Matthew § 91
Friday of 10th Sunday
Saying, Master, Moses said, If a man die, having no children, his brother shall marry his wife, and raise up seed unto his brother.
λέγοντες· διδάσκαλε, Μωσῆς εἶπεν, ἐάν τις ἀποθάνῃ μὴ ἔχων τέκνα, ἐπιγαμβρεύσει ὁ ἀδελφὸς αὐτοῦ τὴν γυναῖκα αὐτοῦ καὶ ἀναστήσει σπέρμα τῷ ἀδελφῷ αὐτοῦ.
глаго́люще: ᲂу҆чт҃лю, мѡѷсе́й речѐ: а҆́ще кто̀ ᲂу҆́мретъ не и҆мы́й ча̑дъ, (да) по́йметъ бра́тъ є҆гѡ̀ женꙋ̀ є҆гѡ̀ и҆ воскреси́тъ сѣ́мѧ бра́та своегѡ̀:
(Vers. 24 seqq.) And they asked him, saying: Master, Moses said: If any man die, having a wife, and he have no children, that his brother should take her to wife, and raise up seed to his brother. Now there were with us seven brethren: and the first, having taken a wife, died; and, not having issue, left his wife to his brother. In like manner the second and the third, unto the seventh. And last of all the woman died also. Those who did not believe in the resurrection of the body and thought that the soul perished with the body rightly invent such a fable, which demonstrates their madness in asserting the resurrection of the dead. However, it is possible that this might actually happen in their nation at some point.
Commentary on MatthewAs they disbelieved the resurrection of the body, and supposed that the soul perished with the body, they accordingly invent a fable to display the fondness of the belief of a resurrection. Thus they put forward a base fiction to overthrow the verity of the resurrection.
Catena Aurea by AquinasAnd again, these too attack Him with a show of moderation, saying, "Master, Moses said, If a man die, not having children, his brother shall marry his wife, and raise up seed unto his brother. Now there were with us seven brethren: and the first, when he had married a wife, deceased; and, having no issue, left his wife unto his brother. Likewise the second also, and the third, unto the seventh. And last of all the woman died also. Therefore, in the resurrection, whose wife shall she be of the seven?"
See Him answering these like a teacher. For though out of craft they came unto Him, yet was their question rather one of ignorance. Therefore neither doth He say unto them, "Ye hypocrites."
Moreover, in order that He might not blame, saying, "Wherefore had seven one wife?" they add the authority of Moses; although, as I have said before, it was a fiction, in my judgment at least. For the third would not have taken her, when he saw the two bridegrooms dead; or if the third, yet not the fourth or the fifth; and if even these, much more the sixth or the seventh would not have come unto the woman, but have shrunk from her. For such is the nature of the Jews. For if now many have this feeling, much more then had they; when at least, even without this, they often avoided marrying in this way, and that when the law was constraining them. Thus, at any rate, Ruth, that Moabitish woman, was thrust off to him that was further off from her kindred; and Tamar too was thus compelled to obtain, by stealth, seed from her husband's kinsman.
And wherefore did they not feign two or three, but seven? In order the more abundantly to bring derision, as they thought, upon the resurrection. Wherefore they further say, "they all had her," as driving Him into some difficulty.
Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 70(non occ.) For because death to the Jews, who did all things for the present life, seemed an unmixed evil, Moses ordered that the wife of one who died without sons should be given to his brother, that a son might be born to the dead man by his brother, and his name should not perish, which was some alleviation of death. And none other but a brother or relation was commanded to take the wife of the dead; otherwise the child born would not have been considered the son of the dead; and also because a stranger could have no concern in establishing the house of him that was dead, as a brother whose kindred obliged him thereto.
