Matthew 12

3–4

How then doth Jesus defend His disciples? "Have ye not read," saith He, "what David did in the temple, when he was an hungered, himself and all they that were with him? how he entered into the house of God, and did eat the show-bread, which was not lawful for him to eat, neither for them which were with him, but only for the priests?"

Thus, whereas in pleading for His disciples, He brings forward David; for Himself, it is the Father.

And observe His reproving manner: "Have ye not read what David did?" For great indeed was that prophet's glory, so that Peter also afterwards pleading with the Jews, spake on this wise, "Let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried."

But wherefore doth He not call him by the name of his rank, either on this occasion or afterwards? Perhaps because He derived His race from him.

Now had they been a candid sort of persons, He would have turned His discourse to the disciples' suffering from hunger; but abominable as they were and inhuman, He rather rehearses unto them a history.

But Mark saith, "In the days of Abiathar the High Priest:" not stating what was contrary to the history, but implying that he had two names; and adds that "he gave unto him," indicating that herein also David had much to say for himself, since even the very priest suffered him; and not only suffered, but even ministered unto him. For tell me not that David was a prophet, for not even so was it lawful, but the privilege was the priests': wherefore also He added, "but for the priests only." For though he were ten thousand times a prophet, yet was he not a priest; and though he were himself a prophet, yet not so they that were with him; since to them too we know that he gave.

"What then," it might be said, "were they all one with David?" Why talk to me of dignity, where there seems to be a transgression of the law, even though it be the constraint of nature? Yea, and in this way too He hath the more entirely acquitted them of the charges, in that he who is greater is found to have done the same.

"And what is this to the question," one may say; "for it was not surely the Sabbath, that he transgressed?" Thou tellest me of that which is greater, and which especially shows the wisdom of Christ, that letting go the Sabbath, He brings another example greater than the Sabbath. For it is by no means the same, to break in upon a day, and to touch that holy table, which it was not lawful for any man to touch. Since the Sabbath indeed hath been violated, and that often; nay rather it is continually being violated, both by circumcision, and by many other works; and at Jericho too one may see the same to have happened; but this happened then only. So that He more than obtains the victory. How then did no man blame David, although there was yet another ground of charge heavier than this, that of the priests' murder, which had its origin from this? But He states it not, as applying himself to the present subject only.

Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 39

3–4

To put down the chicanery of the Pharisees it is recorded in ancient history that David was fleeing from Saul and came to Nob. Having been received by Ahimelech the priest, he asked him for food. Since Ahimelech had no common bread at hand, he gave David some holy bread, which only priests and Levites could lawfully eat. The priest asked whether the young men had kept themselves from women, and he received the answer “since yesterday and the day before.” He did not hesitate to give the bread, having thought it better, remembering that the prophet says, “I desire mercy and not sacrifice.” In view of the danger of hunger, Ahimelech judged it better to help people than to offer sacrifice to God. The slain victim pleasing to God is the salvation of humankind. If David is holy and the priest Ahimelech is not offensive to you, but they have broken both commandments of the law with a probable excuse—in this case, hunger—why do you not find acceptable the same hunger in the apostles that you find acceptable in others? However, in this there is a great difference: the disciples plucked grain on the sabbath, whereas David ate the levitical bread.… Note that neither David nor his young men accepted the loaves of the presence until they replied that they had kept themselves from women.

Commentary on Matthew 2.14.4

3–4

(Ver. 3, 4.) But he said to them: Have you not read what David did when he was hungry, and those who were with him: how he entered the house of God and ate the bread of the Presence, which it was not lawful for him to eat, nor for those who were with him, but only for the priests? To refute the slander of the Pharisees, he recalls an old story, when David, fleeing from Saul, came to Nob and was received by the priest Ahimelech. He asked for food, and since he did not have any ordinary bread, Ahimelech gave him the consecrated bread, which only the priests and Levites were allowed to eat. And he merely asked if there were any boys in the world born of women; and when he responded, without hesitation, he did not hesitate to give bread, deeming it better to free people from the danger of hunger, as the prophet says: 'I desire mercy, not sacrifice' (Hosea 6:6), rather than to offer sacrifice to God. For a merciful offering is pleasing to God and the salvation of humanity. Therefore, the Lord opposes and says: 'If even David, who is holy, and Ahimelech the high priest, are not condemned by you, but rather both have transgressed the command of the Law with a justifiable excuse, and hunger is the cause, why do you not approve the same hunger in the apostles, which you approve in others?' Although there is a great difference in this. Those people rubbed the ears of grain in their hands on the Sabbath, while others ate the Levitical loaves and came near the feast of the New Moon, on which day he was sought for at the banquet and fled from the royal court. Note that neither David nor his servants took the showbread before they answered that they were clean from women.

Commentary on Matthew

3–4

Then it proceeds to their excuse; But he said unto them, Have ye not read what David did, when he was an hungred? To refute the false accusation of the Pharisees, He calls to mind the ancient history, that David flying from Saul came to Nobba, and being entertained by Achimelech the Priest, asked for food; (1 Sam. 21.) he having no common bread, gave him the consecrated loaves, which it was not lawful for any to eat, but the Priests only and Levites; esteeming it a better action to deliver men from the danger of famine than to offer sacrifice to God; for the preservation of man is a sacrifice acceptable to God. Thus then the Lord meets their objection, saying, If David be a holy man, and if you blame not the high-priest Achimelech, but consider their excuse for their transgression of the Law to be valid, and that was hunger; how do ye not approve in the Apostles the same plea which you approve in others? Though even here there is much difference. These rub ears of corn in their hands on the sabbath, those ate the Levitical bread, and over and above the solemn sabbath it was the season of new moon, during which when sought for at the banquet he fled from the royal palace.

Observe that neither David nor his servants received the loaves of show-bread, before they had made answer that they were pure from women.

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

3–5

(Quæst. in Matt. q. 10.) It should be observed, that one example is taken from royal persons, as David, the other from priestly, as those who profane the sabbath for the service of the Temple, so that much less can the charge concerning the rubbing the ears of corn attach to Him who is indeed King and Priest.

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

3–4

He said to them... Here the justification is given: first, with certain examples; secondly, with a text of Scripture (v. 7).

In regard to the first he does two things: first, he gives an example, in which some were excused on account of necessity; secondly, in which some were excused on account of holiness (v. 5).

He says, therefore, He said to them... In Leviticus (24:5) it is read that twelve loaves were baked from fine flour and placed on the table of proposition on the Sabbath, and on another Sabbath they were removed and others put there, and the first ones were eaten by the sons of Aaron. Then in 1 Samuel (21:6) it is written that when David was fleeing from Saul, Ahimelech divided those loaves among them. This is why he says, Have you not read what David did, when he was hungry, and those who were with him. For David was a good man, of whom the Lord says that he has found a man according to his own heart (1 Sam 13:8). But someone might say that David was a prophet and so was allowed to take them. Therefore, he adds, and those who were with him. The loaves of proposition were the ones offered on the Sabbath and it was not lawful according to the precept to eat them (Lev 24:5). But what does this have to do with the case? Because it was the Sabbath, when he did this. And this is clear, because he said, "I have no bread except what I took form the Lord's table," and he did this only on the Sabbath. Likewise on the first day of the month was the feast of the new moon; therefore, if it happened on the Sabbath, it was violated by necessity. But it still seems that he did not violate it, because it is not a sin to eat on the Sabbath. However, Chrysostom says that he violated more than the Sabbath, because he took loaves, which were not lawful for anyone to use, out of necessity. Likewise, it should be noted that according to Chrysostom some precepts are such that they are commanded for their own sake, and these cannot be broken for any need; but some are not for their own sake but for the sake of a figure, and these can be broken at certain times and places: as a fast can now be broken out of necessity. But that bread was the figure of another bread, namely, the bread of the altar, which is received not only by the priest but by the people; therefore, David was the figure of that people. Hence Revelation (5:10): "You have made us a kingdom and priests to our God."

Commentary on Matthew

Afterwards again He refutes it in another way also. For as at first He brought in David, by the dignity of the person quelling their pride; so when He had stopped their mouths, and had put down their boasting, then He adds also the more appropriate refutation. And of what sort is this? "Know ye not, that in the temple the priests profane the Sabbath, and are blameless?" For in that other instance indeed, saith He, the emergency made the relaxation, but here is the relaxation even without emergency. He did not however at once thus refute them but first by way of permission, afterwards as insisting upon his argument. Because it was meet to draw the stronger inference last, although the former argument also had of course its proper weight.

For tell me not, that it is not freeing one's self from blame, to bring forward another who is committing the same sin. For when the doer incurs no blame, the act on which he hath ventured becomes a rule for others to plead.

Nevertheless He was not satisfied with this, but subjoins also what is more decisive, saying that the deed is no sin at all; and this more than anything was the sign of a glorious victory, to point to the law repealing itself, and in two ways doing so, first by the place, then by the Sabbath; or rather even in three ways, in that both the work is twofold. that is done, and with it goes also another thing, its being done by the priests; and what is yet more, that it is not even brought as a charge. "For they," saith He, "are blameless."

Seest thou how many points He hath stated? the place; for He saith, "In the temple;" the persons, for they are "the priests;" the time, for He saith, "the Sabbath;" the act itself, for "they profane;" (He not having said, "they break," but what is more grievous, "they profane;") that they not only escape punishment, but are even free from blame, "for they," saith He, "are blameless."

Do not ye therefore account this, He saith, like the former instance. For that indeed was done both but once, and not by a priest, and was of necessity; wherefore also they were deserving of excuse; but this last is both done every Sabbath, and by priests, and in the temple, and according to the law. And therefore again not by favor, but in a legal way, they are acquitted of the charges. For not at all as blaming them did I so speak, saith He, nor yet as freeing them from blame in the way of indulgence, but according to the principle of justice.

And He seems indeed to be defending them, but it is His disciples whom He is clearing of the alleged faults. For when He saith, "those are blameless," He means, "much more are these."

"But they are not priests." Nay, they are greater than priests. For the Lord of the temple Himself is here: the truth, not the type.

Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 39

You falsely accuse my disciples, Jesus says, for plucking ears of grain while passing through the standing fields. They did this because of their pangs of hunger. But you must violate the sabbath by immolating victims in the temple, slaughtering bulls and burning holocausts on a heap of firewood and, according to the testimony of the other Gospel, circumcising children on the sabbath. Thus, while you wish to observe the one law, you dishonor the sabbath. But God’s commands do not contradict each other.

Commentary on Matthew 2.12.5

(Verse 5.) Have you not read in the Law that on the Sabbath the priests in the temple violate the Sabbath and yet are without guilt? But I tell you that something greater than the temple is here. If you had known what this means, ‘I desire mercy, and not sacrifice,’ you would not have condemned the guiltless. For the Son of Man is lord of the Sabbath.” (Matthew 12:5-8) However, the Laws of God are never contradictory to themselves. And wisely, when his disciples were able to be accused of transgression, David and Achimelech mention examples that they followed: but he attributes the violation of the Sabbath, true and without excuse, to those who had committed slander.

Commentary on Matthew

As though He had said, Ye bring complaints against my disciples, that on the sabbath they rub ears of corn in their hands, under stress of hunger, and ye yourselves profane the sabbath, slaying victims in the temple, killing bulls, burning holocausts on piles of wood; also, on the testimony of another Gospel (John 7:23.), ye circumcise infants on the sabbath; so that in keeping one law, ye break that concerning the sabbath. But the laws of God are never contrary one to another; wisely therefore, wherein His disciples might be accused of having transgressed them, He shows that therein they followed the examples of Achimelech and David; and this their pretended charge of breaking the sabbath He retorts truly, and not having the plea of necessity, upon those who had brought the accusation.

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

5–6

The law prohibited work on the sabbath; so, then, the priests as they split wood and lit fires on the sabbath were profaning, that is, defiling, the sabbath, by your reckoning. But you will say to Me, "They were priests, the disciples are not." I say, then, that something greater than the temple I here. I am the Master Who is greater than the temple, and since I am with My disciples, they have greater authority to set aside the law of the sabbath than do the priests.

Commentary on Matthew

Then another example is given, namely, based on holiness, when he says, Have you not read in the Law how on the Sabbath the priests in the temple profane the Sabbath, and are guiltless? In Leviticus it was commanded that the offering customary on other days be doubled on the Sabbath; yet it was done in the temple and on the Sabbath, because it was done out of deference to the temple and to God; hence the priests were excused. The example is cited, because the apostles were dedicated to one greater than the temple, namely, to Christ. Hence he said: Have you not read in the Law how the priests profaned the Sabbath? unless it was for the sake of the temple.

Commentary on Matthew

Christ also reminded them of another prophecy so that they might learn that all things that were spoken of previously were accomplished in him through the law, that the priests in the temple broke the sabbath without offense, clearly revealing that Jesus himself was the temple. In him salvation was given to the Gentiles through the teaching of the apostles, while the people who were bound by the law wandered about faithlessly, so that he himself might be greater than the sabbath. Evangelical faith lived in Christ transcends the law.

Commentary on Matthew 12.4

Wherefore He said also, "But I say unto you, That in this place is one greater than the temple."

Nevertheless, great as the sayings were which they heard, they made no reply, for the salvation of men was not their object.

Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 39

(Verse 6.) But I tell you that here is a greater temple. Here, is not a pronoun, but an adverb of place; that the place, which holds the Lord of the temple, is greater than the temple.

Commentary on Matthew

The word Hic is not a pronoun, but an adverb of place here, for that place is greater than the Temple which contains the Lord of the Temple.

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

I tell you this, that something greater than the temple is here. That something greater than the temple is here is clear, because his body is a temple. Likewise it should be noted that in the first example he does not claim that it is without sin. In the second he states that if one breaks the Sabbath out of necessity, it is not on that account entirely free of sin; but it is, if it is done on account of God.

Commentary on Matthew

He therefore said: "You wash the outside of the cup," that is, the flesh, "but you do not cleanse your inside part," that is, the soul; adding: "Did not He that made the outside," that is, the flesh, "also make the inward part," that is to say, the soul?-by which assertion He expressly declared that to the same God belongs the cleansing of a man's external and internal nature, both alike being in the power of Him who prefers mercy not only to man's washing, but even to sacrifice. For He subjoins the command: "Give what ye possess as alms, and all things shall be clean unto you.

Against Marcion Book 4

"But," say they, "God is `good, 'and `most good, ' and `pitiful-hearted, 'and `a pitier, 'and `abundant in pitiful-heartedness, ' which He holds `dearer than all sacrifice, ' `not thinking the sinner's death of so much worth as his repentance', `a Saviour of all men, most of all of believers.

On Modesty

In order to show that this appearance of his work anticipated all the power of things to come, he added, “If you understood what the saying means: ‘I want mercy, not sacrifice,’ you would never have condemned the blameless.” The business of our salvation lies not in sacrifice but in mercy. When law is made void, we are saved by the goodness of God. If they had understood the grace of this statement, they would never have condemned the blameless. They would not have condemned the apostles whom they were going to accuse falsely, out of envy, of transgressing the law. When the ancient practice of sacrifices was stopped, the strangeness of mercy became more clearly known. Had this been known, they would not have thought that the Lord of the sabbath was confined by the law of the sabbath.

Commentary on Matthew 12.5

Then, because to the hearers it would seem harsh, He quickly draws a veil over it, giving His discourse, as before, a lenient turn, yet even so expressing Himself with a rebuke. "But if ye had known what this meaneth, I will have mercy and not sacrifice, ye would not have condemned the guiltless."

Seest thou how again He inclines His speech to lenity, yet again shows them to be out of the reach of lenity? "For ye would not have condemned," saith He, "the guiltless." Before indeed He inferred the same from what is said of the priests, in the words, "they are guiltless;" but here He states it on His own authority; or rather, this too is out of the law, for He was quoting a prophetic saying.

Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 39

(Verse 7.) But if you knew what this means, 'I desire mercy, and not sacrifice,' you would not have condemned the guiltless. What it means, 'I desire mercy, and not sacrifice,' we have already explained. But what follows, 'You would not have condemned the guiltless,' refers to the apostles. And the meaning is this: If you approved of Achimelech's mercy, because he refreshed David and his men who were in danger of starvation, why do you condemn my disciples, who have done nothing similar?

Commentary on Matthew

What I will have mercy, and not sacrifice, signifies, we have explained above. The words, Ye mould never have condemned the innocent, are to be referred to the Apostles, and the meaning is, If ye allow the mercy of Achimelech, in that he refreshed David when in danger of famishing, why do ye condemn My disciples?

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

7–8

He also shows them up as unlearned, not knowing the words of the prophets (Hosea 6:7). For was it not right, He says, to show mercy to men who were hungry? Furthermore, I, the Son of Man, am Lord of the sabbath for I am the Creator of all things, including the days. Hence it is I as Master Who sets aside the sabbath. Understand this also in a spiritual sense. As the apostles were laborers, and the believers were the harvest and the heads of grain, so the apostles were plucking and eating them, that is, they took the salvation of men to be their food. This they were doing on the sabbath, made for rest and cessation from evils. The Pharisees were vexed; and so it is even in the Church, that those who are pharisaical and envious are displeased with teachers who constantly teach and bring benefit.

Commentary on Matthew

Then he argues from the example: first, because his disciples should be dealt with mercifully; because if you had known what this means, 'I desire mercy and not sacrifice,' you would not have condemned the guiltless (Hosea 6:6). How this is to be understood has been stated above. "To do mercy and judgment is more acceptable to the Lord than sacrifice" (Pr 21:3).

Commentary on Matthew

Any one who refused to believe that that flesh was human might pretend it to be anything he liked, for-as much as (and this remark is applicable, to all heretics), if it was not human, and was not born of man, I do not see of what substance Christ Himself spoke when He called Himself man and the Son of man, saying: "But now ye seek to kill me, a man that hath told you the truth; " and "The Son of man is Lord of the Sabbath-day." For it is of Him that Isaiah writes: "A man of suffering, and acquainted with the bearing of weakness; " and Jeremiah: "He is a man, and who hath known Him? " and Daniel: "Upon the clouds (He came) as the Son of man.

On the Flesh of Christ

You will also thus observe that knowing God is more necessary than resting on the sabbath. The sabbath was given to the Jews when, in Egypt, they were turned toward idolatry. And the sabbath was given for this reason: so that they would not call the world uncreated and outside the sphere of providence, but that they would acknowledge that God is both the One who planned it and that it is he himself who made the world in six days and on the seventh day rested. When God commanded them to do no work on the sabbath, it was to remind them of this. Subsequently, the fact that God is the Maker of the universe has become known to all, and so much of the detailed sabbath law has become superficial. If these extreme arguments about the sabbath were truly useful, they would have been applied not only to human beings but even to the sun and moon. Imagine that the very sun would cease working its benefits to us on the sabbath day. No. This commandment has been given to human beings, even from the foundation of the world.

Fragment 84

After this He mentions another reason likewise; "For the Son of man," saith He, "is Lord of the Sabbath day;" speaking it of Himself. But Mark relates Him to have said this of our common nature also; for He said, "The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath."

Wherefore then was he punished that was gathering the sticks? Because if the laws were to be despised even at the beginning, of course they would scarcely be observed afterwards.

For indeed the Sabbath did at the first confer many and great benefits; for instance, it made them gentle towards those of their household, and humane; it taught them God's providence and the creation, as Ezekiel saith; it trained them by degrees to abstain from wickedness, and disposed them to regard the things of the Spirit.

For because they could not have borne it, if when He was giving the law for the Sabbath, He had said, "Do your good works on the Sabbath, but do not the works which are evil," therefore He restrained them from all alike for, "Ye must do nothing at all," saith He: and not even so were they kept in order. But He Himself, in the very act of giving the law of the Sabbath, did even therein darkly signify that He will have them refrain from the evil works only, by the saying, "Ye must do no work, except what shall be done for your life." And in the temple too all went on, and with more diligence and double toil. Thus even by the very shadow He was secretly opening unto them the truth.

Did Christ then, it will be said, repeal a thing so highly profitable? Far from it; nay, He greatly enhanced it. For it was time for them to be trained in all things by the higher rules, and it was unnecessary that his hands should be bound, who was freed from wickedness, winged for all good works; or that men should hereby learn that God made all things; or that they should so be made gentle, who are called to imitate God's own love to mankind (for He saith, "Be ye merciful, as your Heavenly Father"); or that they should make one day a festival, who are commanded to keep a feast all their life long; ("For let us keep the feast," it is said, "not with old leaven, neither with leaven of malice and wickedness; but with unleavened bread of sincerity and truth"); as neither need they stand by an ark and a golden altar, who have the very Lord of all for their inmate, and in all things hold communion with Him; by prayer, and by oblation, and by scriptures, and by almsgiving, and by having Him within them. Lo now, why is any Sabbath required, by him who is always keeping the feast, whose conversation is in Heaven?

Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 39

(Verse 8) And when he had passed from there, he came into their synagogue. And behold, there was a man with a withered hand. This is the thirteenth one who is healed in the synagogue. And it should be noted that his hand was healed not on the road or outside, but in the council of the Jews.

Commentary on Matthew

He calls Himself the Son of Man, and the meaning is, He whom ye suppose a mere man is God, the Lord of all creatures, and also of the sabbath, and He has therefore power to change the law after His pleasure, because He made it.

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

There is another argument which makes them innocent, namely, obedience; hence they can do these things, because he ordered them, for the Son of man is Lord of the Sabbath, and the lawgiver is not subject to the law: "He is our lawgiver" (Is 33:22); therefore, he has the power, because he has the authority.

Commentary on Matthew

11–12

"What man is there among you that shall have one sheep, and if this fall into a pit on the Sabbath days, will he not lay hold of it, and lift it out? How much then is a man better than a sheep? Wherefore it is lawful to do well on the Sabbath days."

Thus, lest they have ground of obstinacy, and of accusing him again of transgression, He convicts them by this example. And do thou mark, I pray thee, how variously and suitably in each case, He introduces His pleas for the breaking of the sabbath. Thus, first, in the case of the blind man, He doth not so much as defend Himself to them, when He made the clay: and yet then also were they blaming Him; but the manner of the creation was enough to indicate the Lord and Owner of the law. Next, in the case of the paralytic, when he carried his bed, and they were finding fault, He defends Himself, now as God, and now as man; as man, when He saith, "If a man on the Sabbath day receive circumcision, that the law should not be broken;" (and He said not "that a man should be profited"); "are ye angry at me, because I have made a man every whit whole on the Sabbath day?" As God again, when He saith, "My Father worketh hitherto, and I work."

But when blamed for His disciples, He said, "Have ye not read what David did, when he was an hungered, himself and they that were with him, how he entered into the house of God, and did eat the show-bread? He brings forward the priests also.

And here again; "Is it lawful to do good on the Sabbath days, or to do evil? Which of you shall have one sheep?" For He knew their love of wealth, that they were all taken up with it, rather than with love of mankind. And indeed the other evangelist saith, that He also looked about upon them when asking these questions, that by His very eye He might win them over; but not even so did they become better.

And yet here He speaks only; whereas elsewhere in many cases He heals by laying on of hands also. But nevertheless none of these things made them meek; rather, while the man was healed, they by his health became worse.

Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 40

11–12

Thus He answers their question in such a way as to convict the questioners of covetousness. If ye on the sabbath, saith He, would hasten to lift out a sheep or any other animal that might have fallen into a pit, not for the sake of the animal, but to preserve your own property, how much more ought I to deliver a man who is so much better than a sheep?

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

11–12

(Vs. 10 seqq.) But he said to them: Which one of you, having a sheep, if it falls into a pit on the Sabbath, will not take hold of it and lift it out? How much more valuable is a man than a sheep! Therefore, it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath. In this way, he solved the proposed question, so as to condemn those who were questioning out of greed. If, he said, on the Sabbath you hurry to rescue a sheep or any other animal that falls into a pit, not because of the animal, but because of your greed, how much more should I free a man, who is much more valuable than a sheep!

