Afterfeast of the Holy Theophany

And he entered Jerusalem into the temple. Having entered the city, he first went to the temple, showing us the form of religion which we should follow. So that when by chance we enter a village or town or any other place where there is a house dedicated to the worship of God, we first go to this; and, after we have commended ourselves to the Lord through the duty of prayers, we then withdraw to attend to the temporal business for which we came. However, as the time of the Passion approached, the Lord wished to draw near to the place of the Passion and remain there, where at the appointed and predetermined time he could be found by those through whom the Passion was to be accomplished. Through this, he also intimated to all those hearing that he would face death not unwillingly, as the profane thought, but of his own will. When the hour was approaching, he boldly went to the place where he had foretold far in advance through himself and his prophets that he would suffer. It should be noted that this entry of his into Jerusalem occurred five days before Passover, during which he decided to fulfill the mystery of his most holy Passion. For John narrates that six days before Passover, he came to Bethany, where a supper was made for him, and many reclining at the table, Mary, the sister of Lazarus, anointed him with mystical ointment; and the next day, sitting on a donkey, with a large crowd meeting him with palms, he came to Jerusalem. Here, not only the harmony in things but also in the times of the Old and New Testaments, the shadow and the truth, the law and the Gospel, must not be passed over in silence. For it is written in the law, with the Lord speaking to Moses and Aaron: "This month shall be for you the beginning of months; it shall be the first month of the year for you. Speak to the whole congregation of Israel, and say to them: On the tenth day of this month, every man shall take a lamb according to their ancestral houses, a lamb for each household." And shortly after: "And you shall keep it until the fourteenth day of this month, and the whole assembly of the congregation of Israel shall kill it at twilight" (Exodus 12). Therefore, on the tenth day of the first month, the lamb to be sacrificed at Passover was commanded to be brought into the house, because also on the tenth day of the same month, that is, five days before Passover, the Lord was to enter the city in which he would suffer. And just as the lamb chosen from the whole flock awaited the certain day of its sacrifice, so also the Lord, as the whole council of elders and leaders conspired against him, steadfastly awaited the hour in which he would offer himself as a sacrifice to God and a victim in the odor of sweetness for the salvation of the world. The lamb was sacrificed on the fourteenth day of the first month at twilight, and the Lord, at the same hour, eating the lamb with his disciples, where he completed the decrees of the legal Passover, immediately went out with them to the place of prayer, where, being captured and bound by the Jews, he began at once the mysteries of his blessed suffering.

And having looked around at everything, since it was already evening, he went out to Bethany with the twelve. He did not do this just once; but for all five days after he had gone up to Jerusalem until the time of the Passion, he was accustomed to do this very thing: that during the day he would teach in the temple, but at night he would go out and spend the night on the Mount of Olives, as we read in Luke. For by teaching the unbelievers, he diligently fulfilled the duty of correction. However, by staying among the faithful, he graciously exhibited the kindness of his favor to them. It is well noted that, after looking around at everything, he went out to Bethany. Indeed, the internal judge examines the hearts of all, and when he does not find a place to rest his head among those who oppose and resist the truth, he withdraws to the faithful and rejoices in making a dwelling with the Father in those who obey the word. For Bethany is called the house of obedience. This also must be understood, that the Lord was of such great poverty, and so did not flatter anyone, that he found no host, no lodging in that greatest city, but stayed in the small country place with Lazarus and his sisters. For their village is Bethany.

(ubi sup.) As the time of His Passion approached, the Lord wished to approach to the place of His Passion, in order to intimate that He underwent death of His own accord: wherefore it is said, And Jesus entered into Jerusalem, and into the temple. And by His going to the temple on first entering the city, He shows us beforehand a form of religion, which we are to follow, that if by chance we enter a place, where there is a house of prayer, we should first turn aside to it. We should also understand from this, that such was the poverty of the Lord, and so far was He from flattering man, that in so large a city, He found no one to be His host, no abiding place, but lived in a small country place with Lazarus and his sisters; for Bethany is a hamlet of the Jews. Wherefore there follows: And when he had looked round about upon all things, (that is, to see whether any one would take Him in,) and now the eventide was come, he went out into Bethany with the twelve. Nor did He do this once only, but during all the five days, from the time that He came to Jerusalem, to the day of His Passion, He used always to do the same thing; during the day He taught in the temple, but at night, He went out and dwelt in the mount of Olives.

(ubi sup.) Farther, He looks round about upon the hearts of all, and when in those who opposed the truth, He found no place to lay His head, He retires to the faithful, and takes up His abode with those who obey Him. For Bethany means the house of obedience.

