , neque ervah simpliciter habet notionem feminae quae viro lege sit interdicta; et si verteris : non dimittes mulierem extra causam turpitudinis i. e. quando vivere cum ilia res esset propter turpitudinem et impuritatem prohibita (quando esset solum concubinatus) , haec explicatio plura infert, quae in verbis extra causam impudicitiae non continentur. Si' vero contenditur Tropvei'av non posse significare adulterium (Katholik 1889 II p. 636), obstant loci sat multi quibus defectio a Deo eo nomine designalur, quia Israel sacro connubio Deo iuncta eonsideratur, et praeterea cf. Amos 7,17. Os. 3,3, Eccli. 26,9. &v8po<; [/.otxatai (Apol. 1,15) et Athenagoras : 3 yp ^ ArcoXucv), <pvjot, yuvouxa auTotJ xal yaj/.ifcyi XX?iv [AO'X" Tat (Legat. 33) et Theophilus : 6 d(TioXeXu[/.evyiv arco (JvSpb; (jLot^euet, xal 8<; dicoXuei yuvawta itapextoi; Xoyou note? auryjv |/.oiy w eu09ivai (AutoL 3,13); quae ultima sententia rem clare definit. Multa in hanc rem testimonia antiquitatis Maid, recitat. Animadvertentes discipuli quam multi in coniugiis casus oborirl possent quos vir sustinere debeat ac summis proinde difficultatibus et periculis defungi vel eos non sustinentem in Ghristi mandata peccare, ad coelibatum quasi faciliorem et matrimonio utiliorem confugientes dicunt (Orig.} : si ita est causa hominis cum uxore, non expedit nubere v. 10; quae discipulorum responsio bene perpendatur oportet quia ad verba Christi rite intelligenda lucem affert. Videntes ergo apostoli , ait S. Hier., grave uxorum iugum proferunt motum animi sui. lam in verbis Ghristo multo gravius onus deprehendunt quam eousquenorunt; si ergo Christus nil aliud statuisset quam quod discipuli Schamai etiam statuebant mulierem ob rem inhonestam posse dimitti , ita ut habeatur divortium matrimonio soluto , profecto non erat cur ad illam pervenirent conclusionem. Videntur autem Christo quasi obiicere : tua lege statuta matrimonium adeo evadit grave et onerosum , ut satius sit illud omnino non inire; tu homines a matrimonio deterres. Atqui ut tale quid apostoli inferre possent, Christus debuit aliquid statuere quod in lege vetere inauditum erat et quod viris, qui usum libelli repudii tamquam remedium contra mulieres nimis onerosas noverint , plane intolerable videri poterat. Quomodo enim alias quasi .desperantes de felicitate status matrimonialis loqui potuissent? Tale autem antea ignotum et tale onus viris impositum solum videri poterat lex de matrimonii vinculo indissolubili etiam eo in casu quo viri ira et vindicta quam maxime accenditur, si uxor infidelis evaserit. Quare dicunt : si ita est causa -t\ airta, uti soil, v. 3 interrogatum est de causa qua liceat uxorem dimittere , si causa et ratio qua vir possit dimittere eiusmodi est , non expedit inire matrimonium ; si una causa est vel medium separans virum et mulierem, dicosane fornicationem , non expedit venire ad nuptias (Euth.]. Alio modo causam explicat Theoph. : causam hominis cum muliere dicit perpetuam et inseparabilem unionem; nonnulli autem et sic intelligunt : si reprehensionem ; et culpam habiturus est vir, ut illegitime eiiciat uxorem , non expedit matrimonium. contrahere . Haec utique ex prima notione et Ghristi verbis voci causae supponi possunt tamquam consectaria. Quod discipuli admirantes et quasi obiicientes dixerant , eo utitur Ghristus, ut doctrinain proponat de statu meliore virginitatis v. 11 qui dixit illis : non omnes capiunt verbum istud, sed quibus datum est sell. verbum de non contrahendo matrimonio non omnes suscipiunt neque fenmt; mag % na enirn res est coelibatus (Euth.}\ X W P ^ V capere, mente intelligere videtur hoc loco dici non tarn de sola cognitione intellectual! , qua quis iudicet esse statum coelibem variis ex causis meliorem, sed de tali cognitione et approbatione qua voluntas quoque efficaciter impellitur, ut hunc statum amplectatur. Id suadetnr ex v.~12 et iam indicari videtur eo quod Christus dicat : quibus datum est. Sola enim cognitio non expedit nubere posset etiam saepius haberi rationibus naturalibus vel potest simplici acquiri ratiocinio ex iis quae S. Paulus docet i Cor. 7,32 seq. utique etiam exsistit cognitio ex fide et aestimatio ad quam lumen fidei et gratia opus est, quia carnalis homo non percipit ea quae Spiritus sunt. Et hoc sensu solum ii capiunt quibus istud lumen datur. At cum simplici ter dicatur quibus datum est et de re agatur quae in opus deduci possit et debeat , istud dari certe non potest restringi ad sterilem cognitionem intellectualem , sed debet intelligi donum quod fructuosum sit et tamquam beneficium divinum ad ipsam vitae rationem yaleat. Indicatur itaque esse donum Dei servare virginitatem propter rationes ex fide depromptas neque istud omnibus dari. Sed quibus datur? respondet Orig. : petite et dabitur vobis; omnis enim qui petit accipit et S. Hier. : his datum est qui petierunt, qui voluerunt, qui ufc acciperent laboraverunt; omni enim petenti dabitur et quaerens inveniet et pulsanti aperietur eiEuth. : petentibus, in quam, non simpliciter, sed ferventer, perseveranter, et ut semel dicam, sicut oportet; significatum est ergo virginitatem Dei donum esse, datum his qui petunt ut oportet et similiter donum hoc esse precibus impetrandum et precibus retinenclum ac conservandum interpretes catholici decent et iam sequitur ex ratione et norma generali quae pro Dei donis ac beneficiis impetrandis statuta est. Huius status excellentia iam eo indicatur, quia ad hoc verbum capiendum speciale Dei donum , ergo beneficium singulare requiritur quod non omnibus conceditur. Quare bene notat S. Chrys. : rem extollit et magnam esse indicat, atque hoc modo attrahit et hortatur . Jam in voce quibus datum est necessario includitur posse cum Dei gratia virginitatem perpetuo servari , si homo ex sua parte allaboret iisque utatur subsidiis quae Deus ab homine adhiberi vult, ut sunt oratio, sensuum custodia, usus.sacramentorum etc. Nam dona Dei sunt sine poenitentia, et si Christus statum hunc utilem ac bonum declarat, eum posse per totam vitam retineri etiam sequitur. Etiam clarius id enuntiatur v. 12. Qui autem sint illi quibus id coelitus datum sit et undenam hoc possit cognosci, exponitur
19:12
v. 12 sunt enim eunuchi guide matris ufero sic nati sunt, ergo ex naturae defectu et necessitate, et sunt eunuchi qui facti sunt ab hominibus, ergo violentia aliorum et malitia aut pravitate, et sunt eunuchi qui se ipsos castraverunt propter regnum coelorum, id quod^ tarn parutn ad litteram intelligendum est quam illud 5,29. 30 et 18,8. 9 : abscide et proiice a te manum vel pedem etc.; neque enim impotentia physica quidquam confert ad regnum coelorum vel sibi acquirendum vel aliis annuntiandum. Illam litteralem acceptionem etiam Orig. reprehendit et intelligenda verba esse dicit de affectionum ab anima resectione. Sunt itaqtie ii qui proposito voluntatis se continent et a cura et sollicitudine familiae liberi esse volunt , quo se liberius et expeditius totos impendere possint servitio Dei, uti S. Paulus docet : qui sine uxore est, sollicitus est quae Domini sunt, quomodo placeat Deo; qui autem cum uxore est, sollicitus est quae sunt mundi , quomodo placeat uxori et divisus est ; et mulier innupta et virgo cogitat quae Domini sunt, ut sit sancta corpore et spiritu ; quae autem nupta est cogitat quae sunt mundi , quomodo placeat viro et statum hunc virginitatis se commendare dicit quia confert rcpo? TO u<jpip!.ov KOU euTWcpe^pov TO> K.upuo a7Cpio"rca<7- T<O? (1 Cor. 7,32-36), est itaque status valde bonus Deoque placens, quo facile quis Deo adhaereat et continue sine ulla (Jistractione et impedimento quo retrahatur ei assistat eiusque servitio se addicat (cf. Comely, Comment, in 1 Cor. ad 7,32-36). In quo loco S. Pauli commentarium habemus ad illud propter regnum coelorum, scil. ut quis magis ac certius placeat. Deo quod non est aliud quam propter regnum coelorum assequendum plenius ac certius (lans. Cai. etc.); Discip.uli in v. 10 solum attenderunt ad incommoda quae oriri possunt ex vinculo rnatrimonii indissolubili ; Christus autem ad causam sublimiorem ob quam abstineri po'test amatrimonio eorum mentes avocat, ad regnum coelorum sensu plane generali , ut bona eius et ipsi facilius, copiosius habeant et regnum Dei apud alios expeditius promoveant servientes bono spiritual! aliorum, evangelium inter gentes longinquas annuntiantes etc. Statum autem designari non pro brevi quodam tempore vel pro uno alterove anno, ipsa verba qui se ipsos castraverunt clarissime indicant; per se enim ii designantur qui perpetuo impotes sunt et se impotes reddiderunt ad matrimonium ; ergo illi sunt qui voluntatis proposito cum Dei gratia in perpetuum omne matrimonium sibi interdicunt. Quare verba ea quam maxime implentur in iis qui voto facto se obligant et matrimonium sibi illicitum et invalidum reddunt. Status quoque perpetuus sequitur ex duobus illis exemplis vel ordinibus-eunuchorum , qui tales sunt perpetuo naturae defectu aut violentia vel crimine aliorum. Et cum Christus dicat sunt qui se ipsos etc., etiam necessario sequitur tales fore in regno messiano. Ea enim assertione Christus enuntiat quid futurum sit et quid ipse velit. Immo clarius quoque invitat, ut ad statum ilium tamquam ad rem excellentem et sublimem complures adnitantur eumque amplectantur, addens qui po test capere, capiai i. e. qui ilia in se desideria rei excellentia fide perspecta sentit inflammari , huic Dei dono ex sua parte cooperetur et fretus gratia Dei hunc eligat statum; capere vide ad v. 11. Ea quippe exhortatione validius inflammat quod rem insignem et grandem esse demonstret, nee rem intra legis necessitatem includit, sed rem esse possibilem maxime ostendit ut maior inde cupiditas voluntati accrescat (S. Chrys.} et S.. Hier. haec dici ait, ut unusquisque consideret vires suas, utuum possit virginalia et pudicitiae implere praecepta; per se enim castitas blanda est et quemlibet ad se alliciens; sed considerandae sunt vires, ut qui potest capere capiat; quasi hortantis vox Domini est et milites suos ad pudicitiae praemia concitantis : qui potest pugnare, pugnet, siiperet ac trinmphet et sim. S. Hil. Euth. Theoph. Bed. Rab. etc. Ea ipsa adhortatione Christus quoque promittit fore ut qui se sentit invitari ad ilium statum, si fideliter ex sua parte cooperetur, Dei gratia adiutus viam illam inoffenso pede percurrat. Atque quemadmodum S. Paulus scribens : volo vos omnes esse sicut meipsum etc. indicat posse complures vel etiam inultos illud donum a Deo accipere, ita verba Christi omnes invitant ut se probent adeoque indicant donum illud a Deo concessum iri multis. Cum intertio eunuchorum ordine de exsectione sermo esse nequeat, nihil videtur obstare quominus duo priores ordines etiam latiore quodam modo explicentur; in quern modum iam scribit Theoph. eunuchum a natura esse qui propter naturalem complexionem non moveatur ad venerea; eunuchum ab homine qui ex humano praecepto abstineat; ad priorem ordinem p'ertinere eos qui frigidiores natura sunt nee libidinis appetentes etiam S. Hier. Br. Schegg explicant; ad secundum ordinem autem eos qui propter varias vitae concliiiones non possint matrimonium contrahere (S. Br. Schegg}. Ceterum Christi doctrina de coelibatu iam praeformatur a propheta Isaia 56,3-5 (vide Comment, in Is. II p. 363 seq.). Interpretes protestantes hie sedulo aclnotant coelibatum non praescribi a Christo; id verum est; at adverti debet eum multum commendari eiusque pro regno coelorum utilitatem clare proponi ; proinde omnino sequi valde esse conveniens ut qui se consecrare velint praedicationi evangelii et ministerio sacro etiam a matrimonio el ilia clivisione abstineant de qua S. Paulus loquitur. Nonne ilia divisione quam plurimuni impedietur unusquisque a ministerio divinp? et si quern decet euiKfcpe^pov T& Kupuo aTcsptoTO&TTto? adhaerere et assistere, nonne is iure praecipuo erit sacerdos? Quare prorsus gratuito illi interpretes praeceptum coelibatus Ecclesiae catholicae reprehendunt; qui enim nolunt continentiam servare eos nemo cogit ut ordines sacros suscipiant et qui eos suscipiunt aetatis sunt adultae et saepe edocti sunt, ut secum perpenderent vellentne illam in se suscipere obligationem sentientes se invitari a Domino. Multo magis autem a vera explicatione abest Weiss qui censet statum coelibem ne commandari quidem a Domino ; bene vero Holtzm. dicit Iesum talem renuntiationem accipere velut sanctum sacrificium. At falsum est quod Meyer contendit in verbis Christi non contineri promissionem ut quis perpetuo possit servare continentiam. Christus statum designat perpetuum; ergo ad hunc etiam gratia subministrabitur ei qui lideliter et constanter facit quod in se est. Quod ille ex confessione augustana in medium profert contra : non placet Ghristo immunda continentia, etiam catholicus quisque dicit; at quod ille insinuare velle vide tur continentiam perpetuam non posse esse nisi immundam , id quam maxime iniuriosum est verbis Ghristi. Nam continentia ad tempus omnibus est necessaria. Etenim a tempore pubertatis usque ad nuptias complures anni fluunt, immo non raro sat multi ; multi vivunt diu in statu viduitatis ; isti omnes debent sese contineri. Quomodo itaque Christus dicere posset continentiam ad tempus esse donum singulare ad quod non ornnes possent pervenire? Cum itaque omnes ad continentiam pro aliquo tempore, et saepe longo teneantur, Christus necessario perpetuam hoc loco debuit intelligere. Mire invenit Resch in v. 11 doctrinam secretiorem pennanentem ad modum gnosticorum (1. c. p. 246).