Commentary on Matthew

11–12

He shows that for love of money and so as not to lose a sheep they would set aside the sabbath, but they could not tolerate that the sabbath be set aside so that a man might be healed. By this He shows that they were not only lovers of money and cruel men, but even despisers of God. For they hold the sabbath in contempt so as not to suffer the loss of a sheep, and yet without mercy they condemn the healing of a man.

Commentary on Matthew

11–12

(ord.) Thus He answers their question with a suitable example, so as to show that they profane the sabbath by works of covetousness who were charging Him with profaning it by works of charity; evil interpreters of the Law, who say that on the sabbath we ought to rest from good deeds, when it is only evil deeds from which we ought to rest. As it is said, Ye shall do no servile work therein, (Lev. 23:3) that is, no sin. Thus in the everlasting rest, we shall rest only from evil, and not from good.

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

He said to them... Here the answer is given: first, he answers in words; secondly, in deed (v. 13).

In the first he does three things: first, he reminds them of a custom; secondly, he makes a comparison (v. 12); thirdly, he draws the conclusion (v. 12b).

He says, therefore, What man of you, if he has one sheep and it falls into a pit on the Sabbath will not lay hold of it and lift it out? It was their custom that if a sheep fell into a pit, they would lift it out on the Sabbath; for they were so greedy, that they considered temporal damage worse than spiritual damage. Hence the words of Sirach (10:9): "Nothing is more heinous than a greedy man" applies to them. And later on he says: "For he has a venal soul," because he exposes himself to danger and eternal damnation for a slight temporal profit.

Commentary on Matthew

(De Cons. Ev. ii. 35.) After this comparison concerning the sheep, He concludes that it is lawful to do good on the sabbath day, saying, Therefore it is lawful to do good on the sabbath.

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Secondly, the comparison is made: Of how much more value is a man than a sheep! Incomparably, because all things are for man; for dominion over all things has been entrusted to man, as it says in Genesis (1:26): "Let us make man to our own image and likeness..., and let him have dominion over the fish of the sea, and the birds of the air, and the beasts of the earth." Consequently, what was made to the image of God is preferred to a sheep. From this he concludes: So it is lawful to cure on the Sabbath, i.e., to do good to men: "Cease to do evil, learn to do good" (Is 1:16), because it is written in Exodus (20:10): "You shall do not servile work on that day." Servile work is sinful; therefore, it is lawful to do good. But then there is a question: Is it lawful to do all good works on the Sabbath? For then it is lawful to plow. Therefore, it must be said that servile work can be understood literally, and mystically servile work is sin: "he that commits sin is the slave of sin" (Jn 8:34). Again, servile work is that in which the body is employed more than the mind. For the soul is supposed to rule the body. Therefore, to take counsel is not a servile work. Hence we can see which things are excused from the Sabbath. For the Lord excuses the disciples by reason of need; hence necessity excuses. Likewise, things which are immediately directed to the worship of God, as to swing a censer, etc. Also things pertaining to bodily health, as to concoct medicine, salve, etc. Hence they are rebuked, because they narrowed a precept of the Law.

Commentary on Matthew

Such healing is rightly attributed to our Lord. After his return from the cornfield from which his apostles had gotten the produce, he went to the synagogue. From there Jesus intended to acquire laborers for his own harvest. Many of them afterwards lived with the apostles. Many were healed, as in the case of the maimed man. Yet the leaders of the synagogue did not believe in the grace of salvation. The use of the man’s hand had atrophied. That function of his body had withered, by which he was able to do or share in certain tasks. So the Lord ordered him to stretch out his hand, and it was restored to him as the other one was. His whole cure rested on the word of the healer alone. The hand was restored to the same condition as the other hand. It was made a partner in the service of the apostles in their duty of granting salvation.

Commentary on Matthew 12.7

All healing is done by the word; and the hand is restored as the other; that is, made like to the ministry of the Apostles in the business of bestowing salvation; and it teaches the Pharisees that they should not be displeased that the work of human salvation is done by the Apostles, seeing that if they would believe, their own hand would be made able to the ministry of the same duty.

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

For His desire indeed was to cure them before him, and He tried innumerable ways of healing, both by what He did in their presence, and by what He said: but since their malady after all was incurable, He proceeded to the work. "Then saith He to the man, Stretch forth thine hand. And he stretched it forth, and it was restored whole, like as the other."

Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 40

(Verse 13) Then he said to the man, \"Stretch out your hand.\" And he stretched it out, and his health was restored like the other. In the Gospel used by the Nazarenes and Ebionites (which we recently translated from Hebrew into Greek, and which some call the authentic Gospel of Matthew), this man, who has a withered hand, is said to be a mason, praying for help with these words: \"I was a mason, seeking food with my hands. I beg you, Jesus, to restore my health, so that I may not shamefully beg for food.\ Until the coming of the Savior, the hand of God was dry in the synagogue of the Jews, and His works were not performed in it: but after He came to the earth, His right hand was restored to the believing apostles, and the former work was renewed.

Commentary on Matthew

In the Gospel which the Nazarenes and Ebionites use, (vid. note, p. 433.) and which we have lately translated into Greek out of the Hebrew, and which many regard as the genuine Matthew, this man who has the withered hand is described as a builder, and he makes his prayer in these words, 'I was a builder, and gained my living by the labour of my hands; I pray thee, Jesus, to restore me to health, that I may not disgracefully beg my bread.'

Until the coming of the Lord the Saviour, there was the withered hand in the Synagogue of the Jews, and the works of the Lord were not done in it; but when He came upon earth, the right hand was restored in the Apostles who believed, and given back to its former occupation.

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Many, even now, have withered hands, that is, they are merciless and tightfisted. But when the word of the Gospel resounds within them, they stretch out their hands in giving. They do this even though the Pharisees, that is, the proud demons who are cut off from us, (The word "Pharisee" in Hebrew means "cut off" or "set apart") on account of their enmity for us do not want our hands to be stretched out to others in mercy and almsgiving.

Commentary on Matthew

Then he said to the man, "Stretch out your hand." Here he answers them with a deed, namely, curing him; for he would not have cured him, if it were not lawful. The cure follows: it was restored, whole like the other. Mystically, a man with a withered hand, i.e., incapable of doing good, has no better cure than to extend his hand to help the poor. Hence Daniel (4:27): "Break off your sins by showing mercy to the oppressed"; "Water extinguishes a blazing fire; so almsgiving atones for sins" (Sir 3:30); "Let not our hand be open for receiving and closed for giving" (Sir 18:36). And note that first he had the left hand healthy, and the other, namely, the right was restored. And this is so, because men are first capable of evil: "Woe to you who are strong for doing evil" (Is 5:22); but after they are healed by grace, they are inclined to do good: "As you once yielded your members to impurity and to greater and greater iniquity, so now yield your members to righteousness for justification" (Rom 6:19).

Commentary on Matthew

25–26

For a city or family is analogous to a kingdom, as it follows, And every city or house divided against itself shall not stand.

But the word of God is rich, and whether taken simply, or examined inwardly, it is needful for our advancement. Leaving therefore what belongs to the plain understanding thereof, let us dwell on some of the more secret reasons. The Lord is about to make answer to that which they had said concerning Beelzebub, and He casts upon those to whom He made answer a condition of their answering. Thus; The Law was from God and the promise of the kingdom to Israel was by the Law, but if the kingdom of the Law be divided in itself, it must needs be destroyed; and thus Israel lost the Law, when the nation whose was the Law, rejected the fulfilment of the Law in Christ. The city here spoken of is Jerusalem, which when it raged with the madness of its people against the Lord, and drove out His Apostles with the multitude of them that believed, after this division shall not stand; and thus (which soon happened in consequence of this division) the destruction of that city is declared. Again He puts another case, And if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how then shall his kingdom stand?

Otherwise; If the dæmon was driven to this division to the end that he should thus afflict the dæmons, even thus must we attribute higher power to Him who made the division than to those who are thus divided; thus the kingdom of the Devil, after this division made, is destroyed by Christ.

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

The law comes from God. The promise of the kingdom of Israel comes from the law, and the announcement of Christ’s birth and arrival come from the law. If the kingdom of the law is divided against itself, it will of necessity be abandoned. Every power is pulled down by division, and the strength of a kingdom separated from itself is destroyed. Thus the kingdom of Israel has fallen from the law when the people of the law oppose the fulfillment of the law in Christ. “But both a city and a house divided against themselves will not stand.” The dwelling of a city is the same principle as that of a kingdom. But this city of Jerusalem is always viewed in contrast to the boastful tyranny of the nations. Now after Jerusalem had been inflamed against the Lord by the madness of its people and after the crowd of the faithful had put his apostles to flight, then it will not stand because of the division of those who are leaving. And so, what directly follows this division is the order for that city’s destruction.

Commentary on Matthew 12.13-14

The Lord declared that a kingdom or city or house divided against itself could not stand. This was said in reference to the kingdom that the Jews themselves occupied under the rule of Jeroboam, the servant of Solomon, which was judged as abandoned before being divided. The Jews would lose entirely the city of Jerusalem, to which Samaria had been hostile. They would lose the dwelling place of God’s temple against which golden calves and the house of idols had been erected. He showed them that they ought rather to follow that kingdom that cannot be divided—that is, the heavenly and eternal one. The spiritual city of Jerusalem always remains fixed and immovable. No hostile power ever has been or will be able to overcome the true house of God. That house which is protected by the Son of God is quite safe.

Tractate on Matthew 49.5

25–26

Even before now they had accused Him of this, that "by Beelzebub He casteth out the devils." But whereas then He did not rebuke them, allowing them both to know His power by His more numerous miracles, and by His teaching to learn His majesty: now, since they continued saying the same, He proceeds also to rebuke them, showing His Godhead by this first, that He made their secrets public; and secondly, by the very act of casting out the devils with ease.

And indeed the accusation too was very shameless. Because, as I have said, envy seeks not what to say, but only that it may say somewhat. Yet for all that, not even so did Christ despise them, but defends Himself with the forbearance proper to Him, teaching us to be meek to our enemies; and though they say such things, as we are neither conscious of, nor have they any the least probability, not to be disturbed, nor troubled, but with all long suffering to render them an account. This then He did most especially on that very occasion, affording the strongest proof, that the things were false that were said by them. For neither was it a demoniac's part to exhibit so much meekness; it was not a demoniac's part to know men's secrets.

For, in truth, both because of the exceeding impudence of such a suspicion, and because of the fear of the multitude, they durst not publicly make these charges, but were turning them in their mind. But He, to show them that He knew all that likewise, doth not set down the accusation, nor doth He expose their wickedness; but the refutation He adds, leaving it to the conscience of them that bad said it to convict them. For on one thing only was He bent, to do good to them that were sinning, not to expose them.

Yet surely, if He had been minded to extend his speech in length, and to make them ridiculous, and withal to have exacted of them also the most extreme penalty, there was nothing to hinder Him. Nevertheless He put aside all these things, and looked to one object only, not to render them more contentious, but more candid, and so to dispose them better toward amendment.

How then doth He plead with them? Not by allegation out of the Scriptures (for they would not so much as attend, but were sure rather to distort their meaning), but by the events of ordinary life. For "every kingdom," saith He, "divided against itself shall not stand; and a city and a house, if it be divided, is soon dissolved."

For the wars from without are not so ruinous as the civil ones. Yea, and this is the case in bodies too; it is the case even in all things; but for this time He takes His illustration from those that are more publicly known.

And yet, what is there more powerful on earth than a kingdom? Nothing, but nevertheless it perishes if in dissension. And if in that case one throw the blame on the great burden of the affairs thereof, as breaking down by its own weight; what wouldest thou say of a city? and what of a house? Thus, Whether it be a small thing, or a great, if at dissension with itself, it perishes. If then I, having a devil, do by him cast out the devils, there is dissension and fighting among devils, and they take their stand one against another. But if they stand one against another, their strength is wasted and destroyed. "For if Satan cast out Satan" (and He said not "the devils," implying their great unanimity one with another), "he is then divided against himself;" so He speaks. But if he be divided, he is become weaker, and is ruined; and if he be ruined, how can he cast out another?

Seest thou how great the absurdity of the accusation, how great the folly, the inconsistency? Since it is not for the same persons to say first, that He stands, and casts out devils, and then to say, that He stands by that, which it was likely would be the cause of His undoing.

Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 41

25–26

The Pharisees ascribed the works of God to the Prince of the dæmons; and the Lord makes answer not to what they said, but to what they thought, that even thus they might be compelled to believe His power, Who saw the secrets of the heart; Jesus, knowing their thoughts, said unto them.

For as small things grow by concord, so the greatest fall to pieces through dissensions.

As much as to say, If Satan fight against himself, and dæmon be an enemy to dæmon, then must the end of the world be at hand, that these hostile powers should have no place there, whose mutual war is peace for men.

But if ye think, ye Scribes and Pharisees, that the dæmons depart out of the possessed in obedience to their Prince, that men may be imposed upon by a concerted fraud, what can ye say to the healing of diseases which the Lord also wrought? It is something more if ye assign to the dæmons even bodily infirmities, and the signs of spiritual virtues.

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

(Verse 25) But Jesus, knowing their thoughts, said to them: Every kingdom divided against itself shall be made desolate, and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand. The crowds marveled and confessed that he, who performed such great signs, was the son of David. But the Pharisees attributed the works of God to the prince of demons. To them, the Lord did not respond to their words, but to their thoughts, so that they might be compelled to believe in his power, who saw the hidden things of the heart.

Commentary on Matthew

25–26

Beelzebub is the same as Beel or Baal, or Beelphegor. Beel was father of Ninus king of Assyria; Baal was so called because he was worshipped on high; he was called Beelphegor from the mountain Phegor; Zebub was the servant of Abimelech the son of Gedeon, who, having slain his seventy brothers, built a temple to Baal, and set him up as Priest therein, to drive away the flies which were collected there by the abundant blood of the victims; for Zebub means, a fly. Beelzebub therefore is interpreted, The man of flies, wherefore from this most unclean worship they called him the Prince of the dæmons. Having therefore nothing more mean to cast upon the Lord, they said that He cast out dæmons by Beelzebub. And it should be known that this word is not to be read with d or t at the end, as some corrupt copies have, but with b.

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

25–26

By divulging their thoughts He shows that He is God. He defends Himself from their accusation by means of everyday examples, and reveals their foolishness. For how is it that demons cast out one another when in fact they strive to assist one another? "Satan" means "the adversary."

Commentary on Matthew

25–26

(ord.) He holds them therefore in this dilemma. For Christ casts out dæmons either by the power of God, or by the Prince of the dæmons. If by the power of God, their accusations are malicious; if by the Prince of the dæmons, his kingdom is divided, and will not stand, and therefore let them depart out of his kingdom. And this alternative He intimates that they had chosen for themselves, when they refused to believe in Him.

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

But Jesus, knowing their thoughts, said to them. In this part Jesus refutes his detractors: first, he argues against their statements; secondly, against the detractors (v. 31).

He refutes their statements with four arguments, the second of which is at v. 26, the third at v. 26b, the fourth at v. 30.

The first is stated most aptly: Every kingdom divided against itself is laid waste. First he states the major premise, when he says, Every kingdom... There are three kinds of community: the house or family, the city and the kingdom. The house is a community consisting of those by whom common actions are performed; therefore, it consists of a three-fold union, namely, of father and son, of husband and wife, of lord and servant. The civil community contains every necessity for a man's life; therefore, it is perfect as far as the merely necessary are concerned. The kingdom is a complete community. For where there would be fear of enemies, one city by itself could not subsist; therefore, because of the fear of enemies, there is need for a community of many cities which form one kingdom. Hence as life is to each man, so is peace to a kingdom; and as health is nothing more than the proper equilibrium of humors, so peace consists in each thing maintaining its order. And just as, when health is receding, a man is tending toward death, so with peace: if it departs from a kingdom, it tends to ruin. Hence the ultimate objective is peace. Therefore, the Philosopher says: as the doctor is to health, so the defender of the republic is to peace. Consequently, he says: Every kingdom divided against itself is laid waste: "Their heart is divided; now they shall perish" (Hos 10:2); "The youth will be insolent to the elder, and the base fellow to the honorable" (Is 3:5).

Commentary on Matthew

(Verse 26) And if Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself; how then will his kingdom stand? A kingdom and a city divided against themselves cannot endure; but just as small things grow by harmony, so great things are destroyed by discord. Therefore, if Satan fights against himself, and a demon is an enemy of a demon, then the end of the world should have already come; so that opposing powers would not have a place in it, and their war would be the peace of mankind. But if you think, O scribes and Pharisees, that the expulsion of demons is by the power of their prince, in order to deceive ignorant men by fraudulent pretense, what can you say about the healings of bodies, which the Lord performed? It is one thing if the weakness of limbs and the signs of spiritual virtues are also assigned to demons.

Commentary on Matthew

In saying this, he wanted it to be understood from their confession that they had chosen to live in him by not believing in the kingdom of the devil and that the devil could not stand divided against himself. So let the Pharisees choose what they want. If Satan could not cast out Satan, they could find nothing to say against the Lord. But if Satan can cast out Satan, let them look out for themselves all the more and let them abandon his kingdom because it cannot stand divided against itself.

Sermon 71.1

If Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself. Casting out implies violent motion; therefore, it is necessary that where there is contradiction there is division: "There are always quarrels between the proud" (Pr 13:10). But someone could say that there was no casting out, because he went out voluntarily. But this has no force, because such a departure is not a casting out, but takes place by obeying someone commanding; hence this would be a voluntary departure. But that they depart involuntarily is apparent from what happened above, namely, they began to groan and shout [above 8:29]: "What have you to do with us, son of God? Have you come to torment us before the time?" Therefore, there is division.

How then will his kingdom stand? Jerome explains it thus: How will his kingdom stand? As if to say: The devil's kingdom stands in sinners until the day of judgment, because then all power will be removed. Hence if this were so, it would now be the end of the world. Rabanus, thus: How will his kingdom stand? Because if he is opposed, he is in danger; therefore, you should be wary of his kingdom. Hilary: How will it stand? As if to say: It is due to my power that I make it possible for one to expel another. Therefore, I destroy the devil's kingdom; and for this reason you should adhere to me.

Commentary on Matthew

27–28

And they are worthily appointed judges over them, to whom Christ is found to have given that power over the dæmons, which it was denied that He had.

If then the disciples work by Christ, and Christ by the Spirit of God, already is the kingdom of God transferred to the Apostles through the office of the Mediator.

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

27–28

This then being the first refutation, the next after it is that which relates to the disciples. For not always in one way only, but also in a second and third, He solves their objections, being minded most abundantly to silence their shamelessness. Which sort of thing He did also with respect to the Sabbath, bringing forward David, the priests, the testimony that saith, "I will have mercy, and not sacrifice," the cause of the Sabbath, for which it was ordained; "for the Sabbath," saith He," was for man." This then He doth in the present case also: where after the first He proceeds to a second refutation, plainer than the former.

"For if I," saith He, "by Belezebub cast out devils, by whom do your sons cast them out?"

See here too His gentleness. For He said not, "my disciples," nor, "the apostles," but "your sons;" to the end that if indeed they were minded to return to the same nobleness with them, they might derive hence a powerful spring that way; but if they were uncandid, and continued in the same course, they might not thenceforth be able to allege any plea, though ever so shameless.

But what He saith is like this, "By whom do the apostles cast them out?" For in fact they were doing so already, because they had received authority from Him, and these men brought no charge against them; their quarrel not being with the acts, but with the person only. As then it was His will to show that their sayings arose only from their envy against Him, He brings forward the apostles; thus: If I so cast them out, much more those, who have received their authority from me. Nevertheless, no such thing have ye said to them. How then bring ye these charges against me, the author of their doings, while acquitting them of the accusations? This, however, will not free you from your punishment, rather it will condemn you the more. Therefore also He added, "They shall be your judges." For when persons from among you, and having been practised in these things, both believe me and obey, it is most clear that they will also condemn those who are against me both in deed and word.

"But if I cast out devils by the Spirit of God, then the Kingdom of God is come unto you."

What means "the Kingdom"? "My coming." See how again He conciliates and soothes them, and draws them to the knowledge of Himself, and signifies that they are warring with their own good, and contentious against their own salvation. "For whereas ye ought to rejoice," saith He, "and leap for joy, that One is come bestowing those great and unutterable blessings, hymned of old by the prophets, and that the time of your prosperity is at hand; ye do the contrary; so far from receiving the blessings, you do even speak ill of them, and frame accusations that have no real being."

Now Matthew indeed saith, "If I by the Spirit of God cast out"; but Luke, "If I by the finger of God cast out the devils:" implying that to cast out devils is a work of the greatest power, and not of any ordinary grace. And He means indeed that from these things they should infer and say, If this be so, then the Son of God is come. This, however, He saith not, but in a reserved way, and so as not to be galling to them, He darkly intimates it by saying, "Then the kingdom of God is Come unto you."

Seest thou exceeding wisdom? By the very things which they were blaming, He showed His presence shining forth.

Then, to conciliate them, He said not simply, "The Kingdom is come," but, "unto you," as though He had said, To you the good things are come; wherefore then feel displeased at your proper blessings? why war against your own salvation? This is that time, which the prophets long ago foretold: this, the sign of that advent which was celebrated by them, even these things being wrought by divine power. For the fact indeed, that they are wrought, yourselves know; but that they are wrought by divine power, the deeds themselves cry out. Yea, and it is impossible that Satan should be stronger now; rather he must of absolute necessity be weak. But it cannot be, that he who is weak should, as though he were strong, cast out the strong devil.

Now thus speaking He signified the power of charity, and the weakness of separation and contentiousness. Wherefore He was Himself also continually charging His disciples, on every occasion, concerning charity, and teaching them that the devil, to subvert it, leaves nothing undone.

Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 41

27–28

But if ye think, ye Scribes and Pharisees, that the dæmons depart out of the possessed in obedience to their Prince, that men may be imposed upon by a concerted fraud, what can ye say to the healing of diseases which the Lord also wrought? It is something more if ye assign to the dæmons even bodily infirmities, and the signs of spiritual virtues.

He alludes, as is His manner, under the name children of the Jews, either to the exorcists of that race, or to the Apostles who are by race of that nation. If He means the exorcists who by the invocation of God cast out dæmons, He thus constrains the Pharisees by a wise enquiry to confess that their work was of the Holy Spirit. If, He would say, the casting out of the dæmons by your children is imputed to God, and not to dæmons, why should the same work wrought by Me not have the same cause? Therefore shall they be your judges, not by authority but by comparison, they ascribe the casting out of the dæmons to God, you to the Prince of the dæmons. But if it is of the Apostles also that this is said, (and so we should rather take it,) then they shall be their judges, for they shall sit on twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

For the kingdom of God denotes Himself, of whom it is written in another place, The kingdom of God is among you; (Luke 17:21) and, There standeth one in the midst of you whom ye know not. (John 1:26) Or surely that kingdom which both John and the Lord Himself had preached above, Repent ye, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand. (Mat. 3:2 4:17.) There is also a third kingdom of the Holy Scripture which shall be taken from the Jews, and be given to a nation that brings forth the fruit thereof.

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

If they were exorcists casting out devils by invoking God’s name, he intimates by clever questioning that they should declare the work to be of the Holy Spirit. He goes on to say, “If the casting out of devils by your [the Pharisees’] children is attributed to God and not to devils, how come the same work does not have the same cause?” Therefore “they shall be your judges,” not by authority but by comparison. While they attribute to God the casting out of devils, you attribute it to Beelzebub the prince of devils. But it was said about the apostles (and this we should bear in mind), they will be the judges of those children, for they will sit on twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

Commentary on Matthew 2.12.27

(Verse 27) And if I cast out demons by Beelzebul, by whom do your sons cast them out? Therefore they will be your judges. He indicates the sons of Judaeans, either the exorcists of that nation according to custom, or the apostles generated from their lineage. If exorcists, who were casting out demons by invoking God, are constrained by wise questioning to confess that it is the work of the Holy Spirit. He says that if the expulsion of demons is attributed to God and not to demons in your sons, why should the same work and cause not apply to me? Therefore your judges will be, not by power, but by comparison: while they assign the expulsion of demons to God; you to Beelzebub, the prince of demons. But if it is said of the apostles, which we must understand more, they will be their judges: because they will sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel (Matthew 19 and Luke 22).