Likewise, Mark 11: Having looked around at all things, He went out to Bethany: Gloss: "to see if anyone would receive Him as a guest; for He was of such great poverty and flattered no one, so that in so great a city He could find no lodging"; but it is certain that if He had wished to hire lodging, He would have found a place to hire: therefore He was looking around as a poor man and beggar.

He went in the morning to the Jews, and visits us in the eventide of the world.

Jesus entered the temple and soon went out of it again, showing by this that He was already leaving it to desolation and plunder. He departs to Bethany, which means "house of obedience," for, leaving the disobedient and hard-hearted, He now goes with His disciples to those obedient to Him.

Wishing to show His disciples that if He chose He could in a moment exterminate those who were about to crucify Him. In a mystical sense, however, the Lord entered into the temple, but came out of it again, to show that He left it desolate, and open to the spoiler.

Did Christ really want physically to relish and consume fruit himself when he sought the fruit of this fig tree? And if he had found it there, would he then even have eaten it? Did he really want to drink water when he said to the woman of Samaria, "Give me a drink"? When he was on the cross saying "I thirst," was this really all about his physical thirst? For what does Christ hunger more than our good works? For what does Christ thirst more than our faithful response? On the Psalms

Mark, on his side, has recorded in connection with the second day what he had omitted to notice as occurring really on the first—namely, the incident of the expulsion of the sellers and buyers from the temple. On the other hand, Matthew, after mentioning what was done on the second day—namely, the cursing of the fig tree as he was returning in the morning from Bethany into the city—has omitted certain facts which Mark has inserted, namely, his coming into the city, and his going out of it in the evening, and the astonishment which the disciples expressed at finding the tree dried up as they passed by in the morning; and then to what had taken place on the second day, which was the day on which the tree was cursed, he has attached what really took place on the third day—namely, the amazement of the disciples at seeing the tree's withered condition, and the declaration which they heard from the Lord on the question of the power of faith.

And the next day, when they went out from Bethany, he was hungry. He was hungry, either showing the truth of human flesh or desiring the salvation of believers, burning with zeal against the unbelief of Israel.

It goes on, And on the morrow, when they were come from Bethany, he was hungry.

The miracles of healing fall into the same pattern. This is sometimes obscured for us by the somewhat magical view we tend to take of ordinary medicine. The doctors themselves do not take this view. The magic is not in the medicine but in the patient's body. What the doctor does is to stimulate Nature's functions in the body, or to remove hindrances. In a sense, though we speak for convenience of healing a cut, every cut heals itself; no dressing will make skin grow over a cut on a corpse. That same mysterious energy which we call gravitational when it steers the planets and biochemical when it heals a body is the efficient cause of all recoveries, and if God exists, that energy, directly or indirectly, is His. All who are cured are cured by Him, the healer within. But once He did it visibly, a Man meeting a man. Where He does not work within in this mode, the organism dies. Hence Christ's one miracle of destruction is also in harmony with God's wholesale activity. His bodily hand held out in symbolic wrath blasted a single fig tree; but no tree died that year in Palestine, or any year, or in any land, or even ever will, save because He has done something, or (more likely) ceased to do something, to it.

As we behold the mystery of his tears, hunger and thirst, let us remember that the one who wept also raised the dead to life, rejoicing for Lazarus. From the very One who thirsted flowed rivers of living water. He who hungered was able to wither the fig tree which offered no fruit for his hunger. How could this be, that he who was able to strike the green tree dead merely by his word could also have a nature that could hunger? This was the mystery of his hunger, grief, and thirst, that the Word was assuming flesh. His humanity was entirely exposed to our weaknesses, yet even then his glory was not wholly put away as he suffered these indignities. His weeping was not for himself, his thirst was not for water, nor his hunger merely for food. He did not eat or drink or weep just to satisfy his appetites. Rather, in his incarnate humbling he was demonstrating the reality of his own body by hungering, by doing what human nature does. And when he ate and drank, it was not a concession to some necessity external to himself, but to show his full participation in the human condition.

We may also say, in another sense, that the Lord sought for fruit on the fig tree before its time, and not finding it, cursed it, because all who fulfil the commandments of the Law, are said to bear fruit in their own time, as, for instance, that commandment, Thou shalt not commit adultery; but he who not only abstains from adultery but remains a virgin, which is a greater thing, excels them in virtue. But the Lord exacts from the perfect not only the observance of virtue, but also that they bear fruit over and above the commandments.