19:13
Commendat Christus suoexemplo discipulis humilitatem et amorem curamque parvulorum et docet etiam parvulos suae gratiae posse esse participes. Colligit Weiss exaestimationeparvulorumlesumnon.commendasse continentiam perpetuam ! ! Aliqui nexum cum antecedentibus in eo reponunt quod audientes Christum laudantem et commendantem castitatem ei parvulos titpote corpore mundos castosque obtulerint (op. imp. Bed. Rab. Pasch. Thorn.}] alii quandoque opinautur post laudem virginitatis nunc matrimomo quoque suum tribui honorem, cum infantes, fructus matrimonii, complectatur magno amore eis bene precatus. Sed uterque modus connecteridi subtilior videtur; satis erit dicer e id adiungi quia ad eruditionem discipulornm eadem ratione pertinet sicut quae antecedunt et subsequuntur ; v. 13 tune, utrum statim post antecedentia, necne, ex ipsa voce dirimi nequit; eadem connexio habetur Marc. 10,13; sed propter Luc. 18,15 aliqui id ad aliud referunt tempus, id quod tamen necessarium non esse vide apud Comely, Introd. Ill p. 295; oblatisunt eiparmdi., Luc. TOC (3pe'<pv), infantes, qua voce saepius infantes recenter nati, omnino teneri signilicantur (cf. Luc. 2,12. 16. Act. 7,19); at sensu quodam latiore etiam adhibetur de puerulis (cf. 2 Tim. 3,15 : KTTO ppe'cpou? a teneris, ab infantia sacras litteras nosti, nisi id popular! quada'm hyperbole dictum sit), ut manus eis imponeret et oraret; viderant enim impositione manuum Iesu aegrotos sanari , pelli daemones ; proinde tactum Iesu esse salutarem (S. Pasch. Thorn. lans. Maid.}] unde impositionem illam desiderabant ut mala quaeque ab infantibus propellerentur et beneficia eis obvenirent. Impositio manuum symbolum est benedictionis vel ita ut aliquod bonum a Deo efflagitetur vel ut illud ex virtute et potestate imponentis alteri communicetur ; quare impositio ex aequo includit orationem vel benedictionem ; inde illud eloraret etiam omitti potuit, uti Marc. Luc. omittitur. Manus ad benedicendum imponi iam legimus Gen. 48,14. 15; atque consuetudinem fuisse apud ludaeos receptain qua solebant parvuli senioribus et sanctis viris offerri, ut manibus impdsitis ab eis benedicerentur, recte notant 5. Thorn, lans. et Maid, et coniirmatur eo quod Buxtorf refert ex libro Colbo num. 74 consuevisse olim Hierosolymis patres puerulis manus imponere eosque adducere ad singulos seniores, ut illi quoque eis benedicerent et bene precarentur, quo digni fiere.nt lege , matrimonio, operibus bonis (de synagoga iudaica cap. 7; Ugolini, Thes. antiq. vol. IV p. 826). Laudanda est pia parentum sedulitas et commendanda fides qua Iesu parvulos offerunt. enim solliciti de dignitate Christ! ab eius honore alienum esse occupari in benedicendis puerulis eamque aetatem indignam esse quae ad Christum adduceretur (S.. Chrys. Tlieoph. op. imp. Pasch. lans. Maid. Lap. Fit.}. Alii consentiunt sententiae S. Hier. qui censet apostolos voluisse impedire ne importunitate hominum parvulos offerentium lassaretur nimiumque fatigaretur (Bed. Rab. Alb. Thorn. 'Schanz, Grimm V p. 263) vel etiam utramque causam afferunt (Pasch. lans'. Fil.}. Addit praeterea Alb. apostolos. reputasse indiscretum parvulos non intelligentes quae fiebant confirmari et benedici, id quod tamen gratuito asseritur; esset etenim nimis mirum, si apostoli putassent benedictionem Christi parvulis ad avertenda mala et ad bona procuranda prodesse non posse ; sibenedictio patris firmat domos filiorum (Eccli. 3,11), quanto magis oratio et benedictio Christi? Discipuli certe volebant Domino parcere, ne nimium obrueretur importunitate hominum , immemores quae esset Christi aestimatio et sententia de parvulis 18,2 seq.; Iesus autem hac occasione utitur, ut discipulis praeclara tradat documenta vitae apostolicae, inter quae non ultimo loco poni debet , ne vir apostolicus taedio laboris et fatigatione victus opem suam petentibus deneget , sed ut se impendat et superimpendat. Et si apostoli forte censebant parvulos esse indignos quibus tanta cura impenderetur, vel honori Domini detrahi adductioneparvulorum et infantium, Christus omnem fastum spernere et humilem animi sensum induere docet (S. Chrys.] et simul manifestat in quanta apud se sint aestimatione parvuli
19:14
v. 14 Iesus vero. ait eis : smite parvulos et nolite eos prohibere ad me venire; Marc. 10,14 Christum agendi modum discipulorum indigne tulisse refertur; clareitaque et distincte eos reprehendens suam senteutiam et doctrinam altius eorum mentibus imprimit. Simnl facile cogitare possumus, qua consolatione fidem parentum, probabilissime matrum offerentium remuneratus sit, cum adeo amanter delicias matrum, parvulos, ad se invitaret et quam libenter eos admitti vellet significaret. Quae matrum laetitia eo maior fuit, quia post verba duriora discipulorum tanta benignitas Domini et snavitas magis inexspectato contigit. Etiam maior effecta est et delectatio matrum et discipulorum pudor, cum audirent talium est enim regnum coelorum; quia haec ratio subditur, cur velit parvulos ad se adduci , in voce talium nequaquam parvuli aetate ab hoc dicto et a participatione regni coelorum excluduntur, sed sensus necessario debet esse : etiam parvulos aetate si modo ad Christum veniant oblati ab aliis participes esse regni coelorum (cf. lans. Maid.}. Plerique explicant talium de iis adultis qui voluntate et simplicitate sint parvuli , qui sintinnocentes, malitiae expertes r humiles (S. Chrys. Theoph. .Ent/i. op. imp. Pasc/i. Br, Alb. Thorn.}, non enim aetatem regnare, sed mores dicunt S. Hier. Rab. Pasch. et S. Ambrosiiis scribit : non aetas praefertur aetati , alioquin obesset adolescere (in Luc. 18,16). At parvuli nequeunt excludi, sed cum Qhristus dicat taliwn , etiam includuntur qui virtute et voluntate tales sunt quales parvuli suntnatura, qui, ut5. Chrys. dicit, proposito voluntatis ilia operantur, quae naturasua parvuli faciunt; non enimpueruli retinent memoriam iniuriarum, non premuntur iactura pecuniarum, non voluptate inflammantur, non superbe extolluntur etc.; vide ad 18,3. Similiter Pdlzl. Quanta amoris significatione Christus parvulos susceperit , explicatius legitur Marc. 10,16 : et complexans eos et imponens manus super illos benedicebat eos. Uti antea verbis , ita nunc re et exemplo docet discipulos , quanta cura et quam tenero amore fovendi sint parvuli ; nullo modo eos esse spernendos , neque esse rem vilem eorum gerere curam, e contra dum Christus eos complectitur, magnam eorum dignitatem quam verbis declaravit v. 14, iam actione sua exprimit. In hoc quam maxime elucet Christi indoles -amabilissima et snavitas eximia; mitis est et humilis corde, quare parvulis, suam largiter praebet clementiam, qua animos quoque 'adultorum ad se attrahit. Brevius sed sufficienter eundein Ghristi in parvulos amorem blandum describit evangelista
19:15
v. 15 et cum imposuisset eis manus , abiit indej ex narratione Marc. 10,10 seq. sequi videtur Christum in domo esse eommoratum , cum offerrentur parvuli ; quare abiit inde declaratur Marc. 10,17 et cum egressus esset in viam. Praesens locus, aitauctor op. imp., instruit omnes parentes, ut filios suos indesinenter sacerdotibus offerant, quia si sacerdotibus offerunt, offerunt Christo ; non enim sacerdos manus imponit sed Christus in cuius nomine manus imponitur . Cum. benedictio Christi non potuerit non esse efficax, seqtiitur etiam infantes esse capacesdonorum supernaturalium (/#??,$.); unde ex hoc loco aliquid argumenti capi potest pro baptismo parvulorum; attamen prudenter monet Maid, non adeo firmum esse, ut tarn certi tamque necessarii ad salutem dogmatis fundamentum esse possit. Id tamen fortasse ex hoc loco conficitur merito posse et cum effectu baptismum administrari infanti .usu rationis carenti (si licet Ppe'cpy) sensu communi accipere, id quod sane convenit); debere dari baptismum elucet ex loan. 3,5. Secundum Luc. 18,17 Christus ea occasione discipulis in memoriam revocat doctrinam traditam Matth. 18,3, ex qua etiam discant quam immerito voluerint prohibere parvulos a Christo. do i, TI' d?pa ^arai rjfuv; 28. 6 81 'Irj- E!TOV auTot 1 ?' [xr]v Xsyto uj 01 (JxoXouOviaavTc? [xot iv T^ Tt fa, 8Tav xaOfarj 6 utb? tou (JvOptinou ITI\ Op6vou 86?r]s OCUTOU,' xa0(aea6 ITC\ 8ti8Exa Opo'vou? xpfvovTE? T cpuXas TOU 'lapayfX. 29. xa\ TTO; "TJXEV o?xia? ^ (JSEX^oug ?] dSsX^^s 7^ p.r)TE r pa T] T^xva $ dcypoug E'VEXEV TOU Edocentur discipuli de periculis divitiarum et quale impedimentum esse possint ne quis potiatur vita aeterna; in paupertate autem iis ostenditnr via ad perfectionem , quae scil. in renuntiatione rerum omnium et in arctissima imitatione Christi consistit. Ad quam perfectionem sequendam Ghristus praemiis magnificis propositis invitat. Quemadmodum ig-itur antea Christus de matrimonio legem tulit et virginitatem tamquam inaius quoddam bonum commendavit, ita mine de divitiis docet et paupertatem sponte susceptam consulit eamque mentem disponere ostendit ut quis perfecte Domino adhaereat totumque se eius mancipet servitio. Unde in his narrationibus consilia quae dicuntur evangelica egregie proponuntur. Cum Christus e domo in qua discipulos de virginitate docuerat et parvulis manus imposuerat,' egressus esset in viam (Marc. 10,17)
19:16
v. 16 ecce unus, ei?, aliquis, secundum Luc. 18,18 apx lov "" princeps quidam , quo nomine et assessores synedrii et praefecti synagogarum apud ludaeos designabantur; cum ille postea ut iuvenis veavioco? describatur, non poterit censeri membrum synedrii , sed princeps synagogae; accedens, quanto studio ac reverentia accesserit, narrat Marcus : procurrens genu flexo ante eum rogabat eum , ait illi : magister bone, quid boni faciam ut habeam vitam aeternam? ^( a^aOov; cum iuvenis iam studuerit bonum facere neque tamen -animi pacem et tranquillitatem invenerit , desiderio vitae aeternae impulsus adit Iesum quern eximium agnoscit magistrum et quern miraculis a Deo approbatum cognoscit eumque interrogat , quale bonum sibi praeprimis praestandnm sit, quo certius vita aeterna potiatur? Qua interrogatione a Christo discere vult quid sibi pro sua indole suisque moribus faciendum sit ne a felicitate aeterna excidat ; unde iam magnam prodit suae salutis sollicitudinem. Opinati sunt aliqui iuvenem animo Christum tentandi accessisse ; S. HiL eum vocat insolentem , S. Hier. superbum tentatorem etsimiliter S. Ambrosius (in Luc.) op. imp. Bed. Rab.; hi in earn videntur adducti esse sententiam quia existimabant iuvenem esse legisperitum ilium qui tentans Iesum similem quaestionem posuit , uti Luc. 10,25 refertur. Sed hie est error manifestus. Alii censebantinhoc adolescents delineari indolem populi iudaici : iactationem de lege, desiderium fictum excellendi in regnoDei, avaritiam (cf. S. HiL op. imp. Pasch.}. At immerito. Quare plerique recte tenent iuvenem sincero animo interrogasse. Idque planum fit ex multis capitibus. Primo enim ex Marco habemus quanta reverentia adierit Iesum; tali modo pharisaei superbi et inflati scribae accedere non solebant; dein nihil refertur de eius animo tentandi , cum tamen alias id evangelistae haud tacere soleant (16,1; 19,3; 22,35. Marc. 8,11; 10,2. Luc. 10,25; 11,16) vel etiamipseChristus increpans dicat : quid me tentatis, hypocritae (22, 18. Marc. 12,15. Luc. 20,23) ? Tertio idem conficitur ex eius ulteriore quaestione quid sibi desit , cui Ghristus pariter ita respondet , uti priori, adeo ut ipsa responsione Christi pateat eum sincero desiderio rogasse (cf . Maid.} ; demum vere monet iam S. Chrys. : si tentans accessisset, non moerens ob ilia quae audierat recessisset (idem S. Thorn.}. Iesus prius ita respondet , ut ei summam omnis bonitatis normam et regulam quam ignorare non possit proponat
19:17
v. 17 quid me inferrogas de bono^-1 units est bonus, Deus (vide lect. var. Deus additum videtur explicationis gratia); unus est qui in se omnem bonitatem concludit et a quo cuncta quae bona appellantur descendunt et secundum quern omnia diiudicanda sunt; proinde ad ilium unum est respiciendum , ut habeatur vita aeterna (Fab,}\ illius voluntas est exquirenda et opere complenda. Deus autem bonus est, ut -Alb. dicit, essentialiter, causaliter, exemplariter, finaliter. Unde qui Deumnorit, . iam non potest esse dubius quid sit bonum. Deinde progreditur (e) Christus ad explicandum qualem viam Deus iam assignaverit , ut quis summiilJiusboni, ipsius.Dei, particeps fiat : si autem vis admtam ingrediy serva mandata; asseritur hie a Christo liberum arbitrium et mandata decalogi etiam ab ipso sollemniter promulgantur, quae mandata a Deo utpote summa bonitatis norma profecta ex priore sententia declarantur. Uti ex v. 16 iam colligi potest, adolescens singularia quaedam mandata quae sibi pro indole sua vel pro Dei de se dispositione observanda sint a Christo innui existinaat; quare
19:18
v. 18 dicit illi : quae? rcoias; qualia mandata, cuius generis? bene S. Chrys. : non tentans dicit; absit ; sed quod existimaret alia quaedam esse mandata praeter legalia quae vitam sibi possent afferre ; quod desiderio flagrantis est . Iesus autem dixit : non homicidium fades, non adulterabis , non fades furtum, non f ahum testimonium dices; v. 19 honor a patrem tuum et matrem tuam et diliyes proximum tuum sicut teipsum; TO ou cpoveucet? i. e. notum illud : non occides etc. ; determinat, ut Alb. dicit, quinque in opere et sextum , quod est forma operis, vel secundum S. Thorn. radix. Ut adolescens intelligat de quibus mandatis sermo sit , aliqua ei Ghristus recitat , quibus officia in homines J>raescribuntur. Unde liaec deprompta sint, scit adolescens; ergo etiam scit quae alia mandata hisce sint connexa et quae eadem ratione necessario observanda sint. Cur auifem Ghristus ad locum mandatorum designandum solum enumerat ea quae proximum spectant? respondent aliqui in praeceptis tabulae secundae includi praecepta primae et amorem Dei includi in amqre proximi (Tost, in cap. 19 qu. 124; Sylv.}. Sed aequo iure dici potest in praeceptis primae tabulae etiam includi reliqua et in amore Dei includi amorem proximi; quare ilia ratio nihil affert, cur Christus ea praecepta selegerit. Melius assignabimus rationem similem ei quam indicat S. loannes scribehs : qui enim non diligit fratrem suum quern videt Deum quern non videt quomodo potest cliligere (1 loan. 4,20)? Pietatem in Deum facilius quis simulare potest; in operibus et commercio cum aliis apparet qualis sit. Cum perfectio legis sit dilectio et iuvenis dicat se omnia haec observasse, quaerit Orig. et post eum S. Pasch. quomodo statim dicipossit : si vis perfectus esse. Quae difficultas adeo gravis visa est Origeni , ut contenderet illud de dilectione proximi esse perperam ab iinperitis insertum. AtbenerespondetS. Thorn. : tamen plana est solutio, quia duplex est dilectio proximi, scilicet dilectio secundum viam communem. et dilectio perfectionis . Respondit adolescens
19:20
v. 20 omnia haec custodivi a iuventute mea; eum mentitum esse censent qui ilium ammo tentandi accessisse contendunt (cf. 5". Hier. op. imp. Bed. Rab. Fad.} ; at manifesto errant; nam : Iesus autem intuitus eum dilexit eum, subditur eius responsioni Mar. 10,21 ; et si non observasset, quomodo ei in nientem venire potuisset id quaerere quod perfectius esset (cf . Aid.) : quid adhuc mihi deest? sentit se impelli ad maiora et ammo concipit praeter commimem illam viam mandatorum qua omnes Deo servire teneantur et salutem suam acquirere exsistere posse modum servitii divini eminentiorem quo quis arctius Deo coniungatur et quo maxima quaedam in Dei amore ac servitio magnanimitas habeatur. Ostensa itaque via communi qua ad vitam perveniatur Christus eius obsequens desiderlo id quod perfectum est docet
19:21
v. 21 ait illi Iesus f si vis perfectus esse , vade vende quae habes et da pauperzbus et habebis thesaurum in coelo , et veni sequere me! duo igitureffata Christi habentur : si vis ad vitam ingredi, serva mandata , et : si vis perfectus esse etc. quae uti verbis et re differunt , ita duos status diversos in regno messiano describunt, priorem qui omnibus iniungitur, alterum. qui in paupertate sponte suscepta et in coelibatu (nam venditis omnibus iam non poterit cogitari de nuptiis) et in perfecta erga Christum obedientia consistit. Quern statum Christus ipse ut statum perfectionis describit : si vis perfectus esse. Primo Christus eius voluntatem et studium excitat : si revera vis id supplere quod adhuc tibi deest et ad perfectionem pervenire ; dein viam ad idindicat : vende omnia; porro quia haec via difficilis est, praemium ponit; habebis thesaurum in coelo; demum consummationem perfectionis indicat, ad quam paupertas et virginitas abiectis curis et impedimentis viam sternit : veni, sequere me, dum eum ad apostolatum invitat (cf. S. Thorn.}. Bene rem expendit S. Chrys. : viden' quot bravia, quot coronas huic stadio tribuit? si vero tentasset, non ei hoc dixisset; nunc autem et dicit et ut ilium attrahat magnam ei mercedem ostendit totumque eius voluntati relinquit, statimque praemia dicit. Quia enim de pecuniis sermo erat illumque hortabatur, ut omnibus se exspoliaret, ostendens non sua sibi auferri, sed augeri, etiam plura illi dat quam ipse praebere iuberetur; neque plura modo, sed tanto maiora quanto maius coelum quam terra est, immo quid ulterius. Thesaurum autem appellat praemii praestantiam , stabilitatem securitatemque eius declarans quantum per humana subindicari poterat audienti . Cernitur enim in thesauro, ut S. Thorn, dicit, stabilitas et abundantia, vel, ut Dion. explicat, copiosa et supereffluens remuneratio ac possessio multo plenior quam eorum.qui sola praecepta custodiunt. Meminit autem Christus thesauri, quiadiviti loquebatur qui divitiarum amator erat (Theoph.}. Christum nullatenus dare consiiium evangelicum Weiss statuit. Yerum prae amore divitiarum blanclam hanc Christi invitationem negligit et qnamvis se sentiat ad perfectionem interius vocari et irnpelli, haec tamen via paupertatis ei nimis onerosa est
19:22