Commentary on Matthew

27–28

(Quæst. Ev. i. 5.) Whence the sense might be this, If I by Beelzebub vast out dæmons, then, according to your own opinion, the kingdom of God is come upon you, for the kingdom of the Devil, being thus divided against itself, cannot stand. Thus calling that the kingdom of God, in which the wicked are condemned, and are separated from the faithful, who are now doing penitence for their sins.

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

27–28

Or, because the Apostles well knew within their own conscience that they had learnt no evil art from Him.

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Let us suppose, He says, that I am such as you say. But by whom do your sons, that is, My disciples, cast them out? Surely they do not also cast them out by Beelzebub? But if they cast them out by divine power, how much more so do I? For they work miracles in My name. Therefore they will be to your condemnation, since you saw them, too, working miracles in My name, and still you slander Me.

Commentary on Matthew

27–28

(ap Anselm.) For the weakening of the kingdom of the Devil is the increase of the kingdom of God.

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

If I cast out devils by Beelzebub. Here the second reason is given. If I cast out, I do this either by the devil's power or by the power of the Holy Spirit; whichever of these it is, you should not slander me. First, he continues the first reason; secondly, the second (v. 28). He says, therefore, If I cast out devils by Beelzebub, by whom do your sons cast them out? Jerome explains this in two ways: In one way of exorcists, concerning whom it says in Acts (19:13) that certain exorcists cast out demons in the name of Jesus Christ. Hence if I cast out devils by Beelzebub, by whom do your sons cast them out? As if to say that their sons cast them out. Therefore, if you do not slander them, you should not slander me. Hence you are accepting persons. Therefore they shall be your judges. Because I cast them out by the power of God, they shall judge, just as below he says of the queen of the south that she will judge. Or it can be explained of the apostles. Your sons, i.e., the apostles. He calls them their sons and not disciples, so that they would be more predisposed toward them. Likewise to show that in belittling them, they attack themselves; because if your sons cast them out, you would do in like manner, if you prepared yourselves. Therefore, because they are aware that I do this by a power given to me and not by Beelzebub, they will be your judges, as it says below (19:28): "You will sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel."

Commentary on Matthew

Again, his ability “to cast out demons” in the Spirit was something which, as man, he had been made able to do, according to the divine economy. And if the work of the Spirit is the kingdom of God, we should in no way regard the Spirit as something added to the Godhead, as if brought in from the servile creation in order to prepare for the divine kingdom.

Fragment 72

(Verse 28.) But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you. In Luke, we read this passage as follows: But if it is by the finger of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you (Luke 11:20). This is the finger that the Magi confessed, who were making signs against Moses and Aaron, saying: This is the finger of God (Exodus 8:19). By this finger, the stone tablets were written on Mount Sinai (Deuteronomy 9). Therefore, if the hand and arm of God is the Son, and his finger is the Holy Spirit, then the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are of one substance: let the inequality of the members not scandalize you, for the unity of the body builds it.

Therefore, the kingdom of God has come upon you. It signifies either himself, about whom it is written in another place: The kingdom of God is within you (Luke 17:21). And: One stands among you, whom you do not know (John 26). Or certainly that kingdom which both John and the Lord himself preached: Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand (Matthew 3:2). There is also a third kingdom of Holy Scripture, which is taken away from the Jews and will be given to a nation producing its fruits (Matthew 21).

Commentary on Matthew

This means, if it is by divine power that I cast out demons, then I am the Son of God, and I have come for your sake, to do good to you. So, then, I have come unto you, and this is the kingdom of God. Why do you slander My coming which is for your sake?

Commentary on Matthew

But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you. As if to say: He is a fool who rejects what would turn out for his good; but this, namely, to cast out devils, redounds to your good. From this, therefore, you can gather that it is by the Holy Spirit, because the finger of God is the Holy Spirit, as the Son is the hand. Nor is there any invoking, but it is done solely from authority. Hence if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out devils... But why is the expulsion of devils attributed to the Holy Spirit? Because love and goodness are appropriated to him; therefore, to expel the devil befits no one so well as the person of the Holy Spirit. The kingdom of God has come upon you: (Lk 17:21): "The kingdom of God is within you." And you can know that it is done by Christ and this is to your benefit; therefore he says, upon you. Or another way: The kingdom of God, i.e., God's dominion over men: "For he must first reign until he has put all things under his feet" (1 Cor 15:25). Therefore if the demons are already beginning to be trod under foot, the kingdom and dominion of God has already arrived among you.

Commentary on Matthew

Having then uttered His second refutation, He adds also a third, thus saying:

"How can one enter into the strong man's house, and spoil his goods, except he first bind the strong man, and then spoil his goods?"

For that Satan cannot possibly cast out Satan is evident from what hath been said; but that neither in any other way is it possible to cast him out, except one first get the better of him, this too is acknowledged by all.

What then is established hereby? The former statement, with more abundant evidence. "Why, I am so far," saith He, "from using the devil as an ally, that I make war upon him, and bind him; and an infallible proof thereof is the plundering of his goods." See how the contrary is proved, of what they were attempting to establish. For whereas they wished to show, that not by His own power doth He cast out devils, He shows that not only the devils, but even their very chief leader is held by Him bound with all authority; and that over him, before them, did He prevail by His own power. And this is evident from the things that are done. For if he be the prince, and they subjects, how, except he were worsted, and made to bow down, could they have been spoiled?

And here His saying seems to me to be a prophecy likewise. For not only, I suppose, are the evil spirits the goods of the devil, but also the men that are doing his works. Therefore to declare that He doth not only cast out devils, but also will drive away all error from the world, and will put down his sorceries, and make all his arts useless, He said these things.

And He said not, He will take away, but "He will spoil," to express what is done with authority. But He calls him "strong," not because he is so by nature, God forbid, but declaring his former tyranny, which arose from our remissness.

Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 41

His house is this world, which is set in evil, not by the majesty of the Creator, but by the greatness of the sinner. The strong man is bound and chained in tartarus, bruised by the Lord's foot. Yet ought we not therefore to be careless; for here the conqueror Himself pronounces our adversary to be strong.

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

(Verse 29.) Or how can anyone enter the strong man's house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man? And then he will plunder his house. We should not be secure: Our adversary is strong, which is confirmed by the voice of the victor. His house is the world, which is situated in evil (1 John 5), not by the dignity of the Creator, but by the greatness of the transgressor. We were once his vessels. The strong man has been bound, and bound in Tartarus, and crushed by the foot of the Lord. And with the seats of the tyrant plundered, captivity has been taken captive.

Commentary on Matthew

Jesus here compares the earth with a house and human beings with vessels or possessions. Human beings have become possessions of demons and of the devil, having by evil means been brought under his authority. Thus it was impossible for the demons’ own possessions to be taken away unless the demons were first weakened and bound with chains.

Fragment 68

(ubi sup.) For he held us, that we should not by our own strength be able to free ourselves from him, but by the grace of God. By his goods, he means all the unbelievers. He has bound the strong man, in that He has taken away from him all power of hindering the faithful from following Christ, and gaining the kingdom of heaven.

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

He calls the devil strong, not as though he were so by his created nature but as signifying his tyranny over us, which he has obtained through our own indolence. The Son says, in effect, “I will despoil him, not by allowing him to have human beings as worshipers but by changing their belief so that they might come to acknowledge God. In that case, how then could he become my ally? For is he fighting against himself.”

Fragment 155

Therefore He has spoiled his house, in that them whom He foresaw should be His own, He set free from the snares of the Devil, and has joined to the Church. Or in that He has divided the whole world among His Apostles and their successors to be converted. By this plain parable therefore He shows that He does not join in a deceitful working with the dæmons as they falsely accused Him, but by the might of His divinity He frees men from the dæmons.

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

I do not, He says, keep demons as friends; just the opposite, I war against them and bind them who were strong men before My coming. For when Christ entered the house, that is, the world, He seized from the demons their goods, which are men.

Commentary on Matthew

Or how can one enter a strong man's house? Here is presented the third reason through which the Lord intends to refute the contentions of the Pharisees, and it is an argument taken from things that occur among men. For when someone is well defended in his own home, he cannot be ejected from it or his vessels plundered, unless a stronger man overcomes him. But Christ plunders the devil's vessels by casting him out from men in whom he exists as in his own property. Therefore Christ is stronger than he. And this reason he presents in those words. Strong man. This is the devil, who is called strong on account of his power: "No power can be compared to his" (Jb 41:24). And he is made stronger through consent, because one who consents gives him power over himself: "Every man will fight against his brother, city against city, and I will give over the Egyptians into the hand of cruel masters" (Is 41:24). The house is the world or the assemblage of sinners, not because he created the world, but because it obeys him by consenting; hence in John (12:31) he is called "the prince of this world." His vessels are men. Vessel is taken in two senses. A vessel of something is that which is filled with it, as a vessel of oil, because it is full of oil, or a vessel of water, because it is full of water; in this way some are vessels of the devil, because they are filled with the devil, either in regard to the body, as those obsessed by the devil; but in regard to the soul those whose hearts are in full accord with the devil's will, as is said of Judas. Sometimes vessels are any instruments destined for any purpose whatever; hence whoever affords the occasion of sin to others is called the devil's vessel. But no matter the sense in which it is taken, Christ destroyed the devil's vessels: "I disarmed the principalities and powers, and made a public example of them, triumphing over them in him" (Col 2:15). But this is not enough, unless he first binds the strong man. What is this binding? It occurs when the power to injure, which he has of himself, is restricted by God. Hence by the power of his own nature he can do many things, but by the power of God it is restricted, as a bound person is prevented from doing what he wants. Hence Psalm 149 (v. 8): "To bind their kings with fetters." Then indeed he may plunder his house, because when the devil is bound, the men he bound will be freed. "Even the captives of the mighty shall be taken, and the prey of the tyrant be rescued" (Is 49:25).

Commentary on Matthew

Wherein He shows how far He is from having borrowed any power from the Devil; teaching us how great the danger to think amiss of Him, not to be with Whom, is the same as to be against Him.

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

And rightly Jesus adds, “He who is not with me is against me. And he who does not gather with me scatters.” By this he meant that his work is one thing and the devil’s work another. For the devil is the enemy of human well being. It is proper for the devil to scatter to utter destruction and for Christ to gather to salvation. Hence it is clear that one who is against the Lord cannot be with the Lord. Therefore, although the Lord seems to be repudiating those Pharisees who, unwilling to gather with Christ, have remained the Lord’s enemies and adversaries, he speaks also of all heretics and schismatics. Drawing impious conclusions against the church or the Lord by way of unorthodox teachings or schismatic beliefs, they aim to tear asunder and ravage the incorrupt body of the church and the unity of peace and faith. They are oblivious to Solomon’s words: “He who splits a log is endangered by it.” Clearly those who cause separation in the church shall run the risk of eternal death.

Tractate on Matthew 50.2.25

"He that is not with me is against me, and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad."

Behold also a fourth refutation. For what is my desire? saith He. To bring men to God, to teach virtue, to proclaim the kingdom. What, that of the devil, and the evil spirits? The contrary to these. How then should he that gathers not with me, nor is at all with me, be likely to co-operate with me? And why do I say co-operate? Nay, on the contrary, his desire is rather to scatter abroad my goods. He then who is so far from cooperating that he even scatters abroad, how should he have exhited such unanimity with me, as with me to cast out the devils?

Now it is a natural surmise that He said this not of the devil only, but Himself also of Himself, as being for His part against the devil, and scattering abroad his goods. And how, one may say, is he that is not with me against me? By this very fact, of his not gathering. But if this be true, much more he that is against him. For if he that doth not co-operate is an enemy, much more he that wages war.

But all these things He saith, to indicate His enmity against the devil, how great and unspeakable it is. For tell me, if thou must go to war with any one, he that is not willing to fight on thy side, by this very fact is he not against thee? And if elsewhere He saith, "He that is not against you is for you," it is not contrary to this. For here He signified one actually against them, but there He points to one who in part is on their side: "For they cast out devils," it is said "in Thy name."

But to me He seems here to be hinting also at the Jews, setting them on the devil's side. For they too were against Him, and were scattering what He gathered. As to the fact that He was hinting at them also, He declared it by speaking thus,

"Therefore I say unto you, that all manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men."

Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 41

30–31

(Verses 30, 31.) Whoever is not with me is against me, and whoever does not gather with me scatters. Therefore I say to you: every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven to men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. Let no one think that this is said about heretics and schismatics (although it can be understood in that way from what is said in excess), but it refers to the consequences and context of the discourse to the devil: because the works of the Savior cannot be compared to the works of Beelzebub. He desires to hold captive the souls of men; the Lord desires to set them free. He preaches idols; this one preaches the knowledge of the one God. He draws towards vices; this one calls back to virtues. How, then, can they have concord, whose actions are divided (or different)?

Commentary on Matthew

But let none think that this is said of heretics and schismatics; though we may apply it besides to such; but it is shown by the context to refer to the Devil; in that the works of the Saviour cannot be compared with the works of Beelzebub. He seeks to hold men's souls in captivity, the Lord to set them free; he preaches idols, the Lord the knowledge of the true God; he draws men to sin, the Lord calls them back to virtues. How then can these have agreement together, whose works are so opposite?

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Therefore He has spoiled his house, in that them whom He foresaw should be His own, He set free from the snares of the Devil, and has joined to the Church. Or in that He has divided the whole world among His Apostles and their successors to be converted. By this plain parable therefore He shows that He does not join in a deceitful working with the dæmons as they falsely accused Him, but by the might of His divinity He frees men from the dæmons.

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

How, He says, could Beelzebub work with Me, when, on the contrary, he acts against Me? For I teach virtue, but he, evil. How then is he with Me? And I gather men unto salvation, but he scatters them. Christ also hints at the Pharisees, who, while He was teaching and bringing benefit to many, were dispersing the people so that they could not approach Him. He shows that in reality it is they who are demonic.

Commentary on Matthew

He who is not with me is against me. Here he presents the fourth reason, which gives vigor to all the other arguments. For someone could say: if you overcame by violence, the reasoning would hold; but you do not act by violence but by suffering. Therefore, that is not a sign that you have bound anyone. So he presents the fourth reason: Things that agree in some feature have a similar work; hence those who do similar works do not hinder one another. But I do works contrary to them. Therefore, he who is not with me is against me. First he presents the reason in general; secondly, he gives a specific example.

He says, therefore: he who is not with me... and the devil seems not to be with me, because he is contrary to my works: "What accord has Christ with Belial?" (2 Cor 6:15). That he is against him is obtained from Sirach (33:14): "Life is the opposite of death, and the sinner is the opposite of the godly"; so the opposite of man is the devil, the father of sin. But in what is he the opposite? He who does not gather with me scatters. For the Lord gathers: "He will gather the lambs in his arms, he will carry them in his bosom, and gently lead those that are young" (Is 40:11). But the devil scatters: "The wolf snatches and scatters the sheep" (Jn 10:12). But in Luke (9:50) it says: "He that is not against you is for you." But this seems contrary to what has been said. Chrysostom says that both statements are particular; hence they are not to be taken universally but in particular cases that whoever does not have my covenant is against me. Hence in Luke they are called disciples, but here devils. Or we can say that it is one way with God and another way with men. Clearly, God is the natural end toward which all things tend; therefore, whoever is not with God must be apart from him. Hence 1 Kings (18:21): "How long will you go limping with two different opinions. If the Lord is God, follow him." But it is not the same with man, because whoever is not for me is not on that account against me.

Commentary on Matthew

This happens in the history of every Christian movement, beginning with the ministry of Christ Himself. At first it is welcome to all who have no special reason for opposing it: at this stage he who is not against it is for it. What men notice is its difference from those aspects of the world which they already dislike. But later on, as the real meaning of the Christian claim becomes apparent, its demand for total surrender, the sheer chasm between Nature and Supernature, men are increasingly "offended." Dislike, terror, and finally hatred succeed: none who will not give it what it asks (and it asks all) can endure it: all who are not with it are against it.

The Decline of Religion, from God in the Dock

31–32

He condemns by a most rigorous sentence this opinion of the Pharisees, and of such as thought with them, promising pardon for all sins, but refusing it to blasphemy against the Spirit; Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men.

And what is so beyond all pardon as to deny that in Christ which is of God, and to take away the substance of the Father's Spirit which is in Him, seeing that He performs every work in the Spirit of God, and in Him God is reconciling the world unto Himself.

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

He condemns in no uncertain terms the thinking of the Pharisees and their intellectual bedfellows. He promises forgiveness of all sins and denies pardon for blasphemy against the Spirit. For although other words and deeds may be treated with liberal forgiveness, there is no mercy if God is denied in Christ. For whatever sins one may commit, he extends the benevolence of his repeated admonition. All kinds of sins are to be forgiven, but blasphemy against the Holy Spirit shall not be forgiven. For what is so beyond the pale of forgiveness as to deny Christ since he is of God? To forsake Christ is to forsake the nature of the Spirit of the Father residing in him. For Jesus fulfills every work in the Spirit of God, is himself the kingdom of heaven, and in him God is reconciling the world to himself. Therefore any blasphemy aimed at Christ is aimed at God, because God is in Christ and Christ is in God.

Commentary on Matthew 12.17

31–32

Thus having defended Himself, and refuted their objection, and proved the vanity of their shameless dealings, He proceeds to alarm them. For this too is no small part of advice and correction, not only to plead and persuade, but to threaten also; which He doth in many passages, when making laws and giving counsel.

And though the saying seem to have much obscurity, yet if we attend, its solution will prove easy.

First then it were well to listen to the very words: "All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men; but the blasphemy of the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto them. And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven him; but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to Come."

What now is it that He affirms? Many things have ye spoken against me; that I am a deceiver, an adversary of God. These things I forgive you on your repentance, and exact no penalty of you; but blasphemy against the Spirit shall not be forgiven, no, not to those who repent. And how can this be right? For even this was forgiven upon repentance. Many at least of those who said these words believed afterward, and all was forgiven them. What is it then that He saith? That this sin is above all things unpardonable. Why so? Because Himself indeed they knew not, who He might be, but of the Spirit they received ample experience. For the prophets also by the Spirit said whatever they said; and indeed all in the Old Testament had a very high notion of Him.

What He saith, then, is this: Be it so: ye are offended at me, because of the flesh with which I am encompassed: can ye say of the Spirit also, We know it not? And therefore is your blasphemy unpardonable, and both here and hereafter shall ye suffer punishment. For many indeed have been punished here only (as he who had committed fornication, as they who partook unworthily of the mysteries, amongst the Corinthians); but ye, both here and hereafter.

Now as to your blasphemies against me, before the cross, I forgive them: and the daring crime too of the cross itself; neither shall ye be condemned for your unbelief alone. (For neither had they, that believed before the cross, perfect faith. And on many occasions He even charges them to make Him known to no man before the Passion; and on the cross He said that this sin was forgiven them.) But as to your words touching the Spirit, they will have no excuse. For in proof that He is speaking of what was said of Him before the crucifixion, He added, "Whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven him; but whosoever shall speak against the Holy Ghost," there is no more forgiveness. Wherefore? Because this is known to you; and the truths are notorious which you harden yourselves against. For though ye say that ye know not me; yet of this surely ye are not ignorant, that to cast out devils, and to do cures, is a work of the Holy Ghost. It is not then I only whom ye are insulting, but the Holy Ghost also. Wherefore your punishment can be averted by no prayers, neither here nor there.

For so of men, some are punished both here, and there, some here only, some there only, others neither here nor there. Here and there, as these very men (for both here did they pay a penalty, when they suffered those incurable ills at the taking of their city, and there shall they undergo a very grievous one), as the inhabitants of Sodom; as many others. There only, as the rich man who endured the flames, and had not at his command so much as a drop of water. Here, as he that had committed fornication amongst the Corinthians. Neither here nor there, as the apostles, as the prophets, as the blessed Job; for their sufferings were not surely in the way of punishment, but as contests and wrestlings.

Let us labor, therefore, to be of the same part with these: or if not with these, at least with them that wash away their sins here. For fearful indeed is that other judgment, and inexorable the vengeance, and incurable the punishment.

Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 41

31–32

Or the passage may be thus understood; Whoso speaks a word against the Son of Man, as stumbling at My flesh, and thinking of Me as no more than man, such opinion and blasphemy though it is not free from the sin of heresy, yet finds pardon because of the little worth of the body. But whoso plainly perceiving the works of God, and being unable to deny the power of God, speaks falsely against them prompted by jealousy, and calls Christ who is the Word of God, and the works of the Holy Ghost, Beelzebub, to him it shall not be forgiven, neither in this world, nor in the world to come.

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

31–32

(Serm. 71. 13.) For what difference does it make to the purpose, whether it be said, The spirit of blasphemy shall not be forgiven, or, Whose shall blaspheme against the Holy Spirit it shall not be forgiven him. (Luke 12:10) as Luke speaks; except that the same sense is expressed more clearly in the one place than in the other, the one Evangelist not overthrowing but explaining the other? The spirit of blasphemy it is said shortly, not expressing what spirit; to make which clear it is added, And whoso shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him. After having said the same of all manner of blasphemy, He would in a more particular way speak of that blasphemy which is against the Son of Man, and which in the Gospel according to John He shows to be very heavy, where He says concerning the Holy Ghost, He shall convince the world of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment; of sin, because they believe not on me. That then which here follows, He who shall speak a word against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, nor in that which is to come, is not said because the Holy Spirit is in the Trinity greater than the Son, which no heretic ever affirmed.

(ubi sup.) But if this were said in such manner, then every other kind of blasphemy is omitted, and that only which is spoken against the Son of Man, as when He is pronounced to be mere man, is to be forgiven. That then that is said, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men, without doubt blasphemy spoken against the Father is included in its largeness; though here again that alone is declared irremissible which is spoken against the Holy Ghost. What then, hath the Father also taken upon Him the form of a servant, that the Holy Ghost is thus as it were spoken of as greater? For who could not be convicted of having spoken a word against the Holy Spirit, before He become a Christian or a Catholic? First, the Pagans themselves when they say that Christ wrought miracles by magic arts, are they not like those who said that He cast out dæmons by the Prince of the dæmons? Likewise the Jews and all such heretics as confess the Holy Spirit, but deny that He is in the body of Christ, which is the Church Catholic, are like the Pharisees, who denied that the Holy Spirit was in Christ. Some heretics even contend that the Holy Spirit Himself is either a creature, as the Arians, Eunomians, and Macedonians, or deny Him at least in such sort that they may deny the Trinity in the Godhead; others assert that the Father alone is God, and the same is sometimes spoken of as the Son, sometimes as the Holy Spirit, as the Sabellians. The Photinians also say, that the Father only is God, and that the Son is nothing more than a man, and deny altogether that there is any third Person, the Holy Spirit. It is clear then that the Holy Spirit is blasphemed, both by Pagans, Jews, and heretics. Are all such then to be left out, and looked upon as having no hope? For if the word they have spoken against the Holy Spirit is not forgiven them, then in vain is the promise made to them, that in Baptism or in the Church, they should receive the forgiveness of their sins. For it is not said, 'It shall not be forgiven him in Baptism;' but, Neither in this world, nor in the world to come; and so they alone are to be supposed clear of the guilt of this most heavy sin who have been Catholics from their infancy. Some again think that they only sin against the Holy Ghost, who having been washed in the laver of regeneration in the Church, do afterwards, as though ungrateful for such a gift of the Saviour, plunge themselves into some deadly sin, such as adultery, murder, or quitting the Christian name, or the Church Catholic. But whence this meaning can be proved, I know not; since place for penitence of sins however great was never denied in the Church, and even heretics are exhorted to embrace it by the Apostle. If God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth. (2 Tim. 2:25.) Lastly, the Lord says not, 'If any Catholic believer,' but, Whoso shall speak a word, that is, whosoever, it shall not be forgiven him neither in this world, nor in the world to come.