But let us also examine the account of the fig tree, for here something seemingly strange and harsh appears. First, Jesus was hungry early in the morning; second, He demands fruit when the season for figs had not yet come; and furthermore, He punishes an insensible tree. For in what He says and does here, there was a special providence. Until now Jesus had often worked miracles, but only for the benefit of people. But the disciples had not yet seen Him do harm to anyone. Now, in order to show the disciples that He can also punish, and that, if He wished, He could in a single hour destroy those intending to crucify Him, He manifests His power upon an insensible tree. And the miracle was truly great in that a tree so full of sap withered at once, for the fig tree is more full of sap than almost all other trees. That He hungered early in the morning — this He permitted His flesh to experience by a special providence; and He seeks fruit prematurely on the fig tree for the purpose, as I said above, of showing the disciples that He can also punish. And this fig tree was at the same time a figure of the Jewish synagogue, which had only leaves, that is, the Law, which provided nothing but a shadow, while they bore no fruit at all. But Jesus hungered for their salvation. He says: "My food is to do the will of Him who sent Me" (John 4:34), and this will of God consists in converting sinners. Since, however, the synagogue had no fruit, it was cursed and withered, having (no longer among it) neither prophets nor teachers.

Some who witnessed Christ's miracles did not understand what they meant, and how they spoke to those who knew they had special meaning. They wondered only at the miracles themselves. Others both marvelled at the miracles, and attained some preliminary understanding of them. For this we must come to the school of Christ himself. Those fixed only upon the plain sense of Scripture tend to focus merely upon miracle for miracles' sake. Hence they may prematurely conclude that Jesus himself was ignorant of the time of the year, something any ordinary farmer could discern. For it was not yet the season for the tree to bear fruit. Nevertheless, since he was hungry, he looked for fruit on the tree. Does this imply that Christ knew less than what every peasant could easily discern? Surely not. Wouldn't you expect the maker of the fig tree to know what the ordinary orchard worker would know in a snap? So when he was hungry he looked for fruit on the tree, but he seemed to be looking for something more from this tree. He noted that the tree had no fruit, but was full of leaves. It was at that point that he cursed it, and it withered away. So what terrible thing had the poor tree done simply in not bearing fruit? Could the tree reasonably be faulted for its fruitlessness? No. But human beings who by their own free will decide not to bear fruit—that is a different matter. Those found wanting in accountability in this case are those who had the benefit of the law, which was meant to bear fruit, but they had no fruit to show for it. They had a full growth of leaves (the law), yet they bore no fruit (works of mercy).

And when he saw from afar a fig tree having leaves, he went to see if perhaps he might find anything on it. And when he came to it, he found nothing but leaves, for it was not the season for figs. And answering, Jesus said to it, "May no one ever eat fruit from you again." Just as the Lord was accustomed to saying many things in parables, so also he was accustomed to doing certain things in parables. For what reason would there be for him to seek fruit on a fig tree when he was hungry, when any man knew that it was not yet the time for figs, and to condemn the tree to an eternal curse for not having fruit at that time, unless, by this act, he intended to admonish the people whom he was teaching by word, that no one producing leaves but not fruit, that is, displaying the words of righteousness without deeds, would deserve to be cut down and cast into the fire? For every tree is known not by its flowers, not by its leaves, but by its fruit; that is, every man is tested and proven not by the reputation of fame or the pomp of words, but by the testimony of their actions. Therefore, the Lord, being hungry, saw a fig tree having leaves and came to seek fruit on it, but did not find any. Because desiring the salvation of the human race, he saw Judea having the words of the law and the prophets, and came to test, by teaching, correcting, and performing miracles, if he might find any fruit of faith and life in their hearts. But because the fig tree was found to have leaves without fruit, it is condemned, because Judea, which resounded with the words of Scripture without deeds, deserved to be punished with vengeance. However, I would say this, not that the entire Synagogue was rejected, from which certainly the early Church was constructed. But that portion of the Synagogue which refused to feed the hungry Christ with good works deservedly earned condemnation, preferring to be overshadowed by the leaves of spiritual words rather than to be adorned with the fruits of the Spirit. To them, he says elsewhere: "I go, and you will seek me, and in your sin you will die" (John 5:34). This passage, indeed, fits with that parable of his, where he says: A certain man had a fig tree planted in his vineyard, and he came seeking fruit on it and did not find any. He then said to the vinedresser: Behold, for three years I have come seeking fruit on this fig tree and find none. Cut it down, why does it even occupy the ground? But he answered and said to him: Lord, leave it for this year also, until I dig around it and put manure on it. And if it bears fruit, well; but if not, you shall cut it down (Luke 13:6-9). The vinedresser is the order of the apostles and spiritual doctors, who diligently called the Synagogue to repentance, lest it perish, and strove to supplicate the Lord for its salvation. Especially James, the brother of the Lord, who was put in charge of governing the Church in Jerusalem. But because that Synagogue neither in the legal edicts, nor in the prophetic declarations, nor in the grace of the shining Gospel itself, agreed to bear the fruit of obedience, it remained a sterile fig tree for three years and was rejected by the Lord and overturned by eternal malediction. For it was not only cast away from the lot of the elect, but also cut off from the very ground it occupied in vain. But also you, if you do not wish to hear in judgment from Christ: Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire, for I was hungry, and you did not give me to eat (Matthew 25:41), beware of being a sterile tree in this life; rather, offer to the poor Christ who is hungry the fruit of piety he needs.