v. 22 -cum audisset autem adolescens yerbum , abiit tristis, hoc accidit cum desideramus alifiiiid et non possnmus habere , ut optamus (S. Thorn.}] desiderabat quidem perfectionem ; at tali pretio ad earn assequendam conniti prae amore possessionum gravius ei videbatur ; unde ex conflictu affectionum oriebatur tristitia. Divitias descripserat Christus supra 13,22 tamquam spinas quibus semen verbi suffocatur et sine fructu efficitur ; atque revera in hoc adolescente divitiae suffocabant desiderium illud perfectionis idque reddebant sterile et inane; erat enim habens multas possessiones ; qua re simul ratio redditur vehementis eius amoris divitiarum; non sic enim detinentur ii quibus paucae facultates , ut ii qui multa rerum copia frtiuntur ; tune enim violentior cupiditas; accessione opum maior accenditur flamma (S. Chrys.}', additio siquidem divitiarum additionem facit avaritiae, ait lans., idque S. Augustinus pluribus declarat : nescio quo modo, cum superflua et terrena diliguntur, arctius adepta quam concupita constringunt ; nam unde tristis ille discessit qui consilium vitae aeternae consequendae a Domino quaerebat, cum audisset vendenda esse omnia sua et distribuenda pauperibus et habenidum thesaurum in coelo, si vellet esse perfectus, nisi quia magnas habebat divitias? aliud est enim nolle incorporare quae desunt , aliud iam incorporata divellere ; ilia velut cibi repudiantur, ilia velut membra praeciduntur (epist. 31 (al. 34), 5; M. 33,124). In hac narratione clare exprimi consilia quae dicuntur evangelica ex obvio verborum sensu manifestum est; consulitur enim, si quis vult esse perfectus , paupertas voluntaria , ex qua per se coelibatus sequitur, qui insuper iam supra ut peculiare Dei donum commendabatur v. 12; in verbis autem sequere me perfecta exprimitur obedientia, quae Christo vel propter Christum iis praestatnr qui Christi vicem gerunt eiusque auctoritate praesunt. Porro statum designari pernianentem, stabilem, neminem potest latere. Mirum est ad quae effugia recurrant protestantes , ut consilia haec et opera supererogatoria et statum perfectionis a Christo doceri ne'gent. Alii enim volunt Christum id solum intendisse ut doceat iuvenem quantopere animus eius amore divitiarum infectus sit et ut moneat eum ad animum ab iis avellendum ; quare etiam illud si vis perfectus essenihil aliud dicere volunt, nisi earn virtutem quae omnibus adsalutem attingendam sit necessaria (cf. Keil}. Quam arbitrarie haec dicantur, facile patet. Duo enim Christus aperte distinguit : ingredi ad vitam , ad qnod opus est servare mandata ; esse perfectum , ad quod opus est vendere omnia etc. Porro arbitrarium est statuere : vende omnia et da pauperibus idem esse ac : animum avelle a rebus terrenis. Arbitrarium est thesaurum in coelo non ita explicare, ut merces magna detur ei qui omnibus renimtiaverit ; vide ad 6,20. Alii censent verbis Christi id solum contineri quod hunc iuvenem propter rationes plane speciales singular! modo tentare et probare voluit, ut is perfectam sui cognitionem acquireret ; quod itaque diceret vende omnia, liuic iuveni propter causas plane particulares fnisse necessarium ad vitam aeternam adipiscendam; legem enim esse generalem : si quis non renuntiat omnibus, non potest meus. esse discipulus; earn autem. pro indole iuvenis huius ad id determinari , ut venderet omnia etc.; qnare ex casu solum singular! non posse inferri consilium dari a Christo neque ex praecepto particular! quod uni imponatur sequi perfectionem maiorem a communi sanctitate distinctam (cf. Weiss , Ed. H. p. 341). Verum hac explanation e primo verba 'Christi ad e'undem adolescentem : si vis ad vitam ingredi, serva mandata, cum subiuncta explicatione intelligi scil. decalogi praecepta, omni vi et significatione spoliantur ; nam si fuit pro eo necessarium, ut venderet omnia etc. ad vitam aeternam habendam , iam ilia sententia est falsa. Neque attenditur varius Christi loquendi modus : si vis ad vitam ingredi, si vis perfectus esse, qui modus ex eo oritur quod iuvenis ostendit se interius impelli , ut aliquid appetat quod mensuram communem 'excedat. Porro concedamus id quod isti volunt, pro eo iuvene talem exstitisse necessitatem. Ergo sequitur Christum, revera velle ut in regno suo exsistat eiusmodi conditio vitae in qua vivatur venditis omnibus etc. Nemo enim sano modo asserere poterit, talem indolem qualem habuerit iuvenis nunquam posse inveniri inter homines, sed iuvenem ilium fuisse hominem plane singularem, ita ut per omnium saeculorum cursum nullum habiturus sit sui similem. Si vero etiam in eo relucet natura humana , turn pariter certum est fore multos ei plane similes, quibus itaque a Christo idem dicatur. Iain vero verba Ghristi, etsi apud unum alterumve effectu carent, in universum et semper inefficacia esse non possunt. Ergo debet exsistere status paupertatis voluntariae, coelibatus, obedientiae. Concedit Holtzm. cansilium evangelicnm et opera supererogatoria doceri. Ex eo quod amore divitiarum adolescens impeditur quominus invitationi Domini obsequatur, Christus occasionem aceipit docendi de pericnlis quibus divites exponuntur. Quod iam supra in parabola exposuit 13,22, etiam maiori vi proponitur ;
19:23
v. 23 Iesus autem dixit discipulis suis : amen dico vobis quia dives difficile intrabit in regnwn coelorum; multa est enim -verba sunt S. Chrys. pecuniarum tyrannis ; licet enim virtutes alias colamus, haec omnia bona labefactat ; iure itaque Paulus illam omnium rnalorum radicem esse dixit : radix enim omnium malorum est avaritia; uam qui divites fieri volunt, incidunt in tentationem et in laqueum diaboli et desideria multa inutilia et nociva quae mergunt homines in interitum et perditionem (1 Tim. 6,9. 10). Grave onus, ait S, HiL, innocentia subit incrementis opum occupata. Divitiae enim incitamenta sunt et fomenta superbiae, gulae, luxuriae aliorumque vitiorum. Unde cum natura hominis ad malu'm sit proclivis , ex opibus maius accrescit periculunv, quare divites non absque difjfrcultate affectibus et peccatis possunt obsistere, ita ut non corripiantur penitus ab illis et invadantur (Orig.}. In concupiscendis enim et augendis divitiis enervationem corporis et animieffiei merito -elicit S. Augttstmus(Giv. D. 5,12. 3). Cur autem id discipulis dicatur, explicat S. Ghrys., ne de pauper tate erubescant et ut rationem iis reddat Christus, cur nihil eos habere permiserit. Addi debet hoc documentum discipulis necessarium esse, ut quos ad fidem Christiadduxerint eos contra pericula avaritiae praemuniantet remedia . aptaiis suggerant ; cf. 1 Tim. 6,17 : divitibus huius saeculipraecipenon sublime sapere neque sperare in incerto divitiarum, sed in Deo vivo. Non contentus Dominus dixisse difficile esseaddit quod multo magis durum est quo a divitiarum amore efficacissime abstraheret
19:24
v. 24 et iterum dico vobis : facilius est camelumj}er foramen acus transirequam divitem intrare in regnum coelorum; modus loquendi est popularis et proverbialis ad rem valde difficilem designanclam. Similis locutio in usu erat apud rabbinos de elephante per foramen acus incedente (cf. Lightfoot ad h. 1.; Wunsche p. 232; Ed. II p. 342). Uti in huiusmodi dictionibus assolet, modus loquendi esthyperbolicus(<S. Pasch.}, cuius exempla saepius reperiuntnr etiam in s. litteris ; ita Prov. 17,12 : expedit magis ursae occurrere raptis fetibus quam fatuo coniidenti in stultitia sua et Eccli. 22,18 et ler. 13,23 : si mutare potest. Aethiops pelleni suam aut pardus varietates suas , et vos poteritis benefacere , cum didiceritis malum (lans.). Summa itaque sententiae est, ut Maid. dicit, valde esse difficile clivitemin regnum coelorum introire. Sed cur potius de divitiis quam de aliis rebus id dictum est, cum multae sint aliae quae hominis salutem magnopere impediunt, utambitio, libido, vindicta? Respondet Maid.,, quia-ceterae res, etsi aliquos magis tamen plerosque minus impediunt ; divitiae vero fere omnes retardaiit. Addi debet in divitiis adesse incitamenta et subsidia omnium aliarum animi , concupiscentiarum , uti ambitionis, libidinis fomenta etc., iisque " gigni avaritiam, ita ut difficultates quae in aliis rebus singulae reperiantur, in divitiis coniunctae ad versus salutem exsistant. Quare si difficile est operari salutem , si una mala affectio animum infestat , valde difficillimum erit , si omnes quasi agmine facto irruunt mentemque obsident. Atque id locutione ilia proverbiali declaratur, quae quidem quo sensu intelligenda sit, in sequentibus quoque exponitur. Camelum transire per foramen acus aliquibus videbatur locutio mira nimis. Unde aliae explicationes verborurn excogitatae sunt. lam in fragmentis commentarii 5. Cyrilli legitur camelum hie non dici animal TO ifyGocpdpov, sed crassum funem cui anchoras alligant nautae. Et Theoph. Euth. referunt aliquos (rive?) eandem sequi explicationem. Eidem debetur lectio paucorum minusculorum xafMXov, cui voci aliqui notionem funis attribuunt. Verum haec vox non invenitur nisi apud Suidam et apud scholiasten ad Aristophanis Vesp. 1030 neque improbabile est earn vocem ex falsa hums locutionis explicatione esse derivatam (cf. Passow, Griech. Woerterb. Schanz, Weiss). Aliis placuit narrare in Jerusalem fuisse parvulas portas quae foramen acus vocatae sint per quas animalia non intrare pottierint nisi depositis oneribus (Alb. Thorn. Cai.} et flexis genibus. Quam sententiam utfabulosam merito reiicit lans. eamque probabiliter ortam dicit ex inystica explanatione quae apud S. flier. 'legitur : si legamus Isaiam quomodo cameli Madian et Epha veniant Jerusalem cum donis atque muneribus (60,6) et qui prius curvi erant et vitiorum pravitate distorti ingrediantur portas Jerusalem, videbimus quomodo et isti cameli quibus divites comparantur, cum deposuerint gravem sarcinam peccatorum et totius corporis pravitatem intrare possint per angustam portam et arctam viam quae ducit ad vitam . Tamen nuper iterum probare conatus est Sepp in oriente ianuas parvas ac demissas vocari foramina acus ; at eius argumentis id non confici ostendit Socin in Zeitschrift des d. Palaestina-Vereins 1891 p. 34 et antea Wetzstein idem ostenderat, quibus recentiores consentiunt. Qua Domini sententia discipuli magnopere percellebantur
19:25
v. 25 auditis autem his discipuli mirabantur valde dicentes : quis ergo poterit salvus esse? graece e^eirV/icraovirp a<po'pa vehementer obstupescebant. Noverant eniin homines fere omnes magna ieneri cupiditate opum et divitiarum et animos gerere rebus terrenis affixes. Timebant igitur, ut S. Chrys. dicit, tremebantque pro toto orbe tali sententia commoti et de multorum amissa salute dolentes, quia magna erga omnes caritate tenebantnr et -iam magistrorum viscera gerebant; unde indigebant consolatione , quam Christus etiam statim iis largitur ostendens vim et effieaciam gratiae divinae qua omnia obstacula superari possunt;
19:26
v. 26 aspiciem autem Iesus dixit illis : apud homines hoc impossibile est; apud Deum autem omnia possibilia sunt; primum miti aspectu exterritam eorum mentem consolatus est (Euth.], dein verbi sui severitatem temperat in medium adducens divinam virtutem et per earn ad confidentiam adhortans (lans.}. Gravissima itaque sententia inculcatur in negotio salutis nos ex nobis esse plane impotes et ad superanda obstacula ex cupiditate et avaritia oriri solita ad Deum adiutorem esse confugiendum. Deus enim, uti iam apud prophetas promissum est, dabit cor novum et spiritum novum ponet in medio nostri , qui spiritus novus est ipse Spiritus Dei : et spiritum meum ponam in medio vestri (Ez. 36,26. 27). Ita animus hominis avellitur a terrenis, ut dicere possit c.um S. Paulo : vivo iam non ego, vivit vero in me Christus (Gal. 2,20). Maximum posuit Christus salutis periculum , quod triplici modoper gradationem exposuit : difficile intrabit dives, facilius est camelum transire per foramen acus, impossibile est; at huic quoque gravissimo periculo a Deo benigne provideri idque si quis coopeyari voluerit gratiae oinnino averti asserit. Uncle et vim gratiae, qua novus homo creetur, ostendit et in universjum nos ad magnam fiduciam adiutorii divini provocat , cum Deum paratum esse affirmet ea quae apud homines impossibilia sunt redd ere possibilia. Aliqui obstupefactionern discipulorum, qui ipsi pauperes erant ideoque pro se non habebant quid timerent, alio modo concipiunt; ratiocinatos esse discipulos divitibus prostare opportunitatem plurimam Christum coim'tandi, eum audiendi, eius doctrinam bene perdiscendi, faciendi eleemosynas, qua facilitate pauperes carerent; quare si dives non perveniant ad regnum Dei , multo minus fore ut pauperes possint intrare in regnum Dei (cf. Schegg, Meyer). At tale ratiocinium ex verbis Christi nullo pacto derivari-potest. Gum enim Christus .arguat maximum obstaculum salutis esse in divitiis collocatum vel divites non posse intrare in regnum Dei, certe non consequens est statuere : ergo etiam maius obstaculum est in paupertate vel pauperes etiam difficilius possunt salvari. Rabbini paupertatem summum malum dicunt; esse scil. paupertatem peiorem omnibus plagis aegyptiacis in unum collectis, peiorem omnibus aliis miseriis; pessimam afflictionem quae possit homini accidere; pauperem recenseri inter tres pro quibus vita non sit vita et inter quattuor qui dum vivant mortuis sint adnumerandi (vide Ed. II p. 342; Wunsche p. 231). Si rabbini iam Christi tempore talia sparserunt documenta, et tristitia iuvenis et obstupefactio discipulorum etiam ex hoc capite intelli gitur. Iuvenis autem ille, cum se invitari sentiret ad vitam perfectiorem, amore divitiarum victus magnam Dei gratiam repudiavit. Et sane timendum est ne eodem amore victus etiam ab observatione mandatorum recesserit et ita in se expertus sit quam difficile sit clivitem salvari. Hoc certum est eum a magno beneflcio ad quod Deus eum vocavit excidisse. Ex iis quae Iesus iuveni proposuit et quae de obstaculo divitiarum dixit, Petrus occasionem capit interrogandi i. e.
19:27
v. 27 tune respondent Petrus (eo enim sensu adhiberi respondere iam saepius vidimus, pariter Petrum prae aliis agere cum Domino eumque interrogare 16, 22; 17,4; 18,21) dixit ei : ecce nos reliquimus omnia et secuti sumus te; quid ergo erit nobis? omnium, ut fere solet, nomine interrogat (lans.]\ sed quae fuerit mens interrogantis , varie concip'umt. Et S'. Thorn, quidem : audierat paupertatem laudari, audierat vade, vende etc. audierat etiam quod difficile est divites intrare in regnum coelorum , ideo reputabat Petrus magnum fecisse quia omnia dimiserat; unde dicit ;.Euth. Cai. lans. opinantur *Petrum interrogasse ex quodam timore ; timuit sibi et discipulis quasi ipsi minus fecissent quia non vendiderant quae habebant nee dederant pauperibus; ideo etiam ait : ecce nos non vendidimus nee pauperibus dedimus, sed simpliciter omnia quae habebamus reliquimus et secuti sumus te . Quam rationem Maid, merito reiicit. Nam praecipuum quod Ghristus postulaverat ab adolescente erat relinquere omnia; ad id enim ei viam indicavit dicens : vende, da pauperibus. .Recte proinde Maid, dicit Petrum significare se aliosque discipulos omnia fecisse quae Ghristus ab adolescente postulabat. Neque opus est subtilius inquirere, utrum omnia vendiderint dederintque pauperibus, an pauperibus propinquis reliquerint vel partem vel omnia, cum ea de re nihil certi constare possit neque argui possit ex ratione perfectionis quam discipuli ab initio non statim assecuti sunt. Neque iussi erant a Domino vendere et dare pauperibus , sed se sequi. Aliam rationem timoris Petri afiert Maid., Christum promisisse thesaurum ideo adolescenti , quia multas possessiones esset relicturus ; apostolos autem pauca solum et exigua et fere nulla reliquisse ; ideo eos non posse sperare thesaurum in coelo; sed cum 'tamen aliquem in coelo gradum sperarent, interrogasse qualis quantiisque futurus esset. Verum haec ratio et iste timor ipsis verbis Petri quae maximarn spirant fiduciam aperte excluditur. Dicit enim cum emphasi in oppositione ad iuvenem tristem et abeuntem ecce nos, nos non negleximus invitationem tuam, sed reliquimus omnia et qui dicit omnia, sua non parvi pendet e contra se magnum aliquod praestitisse significat. Atque ex Ghristi verbis : vende quae habes et habebis thesaurum, non sequitur, ut quis habeat thesaurum in coelo eum debere pluriraas vendere possessiones. Sunt itaque verba Petri interpretanda cum S. Hier. : fecimus quod iussisti; quid igitur nobis dabis praemii ? Grandi itaque fiducia loquitur. Earn autem liduciam et animum alacrem aliqui potissimum derivant ex eo quod Ghristus miti suo aspectu et verbis .suis apud Deum omnia esse possibilia apostolos sit consolatus (Schegg , Schanz). Sed vix recte. Nam comminatione ilia de periculis opum apostoli de se suoque pericnlo timorem concipere non poteuant quippe qui iam omnia reliquissent ; neque Petri verba ad illud divituin periculum referuntur, sed spectant et efferunt id quod apostoli fecerant et adolescens ille neglexerat. Quare rectius Lap. rem considerat : Petrus sequens consilium pan - pertatis Ghristi quod adolescens spreverat, ammosior factus animat apostolos quod ipsi fere soli secuti simt consilium paupertatis datum a Christo ac ut magis eos exhilaret, rogat quae et quanta se aliosque merces et gloria maneat, ut in proposito sancto se et socios confirmet, promoveat et acoendat . Similiter Polzl quoque. AdPetri verba notat S. Hier. : grandis fiducia; Petrus piscator erat , dives non fuerat, cibos manuet arte quaerebat et tamen loquitur confidenter : reliquimus omnia . Et cur merito ita loquatur idque Christo acceptum fuerit, declarat Orig. : ilia a Deo parvi aestimata non sunt qui haec eos tali affeclu fecisse intelligebat, ut si pluribus etiam fuissent praediti facultatibus et bonis , id eis morae et impedimento haudquaquam fuisset, quominus vehementi Iesum sequendi desiderio parerent ; atque huic opinor alacritati potius ac studio quam rerum a se relictarum sordibus confisum Petrum dixisse Iesu : ecce nos etc. Nam ea in re, ut monet S. Greg onus (horn. 5 in evang. M. 76,1093), affectum debemus potius pensare quam censum; multum reliquit qui sibi nihil retinuit ; multum reliquit qui quantumlibet parum totum deseruit ; certe nos et habita cum amore possidemus , et ea quae minime habemus ex desiderio quaerimus; multum ergo Petrus et Andreas dimisit, quando uterque etiam desideria habendi dereliquit ; multum dimisit qui cum re possessa etiam concupiscentiis renuntiavit. Sic ille. Aeque verum est quod adnotat Theoph. etiam parvarum rerum magna teneri homines affectione, Petrum autem etiam omnem xoajjujtviv ^cWaOetav sprevisse et carnalem erga parentes affectionem. Atque Iesus apostolorum animos promptos omnino laudat eisque mercedem pollicetur eo modo qui ad illorum de regno messiano exspectationem maxime consentaneus est, itaut ea promissione maxima sane afficerentur laetitia;
19:28