(Serm. in Mont. 1.22.) Otherwise, The Apostle John says, There is a sin unto death; I do not say that he shall pray for it. This sin of the brother unto death I judge to be, when any one having come to the knowledge of God, through the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, opposes Himself against the brotherhood, or is roused by the fury of jealousy against that grace by which he was reconciled to God. (1 John 5:16) The stain of this sin is so great, that it may not submit to the humility of prayer, even when the sinful conscience is driven to acknowledge and proclaim its own sin. Which state of mind because of the greatness of their sin we must suppose some may be brought to; and this perhaps may be to sin against the Holy Ghost, that is through malice and jealousy to assail brotherly charity after having received the grace of the Holy Spirit; and this sin the Lord declares shall be forgiven neither in this world, nor in that to come. Whence it may be enquired whether the Jews sinned this sin against the Holy Ghost when they said that the Lord cast out dæmons by Beelzebub the Prince of the dæmons. Are we to suppose this spoken of our Lord Himself, because He said in another place, If they have called the master of the house Beelzebub, how much more they of his household? (Mat. 10:24) Seeing they thus spoke out of jealousy, ungrateful for so great present benefits, are they, though not Christians, to be supposed by the very greatness of that jealousy to have sinned the sin against the Holy Spirit? This cannot be gathered from the Lord's words. Yet He may seem to have warned them that they should come to grace, and that after that grace received they should not sin as they now sinned. For now their evil word had been spoken against the Son of Man, but it might be forgiven them, if they should be converted, and believe on Him. But if after they had received the Holy Spirit, they should be jealous against the brotherhood, and should fight against that grace which they had received, it should not be forgiven them neither in this world, nor in the world to come. For if He had there condemned them in such sort that no hope remained for them, He would not have added au admonition, Either make the tree good, &c.

(Retract. i. 19.) But I do not affirm this for certain, by saying that I think thus; yet thus much might have been added; If he should close this life in this impious hardness of heart, yet since we may not utterly despair of any however evil, so long as he is in this life, so neither is it unreasonable to pray for him of whom we do not despair.

(Serm. 71. 8.) Yet is this enquiry very mysterious. Let us then seek the light of exposition from the Lord. I say unto you, beloved, that in all Holy Scripture there is not perhaps so great or so difficult a question as this. First then I request you to note that the Lord said not, Every blasphemy against the Spirit shall not be forgiven, nor, Whoso shall speak any word against—but, Whoso shall speak the word. Wherefore it is not necessary to think that every blasphemy and every word spoken against the Holy Spirit shall be without pardon; it is only necessary that there be some word which if spoken against the Holy Spirit shall be without pardon. For such is the manner of Scripture, that when any thing is so declared in it as that it is not declared whether it is said of the whole, or a part, it is not necessary that because it can apply to the whole, it therefore is not to be understood of the part. As when the Lord said to the Jews, If I had not come and spoken unto them, they had not had sin, (John 15:22) this does not mean that the Jews would have been altogether without sin, but that there was a sin they would not have had, if Christ had not come. What then is this manner of speaking against the Holy Ghost, comes now to be explained. Now in the Father is represented to us the Author of all things, in the Son birth, in the Holy Spirit community of the Father and the Son. What then is common to the Father and the Son, through that they would have us have communion among ourselves and with them; The love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which he hath given us, (Rom. 5:5) and because by our sins we were alienated, from the possession of true goods, Charity shall cover the multitude of sins. (1 Pet. 4:8) And for that Christ forgives sins through the Holy Spirit, hence may be understood how, when He said to his disciples, Receive ye the Holy Spirit, (John 20:22) He subjoined straight, Whosesoever sins ye forgive, they shall be forgiven them. The first benefit therefore of them that believe is forgiveness of sins in the Holy Spirit. Against this gift of free grace the impenitent heart speaks; impenitence itself therefore is the blasphemy against the Spirit which shall not be forgiven, neither in this world, nor in that to come. For indeed he speaks the evil word against the Holy Spirit either in his thought, or with his tongue, who by his hard and impenitent heart treasures up for himself wrath against the day of wrath. Such impenitence truly has no forgiveness, neither in this world nor in the world to come, for penitence obtains forgiveness in this world which shall hold in the world to come. But that impenitence as long as any lives in the flesh may not be judged, for we must despair of none so long as the patience of God leads to repentance. For what if those whom you discover in any manner of sin, and condemn as most desperate, should before they close this life betake themselves to penitence, and find true life in the world to come? But this kind of blasphemy though it be long, and comprised in many words, yet the Scripture is wont to speak of many words as one word. It was more than a single word which the Lord spoke with the prophet, and yet we read, The word which came unto this or that prophet. Here perhaps some may enquire whether the Holy Spirit only forgives sins, or the Father and the Son likewise. We answer the Father and the Son likewise; for the Son Himself saith of the Father, Your Father shall forgive you your sins, (Mat. 6:14) and He saith of Himself, The Son of Man hath power on earth to forgive sins. (Mat. 9:6) Why then is that impenitence which is never forgiven, spoken of as blasphemy against the Holy Spirit only? Forasmuch as he who falls under this sin of impenitence seems to resist the gift of the Holy Spirit, because in that gift is conveyed remission of sin. But sins, because they are not remitted out of the Church, must be remitted in that Spirit by which the Church is gathered into one. Thus this remission of sins which is given by the whole Trinity is said to be the proper office of the Holy Spirit alone, for it is He, The Spirit of adoption, in which we cry, Abba Father, (Rom. 8:15) so that to Him we may pray, Forgive us our sins; And hereby we know, speaks John, that Christ abideth in us, by the Holy Spirit which He hath given unto us. (1 John 4:13) For to Him belongs that bond by which we are made one body of the only-begotten Son of God; for the Holy Spirit Himself is in a manner the bond of the Father and the Son. Whosoever then shall be found guilty of impenitence against the Holy Spirit, in whom the Church is gathered together in unity and one bond of communion, it is never remitted to him.

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

31–32

But it should be known that they are not forgiven to all men universally, but to such only as have performed due penitence for their guiltinesses. So by these words is overthrown the error of Novatian, who said that the faithful could not rise by penitence after a fall, nor merit pardon of their sins, especially they who in persecution deniedb.

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Therefore, no matter what they say in blasphemy—even against the Son of Man when they were scandalized under the economy of law according to the flesh, as I pointed out—our Lord makes it clear they will be forgiven on the excuse of their ignorance of the mystery, his self-abasement and humility shown as a man. That is why Jesus said, “It will be forgiven humans” and did not say “you.” What he was saying in effect was “It is to those who do not know the depth of my dispensation that I offer forgiveness.” But in their blasphemy they heaped insults against the divine signs he manifested and the many miracles he worked through the Spirit who was in him and who is of the same essence (ousia). They exclaimed, “He casts out demons by the prince of demons.” Those insults—since they smack of blasphemy against the Holy Spirit and (because of the facts themselves) what is proper of God, with no room for excuse—Christ says they shall not be forgiven. They could not use ignorance as a pretext for their defense.

Cathedral Sermons, Homily 98.32

31–32

(Dial. iv. 39.) Hence we may gather that there are some sins that are remitted in this world, and some in the world to come; for what is denied of one sin, must be supposed to be admitted of others. And this may be believed in the case of trifling faults; such as much idle discourse, immoderate laughter, or the sin of carefulness in our worldly affairs, which indeed can hardly be managed without sin even by one who knows how he ought to avoid sin; or sins through ignorance (if they be lesser sins) which burden us even after death, if they have not been remitted to us while yet in this life. But it should be known that none will there obtain any purgation even of the least sin, but he who by good actions has merited the same in this life.

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

31–32

He is saying here that every other sin, such as fornication or theft, has some defense, however slight. For we take refuge in human weakness and we may be forgiven. But when one sees miracles performed by the Spirit and slanders them as being the work of a demon, what defense will he have? For it is clear that such a slanderer knows that these things are of the Holy Spirit, yet he speaks evil of his own will. How then can such a man be forgiven? When the Jews saw the Lord eating and drinking, associating with publicans and harlots, and doing all the other things He did as the Son of Man, then they slandered Him as a glutton and drunkard; yet for this they deserve forgiveness, and not even repentance will be required. For they were understandably scandalized. But when they saw Him working miracles and were slandering and blaspheming the Holy Spirit, saying that it was something demonic, how will this sin be forgiven them, unless they repent? So, then, know that he who blasphemes the Son of Man, seeing Him living as a man, and says that He is a friend of harlots, a glutton, and a drunkard because of those things which Christ does, such a man will not have to give an answer for this, even if he does not repent. For he is forgiven, as he did not realize that this was God concealed. But he who blasphemes the Holy Spirit, that is, the spiritual deeds of Christ, and calls them demonic, unless he repents, he will not be forgiven. For he does not have a reasonable excuse to slander, as does the man who sees Christ with harlots and publicans and then slanders. He will not be forgiven either here or there, but both here and there he will be punished. For many are punished here, but there, not at all, such as the poor man, Lazarus; while others are punished both here and there, as the Sodomites and those who blaspheme the Holy Spirit. But some, like the apostles and the Forerunner, are punished neither here nor there. For though they who are persecuted appear to suffer punishment, these are not punishments for sins, but rather trials and crowns.

Commentary on Matthew

31–32

(ap. Anselm. vid. infra in cap. 25. 46.) This passage destroys that heresy of Origen, who asserted that after many ages all sinners should obtain pardon; for it is here said, this shall not be forgiven either in this world, or in the world to come.

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

31–32

Therefore I tell you that every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men... After refuting their claim, he inveighs against them: first, for the gravity of their sin; secondly, their evil intention (v. 33); thirdly, the future judgment (v. 36).

In regard to the first he does two things: first, he begins with several general statements; secondly, he explains (v. 32b).

He says, therefore: it has come to pass in the manner you claim; therefore I tell you. And he makes two statements. The first concerns the forgiveness of sin in general. I say that every sin, namely, of deed, and blasphemy, namely, of word, will be forgiven men, namely, if they repent: "He forgives all your iniquities, and heals all your infirmities" (Ps 103:3); "Blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered" (Ps 32:1). And in this is refuted the opinion of Novatian, who said that not all sins are forgivable; but here it is stated that every sin is forgivable. Secondly, he mentions a special one, which is not forgiven: but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven, i.e., the will to blaspheme, namely, when one blasphemes from certain malice. And these are stated as a general rule.

Then he explains the first statement by the second. It has been said that every sin... That this is true I show by the fact that blasphemy against the Son can be forgiven. Hence whoever says a word against the Son of man will be forgiven, namely, if he repents. But whoever says a word against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come. And as Augustine says, these words are so difficult that there are no stronger words in the gospel. Therefore it should be noted that the manner of expounding is threefold. Some expound according to the letter, because they saw him working miracles and performing the works of the Holy Spirit, and said that he had an unclean spirit; therefore, they blasphemed against the Holy Spirit. And there are two explanations of this. Some say that both should be referred to the person of the Son. But there are two natures in the Son, human and divine, and according to the divine he is both spirit and holy. Hence the Son is called the Holy Spirit, not in the sense that it is taken under the aspect of one name. This is the way Hilary explains it. And there is another sense: whoever says a word against the Son, and against the human nature has an excuse, if he is moved by weakness; but whoever says anything against the divine has no excuse.

Others expound it of the Holy Spirit in as much as he is the third person in the Trinity. Hence whoever says anything against the Son of man, i.e., the human nature, will be forgiven; but anyone who speaks against the Holy Spirit working does not obtain pardon. This seems to be the full explanation and what the text says. But Augustine objects in the following way: It is obvious that all pagans blaspheme, because they do not believe that the Holy Spirit is in the Church. Again, there are many heretics, but the way to salvation is not closed to them. Furthermore, there are many Jews... But someone could say: these statements do not apply until one has accepted the faith. But if that is the case, is one to be denied forgiveness, if he repents? However, he does not say "any Christian" but "whoever". How then, should it be solved?

Augustine gives two solutions: one is found in his book on the Lord's Sermon on the Mount, and he retracted it later. The other is in the book On the Words of the Lord. Hence it is necessary to understand that a sin against the Holy Spirit is not called blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, but is taken from the way one sins. To the Holy Spirit is attributed goodness, charity and love; to goodness malice responds, to charity envy. Therefore, if anyone knows the truth and detracts from it, he sins against the Holy Spirit; likewise, if one sees holy works in someone and detracts from them through envy. For envy of holiness, not of the person, is an unforgivable sin, not because it is impossible to be forgiven, but because the deformity is such that from divine justice it comes about that one does not repent. Hence those who said that he cast out devils by Beelzebub did not sin against the Holy Spirit, as Augustine claims, because they had not reached that depth of malice. But he began to say this, not because they had done it but in order that those who had begun might be warned not to reach this state.

Augustine repudiates this explanation and retracts it, because there would exist a state for which no prayer could be said; which is not true of anyone in this life.

Therefore he explains it another way in the book On the Words of the Lord, and it is this: Note that he did not say "whoever has said a word of blasphemy," but simply a "word". But a thing put indefinitely that way is not taken universally but sometimes particularly, as John (15:22): "If I had not come and spoken to them, they would not have sin"; not universally, but they would have the sin of unbelief: similarly, whoever has said a word; not just any word, but a word such that, if it is spoken, it is unforgivable. But what that is, Augustine says. The Holy Spirit is charity, through which the members of the Church are united to Christ, the Head, and every sin is forgiven by the Holy Spirit. But although the entire Trinity forgives, yet it is appropriated to the Holy Spirit on account of love. Therefore, whoever has an unrepentant heart speaks against the Holy Spirit. Hence impenitence is opposed to the charity of the Holy Spirit. Consequently, not anyone who says just any word, but that special word, namely, of impenitence, is unforgivable. And he says "word" and not "words", because the custom in Scripture is to call many words one word. Hence in Isaiah the Lord often says, "You will speak my word," although he said many words to him. Hence there is no conflict with what was stated above: therefore, I tell you, every sin and blasphemy..., because whoever says a word against the Holy Spirit blasphemes. Hence a certain teacher, when asked what would be a sin against the Holy Spirit, said: Impenitence stores up wrath for itself.

But why is it that it will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come? Are there any sins that will be forgiven in the age to come? Augustine says not. Therefore, it does not say that some sins are forgiven in the present and some in future, but that sins are so forgiven here, that the forgiveness is valid in the future. Or another way: some sins, namely, mortal, are forgiven in the present age, but others, namely, venial, in the age to come; so if someone dies in venial sin, it is clear that they can be forgiven. Hence there will be some mercy in the age to come, because then he will still be on the way. Chrysostom's explanation is quite clear and says that here he is speaking of two kinds of blasphemy, namely, against the Son of man and the Holy Spirit. They blasphemed the Son of man, because they said that he was a wine-bibber. Their blasphemy was also against the Holy Spirit, because they said that he cast out devils by a devil-spirit. For the first they had an excuse, because they did not know; but they had no excuse for what they said against the Holy Spirit, because they could not verify it by the Scriptures; therefore, they will not be forgiven. But why neither in this age nor in the age to come? This is said, because some sins are punished in this age, some in the other, some both here and there. Some sins are punished only in this age, as in the case of penitents. Some only in the age to come, as those of whom it says in Job (2:13): "They spend their days in prosperity, and in a moment they go down into hell." The one punished here and in the age to come is the sin against the Holy Spirit; hence it will be forgiven neither in this age nor in the age to come, not because there might be forgiveness in the age to come, but because there will be punishment. Hence the meaning is that it will not be forgiven without punishment by suffering in this age and in the age to come. Thus do the saints speak about that sin.

It should be noted that the Master [Peter Lombard] in the Sentences, dist. 43, book 2, art. 3, makes a distinction and assigns six species of sin against the Holy Spirit: despair, presumption, impenitence, obstinacy, attack upon the known truth, and envy of a brother's grace. Hence those are said to sin against the Holy Spirit who sin against qualities appropriated to the Holy Spirit. To the Father is appropriated power, to the Son wisdom, to the Holy Spirit goodness. Therefore, one who sins from weakness is said to sin against the Father; from ignorance against the Son; from malice against the Holy Spirit. But it should be pointed out that one sins from malice, when he sins voluntarily, which is from certain malice; and this is two ways: either because he has an inclination to sin, or because he does not. For when a person commits many sins, a habit of sinning is left in him, and so he sins from choice. Again, someone sins because that by which he was kept from sin is removed. But he is kept from sin by the hope of eternal life; hence a person who does not hope in eternal life sins from certain malice: "Despairing, they have given themselves to licentiousness" (Eph 4:19). Hence a person who sins from inclination sins against the Holy Spirit, namely, from the fact that what restrains from sin has departed. But this happens in six ways. For in God are mercy and justice. From scorning mercy arises despair; from scorning justice, presumption. Again on the part of turning away from God, because one turns to a fragile good, obstinacy comes. Again on the part of turning away from God, because one does not propose to return to God, impenitence results. Then on the part of the remedy, namely, of hope and charity, there come attack on the known truth and envy of brotherly love. These are sins against the Holy Spirit. Therefore, if there is actual impenitence, it is not forgiven, not because it is not forgiven at all, but because it is not easily forgiven; for it lacks the disposition to be forgiven, but only by God's grace: just as if a person has a fever, say, tertian, he has the capacity to be cured; but if he has emitreteum he does not have the resources to be cured, because he is not cured except by divine help.

Commentary on Matthew

Moreover, if the crime of Hymenaeus and Alexander-blasphemy, to wit-is irremissible in this and in the future. age, of course the apostle would not, in opposition to the determinate decision of the Lord, have given to Satan, under a hope of pardon, men already sunken from the faith into blasphemy; whence, too, he pronounced them "shipwrecked with regard to faith," having no longer the solace of the ship, the Church.

On Modesty

(Verse 32.) And whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man, it will be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven him, neither in this age nor in the age to come. And how is it that some of our bishops and priests, after blaspheming against the Holy Spirit, are reinstated in their positions, when the Savior says that all sins and blasphemies will be forgiven to men, but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in the present time or in the future? Unless perhaps we take that example from the evangelist Mark, who expressed the causes of such anger more clearly, saying: 'Because they were saying, He has an unclean spirit.' Therefore, whoever attributes the works of the Savior to Beelzebub, the prince of demons, and says that the Son of God has an unclean spirit, to this person blasphemy will never be forgiven. Or perhaps this passage should be understood as follows: Whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man, being scandalized by my flesh and considering me only human, that I am the son of a carpenter and have brothers named James, Joseph, and Judas; and that I am a glutton and a drunkard, such an opinion and blasphemy, although it is not without fault of error, nevertheless will receive forgiveness on account of the lowliness of the body. But those who clearly understand the works of God, since they cannot deny the power, driven by the same envy, they slander; and they say that Christ, the Word of God, and the works of the Holy Spirit are Beelzebub: these will not be forgiven, neither in this age, nor in the age to come.

Commentary on Matthew

Against this unmerited gift, against this free grace of God, the impenitent heart may continue to murmur. So it is unrepentance that is a blasphemy against the Spirit. It is not forgiven either in this world or in the next. Think of a person whose sins are entirely forgiven in faithful baptism and whom the church has welcomed. This is the very church commissioned to remit sin, in which whatever sins it remits are promised to be truly remitted. You are speaking a very evil, utterly graceless word against the Holy Spirit, you are speaking it in thought or out loud, if when the patience of God is beckoning you to repentance, you harden your impenitent heart. By doing so you store up wrath for yourself on the day of wrath and of the revelation of the just judgment of God, who will render to us all according to our works. This is the impenitence that is called both by the name of blasphemy and speaking against the Holy Spirit, which will never be forgiven. This is the flagrant impenitence against which both the herald and the Judge cried out when they proclaimed: “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is near.” It is the same impenitence against which the Lord opened his mouth to preach the gospel. He preached against it when he foretold that the gospel itself was to be preached in the whole world; when he said to the disciples after rising from the dead that it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise again from the dead on the third day; and for repentance and the forgiveness of sins to be preached in his name throughout all nations, beginning from Jerusalem. Yes, this refusal to repent has absolutely no forgiveness, neither in this age nor in the age to come, because repentance obtains forgiveness in this world in preparation for the next.

Sermon 71.12.20

The man who remains an unbeliever for such reasons is not in a state of honest error. He is in a state of dishonest error, and that dishonesty will spread through all his thoughts and actions: a certain shiftiness, a vague worry in the background, a blunting of his whole mental edge, will result. He has lost his intellectual virginity. Honest rejection of Christ, however mistaken, will be forgiven and healed—"Whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him." But to evade the Son of man, to look the other way, to pretend you haven't noticed, to become suddenly absorbed in something on the other side of the street, to leave the receiver off the telephone because it might be He who was ringing up, to leave unopened certain letters in a strange handwriting because they might be from Him—this is a different matter. You may not be certain yet whether you ought to be a Christian; but you do know you ought to be a man, not an ostrich, hiding its head in the sand.

MAN OR RABBIT?, from God in the Dock

Though spoken in the present, Jesus’ words would be borne out in the future. For in the present he refutes the Jews. They could see that the works of Christ were beyond human power, but they were unwilling to declare them as works of God. In saying this Jesus anticipates the future of numerous perversions of faith, especially of those who would divest the Lord of the dignity and union with the Father’s nature and so plunge into heresy. They then wander aimlessly in the arena between those who act with the excuse of ignorance and those who live in the knowledge of truth.…Through a tree’s inherent vitality, fruitfulness abounds. Therefore either the tree must be made good with good fruit or made bad with bad fruit, because by its fruit the tree is known. The meaning is not that a bad tree, according to the nature of trees, can constitute what is good or be good in its branches if it is bad. Rather, it is that Christ must either be left behind as useless or held onto as good because of the usefulness of good fruit.

Commentary on Matthew 12.18

Thus did He at that present refute the Jews, who seeing Christ's works to be of power more than human, would notwithstanding not allow the hand of God. And at the same time He convicts all future errors of the faith, such as that of those who taking away from the Lord His divinity, and communion of the Father's substance, have fallen into divers heresies; having their habitation neither under the plea of ignorance as the Gentiles, nor yet within the knowledge of the truth. He figures Himself as a tree set in the body, seeing that through the inward fruitfulness of His power sprung forth abundant richness of fruit. Therefore either must be made a good tree with good fruits, or an evil tree with evil fruits; not that a good tree is to be made a bad tree, or the reverse; but that in this metaphor we may understand that Christ is either to be left in fruitlessness, or to be retained in the fruitfulness of good works. But to hold one's self neuter, to attribute some things to Christ, but to deny Him those things that are highest, to worship Him as God, and yet to deny Him a common substance with the Father, is blasphemy against the Spirit. In admiration of His so great works you dare not take away the name of God, yet through malevolence of soul you debase His high nature by denying His participation of the Father's substance.

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Again in another way He shames them, and is not content with His former refutations. But this He doth, not freeing Himself from accusations, (for what went before was quite enough), but as wishing to amend them.

Now His meaning is like this: none of you hath either found fault about the persons healed, as not being healed; nor hath said, that it is an evil thing to deliver one from a devil. For though they had been ever so shameless, they could not have said this.

Since therefore they brought no charge against the works, but were defaming the Doer of them, He signifies that this accusation is against both the common modes of reasoning, and the congruity of the circumstances. A thing of aggravated shamelessness, not only to interpret maliciously, but also to make up such charges as are contrary to men's common notions.

And see how free He is from contentiousness. For He said not, "Make the tree good, forasmuch as the fruit also is good;" but, most entirely stopping their mouths, and exhibiting His own considerateness, and their insolence, He saith, Even if ye are minded to find fault with my works, I forbid it not at all, only bring not inconsistent and contradictory charges. For thus were they sure to be most clearly detected, persisting against what was too palpable. Wherefore to no purpose is your maliciousness, saith He, and your self-contradictory statements. Because in truth the distinction of the tree is shown by the fruit, not the fruit by the tree; but ye do the contrary. For what if the tree be the origin of the fruit; yet it is the fruit that makes the tree to be known. And it were consistent, either in blaming us to find fault with our works too, or praising these, to set us who do them free from these charges. But now ye do the contrary; for having no fault to find with the works, which is the fruit, ye pass the opposite judgment upon the tree, calling me a demoniac; which is utter insanity.