(ubi sup.) Just in the same way as He speaks parables, so also His deeds are parables; therefore He comes hungry to seek fruit off the fig tree, and though He knew the time of figs was not yet, He condemns it to perpetual barrenness, that He might show that the Jewish people could not be saved through the leaves, that is, the words of righteousness which it had, without fruit, that is, good works, but should be cut down and cast into the fire. Hungering therefore, that is, desiring the salvation of mankind, He saw the fig tree, which is, the Jewish people, having leaves, or, the words of the Law and the Prophets, and He sought upon it the fruit of good works, by teaching them, by rebuking them, by working miracles, and He found it not, and therefore condemned it. Do thou too, unless thou wouldest be condemned by Christ in the judgment, beware of being a barren tree, but rather offer to Christ the fruit of piety which He requires.

The nature of the fig tree is such that when it is cut, because of its moisture, it [requires] many months for it to dry up. Our Lord chose it as a symbol, therefore, to make the quality of his power known through it. It is evident that the fig tree becomes moist and tender before the other trees. Hence our Lord said: "From the fig tree learn this parable. As soon as its branch becomes tender and opens up in the outer covering of its buds, you know that summer is near." You see that he proposes it [as a symbol] because of its abundant moisture and its early buds.

For, as to what you have said about the fig-tree, Augustine speaks aptly in the same sense; for, when the evangelist subjoined, For the time of figs was not yet, it is plainly shown that the figs which the Lord had sought were fruit in the synagogue, which had the leaves of the Law, but not the fruit of works. For the Creator of all things could not be ignorant that the fig-tree had no fruit; which was a thing that all might know, since it was not the time of figs.

(The Docetae maintain) that God is the primal (Being), as it were a seed of a fig-tree, which is altogether very diminutive in size, but infinite in power. (This seed constitutes, according to the Docetae,) a lowly magnitude, incalculable in multitude, (and) labouring under no deficiency as regards generation. (This seed is) a refuge for the terror-stricken, a shelter of the naked, a veil for modesty, (and) the sought-for produce, to which He came in search (for fruit), he says, three times, and did not discover (any). Wherefore, he says, He cursed the fig-tree, because He did not find upon it that sweet fruit-the sought-for produce. And inasmuch as the Deity is, according to them to express myself briefly-of this description and so great, that is, small and minute, the world, as it seems to them, was made in some such manner as the following: When the branches of the fig-tree became tender, leaves budded (first), as one may (generally) see, and next in succession the fruit. Now, in this (fruit) is preserved treasured the infinite and incalculable seed of the fig-tree. We think, therefore, (say the Docetae,) that there are three (parts) which are primarily produced by the seed of the fig-tree, (viz.,) stem, which constitutes the fig-tree, leaves, and fruit-the fig itself, as we have previously declared. In this manner, the (Docetic) affirms, have been produced three Aeons, which are principles from the primal originating cause of the universe. And Moses has not been silent on this point, when he says, that there are three words of God, "darkness, gloom, tempest, and added no more." For the (Docetic) says, God has made no addition to the three Aeons; but these, in every respect. have been sufficient for (the exigencies of) those who have been begotten and are sufficient. God Himself, however, remains with Himself, far separated from the three Aeons. When each of these Aeons had obtained an originating cause of generation, he grew, as has been declared, by little and little, and (by degrees) was magnified, and (ultimately) became perfect. But they think that that is perfect which is reckoned at ten. When, therefore, the Aeons had become equal in number and in perfection, they were, as (the Docetae) are of opinion, constituted thirty Aeons in all, while each of them attains full perfection in a decade. And the three are mutually distinct, and hold one (degree of) honour relatively to one another, differing in position merely, because one of them is first, and the other second, and the other of these third. Position, however, afforded them diversity of power. For he who has obtained a position nearest to the primal Deity-who is, as it were, a seed-possessed a more productive power than the rest, inasmuch as he himself who is the immeasurable one, measured himself tenfold in bulk. He, however, who in position is second to the primal Deity, has, inasmuch as he is the incomprehensible one, comprehended himself sixfold. But he who is now third in position is conveyed to an infinite distance, in consequence of the dilatation of his brethren. (And when this third Aeon) had thrice realized himself in thought, he encircled himself with, as it were, some eternal chain of union.