v. 28 amen dico vobis, sollemni assertione eos maxime alacres et certos reddit, quod vos qui secuti estis me, qui mecum per eandem viam inceditis , qui ad coelestia festinatis , qui terrena cuncta despicitis, qui iustitiam et veritatem, pacem et misericordiam diligitis (S. Br.}. Non dicit : qui reliquistis omnia, sed tantum : qui secuti estis me, significans nihil profuturum illis omnia reliquisse , nisi etiam secuti eum fuissent atque ipsam sequelam sui exigere omnium derelictionem (lans.)*, sufficiens ergo fuit, ut S. Br. dicit,, alterum efferre, quia utraque in uno continebantur; riam qui perfecte sequitur Iesum omnia derelinquit ; in regeneratione cum sederit Filius hominis in sede maiestatis suae , sedebitis et vos super sedes duodecim, iudicantes duodecim tribus Israel; voce iva^iv- (TO esc ^euTspou yevvyjO-flvai , Hesychius) alludere videtur Christus ad illam rerum omnium gloriosam innovationem perfectam, de qua Isaias : ecce enim ego creo coelos novos et terram novam (65,17; 66,22) et de qua Petrus : novos vero coelos et novam terram secundum. promissa ipsius exspectamus (2 Petr. 3,13) et Apoc. 21,1 : et vidi coelum novum et terram novam, de qua rerum innovatione in revelatione filiorum Dei Paulus 'quoque loquitur (Rom. 8,19 seq.). Gum haec regeneratio inchoetiir a resurrectione mortuorum , baud immerito sat multi earn explicant de mortuorum resurrectione , idque eo magis intelligi potest quia statim mentio fit iudicii (cf. S. Hier. Rab. fasch. Alb. Cai. lans. Maid. Lap.} et ipsa resurrectio est quasi altera ad vitam generatio. In hac rerum omnium glorificatione quae a resurrectione incipit , Filius. hominis sedet in sede maiestatis suae, in sede sua gloriosa , quia tune omnibus apparebit in maiestate et gloria, dum interea eius maiestas ac divinitas mtiltis est occulta. Metaphora autem sessionis declaratur iudiciaria eius auctoritas, ut sit sensus, turn se cum gloria et maiestate magna omnium iudicem exhibebit (Jans.). Vide 24,30; 25,31; 26,64; Dan. 7,13. Primi autem eius assessores eiusque gloriae participes erunt apostoli : sedebitis et vos super sedes duodecim, qui Christo hisee in terris proximi fuerunt eiusque regni fundatores et principes , iidem etiam in gloriosa ilia divinae maiestatis manifestatione quam maxime similes Christo apparebunt, sedentes ut illein thronis tamqnam indices, hidicantes duodecim tribus Israel, quo apostolorum prae reliquis dignitas significatur. Ponitur itaque praemium perfectionis apostolorum (S. Thorn,}. De iis enim Christus manifesto loquitur et ab iis alios distinguit qui simili modo sua relinquunt et quorum mercedem in v. 29 assignat. Cum itaque Christus adeo distincte apostolos designet et quaestione ipsa et numero duodenario soli apostoli intelligantiir, non erit iis assentiendum qui responsionem Christi ad omnes extendi velint quotquot voluntaria paupertate suscepta Christum per saeculorum decursum secuti fuerint, uti volunt Tost. qu. 205; Lap. Sylv. lans. neque iis qui numerum duodenarium universam quandam multitudinem exprimere hoc loco existimant (uti v. g. S. Aug. de Civ. D. 20,5). Duodecim autem Dominus nominat quia officium apostolorum declarat et ad conditionem praesentem sermonem accommodat. Collegium enim apostolorum constat duodecim; duodecim secum habet; et eodem numero designantur etiam turn cum solum essent unclecim (i Cor. 15,5; vide Comely, Comment, in 1 Cor. p. 454), quia duodecim nomen est ordinis apostolici (Cai.}. Eo quod dicit u[m? 01 axo>.oii9v)(7avTes (/.oi , etiam intelligitur promissionem iis dari qui tamquam socii ei fideliter adhaerent, qui itaque manent tales ; uncle ludarii rion includi manifestum est. Plerumque propter ludam monent eiusmodi promissiones fieri conditions intellecta , uti ler. 18,7-10 et Ez. 33,13-15 conceptis verbis emmtiatur. Numero itague duodenario neque ludas includitiir neque Paulus (et Barnabas?) excluditur, sed illi designantur qui sunt .apostoli a Ghristo vocati t testes resurrectionis, fundatores Ecelesiae. Hisce tamquam peculiaris quaedam excellentia prae aliis (cf. v. 29) promittitur sessio sollemnis in thronis cum Ghristo et munus iudicum : iudicant.es. Sed quo sensu iudicabunt? certe non sufficit dicere eos iudicaturos sui cum aliis comparatione vel sententiae Christi iudicis approbatione , neque eo 'solum modo quo de omnibus fidelib us dicitur: nescitis quoniam angelos. iudicabimus (1 Cor. 6, 3) r sed cum praemiuni singulare iis promittatur, insigniore quodam modo Christo c0mudicabunt (Fab.}, tamquam eius gloriae participes (Cai.) et Christ! assessores et regni coelestis primores et principes (Lap.} cum auctoritate et potestate (lans.}, quia sicut Deus dedit Filio iudicium, sic et datur his qui secuti sunteum (S. Thorn.}. Quoniam ergo apostoli primi fuerunt qui omnibus m relictis Christum snnt secuti ac primi post Christum evangelii praedicatores,' constitute secundum psalmisfcam principes super universam terrain, primi assertores et propagatores regni Christi, ideo merito illis promittitur etiam in regeneratione primatus in regno Christi et iudiciariae potestatis singulare consortium (lans.} . Iudicabunt autem duodecim tribus Israel; intelligi Israelitas non credentes aliqui volunt (Orig. Pasch. Dion.}, etiam S. Hier. : condemnantes duodecim tribus Israel, quia vobis .credentibus illi credere noluerunt . Sed cur potestas indicandi ita restringatur vel solum cum Maid, sit potestas accusandi, non apparet. Melius rem expendit Cai. : ad cumulum honoris spectatesse iudicem populi proprii , praesertim totius , et propterea nonunius sed omnium tribunm Israel apostoli Israelitae promittuntur futuri indices, ut ex hoc intelligamus quod multo, magis erunt indices omnium aliarum nationum . In modo loquendi Christus ea effert quae pro eorum de regno messiano sententia et exspectatione nrnxime apta et consentanea erant, ut magnam conciperent muneris et mercedis existimationem. Regnum quippe messianum primo et per se promittitur Israelites; in hoc regno constituuntur principes et indices totius populi electi r tribuum omnium, atque ut tales superant dignitatem patrum populi T Abraham, Isaac et lacob. Quare hie modus promissionis ad earn quam turn habebant sentiendi cogitandique rationem plane factus erat ; pariter autem veram eorum dignitatem ac sublimitatem describit; exhibentur enim participes gloriae ac potestatis Christi; ex hoc autem consortio quod in una re explicatur reliqua beatitudinis coelestis praemia -facile colliguntur quam maxime eximia. In duodecim tribiibus vi vocis designantur Israelitae ; at ex duplice capite oportet concludere eorum potestatem iudicandi ad omnes extendi nationes. Designantur enim coniudices cum Ghristo cui omne indicium traditum est eiusque gloriae consortes; dein notum est Christi fideles omnes utpote Christo insertos dici semen Abraham (cf. Gal. 3,29. Rom. 4,12; 11,17. Phil. 3,3). Unde me rito duodecim tribus plerique explicant de universitate credentium (Bed. op. imp. Rab. Alb. Thorn. Fah. Dion. lans. Maid. Lap. Arn. Schegg , Fil. Keil}. ego dispono vobis,... ut sedeatis super thronos iudicantes duodecim tribus Israel ; Lucae autem evangelium deberi partibus iudaeo-christianis nemo afflrmat. Hanc promissionem contradicere verbis Matth. 20,23 et Marc. 10,40 lam aliis quoque ordinis inferioris qui sua relinquunt quo Ghristo arctius adhaereant sua praemia attribuuntur
19:29
v. 29 et omnis qui reliquerit domum vel fratres aut sorores aut patrem aut matrem ant uxorem aut filios aut agros propter nomen meum, propter me et propter evangelium (Marc. 10,29) soil, ut Christum sequatur et Christ! doctrinam annuntiet et regno Dei serviat, propter regnum Dei (Luc. 18,29), quo scil. bonis eius largius fruatur, centuplum (vide lect. var.) ac~ cipiet et mtam aeternam possidebit, graece hereditabit. Varia enumerantur quibus animi hominum facile affiguntur nimis , ita ut in eorum gratiam servitium Dei postponant. Quae si evadant impedimenta eius servitii quod Deo debetur aut ad quod Deus vocat et clare invitat, generose abiicienda et relinquenda sunt. Ad quam generositatem ut Ghristus suos animet , multo praeclariora iis quae relicta sunt inventum iri pollicetur. Duo praemiorum genera etiam temporis ratione habita apud Marcum et Lucam distincte efferuntur : centies tantum , multo plura , accipiet nunc in tempore hoc et in saeculo venture vitam aeternam ; quare eadem distinctio etiam hie apud Matthaeum erit observanda neque et vitam aeternam possidebit soluni est epexegeticum ad antecedentia. Quae autem sint ilia iro^a^actova vel e/taTovTaTdaaiova. quae in hac vita promittuntur, varie concipi possunt. Bona spiritualia baud pauci intelligunt : qui carnalia pro Salvatore dimiserit, spiritualia recipiet, quae comparatione et merito sui ita erunt, quasi si parvo numero centenarius numerus comparetur (S. Hier. Bed.}, accipiet spiritualia charismata quae longe superant quaevis terrena , accipiet internas consolation es et animum pacatissimum (lans.} vel : qui reliquerit patrem et elegerit sibi patrem Deum , immo plus quam centuplum constat recepisse ; qui matrem relinquitut diligatmagis matrem Ecclesiam, nonne ei plus est centuplum quam mater carnalis? qui reliquerit fratrem , ut habeat Christum fratrem , nonne melior est ei quam centum fratres? qui relinquit sorores, statim eum suscipiunt gratiae Dei etc. (op. imp.}. Alii magis ad possessiones et bona terrena singula referunt ; si quis propter persecutiones ut fidem servet , reliquerit parentes, parentes inveniet meliores scil. praelatos Ecclesiae , fratres et sorores habebit omnes fideles vel etiam beatos cunctos (Orig. Br.}, amorem matris et uxoris inveniet apud fideles, iam non una domus quam reliquit, sed omnes fidelium do.ni us ei ad hospitium patebunt. Simili modo apostolis omnium fidelium domus erant apertae, eorumque agri eis fructum ferebant, adeo ut dixerit Paulus : tamquam nihil habentes et omnia possidentes (lans. sim. S. Chrys. Euth. Fab. Lap.}. Id singular! ratione irapletur in viris ordinum religiosorum , qui tot habent fratres , domicilia, quot exsistunt socii et monasteria ordinis, a quibus iuvantur et amore foventur. Bonis igitur operibus rite factis suam tribui a Domino mercedem ac remunerationem etiam hie clare enuntiatur. Praeter bona ilia multiplicia in hoc tempore etiam tamquam partem sibi destinatam ac propriam accipient vitam aeternam in saeculo f uturo. Vernm ut ea promissione revera potiantur, necesse est ut fideliter usque ad mortem Christo adhaereant. Ne igitur qui semel omnia reliquerint et Christum ducem secuti sint in fervore tepescant et nimia confidentia salutis evadant negligentes ac tepidi , Christus apposite et graviter monet
19:30
v. 30 multi autem erunt primi novissimi, et novissimi primi i. e. multi qui primi sunt et esse videntur erunt postremi , novissimi ; et qui ultimi sunt et habentur evadent primi. Apostoli vocati sunt primi efc dignitate quoque primi exsistunt ; at ne nimium fidant , qui dignitate primi sunt possunt deficere et evadere ultimi; proinde sic currant ut maneant primi et bravium apprehendant. Idem dicitnr illis qui omnia propter Christum reliquerunt et qui proinde ex v. 29 in praecipuo quodam dignitatis et praemii loco consistimt. Hac itaque sententia generali torpor excutitur et accenditur fervor : qui primi sunt dignitate possunt fieri ultimi et minimi in regno Dei; qui vero dignitate ultimi sunt, possunt evadere primi ac praecipui in gloria et mercede. Neque enim de tempore , sed de dignitate haec verba hoc loco ex contexta oratione intelligere oportet (cf. Rob. Dion. Schanz, Fit.). Nam cum verba apponantur sermoni Ghristi qui modo habitus est, ex multis illis quae sententia adeo generali continentur ea oportet seligere quae praesenti proposito conveniunt. Insuper aliqui statuunt verba esse ex parabpla sequenti explananda (lans. Calm. Arn. Schegg] . Minatur Christus simile quid ei quod supra dixerat : dico autem vobis quod multi ab oriente et occidente venient et recumbent cum Abraham et Isaac et Jacob in regno coelorum ; filii autem regni eiicientur in tenebras gxteriores (8,11. 12). Sat multi sententiam Applicant ad ludaeos et Rentes; illi primi vocati ad regnum Dei fiunt novissimi et ultimo loco ingredientur in regnum Messiae, dum gentes priores eius regni fiunt participes (cf. Theoph. Pasch. Lamy}. At id, ututverum est, hie a contexto sermone abest. Alii verba declarant exemplo Indae qui sua dignitate excidit et latronis in cruce qui ex vilissima conditione in paradisum evectus est (Bed. Rab.}. Censet Lap. Christum occurrere tacitae obiectioni apostolorum : quomodo nos , viles , pauperes , ignorantes , ignobiles sedemus iudicantes tribus Israel in quibus sunt viri plurimi dignitate, scientia, fama eminentes? Sed certe non est probabile talem tacitam obiectionem apud se volvere et de dignitate .sibi oblata obstupescere seseque reputare indignos eos qui alias inter se disceptant qui sit maior, qui primas sedes appetunt sibique expostulant (cf. 18,1. Marc. 9,33; 10,35. Luc. 9,46; 22,24). g) De gratia Dei conferente merita 20, 1-16. 81 Y6VO|A8VV]S Xlyl 6 XliptO? TOlS (JjJLJteXGivOS TO) Eandem mercedem accipiunt.qui per totum diem laborarunt et qui solum per unam horam operi institerunt. Id explicatur eo quod prioribus conventione facta non lit iniuria et quod herus de sua re libere potest disponere et pro sua bonitate etiam ultimis vult. eahdem cum prioribus mercedem dare. Unde indicatur apud Deum (qui unicuique reddet secundum opera eius) dignitatem et meritum operum reputari et aestimari ex eo quod a sola liberalitate Dei donatitr, sell, ex gratia mino.re vel maiore quae tamquam radix et fons actionibus substet iisque veram apud Deum dignitatem largiatur. Edocentur itaque apostoli, ut quis apud Deum honorem et praemium sortiatur, opus esse praeter opus bonum ab homine praestitum gratia Dei illud opus informante etelevante; prpinde non in diuturnitate laboris omne eius meritum constitui, sed gratia Dei qua labores nobilitentur fieri ut consummatus in brevi expleverit tempera multa. In codicibus graecis et in pluribus latinis parabola parfciculae yap enim ope arete adiungitur ad antecedentia. Idque recte fit. Nam ipsa parabola iterum adumbratiir doctrina quomodo fieri possit ut primi evadant novissimi et novissimi primi; quare ad sententiam illam 19,30 expressam eiusque sensum aliud adiungitur maioris explicationis ampliorisque illustrationis causa ; id quod particula enim bene indicatur, quae proinde genuina vipletur;
19:1
Sur cette terminaison des grands discours dans Mt., cf. vu, 28. Dans xt, 53, il y ἃ aussi μετῆρεν. Mt. rédige à sa manière. Le point de départ (en plus de Me.) est la Galilée. Les ὅρια sont, comme d'ordinaire, les domaines plutôt que les limites. Quoi qu’il en soit de l'itinéraire de Me., le théâtre de ce qui va suivre est le même, l'au delà du Jourdain.
19:2
Comme dans xt, 15, Mt. ne prend pas la peine de dire que les guérisons t s'entendre des malades. Les foules ne convergent pas vers Jésus (Mc.), 1; cf. xu, 45). Style plus schématique assurément, mais le suivent (iv, 25; VII, ère de Mt. Chacun des deux a rendu à sa façon mais qui s'explique par la mani le même fait. ἃ. ποιησας (TV) et non κτισας (HS).
19:3
La principale divergence entre Mc. et Mt. est dans la question posée. Dans Mc. elle est absolue : « est-il permis à un homme de répudier sa femme? » Mt. ajoute : « pour une cause quelconque. » On objecte : les Pharisiens n'auraient pas demandé à Jésus son avis sur une question disputée entre Hillel et Chammaï; car il eùt pu prendre parti sans se compromettre. — Sans doute, mais ils espéraient qu'il dirait quelque chose de plus; le véritable juge d'instruction pose d’abord des questions inoffensives. Le πειράζω de Mc. peut signifier un hardi coup de sonde, comme si les Pharisiens invitaient Jésus à se mettre en contravention ouverte avec la Loi. Mc. a choisi ce mode, parce que seule la solution. lui importe, et que la question ainsi posée y conduisait plus directement. Dans Mt. πειράζω indique l'embüche dissimulée. — Le droit de répudiation du mari n'était pas douteux; Josèphe (ἀπέ. IV, vur, 23) : γυναικὸς δὲ τῆς συνοιχούσης βουλόμενος διαζευχθῆναι καθ’ ἀσδηποτοῦν αἰτίας, et Philon (de spec. leg. τ, δ) : ἐὰν δέ, φησίν, ἀνδρὸς ἀπαλλαγεῖσα γυνὴ καθ᾽ ἣν ἂν τύχῃ πρόφασιν. Tel Josèphe qui répudia sa femme, mère de trois enfants, parce que ses mœurs ne lui plaisaient pas (Vita, 76), ce qui est peut-être un euphémisme, mais enfin le mari était le seul juge. Cependant il devait se former la conscience d’après le texte de la Loi. Parmi les rabbins on discutait, selen leur coutume, sur des cas particuliers; l'avis de ἢ. Aqiba (Guiétin, 1x, 10) qu'il suffisait de préférer une personne plus jolie était considéré comme excessif par plusieurs maîtrese Cet avis en effet supposait que l'arbitraire du mari était la seule règle. D'ailleurs κατὰ πᾶσαν αἰτίαν au sens de « pour un motif quelconque, ad libitum » est bien araméen (vg. quacumque ex causa). &-8) Dans Mc. Jésus interroge, on lui cite Moise dans le Dt., il réplique par la Genèse. Et il n'y a rien à objecter contre cet ordre du chef des vraisemblances. Mais l'ordre de Mt. est peut-être plus didactique : Jésus donne sa réponse fondamentale d'après l'autorité du Créateur. On lui objecte Moïse dans le Dt.; il réplique en maintenant la législation primitive. Klost. voit un argument certain de la dépendance de Mt. parce que au v. 8 ἀπ᾿ ἀρχῆς #. τ. À. fait l'effet d’une répétition. Or le plus souvent il reconnaît la dépendance de Mt. à ce qu'il ἃ corrigé de semblables négligences de Me. Dire que Mt. a restitué l’ordre des livres-sacrés, Genèse, puis Dt. (Wernle, Klost.), c'est trop savant. L'ordre de Mt. a assurément plus de méthode, ce qui n'est peut-être pas une preuve d'originalité. Cependant on se demande pourquoi dans Mc. Jésus interroge sur ce que Moïse a commandé, puisqu'en somme il n'avait pas commandé la répudiation, et que, d'autre part, il l'avait sûrement permise. Tandis que dans la bouche des adversaires (Mt.), le renvoi à Moïse est le piège déclanché au moment voulu, mais qui prépare le triomphe de Jésus.
19:4
Jésus dédaigne d'entrer dans la casuistique du temps. La répudiation est {Π] ἃ contraire à l'intention de Dieu quand il créa l’homme et la femme. Les Pharisiens sont renvoyés à l'Écriture, οὐκ ἀνέγνωτε ; c'est un renvoi à Gen. 1, 217. — Il Costes faut convenir que ὃ κτίσας ἀπ᾽ ἀρχῆς (58 rapportant à ἐποίησεν) ἃ l'air d’une correction heureuse de ἀπὸ δὲ ἀρχῆς κτίσεως (Mc., sans sujet exprimé), mais n'est-ce pas le fait de certains mss? χτίσας (Η 8) B 33 sah. ὁδοὶ. Θ, 22, 124, 604 6 (qui constituit), Orig. Ps.-Clém. Méth. Tit. Ath., mais ποιήσας (T Hetz. Vog.) tous les autres. — χτίσας a quelque chose de noble qui n'aurait pas élé corrigé pour le vague et redondant ποιήσας. Ou bien κτίσας avait-il pour but de conserver quelque chose du sens propre de N°92?