Yea, and what He had said before, this He establishes now also; that a good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, nor again can the converse be. So that their charges were against all consistency and nature.

Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 42

(Verse 33.) Either make the tree good and its fruit good, or make the tree bad and its fruit bad. For the tree is known by its fruit. It constrains them with an unassailable argument, which the Greeks call ἄφυκτον and we can call inevitable: it concludes from questions asked here and there, and presses with both horns. If, he says, the devil is evil, he cannot do good works. But if the works you see are good, it follows that the one who does them is not the devil. For it is not possible for good to arise from evil, or for evil to arise from good. But as follows:

Commentary on Matthew

Thus He holds them in a syllogism which the Greeks call 'Aphycton,' the unavoidable; which shuts in the person questioned on both sides, and presses him with either horn. If, He saith, the Devil be evil, he cannot do good works; so that if the works you see be good, it follows that the Devil was not the agent thereof. For it cannot be that good should come of evil, or evil of good.

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

When he says, "Make the tree good and its fruit good," this is not a friendly admonition but a clear command to be obeyed. And when Jesus says, "Make the tree bad and its fruit bad," he does not command you to do so, but he warns you to guard against it. He is referring to those who think they are able, though they are bad, to speak good things or to do good works. This the Lord Jesus says they cannot do. For a person must first be changed in order for his works to be changed. But if a person remains in an evil state, that one cannot do good works. If he abides in what is good, he will not be found producing evil works.

Sermons on New Testament Lessons 72.1.1

(Serm. 72. 1.) Or this is an admonition to ourselves that we should be good trees that we may be able to bring forth good fruit; Make the tree good, and its fruit good, is a precept of health to which obedience is necessary. But what He says, Make the tree corrupt, and its fruit corrupt, is not a command to do, but a warning to take heed, spoken against those who being evil thought that they could speak good things, or have good works; this the Lord declares is impossible. The man must be changed first, that his works may be changed; for if the man remains in that wherein he is evil, he cannot have good works; if he remains in that wherein he is good, he cannot have evil works. Christ found us all corrupt trees, but gave power to become sons of God to them that believe on His name.

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Since the Jews were not able to slander the miracles as bad, they blasphemed as demonic the One Who did them, Christ. So He says: either say that I am a good tree, and then all My miracles, which are the fruit, are good as well; or if you say that I am a corrupt tree, then it is clear that the fruit, that is, the miracles, are corrupt as well. But you say that the miracles, the fruit, are good; therefore, I, the tree, am also good. For indeed, just as the tree is known by its fruit, so I am known by the miracles which I do.

Commentary on Matthew

He continues: Either make the tree good, and its fruit good; or make the tree bad, and its fruit bad. Above the Lord spoke against the manner of the Pharisees, in as much as they were speaking against his deeds by showing the gravity of sin; now against them he states that their doctrine is wrong. First, he presents an example; secondly, he adapts it (v. 34); thirdly, he assigns a reason (v. 34b). In regard to the first he does two things: first, he presents the example; secondly, the proof (v. 33b). He says, therefore: Either make the tree good, and its fruit good... This is explained in two ways. One explanation is according to Chrysostom and Jerome; the other according to Augustine. According to Chrysostom it is this: He wants to show that their vituperation is unreasonable; hence he compares actions to life, as fruit to a tree. If a person sees good fruit, he judges that the tree is good; but conversely, if it is evil. They saw Christ's actions, for example, the expulsion of demons, and this was good; therefore, what you say is quite unreasonable. And most suitably he goes from effect to cause, as the Apostle says in Romans (1:20): "The invisible things of God from the creation of the world are clearly seen from the things that were made..." Hence he wants to say either you, namely, the Pharisees, make, i.e., concede, that if the fruit is good, the tree is good; or make, i.e., say that the fruit is evil, and thus the tree is evil. And this you cannot say.

Augustine, however, refers to the intention. They said that he cast out devils by Beelzebub. Therefore, he wants to show from what root this accusation proceeded, because it was from the malice in their hearts. So he says, either make... Here two things are presented: one is meritorious and ought to be done, namely, make the tree good, i.e., do the work and apply the energy required for being a good tree, which a man cannot be without preparation. Hence, do what is required to be a good tree, and then the fruit will be good and your words good. But the statement which follows indicates something to avoid, namely, or make the tree evil and its fruit evil, i.e., or you will pursue malice, and so you will be an evil tree and your fruit evil: "I have planted you a choice vine, wholly of pure seed. How then have you turned degenerate and become a wild vine?" (Jer 2:21). According to both renditions the proof which follows is suitable: For the tree is known by its fruit, because by good fruit a good tree is known, and by evil fruit an evil one.

Commentary on Matthew

He taught that a corrupt outlook on life arises out of a corrupted nature. He taught that from an evil storehouse nothing can come but what is evil. An account must be rendered to God for every idle, careless and useless word. We are to be condemned or justified by the words we speak. The mercy or the judgment we receive shall depend on the inward conviction we have about the Lord of heavenly glory.

Commentary on Matthew 12.19

Then since He is arguing not for Himself, but for the Spirit, He hath dealt out His reproof even as a torrent, saying, "O generation of vipers, how can ye, being evil, speak good things?"

Now this is at once to accuse, and to give demonstration of His own sayings from their case. For behold, saith He, ye being evil trees, cannot bring forth good fruit. I do not then marvel at your talking thus: for ye were both ill nurtured, being of wicked ancestors, and ye have acquired a bad mind.

And see how carefully, and without any hold for exception, He hath expressed His accusations: in that He said not, "How can ye speak good things, being a generation of vipers? (for this latter is nothing to the former): but, "How can ye, being evil, speak good things?"

But He called them "broods of vipers," because they prided themselves on their forefathers. To signify therefore that they had no advantage thereby, He both casts them out from their relationship to Abraham, and assigns them forefathers of kindred disposition, having stripped them of that ground of illustriousness.

"For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh." Here again He indicates His Godhead, which knew their secrets: and that not for words only, but also for wicked thoughts, they shall suffer punishment; and that He knows it all, as God. And He saith, that it is possible even for men to know these things; for this is a natural consequence, that when wickedness is overflowing within, its words should be poured forth through the lips. So that when thou hearest a man speak wicked words, do not suppose only so much wickedness to be in him as the words display, but conjecture the fountain to be much more abundant; for that which is spoken outwardly, is the superabundance of that which is within.

See how vehemently He reprehends them. For if what they had said is so evil, and is of the very mind of the devil, consider the root and well-spring of their words, how far that must reach. And this is naturally the case; for while the tongue through shame often pours not forth all its wickedness at once, the heart having no human witness, fearlessly gives birth to whatever evils it will; for of God it hath not much regard. Since then men's sayings come to examination: and are set before all, but the heart is concealed; therefore the evils of the former grow less, while those of the latter increase. But when that within is multiplied, all that hath been awhile hidden comes forth with a violent gushing. And as persons vomiting strive at first to keep down the humors that force their way out, but, when they are overcome, cast forth much abomination; so do they that devise evil things, and speak ill of their neighbors. And what can be more barbarous than this, to overlook our soul that is more precious than all, abused by so many adulterers, and so long companying with them, even until they are sated; which will never be.

Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 42

(Verse 34.) Brood of vipers, how can you speak good when you are evil? For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks. It reveals that they are a bad tree, producing fruit of blasphemy, which have the seeds of the devil.

Commentary on Matthew

“O worst of men,” he says, “you have not shrunk from any wickedness of vipers. So it is not surprising that you utter nothing good. For words follow the disposition of the soul. How can you speak good, when you are evil?”

Fragment 70

34–35

A brother asked Poemen about the words, ‘Do not render evil for evil’ (1 Thess. 5:15). He said to him, ‘The passions work in four stages: first in the heart, then in the face, third in words, fourth in deeds – and it is in deeds that it is essential not to render evil for evil. If you purify your heart, passion will not show in your expression, but if it does, take care not to speak about it; if you do speak, cut the conversation short in case you render evil for evil.’

The Desert Fathers, Sayings of the Early Christian Monks

34–35

Or the words, Generation of vipers, may be taken as signifying children, or imitators of the Devil, because they had wilfully spoken against good works, which is of the Devil, and thence follows, Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh. That man speaks out of the abundance of the heart who is not ignorant with what intention his words are uttered; and to declare his meaning more openly He adds, A good man out of the good treasure of his heart bringeth forth good things. The treasure of the heart is the intention of the thoughts, by which the Judge judges that work which is produced, so that sometimes though the outward work that is shown seem great, yet because of the carelessness of a cold heart, they receive a little reward from the Lord.

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

34–35

When you see a speaker of obscenities, know that he does not have in his heart the same quantity of evil that he speaks, but many times more. For it is the excess that spills over, and he who has a hidden treasure displays only a small part. Likewise he who speaks good has even more in his heart.

Commentary on Matthew

Look, He says, you who are evil trees bear evil fruit when you speak ill of Me. And I also, if I were evil, would bring forth evil fruit and not these miracles. He calls them "brood of vipers" because they boasted of Abraham. He shows that they are not of Abraham, but of ancestors worthy of their own wickedness.

Commentary on Matthew

You brood of vipers... This is subsumed under the foregoing in various ways depending on the varying explanations. According to Augustine it is an application to the foregoing thus: It has been said, either make the tree good... But you do evil. You are an evil tree and, as such, you do evil, because you cannot say good things. According to others' explanation, he is showing the source from which this malice comes and calls the Pharisees a brood of vipers, because those who are malicious from their youth retain it more firmly; therefore, their malice is called the malice of a viper: "A young man according to his way, when he is old, he will not depart from it" (Pr 22:6). Consequently, it often happens that those with evil parents are readier for evil: "We have known the iniquities of our fathers" (Jer 12:20). Hence it is good for a man to be trained in the good. Also it is the nature of serpents to eject poison with their tongues, and evil men do likewise: "The tongue of a viper will kill him" (Jb 20:16); "They make their tongue sharp as a serpent's" (Ps 140:3). And so he says, How can you speak good? He does not say "do good," but speak, because you are the offspring of a viper, which inflicts injury with the tongue; therefore, since you are imitators of the crime of your fathers, how can you speak good? As if to say: You cannot.

He assigns the reason: first, in general; secondly, in particular (v. 35). He says, therefore: So you are unable to speak good. Why? Because you are evil. Why? Because from the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks, for the word is the messenger of the mind. He says, from the abundance of the heart, because, according to Chrysostom, when a person speaks from malice, it is a sign that greater malice is in the heart, for no one fears what he keeps within. Therefore, when he utters something out of malice, it is a sign that more is within, although he dares not say it. Hence he says, from the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks. And from the abundance of malice within the mouth speaks, and this is true of good and of evil. Hence Jeremiah (20:9): "The Lord's word is in me as a burning fire." In regard to evil it is similar, because from malice some conceive something they cannot keep within: "The spirit within me impels me" (Jb 32:18).

Commentary on Matthew

This new frivolity is inadequate because there is in it no strong sense of an unuttered joy. The men and women who exchange the repartees may not only be hating each other, but hating even themselves. Any one of them might be bankrupt that day, or sentenced to be shot the next. They are joking, not because they are merry, but because they are not; out of the emptiness of the heart the mouth speaketh. Even when they talk pure nonsense it is a careful nonsense—a nonsense of which they are economical, or, to use the perfect expression of Mr. W. S. Gilbert in “Patience,” it is such “precious nonsense.” Even when they become light-headed they do not become light-hearted. All those who have read anything of the rationalism of the moderns know that their Reason is a sad thing. But even their unreason is sad.

Heretics, Ch. 15: On Smart Novelists and the Smart Set (1905)

"A good man out of his good treasure," saith He, "bringeth forth good things, and an evil man out of his evil treasure bringeth forth evil things."

For think not by any means, saith He, that it is so in respect of wickedness only, for in goodness also the same occurs: for there too the virtue within is more than the words without. By which He signified, that both they were to be accounted more wicked than their words indicated, and Himself more perfectly good than His sayings declared. And He calls it "a treasure," indicating its abundance.

Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 42

(Verse 35) A good man brings forth good treasures. And an evil man brings forth evil treasures. Either it shows the Jews themselves blaspheming the Lord, from what wicked treasure they bring forth blasphemies, or with the previous question, the opinion clings that just as a good man cannot bring forth evil things, nor can an evil man bring forth good things, so Christ cannot do evil things, and the devil cannot do good works.

Commentary on Matthew

What He says, The good man out of the good treasure of his heart, & c. is either pointed against the Jews, that seeing they blasphemed God, what treasure in their heart must that be out of which such blasphemy proceeded; or it is connected with what had gone before, that like as a good man cannot bring forth evil things, nor an evil man good things, so Christ cannot do evil works, nor the Devil good works.

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

When he says “treasure,” Christ refers to the multitude of motives that lie in the soul. It is not by nature that people are good or bad but by their own choice. He makes this plain in his remark to the Pharisees: It is possible for one and the same person at one time to become good, at another time evil, for “a good man speaks out of the abundance of his heart,” and likewise for the bad.

Fragment 158.10

The good man from his good treasure brings forth good. The statement that from the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks he explains in particular. The word which proceeds from a thought is as a gift from a treasure. Hence if the thought is good, the word is good; and conversely. The good treasure is knowledge of the truth and fear of the Lord: "Abundance of salvation, wisdom and knowledge; the fear of the Lord is his treasure" (Is 33:6). Likewise, an evil treasure is evil thinking; and from this treasure only evil proceeds: "Treasures of wickedness do not profit" (Pr 10:2). Note: what is said there of words is understood also of deeds. For as the thought is the wellspring of speech, so intention is of action. Therefore, if the intention is good, the action is good. Hence a Gloss: "You do according as you intend." This statement seems open to objection in regard to good. Suppose that someone wants to steal in order to give an alms: the act is evil and the intention good. Therefore... I answer that intending and willing are sometimes distinguished, namely, when in one and the same act the willing and the intention differ. Willing bears on the object wanted, but intention on the end. Willing, for example, is when I will to go to a window to see the people passing by; the latter is the intention. Hence it is necessary that willing and intending be one. Hence we can consider intention and willing in a wide sense, as in the assertion that if the willing is evil, the act is evil. Yet if it be excluded and taken in the proper sense, it is not true. But granted that intention and the act of willing are one, what then? I answer that the root of merit lies in charity, but consequently in the merit of other virtues. For merit looks at the essential reward, within which charity is considered. Thus, any work whatsoever that is performed with greater charity has more merit. But charity alone has God for object and end. Hence the merit of charity corresponds to the substantial reward, the merit of the other virtues to the accidental reward. Therefore, because charity permeates the intention, to the extent that one does something from greater charity to that extent he achieves; but in regard to accidental reward, this is not so.

Commentary on Matthew

Again, it is said that "impeachment awaits us for every vain and needless word." It follows that, from whatever the Lord keeps us, the same He admonishes us to bear patiently from another.

Of Patience

36–37

Then again He fences them in with great terror. For think not at all, saith He, that the thing stops at this, that is, at the condemnation of the multitude; nay, for all that do wickedly in such things shall suffer the utmost punishment. And He said not, "ye," partly in order to instruct our whole race, partly to make His saying the less burdensome. "But I say unto you," this is His word, "that every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment."

And that is idle, which is not according to the fact, which is false, which hath in it unjust accusation; and some say, that which is vain also, for instance, provoking inordinate laughter, or what is filthy, and immodest, and coarse.

"For by thy words thou shall be justified, and by thy words thou shall be condemned."

Seest thou how far the tribunal is from invidiousness? how favorable the account required? For not upon what another hath said of thee, but from what thou hast thyself spoken, will the Judge give His sentence; which is of all things the very fairest: since surely with thee it rests, either to speak, or not to speak.

Wherefore not those that are slandered, but the slanderers, have need to be anxious and to tremble. For the former are not constrained to answer for themselves touching the evil things which are said of them, but the latter will, for the evil they have spoken; and over these impends the whole danger. So that the persons censured should be without anxiety, not being to give account of the evil that others have said; but the censurers have cause to be in anxiety, and to tremble, as being themselves to be dragged before the judgment-seat in that behalf. For this is indeed a diabolical snare, and a sin having in it no pleasure, but harm only. Yea, and such an one is laying up an evil treasure in his soul. And if he that hath an evil humor in him doth himself first reap the fruits of the malady, much more he that is treasuring up in himself what is more bitter than any bile, I mean, wickedness, will suffer the utmost evils, gathering unto himself a grievous disease. And it is evident from the things that He vomits out. For if they pain others so much, far more the soul that gives them birth.

Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 42

Then again He fences them in with great terror. For think not at all, saith He, that the thing stops at this, that is, at the condemnation of the multitude; nay, for all that do wickedly in such things shall suffer the utmost punishment. And He said not, "ye," partly in order to instruct our whole race, partly to make His saying the less burdensome. "But I say unto you," this is His word, "that every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment."

And that is idle, which is not according to the fact, which is false, which hath in it unjust accusation; and some say, that which is vain also, for instance, provoking inordinate laughter, or what is filthy, and immodest, and coarse.

Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 42

36–37

What He says, The good man out of the good treasure of his heart, & c. is either pointed against the Jews, that seeing they blasphemed God, what treasure in their heart must that be out of which such blasphemy proceeded; or it is connected with what had gone before, that like as a good man cannot bring forth evil things, nor an evil man good things, so Christ cannot do evil works, nor the Devil good works.

And the meaning is; If every idle word which does not edify the hearers is not without danger to him that speaks it, and if each man shall render an account of his words in the day of judgment, how much more shall you, who have spoken falsely against the works of the Holy Spirit, saying that I cast out dæmons through Beelzebub, render an account of your false charge?

being spoken without the profit of either the speaker or hearer; as if laying aside weighty matters we should speak of frivolous trifles, or relate old fables. For he that deals in buffoon jests to create laughter, or brings forth any thing shameful, he will be held guilty not of an idle, but of a sinful word.

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

36–37

(Verse 36, 37.) But I tell you that every idle word that men speak, they shall give an account thereof in the day of judgment. For by your words you shall be justified, and by your words you shall be condemned. This also aligns with what was said before. And the meaning is this: If an idle word, which does not edify the listeners, is not without danger for the one who speaks it, and each person will have to give an account for their own words on the day of judgment, how much more will you, who revile the works of the Holy Spirit and say that I cast out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of demons, have to give an account for your slander! Idle speech is that which is spoken by the speaker and heard by the listener without any usefulness: if we omit serious matters and talk about frivolous things, and tell old stories. However, whoever responds with jests and breaks out in laughter and utters something shameful, they will be held guilty not of idle speech, but of a crime.

Commentary on Matthew

This, too, goes with what was said before, and the meaning is that on the day of judgment each person must render an account of his or her words. If an idle word which by no means edifies the listeners is not without harm to the speaker, how much more will you Pharisees, who criticize the works of the Holy Spirit and say that I cast out devils by Beelzebub the prince of devils, have to render an account of your criticism? An idle word is what is spoken without benefit to the speaker and the listener. We overlook serious things and utter frivolous things and tell old wives’ tales. One who acts like a buffoon and makes mouths drop with boisterous laughter and who utters disgraceful things—that person shall be held to account, not for an idle word but a slanderous word.

Commentary on Matthew 2.12.36

36–37

The words which here follow depend on those that went before; By thy words thou shat be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned. There is no doubt but that every man shall be condemned for his evil words which he speaks; but none shall be justified for his good words, unless they proceed from his inmost heart, and from a entire purpose.

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

36–37

(Hom. in Ev. vi.) Or such as lacks either rightness in itself, or reasons of just necessity;

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

36–37

Here He strikes fear into our hearts, that we will give an account for even a careless word, that is, any lying, slanderous, indecent, or mocking word. Then He brings forward testimony from Scripture, lest He appear to be speaking His own words. "By thy words thou shalt be deemed righteous, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned" (Job 15:6; cf. Ecclesiastes 10:12).

Commentary on Matthew

I tell you... The Lord rebuked them for the gravity of their sin and their malice; here he warns them about the future judgment, which we hold by faith: "Be afraid of the sword, for anger brings the punishment of the sword; for know that there will be a judgment" (Jb 19:29); "He will make room for every act of mercy; everyone will receive in accordance with his deeds" (Sir 16:14). Again 2 Corinthians (5:10): "For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may receive good or evil, according to what he has done in the body." Hence there will be an investigation, because each one will render an account of his deeds. Therefore, he also adds something about words: I say to you, on the day of judgment men will render account for every careless word they utter. This is said in Wisdom (1:9): "He that speaks unrighteous things will not escape notice" and that the sound of murmuring will not go unheard. Why does he say for every careless word? A word is called idle in two ways: in one way every evil word is called idle; because that is called idle which does not attain its purpose, as when a person hunts for a man and does not find him, the search is said to have been idle. But if a word is given to instruct, when it succeeds, it is not idle: "Let no evil talk come out of your mouths, but only such as is good for edifying, that it may impart grace to those who hear" (Eph 4:29). And according to Chrysostom, it refers to the fact that they said, "by Beelzebub". That word was most pernicious and also idle. According to Jerome the former is a word that inflicts harm, and an idle one is that which does not afford any benefit. According to Gregory any word lightly spoken is called idle, unless it has a pious use or a pious need. But it is clear that they spoke a pernicious word. Why does he mention only idle? Because he wishes to argue from the lesser; because if one must render an account for an idle word, then more so for a pernicious one.

Commentary on Matthew

But, however, since the conduct according to the divine rule is imperilled, not merely by deeds, but likewise by words, (for, just as it is written, "Behold the man and his deeds; " so, "Out of thy own mouth shalt thou be justified" ), we ought to remember that, even in words, also the inroad of idolatry must be foreguarded against, either from the defect of custom or of timidity.

On Idolatry

In like manner He inquires of Cain where his brother was, just as if He had not yet heard the blood of Abel crying from the ground, in order that he too might have the opportunity from the same power of the will of spontaneously denying, and to this degree aggravating, his crime; and that thus there might be supplied to us examples of confessing sins rather than of denying them: so that even then was initiated the evangelic doctrine, "By thy words thou shall be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned." Now, although Adam was by reason of his condition under law subject to death, yet was hope preserved to him by the Lord's saying, "Behold, Adam is become as one of us; " that is, in consequence of the future taking of the man into the divine nature.

Against Marcion Book 2

If we are called to account “for every careless word,” how much more will those who have blasphemed against the Spirit of the only begotten Son receive a more bitter punishment on the day of judgment. And if, Christ says, someone merely utters a slander against someone else, that one will by no means escape judgment. If they will give an account concerning an idle word, how much more so concerning a work.

Fragments 88-89

"For by thy words thou shall be justified, and by thy words thou shall be condemned."

Seest thou how far the tribunal is from invidiousness? how favorable the account required? For not upon what another hath said of thee, but from what thou hast thyself spoken, will the Judge give His sentence; which is of all things the very fairest: since surely with thee it rests, either to speak, or not to speak.

Wherefore not those that are slandered, but the slanderers, have need to be anxious and to tremble. For the former are not constrained to answer for themselves touching the evil things which are said of them, but the latter will, for the evil they have spoken; and over these impends the whole danger. So that the persons censured should be without anxiety, not being to give account of the evil that others have said; but the censurers have cause to be in anxiety, and to tremble, as being themselves to be dragged before the judgment-seat in that behalf. For this is indeed a diabolical snare, and a sin having in it no pleasure, but harm only.

Let us flee therefore from this sin, and neither in words nor deeds do our neighbors wrong. For He said not, If thou slander, and summon a court of justice, but simply, If thou speak evil, though within thyself, even so shall thou suffer the utmost punishment. Though it be true which thou hast said, though thou have spoken upon conviction, even so shall vengeance come upon thee. For not according to what the other hath done, but according to what thou hast spoken, will God pass sentence; "for by thy words thou shall be condemned," saith He. Art thou not told that the Pharisee also spake the truth, and affirmed what was manifest to all men, without discovering what was hidden? Nevertheless, he paid the utmost penalty.