This account of the many sellers who were cast out of the temple was reported by all the Evangelists, including John, but in his case he introduces it in a completely different order.… John proceeds to tell us that he went up to Jerusalem at the season of the Jews' passover, and when he had made a scourge of small cords drove out of the temple those who were selling in it. This makes it evident that this act was performed by the Lord not on a single occasion, but twice over. Only in the first instance was it recorded by John, but in the last by the other three.

(de Con. Evan. lib. ii. 67) John, however, relates this in a very different order, wherefore it is manifest that not once only, but twice, this was done by the Lord, and that the first time was related by John, this last, by all the other three.

(de Con. Evan. lib. ii. 68) In this again Mark does not keep the same order as Matthew; because however Matthew connects the facts together by this sentence, And he left them, and went out of the city into Bethany, (Matt. 21:17) returning from whence in the morning, according to his relation, Christ cursed the tree, therefore it is supposed with greater probability that he rather has kept to the order of time, as to the ejection from the temple of the buyers and sellers. Mark therefore passed over what was done the first day when He entered into the temple, and on remembering it inserted it, when he had said that He found nothing on the fig tree but leaves, which was done on the second day, as both testify.

And they come to Jerusalem. And when he had entered the temple, he began to cast out those who sold and bought in the temple, and he overturned the tables of the money-changers, and the seats of those who sold doves. What the Lord did by cursing the barren fig tree as a symbol, he soon showed more clearly by casting out the wicked from the temple. For the tree did not sin in that it did not have fruit when the Lord was hungry, since the time for fruit had not yet come; but the priests sinned by conducting secular business in the house of the Lord, and they neglected to bear the fruit of piety which they owed, and which the Lord hungered for in them. The Lord withered the tree with a curse, so that those who saw or heard might more greatly understand that they would be condemned by divine judgment if they were without the fruits of deeds, but only relied on the praise of religious speech, or on the appearance and covering of flourishing leaves. But because they did not understand, he then exercised the necessary severity of deserved vengeance upon them. And he cast out the commerce of human affairs from that house, in which it was commanded that only divine things be conducted, sacrifices and prayers be offered to God, the word of God be read, heard, and sung. And indeed it is to be believed that he found only those things being sold or bought in the temple which were necessary for the ministry of the same temple, based on what we read happening elsewhere, when he entered the same temple and found in it sellers and buyers of sheep, oxen, and doves. Clearly, it is to be believed that all these things were bought by those who came from afar from the locals, so that they might be offered in the house of the Lord. If, therefore, the Lord did not even want those things to be sold in the temple which he wanted to be offered in the temple, namely because of the greed or fraud that is usually the crime of merchants, how great a punishment, do you think, would he inflict if he found anyone there engaged in laughter or idle talk, or enslaved to any other vice? For if the Lord does not allow temporal business to be conducted in his house, which can be conducted freely elsewhere, how much more do those things deserve celestial wrath that are not allowed anywhere, if they are conducted in buildings consecrated to God? But because the Holy Spirit appeared upon the Lord in the form of a dove, rightly, the gifts of the Holy Spirit are signified by doves. Who, then, are those in the temple of God today who sell doves, but those in the Church who take a price for the imposition of hands? Through this imposition, namely, the Holy Spirit is given from heaven. Therefore, the dove is sold when the imposition of hands, through which the Holy Spirit is received, is provided for a price. But our Redeemer overturned the seats of those who sold doves, because he destroys the priesthood of such merchants. Hence, sacred canons condemn the Simoniac heresy and command that those who seek a price for conferring ordinations be deprived of the priesthood. Therefore, the seat of those who sell doves is overturned, because those who sell spiritual grace are deprived of the priesthood either before humans or before the eyes of God.

(ubi sup.) What the Lord had done in figure, when He cursed the barren fig tree, He now shows more openly, by casting out the wicked from the temple. For the fig tree was not in fault, in not having fruit before its time, but the priests were blameable; wherefore it is said, And they come to Jerusalem; and Jesus went into the temple, and began to cast out them that sold and bought in the temple. Nevertheless, it is probable that He found them buying and selling in the temple things which were necessary for its ministry. If then the Lord forbids men to carry on in the temple worldly matters, which they might freely do any where else, how much more do they deserve a greater portion of the anger of Heaven, who carry on in the temple consecrated to Him those things, which are unlawful wherever they may be done. It goes on: and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers.