19:5
Le sujet de εἶπεν est Dieu, dont l'autorité tranche la question. — καὶ κολληθήσεται τῇ γυναικὶ αὐτοῦ (en plus dans ML.) a été ajouté soit par le Christ, soil par Ma. ou Mt. d'après Gen. π, 24. En faveur d'un premier jet on notera l'absence de αὐτοῦ après πατέρα (Sept. et Me.) οἱ μητέρα (Sept.), réservé pour figurer après γυναιλά (Sept.). Les LXX avaient probablement προσχολληθήσεται (lous les mss.), et Mt. les aurait suivis s’il avait fait l'addition à Ma.
19:6
Comme Mc. sauf la petite inversion σάρξ pla (Mc. μ.. s.). Paroles qui tranchent la question, et qui ont dû être retenues, comme aujourd'hui elles sont citées même par des laïcs. 7. om. αὐτὴν D. ἀπολυσαι (TH) plutôt que add. (SV). 9. om. καὶ ο ἀπολελυμένην yauuwv μοιχαται in fine (TH) plutôt que add. (SV).
19:7
L'objection n’est point mal posée. Moïse n'avait pas ordonné la répudiation; mais, en cas de répudiation, il avait bien ordonné un acte écrit, remis en mains propres, pour éviter les actes irréfléchis (Dt. χχιν, 4). Si la répudiation eût été interdite par Dieu, cette précaution n’avait plus de raison d'être. On comprend que dans Me. les adversaires se soient contentés de ἐπέτρεψεν qui suffisait à Jeur argumentation; Mt. leur assigne une formule trop absolue qui prête le flanc à la réplique. Si Mt. avait suivi Me., il n'eût pas mis δοῦναι au lieu de γράψαι qui était aussi le terme de la Loi.
19:8
Il y avait en effet un commandement de Moïse (Mc.), mais sur le point principal il n'y avait qu'une permission : Moïse avait usé de condescendance envers les Israélites, mais sans abroger le fait primitif, qui est un fait divin. L'argument du début revient done, mais pour clore la discussion ; répétition qui est bien dans les usages de ces sortes de conversations, et qui est un exemple d’inclusio sémitique.
19:9
D'après Me, Jésus a donné en particulier à ses disciples une lecon complémentaire. D'après Mt. il parle encore aux pharisiens. Ce point est à noter. Aux disciples Jésus voulut dire toute sa pensée sur l'institution du mariage. Parlant aux Pharisiens, il a pu se contenter de rester dans les termes qu'ils avaient choisis. Néanmoins, ce verset a servi de point d'appui à ceux qui admettaient le divorce pour cause d’adultère, pouvant légalement être suivi d'un second mariage. L'Église a défini (Trid. Sess. XXIV, Cun. 7) quelle n'errait pas en enseignant, d'après la doctrine évangélique et apostolique, que l’adultère ne peut dissoudre le lien du mariage, mais elle n'a pas fixé le sens précis de chaque texte. Mt. diffère de Mc. par une réserve sur le cas d’adultère. On a soutenu que le texte authentique de Mt. ne la contenait pas, parce que cette réserve est exprimée de deux manières : ἃ) zapextos Aoyou ropvetas B 33 sah. boh. D. quelques minuse. e c ff syr. cur. Orig. Eus. Bas., et b) μὴ ent πορνειᾶ (THS Hetz. Vog.), d'après les autres. Mais la première lecon parait clairement avoir été empruntée à Mt. v, 32, et la pure omission ne peut s'appuyer que sur un min., plus Athénagore, Tert. qui n'ont pas cité textuellement. Le texte μή ἐπὶ πορνείᾳ est donc celui de Mt. que nous ne voudrions pas récuser pour nous débarrasser d’une difficulté. Pour la même suspicion de conformité avec Mt. v, 32, nous ne lisons pas à la fin καὶ ὁ ἀπολελυμένην γαμῶν μοιχᾶται (S Vog. Hetz.). El faut, ou bien admettre avec B que Mt. s’est reproduit lui-même παρεχτὸς λόγου πορνείας, ποιεῖ αὐτὴν μοιχευθῆναι, χαὶ ὁ ἀπολελυμένην γαμήσας μοιχᾶται, ou bien accepter le texte le plus distant de Mt. v, 32 et d’ailleurs bien appuyé μὴ ἐπὶ πορνείᾳ χαὶ γαμήσῃ ἄλλην μοιχᾶται (HT); om. Gi: nain) NDL etc. anc. latt. syrcur. sah. boh. Cela acquis, si on interprétait le verset selon les apparences 48 la dialectique et spécialement des propositions contradictoires, on pourrait en conclure avec Cajetan que, en cas d'adultère de la femme, le mari pourra la renvoyer, et que s'il en épouse une autre, il n’est pas adultère. Mais alors la proposition ainsi conclue de l'exception serait contraire à l'affirmation du Christ sur l'indissolubilité du mariage; aussi l'Église n’a pas consenti à y voir ce sens. De nombreux critiques plus ou moins indépendants (Holtz. Allen, Kiost. MeNeile, Loisy, très netiement) reconnaissent que Jésus n’a pu se contredire de la sorte, mais ils prétendent (sauf McNeile) que Mt. ἃ introduit cette exception dans l'intérêt de ses lecteurs judéo-chrétiens. Or, outre qu'il est invraisemblable qu'un tel disciple ait pris une telle liberté avec son maître, il n’est pas admissible d’attribuer cette contradiction à Mt. dans Le moment où il vient de nous faire connaître la pensée de Jésus. Avant de supposer une contradiction qui reviendrait à prôner la doctrine de Chammaï après avoir aboli au nom de Dieu une licence accordée par Moïse, il faut voir si la rédaction de Mt. ne s’expliquerait pas par une simple maladresse de style. Si l'on tient compte de ce passage et de v, 32, il faut reconnaître que, d’après la tradition, Jésus avait autorisé la PR en cas d'adultère, ne voulant point obliger le mari trompé à vivre avec une femme coupable. Cette situation ne posait pas nécessairément ni même ordinairement le cas d’un second mariage du vivant de la femme adultère car celleci était normalement punie de mort (Lev. xvin, 20 ; xx, 10; Dt. xxn, 20). Si Jésus, d’après Mt., permet la répudiation, terme légal, en cas d'adultère, c'est que les Pharisiens lui avaient demandé si elle était licite dans tous les cas. Il a commencé par établir sa doctrine sur le mariage indissoluble, mais à la fin il a voulu cependant résoudre la première question posée. Les deux solutions sont juxtaposées. La seconde est parfaitement exacte à la lettre; mais elle ne doit pas être prise comme une restriction de la première. Mt. se serait exprimé plus clairement en disant comme Mc. : « celui qui répudie sa femme et en épouse une autre commet l’adulière », et en ajoutant « en cas d’adultère il peut la renvoyer », ce qui ne poserait pas l'hypothèse d’un second mariage pour ce cas. Mais la première décision était déjà établie d'après Moïse; il ne restait qu’à énoncer la seconde, ce que Mt. ἃ fait en mettant comme entre parenthèses : « si ce n’est pour adultère » après le mot « répudie ». Donc quant au renvoi, il faut distinguer; mais cela ne change rien à ce qui 4 été dit de l'indissolubilité du mariage. Ce n'est pas que le texte luimême distingue la séparation a {oro, et la répudiation totale, car il ne dépasse 11. τουτον p. λογὸν (STV) plutôt que om. (H). pas l'horizon légal sur ce point. Mais en fait, le jour où la survivance de la coupable devint le fait normal, ce fut bien la solution de la séparalion de corps qui cadra le mieux avec les paroles de l'Évangile. On épargne ainsi à Mt. le reproche injuste de contradiction. Quant à l'inconcinnitas du style, ce n’est point le seul eas. Il est piquant de constater que Holtz. interprète le texte tel que nous le lisons et comme les catholiques : « quelque chose comme la séparation quoad torum οἱ mensam serait autorisé, mais le divorce complet avec le droit de se remarier interdit ». C’est a doctrine d'Hermas, Mand. 1v, 6 : τί οὖν... ποιήσῃ ὃ ἀνήρ, ἐὰν ἐπιμείνῃ τῷ πάθει τούτῳ à γυνή (si elle refuse de renoncer à l'adultère); ἀπολυσάτω... αὐτήν, καὶ à ἀνὴρ ἐφ᾽ ἑαυτῷ μενέτω ἐὰν δὲ ἀπολύσας τὴν γυναῖχα ἑτέραν γαμήσῃ, καὶ αὐτὸς μοιχάται. C’est aussi la doctrine de Tertullien : le Christ a permis le divorce en cas d'adultère, mais il n’est jamais permis s’il est posé en vue d’un second mariage : dico enim illum condicionaliter runc l'ecisse divortii prohibitionem, si ideo quis dimittat uxorem, ut aliam ducat (c. Marc. iv, 34). Lorsqu'il cite Matthieu : qui dimiserit, … inquif, uxorem suam praeter causam adulterii, facit eam adulterari, c'est plutôt ML. x1x, 9 selon B, que Mt. v, 32, puisqu'il y voit une confirmation du Deutéronome. .
19:10
αἰτία ne peut signifier par allusion au v. ὃ la seule cause de divorce permise. Les Apôtres ne pouvaient déclarer que la doctrine de Chammaï, doctrine officielle du judaïsme postérieur, rendait le mariage impossible. Il faut donc qu'ils aient eu conscience que le Christ venait de poser une loi beaucoup plus sévère; le mariage est indissoluble, et si le mari a le droit de répudier sa femme pour cause d’adultère, il ne peut plus en prendre une autre. Que les Aoôtres aient trouvé cette loi austère, on ne peut s’en étonner quand on assiste aux protestations qu'elle soulève encore et qui ont abouti dans tant de législations modernes à l'abandon néfaste de la loi chrétienne. Il faut donc entendre αἰτία dans le sens latin de causa : « si c'est ainsi qu'il faut entendre la situation de l'homme envers sa femme... » cf. Pap. Par. 49, 27 (164-58 av. J.-C.) : εἴπερ οὖν ἐστὶν αὔτη ἣ αἰτία (MM). L'expression respire la mauvaise humeur de l'homme, habilué à traiter la femme à sa guise. Aujourd'hui on dirait : si telle est la situation des époux.
19:11
Il serait vrai de dire que cette indissolubilité n’est comprise que de ceux auxquels Dieu en fait la grâce par la profession du catholicisme, puisqu'il est le seul à la maintenir. Comme le v. 12 est lié par un γάρ, le sens serait : on comprend aisément cette doctrine sur le mariage si on comprend bien la continence. Mais il semble plutôt que Jésus, sans approuver la boutade des disciples, en prend occasion pour un nouvel enseignement. Il a regardé le mariage comme une institution divine ; et il ne retranchera rien de cette approbation. Mais ce n'est pas à dire qu'il soit obligatoire, et quand on dit : il n’est pas opportun de se marier, cela peut s'entendre, pourvu qu'on se décide pour le bon motif. — χωρέω, « contenir » el par conséquent « comprendre ». — τὸν λόγον ne peut être précisément ni la parole qui va être prononcée, ni celle qu'ont dite les disciples, C'est plutôt une variante de αἰτία : cette affaire, ce point. Et comme le v. 9 parle même de l'exécution, il est probable que χωρέω doit s'entendre non seulement de l'intelligence spéculative, mais de l'intelligence pratique sur la résolution à prendre. Cette intelligence est donnée spécialement par Dieu. — ἀλλά est parfaitement grec dans ce sens: cf. Comm. Me. p. XCHI.
19:12
Origène a bien posé le problème : ou bien les trois castrations sont réelles, ou bien elles sont symboliques, ou bien les deux premières sont réelles et la troisième symbolique. Quoiqu'Eusèbe ait raconté (H. E. VI, vu, 1 5.) qu'Origène avait entendu le troisième cas à la lettre, l’ayant réalisé sur sa personne, il ἃ combattu cette erreur avec d'autant plus d'énergie qu'elle n’était pas sans séduction sur la jeunesse trop fervente de son temps. Il a même tout entendu au sens symbolique (vers lequel incline Kn.). Mais le premier cas étant celui d'une impuissance naturelle, l’allégorie en est exclue; le sens littéral est le seul qu'on en puisse donner. Le second cas est entendu par Origène des doctrines” des philosophes ou des hérétiques qui conseillent la continence. pour mieux vaquer aux choses de l'esprit, mais il est bien plus naturel d’y voir une allusion à la coutume si répandue alors : Ali quos vel captivitas facit, vel deliciae matronales (Jér.). Il n'est pas du tout nécessaire comme a pensé Origène, que les trois cas ressortissent au même ordre. Le mystère de cet enseignement, souligné deux fois par le mot χωρέω, consiste précisément dans le passage du sens littéral des deux premiers cas à un sens métaphorique. — D'ailleurs les anciens ont compris presque unanimement (cf. dans Neufestamentliche Studien für G. Heinrici, p. 235 ss., Bauer, Matth. 19, 12 und die alten Christen) que Jésus parlaït ici de la continence absolue et perpétuelle. Le mot d’eunuques indique en effet une situation qui ne peut plus être changée, un propos perpétuel. Ce propos a en vue le royaume des cieux, soit pour y entrer plus aisément, soit pour travailler au règne de Dieu (cf, 1 Cor. vn). Gomme Jésus emploie l'aoriste, οἵτινες εὐνουχίσθησαν ὑπὸ τῶν ἀνθρώπων, χαὶ εἰσὶν εὐνοῦχοι οἵτινες εὐνούχισαν ξαυτοὺς διὰ τὴν βασιλείαν τῶν οὐρανῶν. ὃ δυνάμενος χωρεῖν χωρείτω. 18 Τότε προσηνέχθησαν αὐτῷ παιδία, ἵνα τὰς χεῖρας ἐπιθῇ αὐτοῖς καὶ προσεύξεται" οἱ δὲ μαθηταὶ ἐπετίμησον αὐτοῖς. 145 ὃὲ Ἰησοῦς εἶπεν Ἄφετε τῶν γὰρ τοιούτων ἔστιν ἢ τὰ παιδία χαὶ μὴ χωλύετε αὑτὰ ἐλθεῖν πρός μέ; 15 χαὶ ἐπιθεὶς τὰς χεῖρας αὐτοῖς ἐπορεύθη ἐχεῖθεν. βασιλεία τῶν οὐρανῶν. πεν Διδάσχαλε, τί ἀγαθὸν ποιήσω ἵνα 16 Ἰζαὶ ἰδοὺ εἷς προσελθὼν αὐτῷ εἶ ἢ fait allusion à ce qui est déjà réalisé. Π va sans dire que lui-même vivait dans la pureté la plus divine; peut-être fait-il allusion à Jean-Baptiste, ou à quelqu'un de ses disciples, comme Jean. — Les derniers mots ne sont pas une pure répétition du v. 11, surtout si on les entend comme une exhortation, non sans tenir compte de la prudence : wf unusquisque consideret vires suas, uirum jue implere praecepta.… Quusi hortantis vox Domini possit virginalia et pudiciti est et milites suos ad pudicitine praemium concitantis… qui polest pugnare, pugnet, superet et triumphet (Jér.). tes d’eunuques est sûrement d’après les La distinction des deux premières sor loyés par les Juifs. Dans Yebam. idées et en partie d’après les termes emp vu, ὦ) eunuque par le l'eunuque devenu tel par une opération est D'N ΟἿ, D‘10, comme l'entenfait de l'homme; et l'impuissant de naissance est man du fait du soleil. On voit ici combien Mt. suit de près les daient les Rabbins, aisonnable de supposer que cet ennemi des Phariformes sémitiques. Est-il r à son œuvre? D'autre parl ce passage, — siens ait donné de parti pris ce coloris non seulement parce qu'il est absent de Le., mais surtout parce qu'il se lie immédiatement à un épisode de la vie de Jésus, — ne peut être regardé comme appartenant à un prétendu recueil composé uniquement de discours. 13-15, JÉSUS IMPOSE LES MAINS A DES ENFANTS (Me. x, 13-16; Le. xvin, 45-17). L'ensemble est comme dans Mc. et Le., sauf l'omission du verset sur la manière de recevoir le règne de Dieu, qui a déjà son équivalent dans χνπι, ὃ. Mais Mt. est plus loin de Me. que Le. dans la manièré d'introduire les faits. Il est, à son ordinaire, moins varié et plus schématique. Ce morceau faisait déjà partie de Ma. comme le prouve surtout l'inclusio 43 et 15.
19:13
Dans Me. (suivi par Le.) on veut faire toucher les enfants, espérant un bienfait de ce contact, par une application à Jésus d’un concept peut-être un peu superstitieux. Mais l'intention était bonne, et Jésus rectifie l’idée en bénissant et en imposant les mains. Mt. toujours très régulier, a rédigé l'introduction historique en harmonie avec le résultat. Ceux qui apportent les enfants ont l'intention que Jésus leur impose les mains et qu'il prie. La prière expliquait le sens du rite : la bénédiction de Dieu invoquée par toute prière, et même son Esprit devaient descendre sur la tête des enfants (DE. xxxiv, 9). Mais si l’idée est plus correcte que dans Mc., elle suppose en somme moins de foi dans la puissance qui émanait de la personne de Jésus.
19:14
Comme Me., si ce n’est que ni Mt. ni Le. ne parlent de l'indignation du Maître, assez naturelle, après ce qu'il avait dit des enfants, symboles des petits (xvur, 3 ss.). Ce n'est pas pour épargner les Apôtres, dont l'attitude ne sera pas jugée moins sévèrement par le lecteur, puisque les faits sont les mêmes, mais parce que ces deux évangélistes sont très réservés sur les expressions sensibles des sentiments du Sauveur. — Naturellement le royaume des cieux, et non de Dieu. — ἐλθεῖν, venir cette fois, Eyesôx (Me. Le.) ordinairement.
19:15
Inclusio : Jésus fait ce qu'on lui avait demandé au début : la prière est sans doute supposée. Dans Me. Jésus embrasse 1658 enfants et les bénit avant d'imposer les mains. — Le départ de là, style de Mt. (11 fois), n'est pas dans Mc.
19:16
L'étranger ἃ conscience, nous le verrons, d'avoir observé les commandements ordinaires, probablement même les règles pharisaiques de la pureté elc. Mais il sait que Jésus préche une doctrine très parfaite. Quoi qu'il eût pu tabler sur les principes généraux pour avoir confiance, il se demandait si Jésus n'avait rien à lui indiquer qui correspondit aux desseins de Dieu sur lui. Manifestement il a insisté sur le mot « quoi de bon » avec un accent personnel, « quelque chose de vraiment bon », qui le classerait aussitôt parmiles assurés de la vie éternelle.