But if we ought not to accuse men of things which are acknowledged, much less of those which are disputed; nay, for the offender hath a judge. Do not now, I warn thee, seize upon the privilege of the Only Begotten. For Him is the throne of judgment reserved.

Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 42

Then he gives the reason: for by your words you will be justified... In the courts of this world the innocent are sometimes punished and the wicked set free, because judgments are based on the statements of witnesses; but in God's court judgment is based on the person accusing himself, namely, on self-confession. Hence lest you suppose that you will be judged on the basis of what others say about you rather than what you say about yourself, he says, by your words you will be justified and by your words you will be condemned: "I will condemn you out of your own mouth, you wicked servant" (Lk 19:22).

Commentary on Matthew

That generation was evil, on account of the influence that had come to be in it from the evil one. It was adulterous because it had left her natural husband—the word or law of truth—and had come to be wedded to a lie. The law which is “in the members” of our flesh wars against “the law of the mind.” It is an adulterer of the soul. Every opposing power, when it has intercourse with the soul unfaithfully—the soul that has as its bridegroom the Word of God—causes the soul to commit adultery.

Fragment 274

Wherefore also He rebukes them severely. And when they were questioning Him roughly and insulting Him, He reasoned with them gently; when they were flattering; reproachfully, and with great severity; implying that He is superior to either passion, and is neither at the one time moved to anger, nor at the other softened by flattery. And see His reproach, that it is not merely hard words, but contains a demonstration of their wickedness. For what saith He?

"An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign." Now what He saith is to this effect: What marvel if ye behave so to me who have been hitherto unknown to you when even to the Father, of whom ye have had so much experience, ye have done the very same? forsaking Him, ye have run unto the devils, drawing to yourselves wicked lovers. With this Ezekiel too was continually upbraiding them.

Now by these sayings He signified Himself to be of one accord with His Father, and them to be doing nothing new; He was also unfolding their secrets, how with hypocrisy and as enemies they were making their demand. Therefore He called them "an evil generation," because they have been always ungrateful towards their benefactors; because upon favors they become worse, which belongs to extreme wickedness.

And He called it "adulterous," declaring both their former and their present unbelief; whereby He implies Himself again to be equal to the Father, if at least the not believing Him makes it "adulterous."

Then, after His reproach, what saith He? "There shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of Jonas the prophet." Now is He striking the first note of the doctrine of His resurrection, and confirming it by the type.

What then? one may say; was no sign given it? None was given to it on asking. For not to bring in them did He work His signs (for He knew them to be hardened), but in order to amend others. Either then this may be said, or that they were not to receive such a sign as that was. For a sign did befall them, when by their own punishment they learnt His power. Here then He speaks as threatening, and with this very meaning obscurely conveyed: as if He said, innumerable benefits have I showed forth, none of these hath drawn you to me, neither were ye willing to adore my power. Ye shall know therefore my might by the contrary tokens, when ye shall see your city cast down to the ground, the walls also dismantled, the temple become a ruin; when ye shall be cast out both from your former citizenship and freedom, and shall again go about everywhere, houseless and in exile. (For all these things came to pass after the cross.) These things therefore shall be to you for great signs. And indeed it is an exceeding great sign, that their ills remain unchanged; that although ten thousand have attempted it, no one hath been able to reverse the judgment once gone forth against them.

Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 43

This is the sign which before He had promised to give them when they asked it, saying, "An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign, and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas;" meaning His cross, and His death, His burial, and His resurrection. And again, declaring in another way the virtue of the cross, He said, "When ye have lifted up the Son of Man, then shall ye know that I am He." And what He saith is to this purport: "When ye have crucified me, and think ye have overcome me, then, above all, shall ye know my might."

For after the crucifixion, the city was destroyed, and the Jewish state came to an end, they fell away from their polity and their freedom, the gospel flourished, the word was spread abroad to the ends of the world; both sea and land, both the inhabited earth and the desert perpetually proclaim its power.

Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 88

(Verse 39.) And he answered and said to them: An evil and adulterous generation. Admirably said adulterous: because she had dismissed her husband, and according to Ezekiel, had joined herself to many lovers (Ezek. 16).

Commentary on Matthew

Excellently is that said, and adulterous, seeing she has put away her husband, and, according to Ezekiel, has joined herself to many lovers.

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Then He begins to answer them, giving them a sign not from heaven, which they were unworthy to see, but giving it them from the deep beneath. But to His own disciples He gave a sign from heaven, to whom He showed the glory of His blessed eternity both in a figure on the mount, and after in verity when He was taken up into heaven. Wherefore it follows, And there shall no sign he given it, but the sign of the Prophet Jonas.

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

39–40

He calls them an evil generation as they were deceiving tempters, and adulterous, because they had abandoned God and followed after demons. He calls His Resurrection a sign as it is marvelous beyond belief. For having descended into the heart of the earth, the nethermost part, which is hades, He arose on the third day. The three days and three nights you must understand as spoken of in part and not in their entirety. For He died on Friday, which is one day. He was dead on Saturday - behold, the second day. And the night of Sunday held Him still dead. The three days and nights, then, are counted by parts, in just the same way as we often count them ourselves.

Commentary on Matthew

But he answered them... Then he refuses them and does two things: first, he denies the request; secondly, he predicts an indignity (v. 41).

In regard to the first he tells what they were seeking; secondly, he denies (v. 39b).

It is stated, therefore, that he answered them, "An evil and adulterous generation seeks for a sign." He says, evil, because they were laying traps. A person is called evil, because he harms his neighbor. Therefore an evil generation of wicked children. It is called an adulterous generation: "You draw near hither, sons of the sorceress, offspring of the adulterer and the harlot" (Is 57:3). Therefore that generation, so subject to sin, seeks a sign; but no sign shall be given it except the sign of the prophet Jonah: "Ask a sign of the Lord, your God; let it be as deep as Sheol or as high as heaven" (Is 7:10). Therefore they sought a sign from heaven, but they were unworthy to see it. For he gave this to his apostles, who saw him ascending and who saw God's glory on the mount. But the others will be given only a sign in hell as to the soul and on earth as to the body. Hence no sign will be given it except the sign of the prophet Jonah. Hence Christ's death is denoted and God's love shown, as the Apostle says: "When we were yet sinners according to the time Christ died for us..." (Rom 5:8). Furthermore, the power of the one raising is shown, as is indicated in 1 Cor (15:20 ff). And these are the signs of things that ought to be present in us. By Christ's death is signified that we should die to sin; by the resurrection, that we should rise from sin.

Commentary on Matthew

For they do not choose to understand, that if these things are as they say, the Lord Himself, in whom they profess to believe, did not rise again upon the third day; but immediately upon His expiring on the cross, undoubtedly departed on high, leaving His body to the earth. But the case was, that for three days He dwelt in the place where the dead were, as the prophet says concerning Him: "And the Lord remembered His dead saints who slept formerly in the land of sepulture; and He descended to them, to rescue and save them." And the Lord Himself says, "As Jonas remained three days and three nights in the whale's belly, so shall the Son of man be in the heart of the earth." [Matthew 12:40] Then also the apostle says, "But when He ascended, what is it but that He also descended into the lower parts of the earth?" [Ephesians 4:9] This, too, David says when prophesying of Him, "And you have delivered my soul from the nethermost hell;" [Psalms 86:13] and on His rising again the third day, He said to Mary, who was the first to see and to worship Him, "Touch Me not, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to the disciples, and say unto them, I ascend unto My Father, and unto your Father." [John 20:17]

If, then, the Lord observed the law of the dead, that He might become the first-begotten from the dead, and tarried until the third day "in the lower parts of the earth;" [Ephesians 4:9] then afterwards rising in the flesh, so that He even showed the print of the nails to His disciples, He thus ascended to the Father;— [if all these things occurred, I say], how must these men not be put to confusion, who allege that "the lower parts" refer to this world of ours, but that their inner man, leaving the body here, ascends into the super-celestial place? For as the Lord "went away in the midst of the shadow of death," where the souls of the dead were, yet afterwards arose in the body, and after the resurrection was taken up [into heaven], it is manifest that the souls of His disciples also, upon whose account the Lord underwent these things, shall go away into the invisible place allotted to them by God, and there remain until the resurrection, awaiting that event; then receiving their bodies, and rising in their entirety, that is bodily, just as the Lord arose, they shall come thus into the presence of God. "For no disciple is above the Master, but every one that is perfect shall be as his Master." [Luke 6:40] As our Master, therefore, did not at once depart, taking flight [to heaven], but awaited the time of His resurrection prescribed by the Father, which had been also shown forth through Jonas, and rising again after three days was taken up [to heaven]; so ought we also to await the time of our resurrection prescribed by God and foretold by the prophets, and so, rising, be taken up, as many as the Lord shall account worthy of this [privilege].

Against Heresies (Book 5, Chapter 31), Section 1-2

By ourselves the lower regions (of Hades) are not supposed to be a bare cavity, nor some subterranean sewer of the world, but a vast deep space in the interior of the earth, and a concealed recess in its very bowels; inasmuch as we read that Christ in His death spent three days in the heart of the earth, [Matthew 12:40] that is, in the secret inner recess which is hidden in the earth, and enclosed by the earth, and superimposed on the abysmal depths which lie still lower down. Now although Christ is God, yet, being also man, "He died according to the Scriptures," [1 Corinthians 15:3] and "according to the same Scriptures was buried." With the same law of His being He fully complied, by remaining in Hades in the form and condition of a dead man; nor did He ascend into the heights of heaven before descending into the lower parts of the earth, that He might there make the patriarchs and prophets partakers of Himself. [1 Peter 3:19]

A Treatise on the Soul, Chapter 55

By ourselves the lower regions (of Hades) are not supposed to be a bare cavity, nor some subterranean sewer of the world, but a vast deep space in the interior of the earth, and a concealed recess in its very bowels; inasmuch as we read that Christ in His death spent three days in the heart of the earth, that is, in the secret inner recess which is hidden in the earth, and enclosed by the earth, and superimposed on the abysmal depths which lie still lower down.

A Treatise on the Soul

After a little space the stone will come from heaven which smites the image and breaks it in pieces, and subverts all the kingdoms, and gives the kingdom to the saints of the Most High. This is the stone which becomes a great mountain, and fills the whole earth, of which Daniel says: "I saw in the night visions, and behold one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and was brought near before Him. And there was given Him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom; and all peoples, tribes, and languages shall serve Him: and His dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and His kingdom shall not be destroyed." He showed all power given by the Father to the Son, who is ordained Lord of things in heaven, and things on earth, and things under the earth, and Judge of all: of things in heaven, because He was born, the Word of God, before all (ages); and of things on earth, because He became man in the midst of men, to re-create our Adam through Himself; and of things under the earth, because He was also reckoned among the dead, preaching the Gospel to the souls of the saints, (and) by death overcoming death.

Fragments - Dogmatic and Historical

Christ says he will spend “three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.” He is referring to the end of Friday, all of Saturday and the beginning of Sunday [of the passion week], in keeping with the way people understood the beginning and ending of days. For we too commemorate the third day of those who have died, not when three days and three nights, completed in equal measure, have gone by. But we reckon as a single, complete day that day on which the person died, regardless of what hour the death occurred. We count as another day that on which we take our leave of the departed in hymns before the tombs. Following this same kind of sequence, then, the Lord announced that he would spend a full three days and nights under the earth. A clear indication of this is the fact that the women arrived at that very time, in order to fulfill those things that the law prescribed to be done for the dead upon the third day.

Fragment 90

We know that He, the Only-begotten Son of God, at the Father's bidding came from the heavens for the abolishment of sin, and was born of the Virgin Mary, and conversed with the disciples, and fulfilled the Economy according to the Father's will, and was crucified, and died and descended into the parts beneath the earth, and regulated the things there, Whom the gate-keepers of hell saw (Job xxxviii. 17, LXX.) and shuddered; and He rose from the dead the third day, and conversed with the disciples, and fulfilled all the Economy, and when the forty days were full, ascended into the heavens, and sitteth on the right hand of the Father, and is coming in the last day of the resurrection in the glory of the Father, to render to every one according to his works.

Councils of Ariminum and Seleucia, Section 8

He was truly laid as Man in a tomb of rock; but rocks were rent asunder by terror because of Him. He went down into the regions beneath the earth, that thence also He might redeem the righteous. For, tell me, could thou wish the living only to enjoy His grace, and that, though most of them are unholy; and not wish those who from Adam had for a long while been imprisoned to have now gained their liberty? Esaias the Prophet proclaimed with loud voice so many things concerning Him; would you not wish that the King should go down and redeem His herald? David was there, and Samuel, and all the Prophets, John himself also, who by his messengers said, Are you He that should come, or look we for another [Matthew 11:3]? Would you not wish that He should descend and redeem such as these?

But He who descended into the regions beneath the earth came up again; and Jesus, who was buried, truly rose again the third day. And if the Jews ever worry you, meet them at once by asking thus: Did Jonah come forth from the whale on the third day, and has not Christ then risen from the earth on the third day?

Catechetical Lecture 4, Sections 11-12

What shall we learn of the three days' time? [...] This one hath loosed the oath of death, this one hath comforted the firstborn of the dead, in this one the iron gates of death are broken down, in this one the brass of the rod of hell are broken. Now the prison of death is opened, now the prisoners are declared to be released... As the ruler of darkness could not approach the presence of the Light unimpeded, had he not seen in Him something of flesh, then, as soon as he saw the God-bearing flesh and saw the miracle performed through it by the Deity, he hoped that if he came to take hold of the flesh through death, then he would take hold of all the power contained in it. Therefore, having swallowed the bait of the flesh, he was pierced by the hook of the Deity and thus the dragon was transfixed by the hook.

Of the three days between the death and resurrection of our Lord Jesus (De tridui inter mortem et resurrectionem domini nostri Jesu), Section 3

But where have the Scriptures said that He was buried, and on the third day shall rise again? By the type of Jonah which also Himself alleges, saying, "As Jonah was three days and three nights in the whale's belly, so shall also the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth." [Matthew 12:40] By the bush in the desert. For even as that burned, yet was not consumed, [Exodus 3:2] so also that body died indeed, but was not holden of death continually. And the dragon also in Daniel shadows out this. For as the dragon having taken the food which the prophet gave, burst asunder in the midst; even so Hades having swallowed down that Body, was rent asunder, the Body of itself cutting asunder its womb and rising again.

Homily 38 on First Corinthians

"For as Jonas," saith He, "was three days and three nights in the whale's belly, so shall the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth." Thus, He said not indeed openly that He should rise again, since they would have even laughed Him to scorn, but He intimated it in such manner, that they might believe Him to have foreknown it. For as to their being aware of it, they say to Pilate, "That deceiver said," these are their words, "while He was yet alive, After three days I will rise again;" and yet we know His disciples were ignorant of this; even as they had been beforehand more void of understanding than these: wherefore also these became self-condemned.

But see how exactly He expresses it, even though in a dark saying. For He said not, "In the earth," but, "In the heart of the earth;" that He might designate His very sepulchre, and that no one might suspect a mere semblance. And for this intent too did He allow three days, that the fact of His death might be believed. For not by the cross only doth He make it certain, and by the sight of all men, but also by the time of those days. For to the resurrection indeed all succeeding time was to bear witness; but the cross, unless it had at the time many signs bearing witness to it, would have been disbelieved; and with this disbelief would have gone utter disbelief of the resurrection also. Therefore He calls it also a sign. But had He not been crucified, the sign would not have been given. For this cause too He brings forward the type, that the truth may be believed. For tell me, was Jonah in the whale's belly a mere appearance? Nay, thou canst not say so. Therefore neither was Christ in the heart of the earth such. For surely the type is not in truth, and the truth in mere appearance. For this cause we every where show forth His death, both in the mysteries, and in baptism, and in all the rest. Therefore Paul also cries with a clear voice, "God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ."

Whence it is clear, that they who are diseased in Marcion's way are children of the devil, blotting out these truths, to avoid the annulling whereof Christ did so many things, while to have them annulled the devil took such manifold pains: I mean, His cross and His passion.

Therefore He said elsewhere also, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up:" and, "The days will come when the Bridegroom shall be taken away from them:" and here, "There shall no sign be given it, but the sign of Jonas the prophet:" declaring both that He should die for them, and that they would profit nothing; for this He afterwards declared. Nevertheless, even with this knowledge He died: so great was His tender care.

Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 43

(Verse 40.) He seeks a sign, and a sign will not be given to him, except the sign of Jonah the prophet (John 2). For just as Jonah was in the belly of the great fish for three days and three nights, so will the Son of Man be in the heart of the earth for three days and three nights. We have discussed this passage more fully in the Commentaries of the prophet Jonah; therefore, we leave it to the diligence of the reader to refer to that passage. Having briefly mentioned this, we are content that the whole should be understood in part through synecdoche: not that the Lord stood in hell for all three days and three nights, but that in part of the day of Preparation, the day of the Lord, and the whole day of the Sabbath, three days and three nights are understood.

Commentary on Matthew

Not that He remained three whole days and three nights in hell, but that this be understood to imply a part of the preparation day, and of the Lord's day, and the whole sabbath day.

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

The Savior pointed out that Jonah the prophet, who having been tossed into the sea was caught in the belly of the whale and emerged on the third day, prefigured the Son of Man who would suffer and rise on the third day. The Jewish people were censured in comparison with the Ninevites, for the Ninevites, to whom Jonah the prophet had been sent by way of reproof, placated God’s wrath by repenting and gained his mercy. “And behold,” he said, “something greater than Jonah is here,” the Lord Jesus implying himself. The Ninevites heard the servant and amended their ways; the Jews heard the Lord and not only did they not amend their ways but moreover they killed him.

Sermon 72A.1

(De Cons. Ev. iii. 24.) Some, not knowing the Scripture manner of speaking, would interpret as one night those three hours of darkness when the sun was darkened from the sixth to the ninth hour; and as a day in like manner those other three hours in which it was again restored to the world, from the ninth hour till sunset. Then follows the night preceding the sabbath, which if we reckon with its own day we shall have thus two days and two nights. Then after the sabbath follows the night of the sabbath prime, that is of the dawning of the Lord's day on which the Lord arose. Thus we shall only get two nights and two days, with this one night to be added if we might understand the whole of it, and it could not be shown that that dawn was indeed the latter part of the night. So that not even by taking in those six hours, three of darkness, and three of restored light, can we establish the computation of three days and three nights. It remains therefore that we find the explanation in that usual manner of Scripture of putting a part for the whole.

(De Trin. iv. 6.) For that the three days were not three full and entire days, Scripture witnesses; the first day is reckoned because the latter end of it comes in; and the third day is likewise reckoned, because the first part of it is included; while the day between, that is the second day, appears in all its twenty-four hours, twelve of the night and twelve of the day. For the succeeding night up to the dawn when the Lord's resurrection was made known, belongs to the third day. For as the first days of creation were, because of man's coming fall, computed from morning to night; so these days are because of man's restoration computed from night to morning.

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

He shows that the Jews were as criminal as the Ninevites, and that unless they repented they would be destroyed. But like as punishment was denounced against the Ninevites, and at the same time a remedy was set before them, so neither should the Jews despair of pardon, if at least after Christ's resurrection they should do penitence. For Jonas, that is The Dove, or The mourner, is a sign of Him on whom the Holy Spirit descended in the form of a Dove, and who bare our sorrows. (Is. 53:4) The fish which swallowed Jonas in the sea, shows forth the death which Christ suffered in the world. Three days and nights was the one in the whale's belly, the other in the tomb; the one was cast up on dry laud, the other arose in glory.

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the whale, i.e., actually, so will the Son of Man be in the heart of the earth. And in this the error of Manicheus is refuted which said that he did not truly die. And he says, in the heart of the earth, because as a man's heart is in the depths, so Christ was in the depth of the earth. Or, in the heart of the earth, i.e., in the heart of the worldly mind of the disciples who despaired of him, as it says in Luke (24:21): "We had hope that he was the one to redeem Israel." For three days and three nights. But a question arises here. For this passage seems to be false, because he died at 3 o'clock, was buried in the evening, but rose on the morning of the third day. Augustine says that some want to say that one must start from the hour when he was put on the cross. Hence they call the darkness which appeared the first day, the second day was the night of the evening star, the third was the day of Sabbath. But according to Augustine, this is invalid; although it would help, if he had been in the tomb for the entire Sunday. Therefore we must have recourse to another solution, namely, that a natural day composed of day and night is taken as an interval of twenty-four hours. But, as Augustine says, in Scripture a part is sometimes taken for the whole. Therefore we must say that it is by synecdoche that Christ is said to have been in the tomb for three days and three nights, because Friday is taken for the whole day and even the previous night; there is no doubt about the second day, but the third is taken for the night and the following day. Yet if we regard what actually happened, it was a case of two nights and one day, to denote that his single destroyed our double. Punishment and guilt were in us, but only punishment in him; therefore...

Another question arises. Had he not worked many miracles? Had he not raised Lazarus and a number of others? Why then does he say, no sign shall be given to it except the sign of Jonah the prophet? I answer that the kind of sign they demand will not be given; or no sign that will benefit them will be given, for he knew that they would not be converted, because they were hardened. But he performed many signs for the sake of the elect and believers, of whom there were many afterwards.

Commentary on Matthew

In the time before the Messiah came, the expectation of the godly was to die and go to Sheol. Jonah (most likely) actually died and cried out to God from the depths of Sheol (Jon. 2:1). The psalmist expected that Sheol would swallow him up (Ps. 18:5; 86:13; 116:3).

In the parable of Lazarus and the rich man, they both died and went down to Hades. In that parable, Hades was divided in two by a vast chasm. The side where Lazarus was had the name of Abraham’s bosom (Luke 16:23), while the rich man was in torment in Hades. Nevertheless, it was possible for communication to occur across the chasm.

In our text [Matt. 12:40], Jesus said that He was going to be three days and nights in the heart of the earth. But He also told the thief on the cross that He would be with him in Paradise that same day (Luke 23:43). So then, Abraham’s bosom was also known as Paradise. To the Greeks, this went by the name of Elysium. This is where Jesus went, and preached across the chasm.

The Greek word for the lowest pit of Hades, the worst part, was Tartarus. This word is used once in the New Testament (without any redefinition, mind). Peter tells us this: “For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell [Tartarus], and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment” (2 Peter 2:4).

While in Hades, the Lord preached. But the preaching was not “second chance” preaching. Rather the word used is one used for heralding or announcing, not the word for preaching the gospel. “By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison; Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water” (1 Pet. 3:19–20). The Lord was announcing their final defeat to the “sons of God” and Nephilim both. And this, incidentally, tells us how momentous the rebellion at the time of the Flood actually was. Thousands of years after their definitive defeat, Jesus went to them to announce their final defeat.

The Bible teaches us that Jesus is the king of all things. The devil is not the ruler of Gehenna—Jesus is. The lake of fire was prepared for the devil and his angels (Matt. 25:41). It is a place of torment for the devil. Furthermore, Jesus holds the keys to Hades as well. “I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell [Hades] and of death.” (Rev. 1:18). Jesus, not the devil, is the King of Hell. Jesus, not the devil, is the Lord of Hades.

When the Lord rose from the dead, He led captivity captive (Eph. 4:8)—all the saints in the Old Testament who had died and gone to Abraham’s bosom were transferred when Paradise was moved (Matt. 27:52). And by the time of Paul, Paradise was up (2 Cor. 12:4). So if you had lived in the Old Testament, you would have died and gone down to Sheol/Hades. But the part of Hades that contained the saints of God has been emptied out, and now when God’s people die, what happens? To be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord (2 Cor. 5:6, 8). We still go to Paradise, but Paradise itself has been moved into the heavens.

The Apostles Creed 11: He Descended Into Hades

Now, that we may give a simpler answer, it was not fit that the Son of God should be born of a human father's seed, lest, if He were wholly the Son of a man, He should fail to be also the Son of God, and have nothing more than "a Solomon" or "a Jonas," -as Ebion thought we ought to believe concerning Him.