(ubi sup.) Because the Holy Spirit appeared over the Lord in the shape of a dove, the gifts of the Holy Spirit are fitly pointed out under the name of doves. The Dove therefore is sold, when the laying on of hands by which the Holy Spirit is received is sold for a price. Again, He overturns the seats of them who sell doves, because they who sell spiritual grace, are deprived of their priesthood, either before men, or in the eyes of God.

And with that thought came a larger one, and the colossal figure of her Master had also crossed the theatre of my thoughts. The same modern difficulty which darkened the subject-matter of Anatole France also darkened that of Ernest Renan. Renan also divided his hero's pity from his hero's pugnacity. Renan even represented the righteous anger at Jerusalem as a mere nervous breakdown after the idyllic expectations of Galilee. As if there were any inconsistency between having a love for humanity and having a hatred for inhumanity! Altruists, with thin, weak voices, denounce Christ as an egoist. Egoists (with even thinner and weaker voices) denounce Him as an altruist. In our present atmosphere such cavils are comprehensible enough. The love of a hero is more terrible than the hatred of a tyrant. The hatred of a hero is more generous than the love of a philanthropist. There is a huge and heroic sanity of which moderns can only collect the fragments. There is a giant of whom we see only the lopped arms and legs walking about. They have torn the soul of Christ into silly strips, labelled egoism and altruism, and they are equally puzzled by His insane magnificence and His insane meekness. They have parted His garments among them, and for His vesture they have cast lots; though the coat was without seam woven from the top throughout.

Instead of looking at books and pictures about the New Testament I looked at the New Testament. There I found an account, not in the least of a person with his hair parted in the middle or his hands clasped in appeal, but of an extraordinary being with lips of thunder and acts of lurid decision, flinging down tables, casting out devils, passing with the wild secrecy of the wind from mountain isolation to a sort of dreadful demagogy; a being who often acted like an angry god--and always like a god. Christ had even a literary style of his own, not to be found, I think, elsewhere; it consists of an almost furious use of the a fortiori. His "how much more" is piled one upon another like castle upon castle in the clouds. The diction used about Christ has been, and perhaps wisely, sweet and submissive. But the diction used by Christ is quite curiously gigantesque; it is full of camels leaping through needles and mountains hurled into the sea. Morally it is equally terrific; he called himself a sword of slaughter, and told men to buy swords if they sold their coats for them. That he used other even wilder words on the side of non-resistance greatly increases the mystery; but it also, if anything, rather increases the violence. We cannot even explain it by calling such a being insane; for insanity is usually along one consistent channel. The maniac is generally a monomaniac. Here we must remember the difficult definition of Christianity already given; Christianity is a superhuman paradox whereby two opposite passions may blaze beside each other. The one explanation of the Gospel language that does explain it, is that it is the survey of one who from some supernatural height beholds some more startling synthesis.

The tremendous figure which fills the Gospels towers in this respect, as in every other, above all the thinkers who ever thought themselves tall. His pathos was natural, almost casual. The Stoics, ancient and modern, were proud of concealing their tears. He never concealed His tears; He showed them plainly on His open face at any daily sight, such as the far sight of His native city. Yet He concealed something. Solemn supermen and imperial diplomatists are proud of restraining their anger. He never restrained His anger. He flung furniture down the front steps of the Temple, and asked men how they expected to escape the damnation of Hell. Yet He restrained something. I say it with reverence; there was in that shattering personality a thread that must be called shyness. There was something that He hid from all men when He went up a mountain to pray. There was something that He covered constantly by abrupt silence or impetuous isolation. There was some one thing that was too great for God to show us when He walked upon our earth; and I have sometimes fancied that it was His mirth.

Why do you not recall before the eyes of your mind that our Redeemer, entering the temple, overturned the seats of those selling doves and poured out the money of the money-changers? For who are those in the temple of God today who sell doves, if not those who in the Church receive payment for the imposition of hands? Through which imposition, namely, the Holy Spirit is given from heaven. Therefore the dove is sold, because the imposition of hands, through which the Holy Spirit is received, is offered for a price. But our Redeemer overturned the seats of those selling doves, because he destroys the priesthood of such merchants. For hence it is that the sacred canons condemn the simonian heresy, and command that those be deprived of the priesthood who seek payment for bestowing ordinations. Therefore the seat of those selling doves is overturned when those who sell spiritual grace are deprived of the priesthood, either before human eyes or before the eyes of God.