La question et la réponse soulèvent de graves difficultés. Dans Me. οἱ dans Le., l'étranger dit : « Bon Maitre, que ferai-je pour. et Jésus répond pourquoi me nommes-tu bon? Personne n’est bon si ce n’est Dieu. » Quelle est la lecon de Mt? a) Merx (Die vier kanonischen Evangelien… 11, 1, p. 278 ss.) a soutenu que le texte primitif de Mt. était le même que dans Mc. et Le. Comme preuve, les textes de Justin, d’Irénée, des Hom. Clém. Mais Justin (Apol. xvr, 1) ἃ d’abord cité d’après Mc. ou Le. διδάσκαλε ἀγαθέ... οὐδεὶς ἀγαθὸς el μὴ μόνος ὃ θεός, ajoutant ὃ ποιήσας τὰ πάντα, pour lesgentils. Dans le dialogue (CI) : διδάσχαλε ἀγαθέ, axexplνατο- τί με λέγεις ἀγαθόν ; Εἷς ἐστιν ἀγαθός, ὁ πατήρ μου ὃ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς, terminaison qui est bien dans le style de Mt., et qui est à coup sûr fort ancienne dans son texte, puisque les Marcosiens en argamentaient ; Ir. 1, 20, 2 : διδάσκαλε dyadé, τὸν ἀληθῶς ἀγαθὸν Θεὸν buokoynrévat εἰπόντα" τί με λέγεις ἀγαθόν ; εἰς ἐστὶν ἀγαθός, 6 πατὴρ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς" οὐρανοὺς δὲ νῦν τοὺς Αἰῶνας εἰρῆσθαι λέγουσι, Dans les Hom. Clém, xvan, 3 : τί ποιήσας ζωὴν αἱώνιον χληρονομήσω, πρῶτον ἔφη μή με λέγε ἀγαθόν' 17. τήρησον (TS V) plutôt que rnpct (B). ὃ γὰρ ἀγαθὸς εἷς ἐστίν, ὁ πατὴρ 6 ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς., de même χΥπὶ, 1; XVU, 4; τὴ, ὅ7. —Ilest clair que Justin dans le Dialogue, lrénée et les Clém. ont cité la fin d'après Mt, mais on voit aussi qu'à cette haute époque, loin de trouver la moindre difficulté à la réponse de Jésus, on était bien aise d'en argumenter pour prouver aux hérétiques qu'il avait enseigné le culte du vrai Dieu; la formule complète ὁ πατήρ (μου) 6 ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς servait à ce dessein. Elle est peut-être authentique, quoique, nous n'osions l’adopter, à défaut de témoignage dans les mss. Seulement, si ce texte de Mt., surtout à l'état développé, rattachait bien Jésus au Dieu de l'A. T., cette seconde partie de la réponse de Jésus se soudait beaucoup mieux à la première partie dans Mc. et dans Lc. que dans Mt. On comprend très bien que Justin, qui connaissait le texte de Me., l'ait fusionné avec celui de Mt., et de même Irénée. Il faut reconnaître que cette fusion a eu le plus grand succès, puisqu'elle a dominé complètement dans le texte reçu. C'est donc une preuve que la question et la réponse n'ont excité aucune susceptibilité. Au lieu de corriger Mc. el Le. d’après Mt. comme on eût dù le faire si leur texte avait paru contraire à la divinité du Christ, c'est Mt. qui a été envahi par les deux autres. b) On doit donc regarder comme le texte de Mt. : διδάσχαλε (sans ἀγαθέ) τί ἀγαθόν (et non τί seulement)... τί με ἐρωτᾷς περὶ τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ (et non τί με λέγεις ἀγαθόν); texte qui se recommande de N Β Ὁ etc. et surtout de sa différence avec les textes de Me. et de Lc., différence constatée par Origène. De ce texte les critiques indépendants disent unanimement qu'il est une correction doctrinale de Mc. par Mt., pour éviter que Jésus refuse le titre de bon, ou qu'il ne donne la divinité qu'à Dieu. Mais nous venons de voir que ni avant, ni après l'arianisme, on n’a eu ce scrupule. Si l'on raisonnait des textes primitifs de la tradition comme des mss. de Mt, il faudrait dire que la forme de Me, et de Le. est une correction dans le sens de la clarté, pour éviter la difficulté considérable du texte de Mt. Si Mt. avait voulu éviter le texte de Mc., il avait bien d'autres manières que de constituer un texte difficile. Ordinairement ce sont les textes difficiles qui passent pour originaux! A tout le moins, si le texte de Mc, et de Le. peut être préféré comme plus limpide, si celui de Mt. est une moditication des termes dont s'est servi Jésus, il serait contraire aux règles de la critique de voir dans Mt. une modification intentionnelle du texte de Me.
19:17
La réponse de Jésus est une interrogation. Le jeune homme à des prétentions; la suite montrera que cette présomption fit place au décourageἡ ment. Croyait-il donc qu’on se hausse si facilement parmi les bons? D'où la deuxième partie de la réponse : « un seul est bon ». Les critiques s’exclament de cette substitution d’un masculin à un neutre. La phrase n'est pas construite logiquement. Soit! . Faut-il conclure qu'elle manque pour cela d'originalité? Sans affirmer que l'homme n'a aucune chance de faire un vrai bien, et par conséquent de devenir bon, Jésus élève les regards du jeune homme vers celui qui est la source de toute bonté, qui seul est vraiment et absolument bon. Et il est certain que cette petite phrase, sans θεός, ni πατήρ x. τ. À. fait un très grand effet. Si l’on vise au bien, c’est Dieu qu'il faut avoir en vue. L'ironie des critiques contre cette interprétation, traditionnelle, quoique sous des formes variées, ne fait pas qu'elle ne soit solide. — εἰ δέ « si par ailleurs », quant à ton dessein, s’il est réduit à ce qui est nécessaire pour entrer dans la vie, l'observation des commandements suffit. — Si Mt. avait évité de dire τί με λέγεις ἀγαθόν, et avait été assez ingénieux pour remplacer cette question choquante par une autre, dans le dessein de ne pas metre Xésus en contraste avec le Dieu bon, il eût été plus que simple, il faut dire maladroit, en laissant subsister εἷς ἐστιν 6 ἀγαθός!
19:18
εἰπεν (TS V) plutôt que epn (H).
La critique est d'ordinaire plus sympathique à des récits aussi naturels qu'est ici celui de Mt. Le renvoi aux commandements avait quelque chose d’un peu mortifiant pour un jeune homme qui aspirait à une véritable perfection. ἢ feint de ne pas comprendre, ou plutôt il ne comprend pas : sûrement le Sauveur ne prétend pas le renvoyer au fondement du Décalogue! rolaç n'est pas τίνας, ce n’est donc pas « quels» sont les commandements, mais « quelle sorte » de commandements? — A quoile Sauveur ne répond pas par le premier précepte du Décalogue, « Tu aimeras le Seigneur » etc., mais par des commandements qu'on ose à peine rappeler aux honnêtes gens, tant la violation en serait peu honorable. L'ordre est le même que dans Mc., mais c'est aussi celui du texte massorétique dans Ex. xx et Dt. v. Les mss. des Septante sont divisés.
19:19
Après ces commandements négatifs, absolument indispensables, Jésus en vient à des préceples qu’en pouvait pratiquer avec plus ou moins de perfection, et d’abord à un jeune homme il recommande d'honorer ses parenis, précepte placé dans le Décalogue avant les autres. —Ensuite Mt. seul fait mention 20. παντὰ ταῦτα (TSV) plutôt que saura παντα (H). 22. vourov (H) ou om. (SV), ou on. τὸν λογον tourov (T). 24. τρυπηματος (TSV) plutôt que τρηματος (H). — τῶν oupavuv (T) ou του θεου (HSV). de l'amour du prochain, ce qui lui a valu bien des reproches. Origène déjà doutait de l’authenticité, parce que si le jeune homme avait accompli le précepte unique de la loi nouvelle d'après Paul, il avait déjà atteint la perfection. Mais d'après Thomas, il y ἃ dilectio secundum viam communem el dilectio perfectionis. Les modernes objectent que Jésus serait sorti du Décalogue, en citant Lev. xx, 18. Comme si ce n'était pas la meilleure preuve que la parole vient bien de Jésus, du moins qu'elle est de très ancienne source! Car un correcteur s’en serait tenu au texte du Décalogue, bien connu de tous les Juifs. Si donc Jésus 8 ajouté cette clause, c'était pour mettre le candidat à la perfection sur la voie d’une charité parfaite, conduisant au détachement effectif.
19:20
Ici Mt. nomme l'étranger veavioxos, et l’on veut qu'il ait employé ce terme parce qu'il lisait dans Me. ἐκ νεότητός μου. Ainsi il aurait emprunté le mot de jeunesse à un auteur qui supposait plutôt un âge plus avancé! Car le texte de Mc. et de Le. s'entend beaucoup plus aisément d’un homme mûr. On peut expliquer leur ἐκ νεότητός (μου) comme un effet de style, que de leur côté ils n'auraient pas mis en œuvre s'ils avaient connu Mt. — Un peu ébahi de ce rappel à la morale la plus élémentaire, et ne prenant pas le temps d’approfondir le sens du dernier précepte, le jeune homme répond qu’il a pratiqué tout cela. Il ajoute avec un mélange de suffisance et de bonne volonté : τί ἔτι ὑστερῶ; fandis que ἕν σε ὕστερεῖ de Mc. est plus didactique.
19:21
τοῖς (H) ou om. (TSV).
Mt. pas plus que Le. ne met au courant des sentiments du Sauveur; il a donc omis le trait si beau de l'affection de Jésus, après un regard pénétrant, Mais ce n'est pas pour déprécier le jeune homme, car le Maitre lui ‘propose le moyen d'accomplir ses bons désirs. — εἰ θέλεις τέλειος εἶναι ἃ été fort torturé par les anciens protestants, qui s'irritaient d'y voir une base à la doctrine de l’Église sur les conseils, distincts des commandements. Holtz. Klost., plus équitables, reconnaissent ici une transition à la doctrine du catholicisme déjà en devenir. Mais l'Église n'a jamais pensé qu'il y eût, comme ils disent, deux sortes de perfection, celle des commandements et celle des conseils, et ce n’est pas non plus ce que dit le texte. Elle enseigne seulement que la pratique des conseils est utile pour arriver à la perfection, et c'était le cas du jeune homme. Il voulait être parfait; le moyen que Jésus lui indique est de vendre ses biens aux pauvres et de le suivre. Il ne dit pas : « Quiconque », mais « toi » et on voit dès le début que le jeune homme consultait pour son compte. C’est une vocation particulière, qui pourra être celle de beaucoup d’autres, sans être jamais un devoir imposé à tous. — τὰ ὑπάρχοντα, ef. χχιν, 47; xxv, 15, fréquent dans Lc., mais étranger à Mc.; le reste comme dans Mc., paroles importantes qui ont été retenues par la tradition.
19:22
Presque comme Mc., si ce n'est que ὃ νεανίσκος remplace στυγνάσας, trait pittoresque. Dans l’évangile selon les Hébreux, il y a d'abord un résumé de Mt., puis une glose qui met le riche dans son tort. Mais c’est bien (contre Merx) une confirmation du texte de Mi. quid bonum faciens vivam? Cf. ΕΒ. 1922, p. 3345.
19:23
Mt. n’a pas le περιδλεψάμενος de Me.; les gestes de Jésus sont le plus souvent étrangers à sa narration; d'ailleurs celui-ci paraîtra au v. 26 comme dans Mc. La conclusion porte plus directement sur le cas d’un riche, πλούσιος, tandis que Mc. (suivi par Le.) qui ἃ οἱ τὰ χρήματα ἔχοντες sera obligé de revenir au thème d’un riche. A son habitude. Mt. écrit « royaume des cieux
19:24
C'est précisément parce qu'il table sur l'épisode précédent, s'occupant toujours d'un riche, que Mt. ἃ pu écrire très naturellement πάλιν, avec λέγω ὑμῖν, ἡ exactement comme dans xvr, 49 (sans parallèles). Au premier abord, ce πάλιν parait un vestige certain de la dépendance de Mc. (πάλιν äarompelele λέγει αὐτοῖς), mais il n'est même pas certain dans Μο., étant omis par W À et trois cursifs. Il peut y avoir là une simple coïncidence. La comparaison qui suit devait appartenir à Ma., du moins elle se trouvait dans l'évangile selon les Hébreux : ef conversus dixit Simoni, discipulo suo sedenti apud se : Simon fili Ioanne, facilius est camelum intrare per foramen acus, quam divitem in regnum coelorum. Sauf ce qui regarde Simon, c’est exactement le texte de Mt. Les éditions critiques lisent βασιλείαν τοῦ θεοῦ ce qui pourrait passer pour une imitation de Me., mais ce peut être le fait d’un copiste. Dans son commentaire, Origène lisait : « des cieux », de même Z 33 fam. 1, lat. ug. syrsin. cur. Clém. Eus. Chrys. — τρήματος (comme Le.) δὶ B, ou τρυπήματος D E, etc. mais non τρυμηλιᾶς (comme Me.) C etc.
19:25
Ce n'est pas comme dans Mc. un étonnement plus grand, puisque Mt. n'a rien du v. 24 de Me., mais un premier étonnement qui est très sensible. On se demande comment les disciples, qui ont tout quilté, ont pu éprouver un sentiment d'inquiétude aussi général : « qui donc peut être sauvé »? Il y avait tous les pauvres, selon la doctrine constante dans Israël qui identifiait les pauvres et les amis de Dieu (cf. Pnicon, quod det. potiori insid. soleal $ 34 Cobn). Chrysostome a donc pensé que les Apôtres, rassurés sur leur propre sort, ont déjà pour les autres des entrailles de pères. Et McNeile suppose même qu'il faut suppléer πλούσιος après τίς. Mais c’est changer le texte par une addition arbitraire. On pourrait penser que les disciples ont estimé les riches plus près du salut : illeur était plus facile d'observer la loi, par exemple les règles de la pureté légale, tandis que le pauvre peuple faisait comme il pouvait, d’où le mépris des Pharisiens, classe riche, pour la classe des paysans. Mais si les disciples avaient voulu dire : si les riches ne se sauvent pas, alors qui sera sauvé? ils auraient compris à rebours. Il suffit de dire qu'ils n'ont pas encore bien compris. Ce qui suit montre qu'ils n'avaient pas réalisé tout l'avantage spirituel de leur renoncement, pour le moment ils sont sous l'impression de l'épisode du riche. I/ observait les commandements, el cependant sa richesse est un obstacle. Tout cela les frappe, et les laisse en suspens. C’est dans cet esprit qu'ils interrogent. Mais on peut penser que Le. a compris qu'il y avait là une difficulté à laquelle il a coupé court en donnant la parole à des personnes quelconques, qui pouvaient être riches.
19:26
Jésus regarde ses disciples, comme pour les inviter à s'en rapporter à son autorité. D'ailleurs si le salut, surtout d'un riche, dépasse les forces humaines, c'est une raison pour se confier en Dieu qui peut tout, même sauver un riche.
19:27
τότε style de Mt.; ἀποχριθείς au sens araméen de prendre la parole. — Ἰδοὺ ἡμεῖς attesté par les trois, met les disciples fortement en vedette; Pierre ne pense qu'à eux et à des disciples qui sont dans la situation spéciale d'avoir tout quitté. Dans Mc. l'aoriste ἀφήκαμεν indiquait l'abandon d’un seul coup, le parf. ἡκολουθήκαμεν la compagnie persévérante. Avec ses deux aor. Mt. n'est pas en progrès; peut-être ἠκολουθήσαμεν indique l'acte de se mettre à la suite du Sauveur, refusé par le riche. La question qui suit (absente de Mc. et de Le.) jaillit du cœur de l’Apôtre, mais aussi de la situation; cf. ἀξιοῦντες εἰδέναι, τί σφισιν ἔσται, ἐὰν χρατήσωσι (XÉN. Anab. 1, 7, 8 cf. nr, 1, 10).