On the Flesh of Christ

41–42

For to hinder thy supposing that the result would be such with the Jews as with the Ninevites; that they would be converted, and that as in their case He established the tottering city, and converted the barbarians, so these too should turn unto Him after His resurrection; hear how He declares altogether the contrary. For that they should reap no good from hence in respect of their own benefit, but rather suffer incurable ills, this too He went on to declare by the parable of the evil spirit.

But for the present He is justifying their future sufferings, signifying that they would suffer justly. For their calamities and their desolation He represents by that similitude; but up to this time He is indicating the justice of their having to suffer all these things: which also in the Old Testament was His wont. Thus when about to destroy Sodom, He first defended Himself to Abraham, by showing the desolation and rareness of virtue, when indeed not even ten men were found in so many cities, who had made it their rule to live chastely. And to Lot also in like manner, He first signifies their inhospitality and their unnatural lusts, and then He brings the fire on them. And with regard to the deluge again He did the selfsame thing, by His acts excusing Himself to Noah. And also to Ezekiel in like manner, when He caused him dwelling in Babylon to see men's evil deeds in Jerusalem. And yet again to Jeremiah, when He said, "Pray not," excusing Himself He added, "Seest thou not what they do?" And everywhere He doeth the selfsame thing, as here also.

For what saith He? "The men of Nineveh shall rise up, and shall condemn this generation, because they repented at the preaching of Jonas, and, behold, a greater than Jonas is here."

For he was a servant, but I am the Master; and he came forth from the whale, but I rose from death; and he proclaimed destruction, but I am come preaching the good tidings of the kingdom. And they indeed believed without a sign, but I have exhibited many signs. And they indeed heard nothing more than those words, but I have given a spring to every kind of self-denial. And he came being ministered unto, but I the very Master and Lord of all am come not threatening, not demanding an account, but bringing pardon. And they were barbarians, but these have conversed with unnumbered prophets. And of him no man had foretold, but of me all, and the facts agreed with their words. And he indeed, when he was to go forth, ran away that he might not be ridiculed; but I, knowing that I am both to be crucified and mocked, am come. And while he did not endure so much as to be reproached for them that were saved, I underwent even death, and that the most shameful death, and after this I sent others again. And he was a strange sort of person, and an alien, and unknown; but I a kinsman after the flesh, and of the same forefathers. And many more topics too might any one collect, were he to seek diligently for more.

But He stops not even at this, but adds also another example, saying, "And the queen of the south shall rise up in judgment with this generation, and shall condemn them, because she came from the uttermost parts of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon, and behold a greater than Solomon is here."

This was more than the former. For Jonah went unto them, but the queen of the south waited not for Solomon to come to her, but went herself unto him, although she was both a woman, and a barbarian, and at so great a distance, no threat laid upon her, nor being in fear of death, but simply through the love of wise words. "But behold even a greater than Solomon is here." For in that case the woman came, but here I have come. And she indeed rose up from the uttermost parts of the earth, but I go about cities and villages. And his discourse was of trees and various kinds of wood, which could do no great good to his visitor: but mine, of secret things, and most awful mysteries.

Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 43

For what saith He? "The men of Nineveh shall rise up, and shall condemn this generation, because they repented at the preaching of Jonas, and, behold, a greater than Jonas is here."

For he was a servant, but I am the Master; and he came forth from the whale, but I rose from death; and he proclaimed destruction, but I am come preaching the good tidings of the kingdom. And they indeed believed without a sign, but I have exhibited many signs. And they indeed heard nothing more than those words, but I have given a spring to every kind of self-denial. And he came being ministered unto, but I the very Master and Lord of all am come not threatening, not demanding an account, but bringing pardon. And they were barbarians, but these have conversed with unnumbered prophets. And of him no man had foretold, but of me all, and the facts agreed with their words. And he indeed, when he was to go forth, ran away that he might not be ridiculed; but I, knowing that I am both to be crucified and mocked, am come. And while he did not endure so much as to be reproached for them that were saved, I underwent even death, and that the most shameful death, and after this I sent others again. And he was a strange sort of person, and an alien, and unknown; but I a kinsman after the flesh, and of the same forefathers. And many more topics too might any one collect, were he to seek diligently for more.

Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 43

41–42

Not by a sentence of judgment, but by the comparison of their example; as He adds, For they repented at the preaching of Jonas; and, behold, a greater than Jonas is here. This word 'hic' is to be taken as an adverb of place, not as a pronoun. Jonas (according to the LXX) preached for three days, (Jonah 3:4 ἔτι τρδῖς ἡμέδαι) I for this so long time; he to the Assyrians an unbelieving nation, I to God's own people the Jews; he preached with his voice only, doing no miracles, I, doing so many wonders, am falsely accused as Beelzebub.

So the queen of the south will condemn the Jews in the same manner as the men of Nineveh will condemn unbelieving Israel. This is the queen of Saba, of whom we read in the book of Kings and Chronicles, who leaving her nation and kingdom came through so many difficulties to hear the wisdom of Solomon, and brought him many gifts. Also in these instances of Nineveh and the queen of Saba, the faith of the Gentiles is significantly set above that of Israel.

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

(Verse 41) The men of Nineveh will rise up in judgment with this generation, and will condemn it: for they repented at the preaching of Jonah. Not by the power of judgment, but by the example of comparison.

And behold, here is more than Jonah. Here, 'here' is an adverb of place, not a pronoun. Jonah, according to the Septuagint Interpreters, preached for three days: I for so much time. He to the unbelieving Assyrians: I to the people of God, the Jews. He to foreigners: I to fellow citizens. He spoke in simple words, doing nothing of signs: I doing so many signs, enduring the slander of Beelzebub. Therefore, there is more of Jonah here, that is, currently among you.

Commentary on Matthew

If Jonah then is taken as a type of Christ, he is not so taken in every respect—he was sent to preach to the Ninevites, but he sought to flee from the presence of God. And he is seen to shrink from going to the east. The Son also was sent from God the Father to preach to the nations, but he was not unwilling to assume this ministry.The prophet appeals to those sailing with him to throw him into the sea, then he was swallowed by a great fish, then after three days he was given back up and afterwards went to Nineveh and fulfilled his ministry. But he was embittered beyond measure when God took pity upon the Ninevites. Christ willingly submitted to death, he remained in the heart of the earth, he came back to life and afterward went up to Galilee and commanded that the preaching to the Gentiles should begin. But he was not grieved to see that those who were called to acknowledge the truth were being saved. Thus just as bees in the field, when flitting about the flowers, always gather up what is useful for the provision of the hives, so we also, when searching in the divinely inspired Scriptures, need always to be collecting and collating what is perfect for explicating Christ’s mysteries and to interpret the Word fully without cause for rebuke.

Fragment 162

41–42

The Lord shows in these words that there shall be one resurrection of the good and the bad against certain heretics, who said that there should be two, one of the good, another of the bad. These words likewise overthrow that fable of the Jews, who use to say that the Resurrection shall be held a thousand years before the Judgment; these words clearly proving that the Judgment shall ensue straight upon the Resurrection. And shall condemn it.

Beautifully is the Church gathered out of the Gentiles spoken of as a queen who knows how to rule her ways. Of her the Psalmist speaks; The queen stood on thy right hand. (Ps. 45:9.) She is the queen of the south because she abounds in the fervour of the Holy Spirit. Solomon, interpreted 'peaceful,' signifies Him of whom it is said, He is our peace. (Eph. 2:14.)

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

41–42

The Ninevites typify those who cease from sin—the queen those that know not to sin; for penitence puts away sin, wisdom shuns it.

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Jonah, He says, after he left the belly of the whale, preached and was believed. But you will not believe Me even after My Resurrection. Wherefore you will be condemned by the Ninevites, who believed in My servant Jonah without any signs, and, what is more, were barbarians. But you who were nourished on the prophets and have seen signs, have not believed in Me, the Master. For this is what is meant by "Behold, a greater than Jonah is here."

Commentary on Matthew

The men of Nineveh will arise at the judgment with this generation. This is the indignity: first, the gentiles are preferred; secondly, the reason (v. 43).

Note that a person is good, either because he does not sin or because he repents. First, therefore, he prefers those who have repented, namely, the gentiles; secondly, those who have sinned (v. 42).

The Lord had compared his resurrection to Jonah; therefore they could believe that it would happen to them as to the Ninevites, who were set free. But the Jews were not only set free, they were dispersed. Hence the men of Nineveh... In these words an error of the Jews is excluded, namely, that the resurrection will occur before the judgment and that in the meantime Jerusalem will be rebuilt. And they appeal to Isaiah (25:6): "On this mountain the Lord will make a feast of fat things." Others said that the just and martyrs will rise one thousand years before the others, and they appeal to Revelation (20:1): "Then I saw an angel coming down from heaven, holding in his hand the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain. And he seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years, and threw him into the pit, and shut it and sealed it over him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years were ended." Both are excluded when he says, They will arise with this generation, the good and those not good together. And will condemn it, by comparison but not by any authority, because they will rise among those to be condemned: "This is Jerusalem; I have set her in the center of the nations, with countries round about her. And she has wickedly rebelled against my statutes more than the countries round about her" (Ez 5:5). And why will they condemn them? Because they repented; but the scribes and Pharisees were not willing to do penance.

The Lord began his preaching with penance as the theme, as did John, but they did not listen: "No one repents of his wickedness" (Jer 8:6). Furthermore, the others did penance at one preaching by Jonah; but Jesus had preached to them many times, and yet they were not converted: "If I had not done among them the works which no one else did, they would not have sin" (Jn 15:24). Again, the former were converted by the preaching of one prophet; but the latter had not only a prophet but the Son of God. Hence it says in Hebrews (1:1): "In many and various ways God spoke of old to our fathers by the prophets; but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he has appointed heir of all things, through whom also he created the world." And he continues: and behold a greater than Jonah here, as in Hebrews (3:3): "Yet Jesus was counted worthy of as much more glory than Moses as the builder of a house has more glory than the house." Therefore the Ninevites are preferred, because they did penance.

Commentary on Matthew

The church of the Gentiles, which in truth is gathered “from the ends of the earth,” fulfills the place of the queen of the south, not providing gifts in “perishable things, silver” and spices, but faith, the incense of knowledge, the outpouring of an offering, the sweat of the virtues and the blood of martyrdom. For with such gifts the true Solomon is pleased, who is Christ, “our peace.” For “Solomon” is interpreted as “peaceful.”

Fragment 277.23

But He stops not even at this, but adds also another example, saying, "And the queen of the south shall rise up in judgment with this generation, and shall condemn them, because she came from the uttermost parts of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon, and behold a greater than Solomon is here."

This was more than the former. For Jonah went unto them, but the queen of the south waited not for Solomon to come to her, but went herself unto him, although she was both a woman, and a barbarian, and at so great a distance, no threat laid upon her, nor being in fear of death, but simply through the love of wise words. "But behold even a greater than Solomon is here." For in that case the woman came, but here I have come. And she indeed rose up from the uttermost parts of the earth, but I go about cities and villages. And his discourse was of trees and various kinds of wood, which could do no great good to his visitor: but mine, of secret things, and most awful mysteries.

Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 43

(Verse 42.) The Queen of Austria will rise in judgment with this generation, and will condemn it because she came from the ends of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon. And behold, someone greater than Solomon is here. In the same way, the Queen of Austria will condemn the people of Judah, just as the men of Nineveh condemned the unbelieving Israel. This, however, is the Queen of Sheba, of whom we read in the Book of Kings and Chronicles: she, despite all the difficulties and leaving her people and empire behind, came to Judah to hear the wisdom of Solomon, and she brought him many gifts. But in Nineveh, the faith of the nations is secretly preferred to that of Israel.

Commentary on Matthew

It was nothing strange for Christ to be more than Jonah and to be more than Solomon, for he is the Lord and they are the servants. But who are those who looked askance at the presence of the Lord, whereas foreigners listened to his servants?

Sermon 72A.1

The queen, He says, came from a great distance, despite her tender womanhood, to hear about trees and woods and certain things of nature. But though I came to you, speaking of ineffable things, you have not accepted Me.

Commentary on Matthew

The queen of the South will arise at the judgment with this generation and condemn it because of wisdom, which they refused to receive. It is recorded of her in 1 Kings (10:24) that she came to hear the wisdom of Solomon. She signifies the Church of believers: "At your right hand stands the queen in gold of Ophir." The Church is called queen, because it ought to rule: "A king who sits on the throne of judgment winnows all evil with his eyes" (Pr 20:8). Of the south by reason of the Holy Spirit: "Awake, O north wind, and come, O south wind. Blow upon my garden..." (S of S 4:16). That queen will arise in the judgment with that generation. Note that it does not say she did not sin, but that she was not rebellious. Why? Because she came from the ends of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon, as it says in 1 Kings (10:24); and there was no need for you to come from the ends of the earth, because he is here. Hence: behold a greater than Solomon here, because he was a temporal king and a sinner, but here is one innocent and eternal: "His power is an everlasting power which shall not pass away, and his kingdom one that shall not be destroyed" (Dan 7:14).

Commentary on Matthew

43–44

The law which was given later intervened, casting out the unclean spirit dwelling in the hearts of the elect people. It kept that spirit away as if it were surrounding the people with its protective power. Going out from there, the spirit wandered among the nations in the deserts and arid places, leaving behind its old home, so that it might rest in these places until the day of judgment and not in a troubled dwelling [as Israel provided].But when God’s grace was imparted afresh to the nations, flowing as a living fountain through the cleansing water [of baptism], there was no place for the spirit to continue living among them, and indeed he had no rest with them. After reconsidering its present situation, the spirit believed the best thing to do was to return to the house from which it had come. That house, having been cleaned out through the law, decorated with the proclamation of the prophets and finally prepared by the coming of Christ, was found to be vacant. The custodian of the law had left—because the whole law [was valid] until John—and those living there did not receive Christ. Also, there was no inhabitant in the dwelling, and it had been left unguarded. Because of the concern of those who were living there before, the place had been kept clean and adorned for the incoming dweller. Then seven spirits even more evil entered in—as many as there were the gifts of grace offered by Christ which God’s all-embracing wisdom had placed there with a sevenfold glory. In this way the possession of wicked spirits was as great as the possession of grace would have been. Thus “the last state of that man becomes worse than the first,” because the unclean spirit left the house for fear of the law but now returns with a vengeance because of the grace that was rejected.

Commentary on Matthew 12:22-23

43–45

When therefore He had condemned them, having proved most amply that they were sinning inexcusably, and that their disobedience arose from their own perverseness not from their Teacher's inability, and when He had demonstrated this as well by many other arguments, as also by the Ninevites, and by the queen: then He speaks also of the punishment that should overtake them, darkly indeed, yet He doth speak of it, interweaving an intense fear in His narration.

"For when," saith He, "the unclean spirit is gone out of the man, he walketh through dry places, seeking rest; and finding none, he saith, I will return to my house from whence I came out; and when he is come, he findeth it empty, and swept and garnished. Then goeth he, and taketh with himself seven other spirits more wicked than himself, and they enter in and dwell there, and the last state of that man is worse than the first. Even so shall it be also unto this generation."

By this He signifies, that not only in the world to come, but here too they should suffer most grievously. For since He had said, "The men of Nineveh shall rise up in judgment, and shall condemn this generation;" lest, on account of the postponement of the time, they should despise and grow more careless, by this He brings His terror close upon them. Wherewith the prophet Hosea likewise threatening them said, that they should be "even as the prophet that is beside himself, the man that is carried away by a spirit;" that is to say, as the madmen, and distracted by evil spirits, even the false prophets. For here, by "a prophet that is beside himself," he means the false prophet, such as are the augurs. Much to the same effect Christ also tells them, that they shall suffer the utmost evils.

Seest thou how from everything He urges them to attend to His sayings; from things present, from things to come; by those who had approved themselves (the Ninevites, I mean, and that queen), and by the offending Tyrians and Sodomites? This did the prophets likewise, bringing forward the sons of the Rechabites, and the bride that forgetteth not her proper ornament and her girdle, and "the ox that knoweth his owner, and the ass that remembereth his crib." Even so here too, when He had by a comparison set forth their perverseness, He speaks afterwards of their punishment also.

What then can the saying mean? As the possessed, saith He, when delivered from that infirmity, should they be at all remiss, draw upon themselves their delusion more grievous than ever: even so is it with you. For before also ye were possessed by a devil, when ye were worshipping idols, and were slaying your sons to the devils, exhibiting great madness; nevertheless I forsook you not, but cast out that devil by the prophets; and again in my own person I am come, willing to cleanse you more entirely. Since then you will not attend, but have wrecked yourselves in greater wickedness (for to kill prophets was a crime not nearly so great and grievous as to slay Him); therefore your sufferings will be more grievous than the former, those at Babylon, I mean, and in Egypt, and under the first Antiochus. Because what things befell them in the time of Vespasian and Titus, were very far more grievous than those. Wherefore also He said, "There shall be great tribulation, such as never was, neither shall be." But not this only doth the illustration declare, but that they should be also utterly destitute of all virtue, and more assailable by the power of the devils, than at that time. For then even although they sinned, yet were there also among them such as acted uprightly, and God's providence was present with them, and the grace of the Spirit, tending, correcting, fulfilling all its part; but now of this guardianship too they shall be utterly deprived; so He tells them; so that there is now both a greater scarcity of virtue, and a more intense affliction, and a more tyrannical operation of the devils.

Ye know accordingly even in our generation, when he who surpassed all in impiety, I mean Julian, was transported with his fury, how they ranged themselves with the heathens, how they courted their party. So that, even if they seem to be in some small degree chastened now, the fear of the emperors makes them quiet; since, if it were not for that, far worse than the former had been their daring. For in all their other evil works they surpass their predecessors; sorceries, magic arts, impurities, they exhibit in great excess. And amongst the rest, moreover, strong as is the curb which holds them down, they have often made seditions, and risen up against kings, which has resulted in their being pierced through with the worst of evils.

Where now are they that seek after signs? Let them hear that a considerate mind is needed, and if this be wanting, signs are of no profit. See, for instance, how the Ninevites without signs believed, while these, after so many miracles, grew worse, and made themselves an habitation of innumerable devils, and brought on themselves ten thousand calamities; and very naturally. For when a man, being once delivered from his ills, fails to be corrected, he will suffer far worse than before. Yea, therefore He said, "he finds no rest," to indicate, that positively and of necessity such an one will be overtaken by the ambush of the devils. Since surely by these two things he ought to have been sobered, by his former sufferings, and by his deliverance; or rather a third thing also is added, the threat of having still worse to endure. But yet by none of these were they made better.

All this might be seasonably said, not of them only, but of us also, when after having been enlightened, and delivered from our former ills, we again cleave unto the same wickedness, for more grievous also thenceforth will be the punishment of our subsequent sins. Therefore to the sick of the palsy also Christ said, "Behold, thou art made whole; sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee;" and this to a man who was thirty-eight years in his infirmity. And what, one might ask, was he to suffer worse than this? Something far worse, and more intolerable. For far be it from us, that we should endure as much as we are capable of enduring. For God is at no loss for inflictions. For according to the greatness of His mercy, so also is His wrath.

Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 43

43–45

Some suppose that this place is spoken of heretics, because the unclean spirit who dwelt in them before when they were Gentiles, is cast out before the confession of the true faith; when after they went over to heresy, and garnished their house with feigned virtues, then it is that the Devil, having taken to him other seven evil spirits, returns and dwells in them; and their last state becomes worse than their first. And indeed heretics are in a much worse condition than the Gentiles; for in the heretics was a hope of faith, in the Gentiles a war of discord. Yet though this exposition has a plausibility and a show of learning, I am doubtful of its truth. For by the concluding words of this, whether it be parable or example, Titus shall it he to this evil generation, we are compelled to refer it, not to heretics, or to men in general, but to the Jewish people. So the context of the passage may not shift about loosely and vaguely, and be like unmeaning speeches, but may be consistent with itself from first to last. The unclean spirit then went out from the Jews when they received the Law; and being cast out of the Jews, he walked through the wilderness of the Gentiles; as it follows, He walketh through dry places seeking rest.

And when they believed on the Lord, the Devil, finding no place among the nations, said, I will return into my house whence I came out; I have the Jews from whom I formerly departed. And when he is come, he findeth it empty, swept, and garnished. For the temple of the Jews was empty, and had not Christ to dwell therein, He having said, Arise, let us go hence. (John 14:31) Seeing then they had not the protection of Angels, and were burdened with the useless observances of the Law, and the traditions of the Pharisees, the Devil returns to his former dwelling, and, taking to him seven other dæmons, inhabits it as before. And the last state of that nation is worse than the first, for they are now possessed by a larger number of dæmons in blaspheming Jesus Christ in their synagogues, than they were possessed with in Egypt before they had knowledge of the Law; for it is one thing to have no belief that He should come, another not to receive Him when He is come. A number seven-fold is joined with the Devil, either because of the sabbath, or from the number of the Holy Spirit; (Is. 11:2) that as in Isaiah upon the bud which comes from the root of Jesse, seven spirits of virtues are related to have descended; so on the other hand an equal number of vices should be poured forth upon the Devil. Beautifully then are seven spirits said to be taken to him, either because of the breaking of the sabbath, or because of the heinous sins which are contrary to the seven gifts of the Holy Spirit.

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

(Verse 43) But whenever an unclean spirit has gone out of a person, it roams through arid places, searching for rest but does not find any. Then it says, 'I will return to my house from which I came.' And when it comes, it finds the house empty, swept clean, and put in order. Then it goes and brings along with it seven other spirits more evil than itself, and they enter and dwell there. And the last state of that person becomes worse than the first. For heretics are in a much worse condition than the Gentiles: because in the former there is hope of faith, and in the latter there is the battle of discord. Although this understanding seems to prefer applause and the appearance of doctrine, I do not know whether it has the truth. For from the fact that a finite or parabolic, or exemplary, sequence follows: so it will be for this wicked generation: we are compelled not to refer to heretics and any other people, but to the Jewish people as a parable, so that the context of the passage does not flow passively and vaguely in different directions and is confused like the custom of fools; but let it adhere to itself, either responding to what came before or what comes after. An unclean spirit went out from the Jews, when they received the Law, and walked through dry places, seeking rest for itself. Being driven out by the Jews, it walked through the deserted places of the Gentiles; and when they later believed in the Lord, he, not finding a place among the nations, said:

Commentary on Matthew

43–45

(Quæst. Ev. i. 8.) So that in these words the Lord signifies that some shall so believe, as not to have strength for the work of continence, and shall return to the world. He taketh unto him other seven, is to be understood that when any has fallen from righteousness, he shall also have hypocrisy. For the lust of the flesh being cast out of its wonted works by penitence, when it finds not any delights in which it may rest, returns the more greedily, and again takes possession of the soul, if carelessness has ensued, and there has not been introduced as the dweller in the cleansed abode the word of God in sound doctrine. And as he will not only have the seven vices which are the contraries of the spiritual virtues, but will hypocritically feign that he has the virtues, therefore his old lust, taking to itself seven other worse, that is, this seven-fold hypocrisy, returns to him so as to make the last state of that man worse than the former.

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

He calls the hearts of the Gentiles, dry places, as lacking all the moisture of wholesome waters, that is of the holy Scriptures, and of spiritual gifts, and strangers to the pouring in of the Holy Spirit.

The Devil supposed he should have rest for ever among the Gentiles, but it is added, and findeth none, because when the Son of God appeared in the mystery of His incarnation, the Gentiles believed.

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

(Mor. xxxiii. 3.) The dry places where no water is are the hearts of the righteous, which by the power of discipline are dried from all humours of carnal lust. The wet places are the minds of worldly men, which the humour of carnal lust fills, and makes watery; in such the Devil imprints his footsteps the more deeply, inasmuch as in his wanderings he comes down upon such hearts as upon low and marshy ground.