Catena Aurea by AquinasThere follows the question. And first he presents the law; secondly, the case; thirdly, the question. They say, therefore, and they interrogated him, saying: master, Moses said: if a man die, having no son, etc. Deuteronomy 25:5 f. What was the reason for the law? The people were carnal. Hence they sought nothing but temporal things. The law, therefore, promised these. For it is manifest that a man cannot endure in himself; therefore it is a consolation to him that he may remain in his likeness, namely, in a son; and nature desires this, that what cannot be preserved in itself may be preserved in its likeness. Hence it happened that someone died without a son; therefore Moses provided for this case according to this law, that his brother should take his wife. Nor was a stranger appointed, who had no relation to him; likewise, he would not have as much care for the household and family as a brother: and this is what it means when it says, and raise up seed to his brother, i.e., beget a son who would have the inheritance of that man.
Commentary on MatthewNow there were with us seven brethren: and the first, when he had married a wife, deceased, and, having no issue, left his wife unto his brother:
ἦσαν δὲ παρ᾿ ἡμῖν ἑπτὰ ἀδελφοί· καὶ ὁ πρῶτος γαμήσας ἐτελεύτησε, καὶ μὴ ἔχων σπέρμα ἀφῆκε τὴν γυναῖκα αὐτοῦ τῷ ἀδελφῷ αὐτοῦ·
бѣ́ша же въ на́съ се́дмь бра́тїѧ: и҆ пе́рвый ѡ҆же́ньсѧ ᲂу҆́мре, и҆ не и҆мы́й сѣ́мене, ѡ҆ста́ви женꙋ̀ свою̀ бра́тꙋ своемꙋ̀:
(Quæst. Ev. i, 32.) Mystically; by these seven brethren are understood the wicked, who could not bring forth the fruit of righteousness in the earth through all the seven ages of the world, during which this earth has being, for afterwards this earth also shall pass away, through which all those seven passed away unfruitful.
Catena Aurea by AquinasHaving presented the law, they propose the case: now there were with us seven brethren, and the first, having married a wife, died, and not having issue, left his wife to his brother, etc. It is possible that such a case actually occurred, or that they made it up. Yet according to Augustine, by the seven brothers are signified evil men, who in seven ages die without fruit. The Apostle, Romans 6:21: what fruit had you then (or have you had) in those things of which you are now ashamed? That woman is worldly living; Psalm 101:27: they shall perish, but thou remainest, and all of them shall grow old like a garment.
Commentary on MatthewLikewise the second also, and the third, unto the seventh.
ὁμοίως καὶ ὁ δεύτερος καὶ ὁ τρίτος, ἕως τῶν ἑπτά.
та́кожде же и҆ вторы́й, и҆ тре́тїй, да́же до седма́гѡ:
And last of all the woman died also.
ὕστερον δὲ πάντων ἀπέθανε καὶ ἡ γυνή.
послѣди́ же всѣ́хъ ᲂу҆́мре и҆ жена̀:
Therefore in the resurrection whose wife shall she be of the seven? for they all had her.
ἐν τῇ οὖν ἀναστάσει τίνος τῶν ἑπτὰ ἔσται ἡ γυνή; πάντες γὰρ ἔσχον αὐτήν.
въ воскрⷭ҇нїе ᲂу҆̀бо, кото́рагѡ ѿ седми́хъ бꙋ́детъ жена̀; вси́ бо и҆мѣ́ша ю҆̀.
(Verse 28) Therefore, in the resurrection, whose wife will she be? For they all had her. They oppose the absurdity of the story in order to deny the truth of the resurrection.
Commentary on MatthewThey conclude with asking, in the resurrection whose shall she be? Though it might be that such an instance might really occur in their nation.
Catena Aurea by AquinasHence they ask: all died, and they all had her: whose wife shall she be in the resurrection, for she cannot belong to all? This opinion is not good, and it is against the Pharisees, because they believed that the resurrection should be with respect to this life, that each one would have his wife back and his possessions, etc. Hence they say, whose wife shall she be? Because she cannot be the wife of all. This opinion is refuted in Job 7:10: he shall not return to his own house. Hence he will not rise to the same manner of living.
Commentary on MatthewJesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God.