19:28
La réponse commence de la même façon dans les trois, puis elle est propre à Mt. ὑμεῖς répond exactement à ἰδοὺ ἡμεῖς. — ἀχολουθήσαντες « qui avez pris le parti de me suivre ». — παλιγγενεσία signifie une nouvelle naissance. Cela dut d'abord s'entendre des hommes. Les anciens peuples, même dans le pays de Canaan (cf. Vincent, Canaan, p. 269 ss.), enterraient quelquefois leurs morts comme s'ils étaient des fétus dans le sein de leur mère. Chez les anciens Égyptiens qui croyaient fortement à une nouvelle vie des corps, on allait dans ce but jusqu'à couper les membres pour les mieux disposer en vue d’une vie nouvelle (RerrzENSTEIN, Poimandres, 369). Cette nouvelle naissance devait naturellement se nommer παλιγγενεσία, régénération. Cependant ce mot s'applique plutôt au renouvellement du monde, et Philon indique comment on ἃ pu passer d’une idée à l’autre, quand il représente les hommes après le déluge devenus le principe d’une palingénésie : πρὸς τὴν τῶν ὁμοίων σποράν τε καὶ γένεσιν..... xai παλιγγενεσίας ἐγένοντο ἥγεμόνες xai δευτέρας ἀρχηγέται περιόδου (ir de Vita Mosis, 19, Cohn, θά s.). D'ailleurs il emploie encore ce mot à propos des hommes et après la mort, mais sans la résurrection des corps à laquelle il ne croyait pas (Cherubüm, Mang. τ, 154). Dans Josèphe le mot a le sens de renaissance d’un pays après une catastrophe (Ant. XI, ur, 9) : τὴν ἀνάκτησιν χαὶ παλιγγενεσίαν τῆς πατρίδος ἑορτάζοντες, Chez les auteurs grecs, la palingénésie a surtout le sens eschatologique, pour désigner la grande transformation du monde. . Que le monde lui-même naïisse de nouveau, les anciens ont cru que c'était un dogme des pythagoriciens. Avec la métempsychose ils croyaient : ὅτι κατὰ περιόδους τινὰς τὰ γενόμενά ποτε πάλιν γίνεται, νέον δ᾽ οὐδὲν ἁπλῶς ἔστι. Sans admettre la métempsychose, les stoïciens acceptèrent le terme de παλιγγενεσία à côté de celui de ἀποχατάστασις (Actes nr, 21), soit à propos des êtres vivants (Lucien, Muse. enc. vu; PLur. Mor. 998, C; Schol. Soph. Εἰ. 62; SÉNÈQUE, Ep. xxxvi, 10 veniet iterum qui nos in lucem reponat dies), soit aussi pour tout le monde (M. Aurèle, χι, 1) : τὴν περιοδιχὴν παλιγγενεσίαν τῶν ὅλων ἐμπεριλαμδάνει. Chez les Juifs cette métaphore de la renaissance du monde n’a jamais pénétré. On disait seulement le monde nouveau, d’après Is. ταν, 17; Lxvi, 22; cf. IV Esd. vi, 78 : donec veniant tempora in quibus incipies creaturam renovare; Apoc. Bar. x, 6; Jubilés, r, 29; Hénoch, zx, 4, si bien que Pes. a traduit Mt. ΝΠ Νουα « dans le monde nouveau », tandis que syrsin. et cur. ΝΠ NS « dans la génération nouvelle » (contre Dalman, Worte... 145). C'est à un ordre nouveau que pensait Mt., mais on n’est point obligé d’y voir avec Origène, Jér. Knab., etc. : la rénovation complète de la vie éternelle. Nous n'entrons pas assez dans les vues de saint Paul qui regardait le temps de la rédemption comme une création nouvelle; ef. IL Cor. v, 17 ὥστε εἴ τις ἐν Χριστῷ, καινὴ κτίσις τὰ ἀρχαῖα παρῆλθεν, ἰδοὺ γέγονεν χαινά (cf. Gal. νι, 15). La palingénésie de Tit. au, ὃ est personnelle et un fruit du baptème, mais le fait personnel est inclus dans 16 fait général de la restauration du monde. MeNeïle pense à la Pentecôte. C’est trop de précision, on peut seulement parler de l'installation du règne du Fils de l'homme qui coïncide avec la fondation de PÉglise. Le Fils de l'homme désigne naturellement Jésus lui-même, et le trône de sa gloire (sémitisme pour : son trône glorieux) est celui qui convient à sa fonction de souverain, plutôt qu'au titre même de Fils de l’homme; l'association des termes est déjà dans Dan. vu, 9 55.; cf. Hénoch, 1x, 5. — καθήσεσθε de χάθημαι, ou καθίσεσθε de καθίζω ; le sens est le même. — « Douze trônes » étonne, à cause de la trahison de Judas; aussi Le. à omis douze. Ce chiffre est donc χαὶ ἔσχατοι πρῶτοι. 49, οἰκίας n a. αδελφους (HV) plutôt que n οἴχιας p. aypous (TS). — 0m. ἡ γυναῖκα p. μητερα (THV) plutôt que add. (8). — spou ονόματος (TH) ou ονοματος μὸν (SV). — εκατονταπλασιονα (SV) plutôt que πολλαπλασιονα( 1}. dans Mt. l'indice de sa fidé traditionnelle. Jésus ayant auprès de Ii douze apôtres n’a voulu exclure personne pour une infidélité qui n’était pas consommée. Les douze tribus appelaient le chiffre de douze assesseurs, sans compter le juge suprême, le Fils de l’homme. Si l’un des apôtres faisait défaut par sa faute, Dieu y pourvoirait. χρίνω en grec signifie juger, cela est incontestable. Mais dans les civilisations anciennes, spécialement chez les Hébreux, l'acte de juger, de prononcer le droit, est l'acte essentiel du gouvernement royal. La traduction en grec, comme pour 1 Regn. vm, 5 s.; IV Regn. xv, 5, (δικάζειν, κρίνειν) ne change pas le fond de l’idée. Les anciens « Juges » d'Israël étaient en réalité des dictateurs, comme les suffètes de Carthage avaient autani de pouvoirs civils et mulitaires que les consuls de Rome. Il faut donc entendre juger au sens de gouverner (Klost. MeNeile). La perspective est celle d’une restauration temporelle avec un Messie qui gouverne le peuple, spécialement si l'on veut en rendant la justice. C'est l'idéal des Psaumes de Salomon (xvrr, 28) : καὶ συνάξει λαὸν ἅγιον, où ἀφηγήσεται ἐν διχαιοσύνη, χαὶ χρινεῖ φυλὰς ‘aoû ἡγιασμένου... Pourquoi seulement les douze tribus d'Israël? Pour nous, elles représentent tout le monde; mais le Sauveur s’en tient à la perspective du moment; il n'a été envoyé qu'à elles (xv, 24); c’est encore un précieux indice d'authenticité. Et on s’expliquerait très bien que Me. écrivant à Rome eût omis ce {rait, ou encore qu'il n'ait pas été souligné par Pierre dans sa catéchèse. Contre l'authenticité de cette parole, Klost. objecte a) Jésus a combattu l'ambition de ses disciples; ὁ) la restriction aux douze tribus est.plutôt une déformation judéo-chrétienne; ὁ) les Douze n'ont point eu de privilèges (Apoc. ur, 2; I Gor. vi, 2). On répondra : a) Jésus n'a pas parlé d'un gouvernement temporel; le pouvoir spirituel doit s'exercer avec moins de pompe; δ) Mt. n'est point un judéo-chrétien, cf, Introduction, p. c1x ss. ni Le. non plus; ec) Les textes cités prouvent seulement que tous les vainqueurs jugeront avec les Douze, comme tous ceux qui sont détachés partageront leur récompense.
19:29
Mt. se retrouve ici avec Mc. et Le., mais il faudrait d’abord établir son texte, ce qu'on ne peut faire avec certitude. Si on Lit οἰκίας ἢ... ἀγρούς, en encadrant comme dans Mc. les parents entre la maison et les champs, une dépendance littéraire est évidente, tant cet ordre est artificiel. C'est le parti de Hort, de Hetz. et de Vogels, qui réunit — cas rare — la quantité et la qualité des mss. La leçon de T et de S ἀδελφοὺς 1... ἀγροὺς ἢ οἰκίας ne peut guère s'appuyer que sur Sa différence avec le texte de Mc. — 11 semble aussi que ἑκατονταπλασίονα (S- Hetz. Vog.) (comme Mc.) est beaucoup plus soutenu que πολλαπλασίονα (TH) (Le.), ce qui indique aussi, quoique moins fortement, une dépendance littéraire. — Quant au sens, Mt. devait naturellement regarder cette promesse générale comme une extension de celle faite aux Apôtres; de là son καί au début. ἕνεκεν τοῦ ἐμοῦ ὀνόματος est plus sémitique que ἕνεκεν ἐμοῦ καὶ ἕνεκεν τοῦ εὐαγγελίου (Μς.). — ἔκαντοντα (ou πολλα) πλασίονα ne peut s'entendre que de la vie présente, à cause de l'addition marquée par καί avant ζωήν (contre Loisy, MeNeile). Si Mt. avait suivi Me., il eût dû lui emprunter aussi ἐν τῷ καιρῷ τούτῳ, comme ἃ fait Le. S'il ne parle pas du temps présent c'est qu'il ἃ ajouté une notion messianique au temps présent, celle de la palingénésie, C'est de cette époque, déjà désignée, qu'il faut entendre la récompense multipliée. C’est parce qu’elle dépend de ce qui précède que sa formule paraît manquer de précision.
19:30
Ce verset, assez difficile à expliquer dans Mc., et que Le. a transporté ailleurs (xx, 20), se comprend très bien dans Mt. comme un intermédiaire entre tout le développement sur la richesse et le renoncement d’une part, et la parabole qui suit. C’est même plutôt une introduction à eette parabole, ainsi encadrée dans cette sentence qui reviendra à la fin (xx, 46). La sentence de Mc. ou de Mt. figure dans une des paroles de Jésus d’Oxyrhynque (iv, 654, 23 ss.), mais on ne peut guère arguer du contexte qui est incertain. Voici la restitution que nous avons proposée (ΒΒ. 1921, 298 55.) après les nombreux essais de Deissmann, Wessely, Swete, White etc. οὐκ ἀποχνήσει ἄνθρωπος ποῦ ἔλθῃ ἀπὸ ρῶν ἐπερωτῆσαι πα[ρά τινα τῶν ἕταί ρων περὶ τοῦ τόπου τῆς δοχῆς" εἰ δὲ μὴ γνώ σετεί(αι) ὅτι πολλοὶ ἔσονται π[ρῶτοι ἔσχατοι καὶ οἱ ἔσγατοι πρῶτοι καὶ [μόνοι ζωὴν ἕξουσιν. 1-16. ῬΑΒΑΒΟΙΕ DES OUVRIERS ENVOYÉS A LA VIGNE. Propre à Mi. Le sens dela parabole dépend de son rapport avec le v. 16 et du rapport du v. 16 avec xx, 30. Le texte du v: 16 n’est pas assuré, mais nous pouvons en faire abstraction. D’après Chrys., il n’y a rien à tirer du v. 16 pour l'interprétation de la parabole : οὐ γὰρ ὡς ἐκ τῆς παραδυλῆς τοῦτο συναγαγών PAT... la sentence sur les premiers et les derniers serait ajoutée par simple analogie. Pour ne pas trancher avec tant de désinvolture ce nœud difficile, Schanz, Kn. après B. Weiss donnent au v. 46 court ce sens : il n’y aura pas de diflérence entre les premiers et les derniers. Comme ce n'est pas le sens de xix, 30, Schanz avoue que les deux sentences, si semblables dans les mots, n'ont pas en réalité le même sens. Mais en réalité la parabole est précisément encadrée entre les deux sentences, comme l'a vu Jülicher, mais sans indiquer la preuve décisive; c'est que xix, 30 dit mystérieusement, sans article : des premiers seront derniers, el des derniers premiers. Cela va être expliqué par la parabole (noter le γάρ); après quoi on peut conclure : C’est de cette facon que les derniers seront premiers et les premiers derniers; l’article, parce que désormais on sait qui c’est. Si telle est bien la pensée de Mt., la sentence doit se prendre dans le même sens à la fin et au début, où elle se soude à la béatitude acquise par ceux qui ont renoncé à tout, ceux-là étant préférés aux autres, qui sont exclus d'après le sens de la sentence dans Le. x, 30. Mais alors il faut constater que la parabole suppose l'exclusion de ceux qui ont été appelés les premiers et qui se croyaient les premiers. C’est bien le sens de Thomas : repulit Dominus intendentes venire ad gloriam propter temporis antiquitatem, et le sens que Jülicher (suivi de très près par Loisy) attribue à Mi. Seulement il a prétendu (x, 459 ss.) que Mi. n'a pas compris le sens de la parabole. D'une parabole de bonté, il aurait fait une parabole de châtiment. Le sens de la parabole était : Dieu donne sa récompense par justice à ceux qui ont toujours été à son service: il la donne par bonté à ceux qui ne s'y mettent qu’au dernier moment. Durant la vie, la porte est toujours ouverte au repentir. Le père de famille est irréprochable, soit qu'il manifeste sa justice, soit qu'il manifeste sa bonté. Au fond tel est bien le sens de la parabole d'après Schanz et Dausch, et c'était déjà le sens de Chrysostome. Sommes-nous obligés pour l'admettre, où de rompre le contexte comme Chrys., ou de forcer le sens du v. 46 comme Schanz, Kn., Dausch, ou de dire comme Jülicher que Mt. a changé le sens de la parabole? Nullement, si nous prenons Jülicher au mot, c'est-à-dire si nous ne faisons pas de la parabole une allégorie. En dépit de ses protestations, Jülicher allégorise lorsqu'il conclut que recevoir le denier c’est entrer dans la vie éternelle, de sorte que tous les ouvriers y sont admis, ce qui est contre le v. 16, méme amputé de sa deuxième partie. Or il à toujours paru étrange qu'on pût murmurer après avoir reçu la vie éternelle, et si Jülicher écarte cette objection comme fondée sur l’allégorie, lui-même y ἃ donné lieu. Le plus grave serait qu'un murmure dont l'injustice est soigneusement relevée, demeurât impuni. Nous distinguons done dans la parabole deux leçons. La première est bien celle qu'on dit : Le plan divin assure, même aux convertis de la dernière heure, la récompense promise de la part de Dieu. Jésus montrait ainsi combien irréprochable était son attitude envers les publicains et les pécheresses. Mais ce plan divin n’était pas compris. Ceux qui croyaient avoir des droits du chef de leurs œuvres, d’une vie entière consacrée à la justice, continuaient à murmurer contre cette justice qui leur paraissait imparfaite. Par 1ὰ même ils 2- s'excluaient. Cela n'est pas dit dans la parabole: cela résulte de sa conclusion, et le plus naturellement du monde. Si l'on ne tombe pas dans l’allégorie, peu importe que les murmurateurs aient déjà reçu leur récompense; ce trait était nécessaire pour que l’objection se produisit. En fait elle se produit. Elle devait être réprimée. A-t-on le droit de soutenir que Jésus a laissé sa parabole sans aucune conclusion, quand l'Évangile en contient une qui est adéquate? Son premier enseignement n'en est pas moins acquis; il y est ajouté une conclusion contre ceux qui sont assez aveugles pour ne pas y adhérer. D'ailleurs tout le monde convient (Jülicher, Loisy, Klost., aussi bien que les catholiques) que l'égalité n'est pas absolue : il y aura, d'après Mt. lui-même, bien des degrés dans le royaume de Dieu (v, 19; x, 41; 19-28; xx, 23), mais tous y entreront pourvu qu'ils se soient convertis, si tard que ce soit. En se préoccupant surtout du but de la parabole on revient au principe posé ici même par Chrys. ; οὐδὲ χρὴ πάντα τὰ ἐν ταῖς παραδολαῖς κατὰ λέξιν περιεργάζεσθαι ἀλλὰ τὸν σκοπὸν μαθόντας, δι᾿ ὃν συνετέθη, τοῦτο δρέπεσθαι, καὶ μηδὲν πολυπραγμονεῖν περαιτέρω. Au lieu de l'entendre ainsi, les Pères, depuis Origène, ont insisté sur des sens allégoriques tirés, tantôt des époques du monde, tantôt des différents âges de la vie. [Il y en ἃ encore des traces dans Kn. et même dans Schanz et dans Dausch. C’est le mérite de Jülicher d’avoir rejeté dans l'ombre ces considérations qui ne peuvent que troubler la pure exégèse. On entrevoit seulement une allusion à ceux contre la doctrine desquels la parabole était proposée, ceux qui voulaient proportionner exactement la récompense au travail, imposant ainsi des limites à la grâce. C’est en somme à cet esprit qu'appartient une parabole du Talmud de Jérusalem qu’on ἃ souvent comparée à celle de Mt. : « À quoi ressemble le cas de R. Boun bar R. Hiya? Α un roi qui aurait engagé à son service beaucoup d'ouvriers, dont l’un était plus actif à son travail. En voyant cela, que fait le roi? ÉVANCILE SELON SAINT MATTHIEU, 28 4. om. you p. αμπελωνα (THV) plutôt que add. (8). 11 l'emmène et fait avec lui des promemades en long et en: large. Au soir, les ouvriers arrivent pour se faire payer, et il paye également: au complet celui avec lequel il s’était promené. À celle vue, ses COMpagnons 56 plaignent en disant :: Nous nous sommes fatigués au travail toute la jeurmée; et celui qui ne s'est: donné de la peine que pendant: deux heures reçoit autant de: salaire que nous? Gest que, répondit le roi, celui-ci ἃ accompli davantage en deux heures que vous dans une journée entière. De même, lorsque R. Boun eut étudié la loi jusqu’à l'âge de vingt-huit ans, il la connaissait mieux απ savant ou qu'un homme pieux qui l'aurait étudiée jusqu’à l’âge de cent. ans. » (Traduction Scawaë, Berakhoth, eh. 1x, t. T, p. 48 5.) Au lieu d’une vue sur la. miséricarde divine, nous avons ici cette constatation banale. qu'avec de la facilité et de l'activité, an peut faire autant en moins. de temps que d'autres dans un temps plus considérable. Les hommes n'ont. à s'inquiéter que du résultat et paient en conséquence. Si la:parabole talmudique a pensé äu jugement de Dieu, c'était pour maintenir l'exacté proportion entre les:œuvres qui: reçoivent la même récompense : Dieu paierait selom le travail fait; ce n’est pas le sens de: Lx parabole évangélique, ee serait plutôt une tentative de la redresser en faveur de l'opinion que le Sauveur ἃ réprouvée. Mais l'application ἃ R Boun (1ve siècle) suggère plutôt une simple rencontre.
19:1
GIOVANNI, APOSTOLO, EVANGELISTA, SANTO
… omessi) e mettere in guardia affinché non siano male intesi (3,24: «non ancora infatti G. era stato mandato in carcere»: come qualcuno avrebbe potuto concludere da Mc. 1,14; 18,13: «lo condussero dapprima da Anna», non subito da Caifa, Mt. 26,37; 19,1: «allora Pilato prese Gesù e lo flagellò», quindi non quando l'aveva già condannato).
… τοῦ Ἰωδῆνου è usata come nome proprio indeclinabile nella enumerazione insieme alla Galilea e Giudea, i cui popoli accorrevano ad ascoltare la predicazione di Gesù (Mt. 4, 15, 25; Mc. 3, 78). La regione, detta anche «la Giudea al di là del Giordano» (Mt. 19, 1), fu visitata da Gesù e due volte fino a Bethania di Transgiordania (Io. 1, 28; 3, 26; 10, 40).
19:3
… ha il merito di appoggiarsi sopra un'idea molto giusta della prudenza e della bontà infinite e su alcuni fatti molto chiari (istituzione della regalità [I Sam. 8 e 10, 18-28]; tolleranza provvisoria della poligamia, e del divorzio soppresso più tardi [Mt. 19, 3-9] «nisi ob fornicationem», fuori del caso di matrimonio invalido [J. Bonsirven, Le divorce dans l'A. T., Parigi 1948], ecc.). …
19:4
… (ʿīfāh) è la forma femminile del nome « uomo » (ʿīf), ciò che la Volgata ha reso: « haec vocabitur virago quia de viro sumpta est ». Illuminato ancora da Dio, Adamo, probabilmente, rivela l'indissolubile e totale vincolo dei coniugi (Gen. 2, 24; cf. Mt. 19, 4-6).
I. TEOLOGIA MORALE E DIRITTO CANONICO. - La p. si oppone direttamente: 1) al precetto divino-positivo, promulgato all'inizio stesso dell'umanità (Gen. 2, 23) e solennemente confermato da Gesù Cristo (Mt. 19, 4-6). Donde si deduce che se è vero che la volontà umana condiziona il costituirsi di una nuova famiglia, non può affatto condizionarne l'intima struttura e le finalità, che hanno un'origine …
19:5
… La sposa, essendo in sé una persona fisica, è congiunta con lo sposo, altra persona fisica, con legami anzitutto morali; ma, inoltre « i due saranno una sola carne » (Mt. 19, 5; Gen. 2, 24; Eph. 5, 31). Il corpo invece, contraddistinto dal capo, forma, insieme ad esso, un'unità più che morale, cioè organica e fisica. …
19:6
INDISSOLUBILITÀ DEL MATRIMONIO E DIVORZIO
… questo vincolo, come quello tra Cristo e la Chiesa, è santo non solo, ma perpetuo (Eph. 5, 25, 27, 28, 29, 32). Il contenuto di queste pagine scritturistiche si compendia bene nella parola di Cristo stesso: «Ciò che Dio ha congiunto, l'uomo non separi» (Mt. 19, 6).