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Or, the dry places are the hearts of the faithful, which after they have been purged from the weakness of loose thoughts, the crafty lier-in-wait tries if by any means he may fix his footsteps there; but flying from the chaste spirit, the Devil finds no resting-place to his mind but in the heart of the wicked; as it follows, and findeth none.

For when any one is converted to the faith, the Devil is cast out of him in Baptism, who driven thence wanders up and down through the dry places, that is, the hearts of the faithful.

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

43–45

He shows that they have been brought to utter perdition by not accepting Him. For just as those who have been delivered from demons suffer worse things if they become lazy and careless, so it is that your generation was possessed of a demon when it worshipped the idols. But this demon was cast out by means of the prophets. Then I Myself came, wishing to cleanse you further. But since you rejected Me, and, indeed, are eager to slay Me, as your sin is worse, so will your punishment be worse, and your last captivity will be more grievous than the former. You, O reader, must also understand this, that the unclean spirit is cast out by baptism and goes forth among waterless and unbaptized souls; but it does not find rest in them. Rest for demons is to harass with evil deeds those who are baptized, for they already possess those who are unbaptized. Therefore the demon returns with seven other spirits to the one who is baptized. For just as there are seven gifts of the Holy Spirit, so, on the contrary, there are seven spirits of evil. When the demon re-enters the one who is baptized, the disaster is worse. For, previously, there was hope of being cleansed through baptism. But now there is no hope of a second baptism, unless it be by the baptism of repentance, which is exceedingly toilsome.

Commentary on Matthew

When the unclean spirit has gone out of a man... Above he showed that the gentiles were preferable to the Jews; here he wants to confirm this with an example. First, he presents the example; secondly, he applies it (v. 45b).

He gives the example of an unclean spirit. But one must keep in mind that sometimes an example is taken from some occurrence, sometimes from a parable. When it is taken from an occurrence, it is required that each be explained separately, so that both need their own explanation, as was done here, when the example of Jonah was presented. Sometimes the example from a parable is presented, as when it is said, "The kingdom of heaven is like unto..." In this case there is no need to state what is in the kingdom of heaven. Therefore we can say according to Jerome that it is a similitude and a parable. In that case there is one sense. Or, according to Augustine, it is taken from an occurrence, and then there are two senses.

The unclean spirit goes out of a man in two ways, because sometimes he torments a man in a bodily way, sometimes in a spiritual. Hence it is necessary to see how a man is filled with an unclean spirit; how in a bodily manner and how in a spiritual; thirdly, how it pertains to the matter at hand. Therefore, four things were said: first, liberation from an unclean spirit; secondly, repeated affliction; thirdly, the occasion; fourthly, the occasion of the second affliction.

He says, therefore, When the unclean spirit has gone out of a man... Anything mixed with a baser thing is called unclean, with a purer thing, more pure. For example, if silver is mixed with lead, it becomes baser. Accordingly, a created spirit, if it is united with one lower than itself, is called an unclean spirit. And sometimes it goes out of a man, whom it was harassing corporeally, and sometimes whom it was vexing spiritually, as in baptism. Consequently, the renewed harassment is mentioned, as well as the occasion: first, on the part of the demon; secondly, on the part of those harassed. On the part of the demon, in regard to those others; secondly, as to these. For it is the demon's custom to be restless unless he causes harm, because he loved sin from the beginning. Hence when he is expelled from anyone, he looks elsewhere to cause vexation. Hence he says, he walks through dry places seeking rest, but he finds none. Hence sometimes he does not find rest. Where he does is described in Job (40:21): "Under the lotus plant he lies, in the covert of the reeds and in the marsh." Marshy places are hearts given to voluptuous pleasures; dry places are those who scorn such pleasures but are turned aside by prosperity. Ezekiel (37:11) says of these: "Our bones are dried up, and our hope is lost." He says, he walks and seeks out any man he might deceive. Hence the fact that he walks shows his diligence: "Be sober, be watchful. Your adversary, the devil, goes about like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour" (1 Pt 5:8). Seeking rest, but he finds none except in marshy places. So it was that leaving the Jews, he went to the gentiles who are dry of the dew of divine grace; but he did not find rest, because he was cast out, for they received God's word.

Commentary on Matthew

(Verse 44.) I will return to my home, from which I departed. This is, I will go to the Jews, whom I had dismissed before.

Commentary on Matthew

(Mor. vii. 17.) For it often happens that the soul in the commencement of its progress is lifted up, and prides itself on its virtues, that it opens an entrance to the adversary who is raging against it, and who shows himself the more violent in breaking into it, by how much he was grieved at being cast out, though but for a short space.

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

And returning to his house whence he had gone out, he findeth it empty, of good works through slothfulness, swept, that is, of its old vices by Baptism, and garnished with feigned virtues through hypocrisy.

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Then he says, 'I will return to the house from which I came.' From these words you can gather that if the devil is ever driven out of a person because he does penance, he does not leave him forever, for it is written of Christ that the devil left him for a time (Lk 4:13). From this we are given to understand that men should always be on their guard, lest he return. And this is why he says, I will return...

And coming, he finds it empty. Here is presented the occasion for his second harassment. And if we refer it to the Jews, it is plain that when he was driven from the gentiles, he returned to the Jews. Hence three occasions for his return are presented, namely, idleness; therefore he says, empty: "Idleness teaches much evil" (Sir 33:24). Accordingly, Jerome: "Always do something good, so that the devil will find you busy." Hence empty, i.e., idle: "The foe gloated over her, mocking at her downfall" (Lam 1:7). Swept with brooms, because something cleaned with brooms is not thoroughly cleaned. Hence sweeping amounts to superficial cleaning. A thorough cleaning needs fire, as it says in the Law that vessels should be cleansed with fire. And ornamented, i.e., superficially adorned. Something ornamented has its own beauty and a beauty that comes from the adornment: "May our daughters be like corner pillars, adorned as a likeness of the temple" (Ps 144:12). But those who would be secure ought to have an inward beauty: "The princess is decked in her chamber with gold-woven robes; in many-colored robes she is led to the king" (Ps 45:13). But when the adornment is only external, one is not left by the devil. So it was with the Jews, for they observed the Sabbath by resting from good more than from evil. They also showed too much concern about the trivial matters of the Law.

Commentary on Matthew

(Verse 45) And coming, he finds it empty, swept clean, and put in order. Then he goes and takes with him seven other spirits more wicked than himself, and they enter and dwell there; and the last state of that man becomes worse than the first. So it will be with this wicked generation. For the temple of the Jews was empty, and it did not have Christ as a guest, who said: Rise, let us go from here (John 14:31). And in another place: Your house shall be left to you desolate (Luke 13:35). Therefore, since both God and the angels did not have protection, and they were adorned with superfluous observances of the Law and traditions of the Pharisees, the devil returns to his former seat: and adding to himself a group of demons, he inhabits his former home, and the last things of that people become worse than the previous ones. For now they are possessed by a much greater number of demons, blaspheming Christ Jesus in their synagogues, than they were possessed in Egypt before the knowledge of the Law: for it is one thing not to believe in the coming One, and another not to receive Him who has come. But the number seven, whether understood to refer to the devil because of the Sabbath, or because of the number of the Holy Spirit: just as it is narrated that the seven spirits of virtues descended upon the rod from the root of Jesse and the flower that ascended from the root (Isa. XI); so, on the contrary, the number of vices is consecrated in the devil.

Commentary on Matthew

When there is forgiveness of sins through the sacraments, the house is cleaned; but the Holy Spirit must be a necessary inhabitant. And the Holy Spirit inhabits only those who are humble of heart, for God says, “Upon whom will my Spirit rest?” And he answers the question: “Upon the one who is humble and quiet and who fears my word.” Therefore, when he is the inhabitant, he fills up, rules, acts, deters from evil, inspires one to do good and tempers justice with sweetness, so that one may do good with the love of an upright heart and not with the fear of punishment. But once that unclean spirit that made you evil has gone out of you, that is, from your mind, when your sins have been forgiven, it roams through dry places in search of a resting place. Finding none, the unclean spirit returns to his house, where he finds everything clean and in order. Then he takes with him seven other spirits more evil than himself; and the last state of that person becomes worse than the first. He takes with him seven other spirits. What is meant by “seven other spirits”? Is the unclean spirit itself sevenfold? What does this mean? By seven the whole group is signified. The whole spirit went away, the whole spirit came back; and would that only one spirit returned! What does it mean: “He takes with him seven other spirits”? Those spirits you did not have when you were evil, you will have unexpectedly when you are good. Listen carefully while I explain as best I can. By a sevenfold operation the Holy Spirit is committed to our care, so that we may have the “spirit of wisdom and understanding, counsel and fortitude, knowledge and true godliness, and fear of God.” Arrayed on the opposite side of this sevenfold good is the sevenfold evil: the spirit of stupidity and error, the spirit of foolhardiness and cowardice, the spirit of ignorance and impiety, and the spirit of pride against the fear of God. These are seven evil spirits. What are the seven other spirits even more evil? The seven other spirits even more evil are found in hypocrisy. One evil spirit is the spirit of stupidity, the other worse evil is the pretense of wisdom. The evil spirit of error, the other worse evil, is the pretense of truth. The evil spirit of foolhardiness, the other worse evil, is the pretense of counsel. The evil spirit of cowardice, the other worse evil, is the pretense of fortitude. The evil spirit of ignorance, the other worse evil, is the pretense of knowledge. The evil spirit of impiety, the other worse evil, is the pretense of piety. The evil spirit of pride, the other worse evil, is the pretense of fear. Seven were intolerable. Who will tolerate fourteen? Necessarily, therefore, when the pretense of truth is added to malice, the last state of that person becomes worse than the first.

Sermon 72A.2

This is said with good reason. For when someone who has once been freed from evils loses self-control, he suffers a much worse fall than previously. For this reason “he passes through waterless places seeking rest.” This indicates how thoroughly the demons’ stratagem has taken hold of such a person—completely and absolutely. There are many reasons why such a person should have kept himself under control before it is too late. He has already suffered. He has been redeemed. The threat of a worse future punishment should be constraining. But none of these reasons has prevailed to make them better.Now remember how the evil spirit inhabited the people when they were in Egypt, how they lived according to Egyptian customs and laws and became filled with all kinds of uncleanness. When they had been delivered by Moses and had received the law as a guide calling them to the light of true divine knowledge, the wicked and unclean spirit left them. But what happens when someone who has believed now disbelieves? The demons again take up their abode there with a vengeance. For just as the Holy Spirit, when he sees a person’s heart desisting from all uncleanness, abides and dwells and rests in that one, so also the unclean spirit likes to take lodging in the souls of the lawless.

Fragment 163

Then he goes and brings with him seven other spirits more evil than himself. Here he deals with the second and more serious harassment. It is shown to be more serious, first, as to the number; secondly, as to duration; thirdly, as to effect. As to number, because he brings seven. According to Chrysostom the literal explanation is that when anyone falls and is not careful, something worse happens to him: "See, you are well! Sin no more, that nothing worse befall you" (Jn 5:14). According to Augustine he brings seven in two ways: for sometimes a penitent does penance, but then acts negligently; as a result he becomes more prone: "God gave them up to a base mind" (Rom 1:28). By the fact that he says seven the entire number of vices is signified. Augustine, however, explains it differently: some commit a certain sin, but in the state of repentance they add hypocrisy. And just as the gifts of the Holy Spirit are seven, so there are seven hypocrisies. Hence they were simple vices at first, then are added the hypocrisies, which are worse. And they are described as seven either on account of the totality of vices or on account of the Sabbath. Those who sin in this way will become fixed in evil; hence he says, they enter and dwell there, because they do not wish to leave: "Why then has this people turned away in perpetual backsliding? They hold fast to deceit, they refuse to return" (Jer 8:5). If it is applied to the Jews, it is clear that he dwells in them and does not wish to depart from them.

And the last state of that man becomes worse than the first. This refers to the effect of the harassment. Literally, one who is punished more is harassed more; hence 2 Peter (2:21): "It would have been better for them never to have known the way of righteousness than after knowing it to turn back from the holy commandment." Again, as to the Jews, who acted worse by blaspheming Christ than by worshipping idols. Therefore he concludes: So shall it be with this evil generation, because it will become worse for them than it was for those in Egypt.

Commentary on Matthew

They say that He testifies Himself to His not having been born, when He asks, "Who is my mother, and who are my brethren? " In this manner heretics either wrest plain and simple words to any sense they choose by their conjectures, or else they violently resolve by a literal interpretation words which imply a conditional sense and are incapable of a simple solution, as in this passage.

Against Marcion Book 4

But whenever a dispute arises about the nativity, all who reject it as creating a presumption in favour of the reality of Christ's flesh, wilfully deny that God Himself was born, on the ground that He asked, "Who is my mother, and who are my brethren? " Let, therefore, Apelles hear what was our answer to Marcion in that little work, in which we challenged his own (favourite) gospel to the proof, even that the material circumstances of that remark (of the Lord's) should be considered.

On the Flesh of Christ

And He cannot be held to have thought meanly of His mother, seeing that in His passion He evinced the most extreme carefulness for her.

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

For He said not, Go and say unto her, She is not My mother, but continues His discourse to him that had brought Him word; as it follows; But he answered and said unto him that told him, Who is my mother? and who are my brethren?

But had He desired to disown His mother, He would have done it at the time when the Jews cast His birth in His teeth.

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

For Jesus, our Creator and Redeemer, pretends not to know His mother, and indicates who is His mother and who are His relatives not through kinship of the flesh, but through union of the spirit, saying: "Who is my mother, and who are my brethren? For whoever does the will of my Father who is in heaven, he is my brother, and sister, and mother." By these words, what else does He suggest to us, except that He gathers many who are obedient to His commands from among the Gentiles, and does not acknowledge Judea, from whose flesh He was born?

Forty Gospel Homilies, Homily 3

48–50

He did not say this to offend His mother, but to correct this vainglorious and human thought of hers. For He did not say, "She is not My mother," but "Unless she does the will of God, that she bore Me is of no benefit to her." He does not deny the relationship by birth, but He adds to it the relationship by virtue. For no unworthy person derives benefit from a relationship by birth. When He had corrected the sickness of vainglory, He once again obeyed His mother who was calling Him. For the evangelist says:

Commentary on Matthew

But he replied... Here he gives Christ's reply and does two things: first, he replies; secondly, he commends his disciples (v. 49). He says, "Who is my mother and who are my brothers?" From these words some have denied that Christ truly assumed flesh, but only seemed to. Hence they explained: this is not my mother and these are not my brothers. But this is contrary to the Apostle to the Galatians (4:4): "God sent forth his Son, born of woman..." Again to the Romans (1:3): "Who was descended from David according to the flesh." Furthermore, the Lord acknowledged her at the foot of the cross: "Woman, behold your son" (Jn 19:26). Chrysostom: Why does the Lord ask, "who is my mother and who are my brothers"? And he says two things, one of which is sound and the other not. For he says that his mother and brothers experienced something human, for they were elated when they saw Christ preaching and the crowd following. Therefore, they wanted, as it were, to share the glory. Consequently, the Lord wanted to show that what he was doing did not stem from what he had received from the mother but from the Father. This position is partly sound, for it is sound in regard to the brothers, because John (7:5) says: "For even his brothers did not believe in him." But it is not sound in regard to the mother, because it is believed that she never sinned either mortally or venially; for it is said of her in Song of Songs (4:7): "You are all beautiful, my love, and there is no stain in you." And Augustine: When it comes to sin, I want no mention to be made of her. Jerome answers in another way, namely, he was so intent on spiritual matters, that he paid no attention to temporal. Therefore, he directs his answer to affection. Hence he would not have loved his mother more, unless she possessed more spiritually. So he says, who is my mother? He does not deny that she is his mother, but he intends to forbid undue affection. Hence above (10:37): "He that loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me."

Commentary on Matthew

(in Luc. 8:21.) Nor does He overthrow the duty of filial submission, which is conveyed in the command, Honour thy father and thy mother, (Ex. 20:12.) but shows that He owes more to the mysteries and relationship of His Father, than of His mother; as it follows, And stretching out his hand to his disciples, he said, Behold my mother and my brethren.

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

49–50

(Verses 49, 50.) Behold my mother and my brothers. For whoever does the will of my Father who is in heaven, he is my brother and sister and mother. These are my mother, who daily begets me in the souls of believers. These are my brothers, who do the works of my Father. Therefore, he did not deny his mother, as Marcion and Manichaeus believed, that he was born from a phantom; but he preferred the apostles to kinship, so that we may also prefer the spirit to the flesh in comparison of love. Behold, your mother and brothers are standing outside, seeking you. Some of the Lord's brothers suspect that Joseph had children by another wife, following the delusions of the apocryphal writings and inventing a certain Melcha or Escha as a little woman. But as it is contained in the book that we wrote against Helvidius, by the brothers of the Lord, we understand the children of Mary's sister, who is said to be the mother of James the Lesser and Joseph and Judas, whom we read are called the brothers of the Lord in another place in the Gospel. But Scripture demonstrates that brothers are called consobrinos. Let us also say differently: The Savior speaks to the crowds, teaching the nations from within. His mother and brothers, that is, the synagogue and the Jewish people, stand outside and desire to enter, but they become unworthy of his word. And when they ask, inquire, and send a message, they receive the answer that they are free to enter and believe if they wish, but they cannot enter unless they ask someone else.

Commentary on Matthew

49–50

He did not then, as Marcion and Manichæus say, disown His mother, so as to be thought to be born of a phantasm, but He preferred His Apostles to His kindred, that we also in a comparison of our affections should set the spirit before the flesh.

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Did not the Virgin Mary do the will of the Father, who believed in faith, conceived in faith, was chosen from whom salvation would be born among men, was created by Christ before Christ was created in her? Holy Mary indeed did the will of the Father: and for this reason, it is greater for Mary to have been a disciple of Christ than to have been the mother of Christ: it is greater, it is more blessed to have been a disciple of Christ than to have been the mother of Christ. Therefore Mary was blessed because, even before giving birth, she carried the Master in her womb. See if it is not what I say. While the Lord was passing by with the following crowds and performing divine miracles, a certain woman said: "Blessed is the womb that carried you!" And the Lord, so that happiness would not be sought in the flesh, what did He reply? "Rather, blessed are they who hear the word of God and keep it." Hence, therefore, also Mary is blessed because she heard the word of God and kept it: she preserved the truth in her mind more than the flesh in her womb. Christ the truth, Christ the flesh: Christ the truth in Mary’s mind, Christ the flesh in Mary’s womb; greater is what is in the mind than what is carried in the womb. Holy Mary, blessed Mary, but the Church is better than the Virgin Mary. Why? Because Mary is a portion of the Church, a holy member, an excellent member, an outstanding member, but still a member of the whole body. If of the whole body, surely the body is greater than the member. The Lord is the head, and the whole Christ is head and body. What shall I say? We have a divine head, we have God as the head.

Sermon 72/A

Then he commends the disciples: first, the immediate disciples; secondly, all believers. Therefore, the evangelist says, And stretching out his hand toward his disciples, he said: "Here are my mother and my brothers." As if to say: I love them more than the affections of my mother or brothers; for love of the Holy Spirit must rank first. And he extends his hand not only to those but to all.

Commentary on Matthew

Knowing therefore these things, let us neither pride ourselves on children that are of good report, unless we have their virtue; nor upon noble fathers, unless we be like them in disposition. For it is possible, both that he who begat a man should not be his father, and that he who did not beget him should be. Therefore in another place also, when some woman had said, "Blessed is the womb that bare Thee, and the paps which Thou hast sucked;" He said not, "The womb bare me not, neither did I suck the paps," but this, "Yea rather, blessed are they that do the will of my Father." Seest thou how on every occasion He denies not the affinity by nature, but adds that by virtue? And His forerunner too, in saying, "O generation of vipers, think not to say, We have Abraham to our father," means not this, that they were not naturally of Abraham, but that it profits them nothing to be of Abraham, unless they had the affinity by character; which Christ also declared, when He said, "If ye were Abraham's children, ye would do the works of Abraham;" not depriving them of their kindred according to the flesh, but teaching them to seek after that affinity which is greater than it, and more real.

This then He establishes here also, but in a manner less invidious, and more measured, as became Him speaking to His mother. For He said not at all, "She is not my mother, nor are those my brethren, because they do not my will;" neither did He declare and pronounce judgment against them; but He yet left in it their own power to choose, speaking with the gentleness that becomes Him.

"For he that doeth," saith He, "the will of my Father, this is my brother, and sister, and mother."

Wherefore if they desire to be such, let them come this way. And when the woman again cried out, saying, "Blessed is the womb that bare Thee," He said not, "She is not my mother," but, "If she wishes to be blessed, let her do the will of my Father. For such a one is both brother, and sister, and mother."

Oh honor! oh virtue! Unto what a height doth she lead up him that follows after her! How many women have blessed that holy Virgin, and her womb, and prayed that they might become such mothers, and give up all! What then is there to hinder? For behold, He hath marked out a spacious road for us; and it is granted not to women only, but to men also, to be of this rank, or rather of one yet far higher. For this makes one His mother much more, than those pangs did. So that if that were a subject for blessing, much more this, inasmuch as it is also more real. Do not therefore merely desire, but also in the way that leads thee to thy desire walk thou with much diligence.

Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 44

He said these things, not in contempt of his mother and his brothers, but in order to show that he values more highly closeness of soul than any blood relation of body. For it was necessary to say this, both for those who thought that it was more important for him to interact with his own family, as well as for the instruction of those who were present. For just as he himself says to the disciples, “he who loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me,” in the same way, I think, Jesus sets a higher value on his disciples than on his “mother and brothers.”

Fragment 71.19

But since he who does the will of the Father is called sister and brother of the Lord, on account of both sexes who are gathered to the faith, this is not surprising; yet it is greatly to be wondered how one is also called mother. For he deigned to call his faithful disciples brothers, saying: Go, announce to my brothers. Therefore, he who could become a brother of the Lord by coming to faith—it must be asked how he can also be a mother? But we should know that one who is a brother and sister of Christ by believing becomes a mother by preaching. For one gives birth to the Lord, as it were, when one has poured him into the heart of the hearer. And one becomes his mother if through one's voice the love of the Lord is begotten in the mind of one's neighbor.

To confirm this matter fittingly for us, blessed Felicity is present, whose birthday we celebrate today, who by believing became a handmaid of Christ, and by preaching was made a mother of Christ. For she feared to leave her seven sons, as is read in the more accurate accounts of her deeds, alive in the flesh after her, just as carnal parents usually fear to send their dead children before them. For when she was seized in the labor of persecution, she strengthened the hearts of her sons by preaching the love of the heavenly fatherland, and she brought forth in spirit those whom she had borne in the flesh, so that by preaching she might bear to God those whom she had borne in the flesh to the world.

Forty Gospel Homilies, Homily 3

(Hom. in Ev. iii. 2.) The Lord deigned to call faithful disciples His brethren, saying, Go, tell my brethren. Since then a man may be made a brother of the Lord by coming to the faith, it should be enquired how one may become also His mother. Be it known by us then, that he that by believing is made brother or sister of Christ, becomes His mother by preaching; for in pouring Him into the heart of the hearer, he may be said to beget the Lord; and he is made the Lord's mother, when by his word love of the Lord is begotten in the mind of his neighbour.

Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Hence it says, Whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother, and sister, and mother. For he had a heavenly generation and a temporal one, and he places the heavenly ahead of the temporal. For those who do the will of his Father are related to him according to heavenly generation; hence John (8:39): "If you are the sons of Abraham, do the works of Abraham." For he came to do his will, as John says (4:34, 5:30, 6:38). He says, brother, to indicate the stronger ones and sisters the weaker. But why does he say is my mother? I answer that every believer who does the Father's will, i.e., who obeys simply, is a brother, because he is like him who fulfilled the Father's will. But one who not only does that but converts others begets Christ in others and so is a mother. On the other hand, one who incites others to evil kills Christ in others. The Apostle to the Galatians (4:19): "My little children, with whom I am again in travail, until Christ be formed in you."

Commentary on Matthew