Having described this, what the Lord did is added: because, entering the temple, he began to cast out those selling and buying in it, saying to them: It is written that my house is a house of prayer, but you have made it a den of thieves. For he who foretold the evils to come and immediately entered the temple to cast out from it those selling and buying, clearly made known that the ruin of the people came chiefly from the fault of the priests. Indeed, in describing the destruction but striking at those selling and buying in the temple, he showed by the very effect of his work whence the root of perdition sprang. Moreover, as we have learned from another evangelist as witness, doves were being sold in the temple. And what is received through doves except the gift of the Holy Spirit? But he expels the sellers and buyers from the temple, because he condemns either those who grant the imposition of hands for a gift, or those who strive to buy the gift of the Spirit.

Just as the temple of God is in the city, so also is the life of religious persons among the faithful people. And often some take up the habit of religion, and when they receive a place in the sacred orders, they turn the office of holy religion into a commerce of earthly business. Those selling in the temple are they who bestow for a reward what rightly belongs to certain persons. For to sell justice is to maintain it in exchange for receiving a reward. Those buying in the temple are they who, while refusing to render to their neighbor what is just, and while disdaining to do what is rightly owed, give a reward to patrons and buy sin.

John also narrates the expulsion of the money changers by Jesus, but he speaks of this at the beginning of the Gospel, whereas this one (Mark) speaks of it toward the end. Therefore one must think that this (latter) expulsion was the second, which serves to the greater condemnation of the Jews, since they did not repent despite the Lord having acted thus with them on more than one occasion. He calls the Temple a "den of robbers" on account of the covetousness of the money changers. For the robber race is given over to plundering. And since the sellers in the Temple also traded in sacrificial animals for the sake of gain, they too were called robbers. The "money changers" were engaged in the exchange of money. The Lord presents the prophet Isaiah as well as their accuser, who says: "My house shall be called a house of prayer" (Is. 56:7). Let us therefore pray that we too may not be cast out of the church! For many come to our church as well in order to sell what is good and buy what is bad. There are also those who, arranging and managing church affairs, have tables full of money: they do everything out of greed. Overturned also are the seats of those who sell doves, that is, the thrones of hierarchs who sell spiritual gifts, for the dove is an image of the Holy Spirit. May the Lord cast out such a bishop from his bishopric, for cursed is he who ordains for money. In like manner, he also sells his dove who sells to the devil the grace and purity received in baptism. For this reason he too is cast out of the Church.

He calls moneychangers, changers of a particular sort of money, for the word means a small brass coin. There follows, and the seats of them that sold doves.

But if a man by sinning gives up to the devil the grace and purity of baptism, he has sold his Dove, and for this reason is cast out of the temple. There follows, And would not suffer that any man should carry any vessel through the temple.

Further, He calls the temple, a den of thieves, on account of the money gained there; for thieves always troop together for gain. Since then they sold those animals which were offered in sacrifice for the sake of gain, He called them thieves.

Which also turns to the greater condemnation of the Jews, because though the Lord did this so many times, nevertheless they did not correct their conduct.

And He would not allow anyone to carry vessels through the temple. He speaks of those vessels which were brought in for the sake of trading. Moreover, far be it that the Lord would cast out from the temple the vessels dedicated to God, or prohibit them from being brought into the temple, where He provided an example of His future judgment; but rather He eliminates the impure and profane vessels from the temple and prohibits them from being brought in any longer, as He not only drives away and expels all the reprobates from the Church, but also, to prevent them from entering again to disturb the Church, restrains them with an eternal scourge. But also in the present time this is the true house of the Lord, that is, the purification of the hearts of the faithful, so that not only does the divinely inspired compunction remove the sins that were present, but also, lest these sins return, the divine grace persevering in them may help.

(ubi sup.) He speaks of those vessels which were carried there for the purpose of merchandise. But God forbid that it should be taken to mean, that the Lord cast out of the temple, or forbade men to bring into it, the vessels consecrated to God; for here He shows a type of the judgment to come, for He thrusts away the wicked from the Church, and restrains them by His everlasting word from ever again coming in to trouble the Church. Furthermore, sorrow, sent into the heart from above, takes away from the souls of the faithful those sins which were in them, and Divine grace assists them so that they should never again commit them.