… Egli infatti prima restituì il M. alla primitiva purezza, richiamando in vigore la legge dell'unità (Mt. 19, 9; Mc. 10, 11; Lc. 16, 18) e della indissolubilità: « Quod Deus coniunxit, homo non separet » (Mt. 19, 6), poi lo elevò alla dignità di Sacramento.
19:7
… A prescrizioni del P. come di Mosè si riportano ugualmente i contemporanei di Cristo: i farisei (Mt. 19, 7; Io. 8, 5; Act. 6, 14), i Sadducei (Mt. 22, 24), i discepoli (Io. 1, 45). La convinzione passa agli Apostoli (Act. 3, 22; Rom. 10, 5, 19; I Cor. 9, 9 ecc.) e ai primi fedeli (Act. 7, 37; 28, 23).
19:8
… Il coniugio per sé è da Dio; ma è la durezza del cuore, la σκληροσκαρδία (Mt. 19, 8). Il non saper amare, che porta al divorzio, mentre l'uomo che guarda la donna per averla a strumento del suo piacere, ad concupiscendam eam (Mt. 5, 28), non l'ama secondo la dignità …
… per 31,9 l'autenticità mosaica del nostro libro deve ritenersi per fede divina: così A. Bea), sulla singolare importanza dell'opera personale di Mosè e sull'antica tradizione nazionale (cf. II Reg. 14, 6 = Deut. 24, 16; Bar. 2, 2 sg. = Deut. 28, 53; Mt. 19, 8 = Deut. 24, 1; Act. 3, 22 = Deut. 18, 15, 19; Rom. 10, 19 = Deut. 32, 21, ecc.). …
INDISSOLUBILITÀ DEL MATRIMONIO E DIVORZIO
… Per quanto riguarda l'antica storia dell'umanità è noto che per gli Ebrei vi fu una dispensa data da Dio al suo popolo « ad duritiam cordis » (Mt. 19, 8). Poiché l'istituto del divorzio si trova anche presso altri popoli ci si potrebbe chiedere se una simile dispensa sia stata estesa anche agli altri popoli fino alla veruta di Cristo. …
… Iud., XX, 141-43). Gesù Cristo, richiamando la legge antica, dichiarava che Dio sopportò l'uso contrario a causa della «dura cervice» degli Ebrei (cf. Mt. 19, 8).
La stessa situazione è riflettuta nel Nuovo Testamento: Gesù parla del «Libro di Mosè» (Mc. 12, 26), della «Legge di Mosè», ecc.; si riferisce a prescrizioni del P. come comandi di Mosè (Mt. 8, 4; 19, 8); dichiara che Mosè «scrisse di lui», ma i Giudei non credono in lui, perché non credono nemmeno agli «scritti» (τράμματα) di Mosè (Io. 5, 46 sg.). …
19:9
Nel Vangelo è contemplata la separazione per adulterio (Mt. 5, 31-32; 19, 9); S. Paolo la ammette per una causa legittima (1 Cor. 7, 11-12), e il Concilio Tridentino ne ha confermato la liceità (sess. …
INDISSOLUBILITÀ DEL MATRIMONIO E DIVORZIO
… I due passi difficili (e nisi ob fornicationem: Mt. 19,9; «excepta fornicationis causa»: ibid. 5, 32) che sembrano suggerire una restrizione alla permanenza del vincolo nel caso di infedeltà della sposa, non vanno necessariamente presi in questo senso. …
… Gesù Cristo riconduce il matrimonio alla unità originaria: « Quicunque dimiserit uxorem suam... et alium duxerit moechatur, et qui dimissum duxerit, moechatur » (Mt. 19, 9), come è confermato anche da s. Paolo (I Cor. 7, 10-11).
… Egli infatti prima restituì il M. alla primitiva purezza, richiamando in vigore la legge dell'unità (Mt. 19, 9; Mc. 10, 11; Lc. 16, 18) e della indissolubilità: « Quod Deus coniunxit, homo non separet » (Mt. 19, 6), poi lo elevò alla dignità di Sacramento.
… Ad ogni modo la dispensa fu revocata da Gesù Cristo, che volle ricondurre l'istituto del matrimonio alla situazione primitiva (Mt. 19, 9; Mc. 10, 11; Lc. 16, 18) e dichiarò che la dispensa era stata concessa «proper duritiam cordis», mentre da principio non era così (Mt. 9, 8); la revoca vale anche per i pagani (cf. …
19:10
… va', vendi ciò che hai e donalo ai poveri, e avrai un tesoro in cielo; poi vieni e seguimi » (Mt. 19, 16-21; Mc. 10, 17-22; Lc. 18, 18-23); la castità perpetua (v.) nella risposta data ai discepoli circa la rinunzia al matrimonio per il Regno dei cieli (Mt. 19, 10-12; cf. I Cor. 7, 7 sg., 25-40); l'obbedienza perfetta (v.), o spontanea subordinazione della volontà a quella di altri, nelle parole che esprimono l'abnegazione (v.): « Se uno vuol venire …
II. STORIA. - I principi che avevano regolato il pagamento della d. nel Vecchio Testamento furono fatti rivivere nel Nuovo, ma la d. non sorse subito come istituto a sé. Sebbene fin da principio s. Paolo avesse fatta l'applicazione della massima evangelica « dignus est operarius cibo suo » (Mt. 19, 10; Lc. 10, 7) ai ministri dell'altare « qui altari deserviunt cum altari participant... » (I Cor. 9, 13), tuttavia l'afflusso spontaneo di offerte e l'esercizio spontaneo di alcune …
… devono ispirarsi alle relazioni che vigono tra Cristo e la Chiesa: da una parte sottomissione rispettosa fino al sacrificio (Eph. 5, 22-24), dall'altra amore e devozione fino alla morte (ibid., 25-29). La gravità di questi obblighi soprannaturali (cf. Mt. 19, 10) implica una fonte corrispondente di grazie e di aiuti divini. …
NASCITE, CONTROLLO (BIRTH-CONTROL) DELLE
… ebbe un'adeguata propagazione sulla terra, ha perduto in seguito la sua obbligatorietà individuale, restando solo come precetto generale diretto alla comunità e non al singolo; come dimostra chiaramente lo stesso invito divino alla castità assoluta (Mt. 19, 10 sgg.; I Cor. 7) e il particolare pregio in cui sempre la Chiesa ha tenuto il celibato (v.), reso addirittura obbligatorio per particolari categorie di persone. …
19:11
… onore, ma chi è chiamato da Dio, come Aronne» (Hebr. 5, 4); «non voi avete scelto me, ma io ho scelto voi e vi ho costituiti affinché andiate e portiate frutto» (Io. 15, 16); «non tutti capiscono questa parola, ma solo quelli ai quali è concesso» (Mt. 19, 11). La ragione di tale privilegiata denominazione di v. divina consiste nello speciale contenuto divino dello stato sacerdotale e religioso, detto, appunto perciò, sacro; che pone cotesto …
19:12
… Chi può intendere. intenda» (Mt. 19, 12). Con queste parole Gesù ha suscitato nel corso dei secoli legioni di uomini e di donne che hanno sublimato l'istinto della procreazione e invece di seguire l'attrattiva del matrimonio, …
… Gesù la presenta come esercizio di virtù superiore (Mt. 19, 12) e s. Paolo la prende come uno dei principi direttivi che devono esser tenuti presenti nella scelta di un vescovo, sacerdote o diacono. …
… Ioan., 1, 12), che ritiene siano state indirizzate agli « eunuchi che si sono evirati da sé per il Regno dei cieli » (Mt. 19, 12). Questa destinazione che non risulta dalla traduzione siriana ritorna invece nella traduzione copta del testo. …
… catecheta, di visitatore e consolatore dei martiri, dedicandosi in pari tempo alla vita di perfezione ed alla pratica dei consigli evangelici con tale ardore, da infliggersi la volontaria mutilazione, prendendo troppo alla lettera la parola del Signore (Mt. 19, 12). Verso il 212 fu a Roma, «per vedere l'antichissima Chiesa dei Romani» (cf. Eusebio, Hist. eccl., VI, 14, 10), e vi conobbe il presbitero Ippolito.
preso è senza dubbio in se stesso superiore in eccellenza allo stato matrimoniale, come appare chiaramente, oltre che dall'esempio stesso di Gesù, anche dalla sua dichiarazione ai discepoli (Mt. 19, 12) e dalle parole di s. Paolo: «Rispetto alle persone vergini non ho nessun ordine del Signore e dò soltanto un consiglio... chi sposa la sua figliola fa bene, e chi non la sposa, fa …
19:13
… Il brano evangelico parallelo di Mt. 19,13-15; Mc. 19,13-16; Lc. 18,15-19, che mostra l'abbraccio di Gesù coi fanciulli, è di una eloquenza e di una freschezza che incanta. …
… considerare come un semplice fiore leggiadro, o, peggio, naturalisticamente, come un grazioso animale, da cui, pure nel rigoglio della vita psichica, si deve tener lontano ogni freno e ogni vita spirituale e religiosa; ma come un fiore prediletto da Dio (Mt. 19, 13), da preservare da ogni anche più leggera ombra di scandalo (Lc. 17, 2) e da prendere a modello, a cui rassomigliare nella sincerità e nel sereno candore, se si vuole entrare nel Regno …
… Gli scrittori latini parlano più spesso di mano al singolare: cf. Tertulliano, De Baptismo, 8: « Dehine manus imponitur »; s. Stefano a s. Cipriano, Epist., 74, 1: « Ut manus imponatur in poenitentiam »; mentre è più comune l'uso del plurale sia nei documenti neo-testamentari (cf. Mt. 19, 13, 15; Mc. 10, 16; Act. 8, 17; 19, 6; Hebr. 6, 2; I Tim. 4, 14; 5, 22; II Tim. 1, 6), sia presso gli scrittori greci. …
19:14
… soprannaturale, originata dall'ammonimento del Salvatore: «Se non diverrete come i fanciulli (ὡς τὰ παῖδε), non entrerete nel Regno dei cieli» (Mt. 18, 3; cf. Mc. 10, 15), «Lasciate che i fanciulli vengano a me, poiché proprio di loro è il Regno dei cieli» (Mt. 19, 14), «Chi è il più piccolo fra tutti voi, questi è il più grande» (Lc. 9, 48). S. Pietro raccomandava di essere «come bambini di fresco nati, senza inganno, bramosi del latte spirituale …
… Theol., 2ª-2ª, q. 184, a. 1), adempendo non solo i comandamenti del Signore, ma anche i suoi consigli di povertà, castità e obbedienza (Mt. 29, 21; 19, 14; 8, 20; Lc. 9, 58). Tale atto riassume in un'unica offerta tutta la vita di un uomo, orientandone a Dio ed alla sua gloria tutte le opere successive, in una forma diversa da quella …
19:16
Con la parola e con l'esempio Gesù Cristo inculcò la pratica di questi c. La povertà (v.) è consigliata al giovane ricco: « Se vuoi essere perfetto, va', vendi ciò che hai e donalo ai poveri, e avrai un tesoro in cielo; poi vieni e seguimi » (Mt. 19, 16-21; Mc. 10, 17-22; Lc. 18, 18-23); la castità perpetua (v.) nella risposta data ai discepoli circa la rinunzia al matrimonio per il Regno dei cieli (Mt. 19, 10-12; cf. I Cor. 7, 7 sg., …
Tale verità ebbe conferma dalla predicazione di Cristo o degli Apostoli (cf. Mt. 19, 16-17; Mc. 10, 17-18; Lc. 18, 18-19; e ancora: Mt. 4, 10; Mc. 12, 30; Lc. 4, 8; 10, 27: la fonte comune di questi ultimi testi è Deut. 6, 5; cf. pure I Cor. 8, 4-6). E in seguito, come giustamente …
19:17
… In Mt. 19, 17-21 è chiara la distinzione tra la via comune dei Comandamenti (v. 17), necessaria per la salvezza, e la via più alta e ardua, facoltativa per chi vuole (v. 21) tendere al più perfetto.
… L'Israelita che trasgredisce la T. rompe il giogo del regno di Dio; come nel Vangelo (Mt. 19, 17), anche negli apocrifi (Testam. …
… La nuova alleanza vaticinata da Geremia (31, 33), comporta una legge nuova, tutta interiore (Mt. 5, 6-7), che richiede molte virtù e l'esercizio della rinunzia da coloro che vogliono «entrare nella vita» (Mt. 19, 17); poiché angusta è la via che conduce ad essa (Mt. 7, 1-14). I buoni, i beati sono caratterizzati dalla vita virtuosa; purità, misericordia, umiltà, semplicità, fedeltà, costanza (Mc. …
19:18
… In questo senso si debbono intendere i frequenti allarmi di Cristo contro la r. Gesù è vissuto in una struttura economico-sociale fondata sul regime di proprietà privata e non l'ha condannata; anzi ha condannato il furto (cf. Mt. 19, 18 e paralleli). …
19:21
… Gesù esprime questa a. con la parola palingenesia (Mt. 19, 21). S. Paolo vi fa allusione quando parla della liberazione del creato dalla servitù della corruzione (Rom. 8, 19-22) e specialmente della distruzione degli effetti del peccato e dell'ultima …
APOSTOLI (GR. ἈΠΌΣΤΟΛΟΣ «INVIATO», DA ἈΠΟΣΤΈΛΛΩ)
… I « dodici » parteciperanno dunque alla funzione giudiziale del « Figlio dell'uomo » su Israele, anche loro saranno, come Lui, rivelati in gloria; si può interpretare la parola greca (χρίνων) anche in senso di governo (cf. Mt. 19, 21, e Apoc. 20, 4). Questo avvenire glorioso dei « dodici » è il premio per i sacrifici che fanno ora, abbandonando tutto e seguendo Gesù (Mt. 9, 27, 29); essi che perseverano con Lui …
… ricchi: Gesù è avverso ai ricchi perché combatte il mondo, il cui fasto e potenza contrastano col Regno di Dio (I Cor. 1, 26-28) e saranno annientati (Io. 16, 33; Apoc. 18, 10-19). Gesù, poverissimo (Mt. 8, 20; Lc. 9, 58), glorifica ed esige la povertà (Mt. 19, 21; Lc. 12, 33; 18, 22) in cambio del Regno (Mt. 13, 44, 46), essendo la ricchezza, fulcro della potenza terrena, effetto e causa del peccato (Mt. 6, 24; Lc. 16, 9-13; cf. Eccli. 31, …
… volontà a quella di altri, nelle parole che esprimono l'abnegazione (v.): « Se uno vuol venire dietro a me, rinneghi se stesso, prenda ogni giorno la sua croce e mi segua » (Mt. 16, 24; Lc. 9, 23); e così pure in quelle che invitano alla fedele sequela (Mt. 19, 21), essendo il discepolato un conformarsi alle direttive del maestro, o inculcano il volontario servire (Mt. 20, 26; Lc. 22, 26). La vita terrena di Gesù Cristo ci diede perfetto esempio …
… Lagrange, Evangile selon si Mathieu, Parigi 1921, p. 1-18), e nell'invito che fece al giovane ricco: «Se vuoi essere perfetto...» (Mt. 19, 21) «una cosa ti manca» (Mc. 10, 21; Lc. 18, 22).
19:23
Cristo non condanna come intrinsecamente perversi i beni terreni, ma impone il totale distacco, sia pure a gradi, a chi vuole seguirlo (Lc. 14, 33), e qualifica le ricchezze ostacoli per il regno dei cieli (Mt. 19, 23-24;
19:27
… 62; Lc. 21, 27; Act. 7, 30; I Thess. 4, 17; II Thess. 1, 8), seduto in un trono di maestà (Mt. 19, 27; 25, 31; Apoc. 20, 11-12), assistito nell'atto di giudicare dagli Apostoli (Lc. 22, 2), dai martiri e da coloro che osservarono i consigli evangelici (Mt. 19, 27-28).
PRIMATO DI SAN PIETRO E DEL ROMANO PONTEFICE
Pietro stesso aveva coscienza della sua posizione, poiché è lui generalmente che parla a nome di tutti (Mt. 14, 28; 15, 15; 16, 16-22; 17, 4; 18, 21; 19, 27; 26, 33; Mc. 8, 29; 10, 28; 11, 21; 14, 29; Lc. 8, 45; 9, 20; 9, 33; 12, 41; 18, 28; 22, 31; Io. 6, 68; 13, 6-10, 36). La particolare posizione di Pietro non si può attribuire alla …
dine provvidenziale (Mt. 4, 20; 19, 27; Hebr. 10, 32-34). La r. abituale consiste nella prontezza permanente a compiere ogni r. attuale richiesta dal Cristo (s. Ignazio, Es. spir., nn. 149-55).
19:28
APOSTOLI (GR. ἈΠΌΣΤΟΛΟΣ «INVIATO», DA ἈΠΟΣΤΈΛΛΩ)
… Gesù stesso ha voluto «i dodici», scelti, come risulta da Mt. 19, 28 (cf. Lc. 22, 30).
(Mt. 19, 28). Chi oserebbe sul serio asserire che Gesù parla di banchetto reale e di troni materiali? …
Come semplici immagini sono «cieli nuovi e terra nuova», per esprimere il profondo rinnovamento che opererà tra gli uomini il Messia (Is. 65, 17; 66, 22; II Pt. 3, 13; cf. la παλεντεύσια di Mt. 19, 28; la καπνή κτίσις di Gal. 6, 15; II Cor. 5, 17; il passaggio da morte a vita di Io. 5, 24-28; E. B. Allo, op. cit., p. 325). Infine i vari elementi (angeli, nube, fuoco, ecc.) che accompagnano …
… Costituiti giudici di tutte le gesti nel giudizio universale (Mt. 19, 28), gli Apostoli
… semitica può essere giustificata; tanto più che in alcuni passi paralleli dei Sinottici la formula è sostituita con «io» (cf. Mt. 5, 11 con Lc. 6, 22; Mt. 10, 32 con Lc. 12, 8; Mt. 16, 31 con Mc. 8, 27 e Lc. 9, 18; Mt. 16, 21 con Mc. 8, 31 e Lc. 9, 22; Mt. 19, 28 con Lc. 22, 29; Mt. 20, 28 con Mc. 10, 45 e Lc. 22, 27).
… In questo senso p. è in Mt. 19, 28 un termine per indicare il mondo futuro. …
… convenzionale, rimasto fino all'epoca cristiana, in cui si ricorda Anna della tribù di Aser, Paolo di Beniamin (Lc. 2, 36; Rom. 11, 1; Phil. 3, 5). Si parla inoltre delle 12 tribù d'Israele, per dire la totalità del popolo eletto in senso messianico (Mt. 19, 28; Apoc. 7, 5 sgg.; 21, 12 sgg.; cf. Ez. 47, 13-48, 35). Giovanni Rinaldi
19:30
… Capovolgendo i privilegi (cf. Mt. 19, 30; 20, 16), le b. annunziano, a chi nulla spera dal mondo e vive nell'abbandono a Dio, l'ordine nuovo, la nuova morale, la nuova felicità. …
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.