De Con. Evan, ii, 67: John, however, relates this in a very different order, wherefore it is manifest that not once only, but twice, this was done by the Lord, and that the first time was related by John, the last, by all the other three. de Con. Evan, ii, 68: In this again, Mark does not keep the same order as Matthew; because however Matthew connects the facts together by this sentence, "And He left them, and went out of the city into Bethany," returning from whence in the morning, according to his relation, Christ cursed the tree, therefore it is supposed with greater probability that he rather has kept to the order of time, as to the ejection from the temple of the buyers and sellers. Mark therefore passed over what was done the first day when He entered into the temple, and on remembering it inserted it, when he had said that He found nothing on the figtree but leaves, which was done on the second day, as both testify. Wherefore it is added, "For they feared Him, because all the people were astonished at His doctrine. For He taught themas one having authority, and not as the Scribes" and Pharisees, as is said elsewhere.

(non occ.) But the Evangelist shows what effect the correction of the Lord had on the ministers of the temple, when he adds: And the Scribes and Chief Priests heard it, and sought how they might destroy him; according to that saying of Amos: They hate him that rebuketh in the gate, and they abhor him that speaketh uprightly. (Amos 5:10) From this wicked design, however, they were kept back for a time solely by fear. Wherefore it is added, For they feared him, because all the people were astonished at his doctrine. For he taught them as one having authority, and not as the Scribes and Pharisees, as is said elsewhere.

The Lord, leaving darkness behind Him in the hearts of the Jews, went out, as the sun, from that city to another which is well-disposed and obedient. And this is what is meant, when it is said, And when even was come, he went out of the city. But the sun sets in one place, rises in another, for the light, taken from the Scribes, shines in the Apostles; wherefore He returns into the city; on which account there is added, And in the morning, as they passed by, (that is, going into the city,) they saw the fig tree dried up from the root.

Now the fig tree withered from the roots is the synagogue withered from Cain, and the rest, from whom all the blood from Abel up to Zechariah is required.

(de Con. Evan. ii. 68) The meaning is not that it dried up at the time, when they saw it, but immediately after the word of the Lord; for they saw it, not beginning to dry up, but completely dried up; and they thus understood that it had withered immediately after our Lord spoke.

And as they passed by in the morning, they saw the fig tree dried up from the roots. Not only the branches or the trunks of the barren fig tree, but even the root itself, drying up, showed the sentence of divine reprobation upon it. And John says that the axe is laid to the root of the trees (Matt. III). Therefore, the fig tree dried up from the roots to show that the impious nation was not to be corrected temporarily or partially by invasions of foreigners, and then immediately, with the Lord's mercy, after repentance, to be restored to its former freedom, as sacred history often reports; but rather, it was to be struck with eternal damnation, dried up from the roots, so that it might be intimated that the wicked people were to be utterly deprived not only of external human glory but even of inner divine favor. For it lost both the salvation and the life it could have received in the heavens and the homeland it had already obtained on earth.

(ubi sup.) Further, the fig tree was dried up from the roots to show that the nation was impious not only for a time and in part, and was to be smitten for ever, not merely to be afflicted by the attacks of nations from without and then to be freed, as had often been done; or else it was dried up from the roots, to show that it was stripped not only of the external favour of man, but altogether of the favour of heaven within it; for it lost both its life in heaven, and its country on earth.

(non occ.) The wonder of the disciples was the consequence of imperfect faith, for this was no great thing for God to do; since then they did not clearly know His power, their ignorance made them break out into wonder; and therefore it is added, And Jesus answering saith unto them, Have faith in God. For verily I say unto you, That whosoever shall say unto this mountain, &c. That is; Thou shalt not only be able to dry up a tree, but also to change a mountain by thy command and order.

Although Matthew says that the fig tree withered at once and that the disciples, seeing this, marveled, do not be troubled hearing now from Mark that they saw the withered fig tree only on the next day. What Matthew said should be understood thus: "And the fig tree withered at once" — stop here; then read: "Seeing this, the disciples marveled." When did they see it? — not at once, but on the next day. Whoever understands it this way will encounter no difficulty.

The greatness of the miracle appears in the drying up so juicy and green a tree. But though Matthew says that the fig tree was at once dried up, and that the disciples on seeing it wondered, there is no reason for perplexity, though Mark now says, that the disciples saw the fig tree dried up on the morrow; for what Matthew says must be understood to mean that they did not see it at once, but on the next day.

You are now being joined with the holy vine. If, then, you abide in the vine, you grow into a fruitful branch, but if you do not so abide, you will be burnt in the fire. Let us therefore bring forth worthy fruit. For let it not come about that it should happen to us what happened to the barren fig tree in the Gospel. Let not Jesus come in these days and utter the same curse upon the fruitless. But instead may all of you say, "I am like a green olive tree in the house of God."

Peter perceives the dry root, which is cut off, and has been replaced by the beautiful and fruitful olive, called by the Lord; wherefore it goes on: And Peter calling to remembrance saith unto him, Master, behold, the fig tree which thou cursedst is withered away.