ἀποκριθεὶς δὲ ὁ Ἰησοῦς εἶπεν αὐτοῖς· πλανᾶσθε μὴ εἰδότες τὰς γραφὰς μηδὲ τὴν δύναμιν τοῦ Θεοῦ.
Ѿвѣща́въ же і҆и҃съ речѐ и҆̀мъ: прельща́етесѧ, не вѣ́дꙋще писа́нїѧ, ни си́лы бж҃їѧ:
(Enchir. 88.) But that earthy matter of which the flesh of men is made perishes not before God; but into whatsoever dust or ashes reduced, into whatsoever gases or vapours dispersed, into whatsoever other bodies incorporated, though resolved into the elements, though become the food or part of the flesh of animals or men, yet is it in a moment of time restored to that human soul, which at the first quickened it that it became man, lived and grew.
Catena Aurea by Aquinas(cont. Faust. xvi. 24.) Seasonably may we confute the Manichæans by this same passage by which the Sadducees were then confuted, for they too though in another manner deny the resurrection.
Catena Aurea by AquinasOn account of these things, they erred since they did not know the Scriptures. Because they were ignorant of the Scriptures, they denied the power of God, that is, Christ, who is the power of God and the wisdom of God.
COMMENTARY ON MATTHEW 3.22.29(Verse 29.) But Jesus, answering, said to them: You err, not knowing the Scriptures, nor the power of God. Therefore, they err because they do not know the Scriptures, and because they are ignorant of the Scriptures, they consequently do not know the power of God, that is, Christ, who is the power of God and the wisdom of God (I Cor. 1).
Commentary on MatthewThey therefore err because they know not the Scriptures; and because they know not the power of God.
Catena Aurea by AquinasFor what saith He? "Ye do err, not knowing the Scriptures, nor the power of God." For since, as if they knew them, they put forward Moses and the law, He shows that this question is that of men very ignorant of the Scriptures. For hence also arose their tempting Him, from their being ignorant of the Scriptures, and from their not knowing the power of God as they ought.
"For what marvel then is it," He saith, "if ye tempt me, who am as yet unknown to you, when at least ye know not so much as the power of God, of which ye have had so much experience, and neither from common sense nor from the Scriptures have become acquainted with it;" if indeed even common sense causes us to know this, that to God all things are possible. And in the first place He answers to the question asked. For since this was the cause for their not believing a resurrection, that they think the order of things is like this, He cures the cause, then the symptom also (for thence arose the disease too), and shows the manner of the resurrection.
Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 70What then saith Christ? He replies unto both, as taking His stand not against the words, but the purpose, and on every occasion revealing the secrets of their hearts; and at one time exposing them, at another time leaving the refutation of them that question Him to their conscience. See, at any rate here, how He proves both points, as well that there will be a resurrection, as that it will not be such a resurrection as they suspect.
Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 70But someone might inquire if [passage], 'You are in error, not knowing the Scriptures,' which is said to the Sadducees who did not recognize any other Scripture than the Law, has reference to other Scriptures than the Law of Moses. This person, therefore, might say in respect of this same passage that the Sadducees are so called because in not recognizing the Scriptures which come after the Law they are in error since they do not know them. Another person might say: it is sufficient for the Sadducees to be reproved of error for not understanding the Scriptures according to Moses such that they apprehend the divine meaning in them. To be sure, however, he claims that the Sadducees do not know two things: one, the Scriptures, and the other, the power of God, which is the power by which those of the resurrection and the new life in it comes to be.
Commentary on Matthew, Book 17, Section 35Two (1 Cor. 1:24.) things there are which He says they know not, the Scriptures and the power of God, by which is brought to pass the resurrection, and the new life in it. Or by the power of God, which the Lord here convicts the Sadducees that they knew not, He intends Himself, who was the power of God; and Him they knew not, as not knowing the Scriptures which spoke of Him; and thence also they believed not the resurrection, which He should effect. But it is asked when the Saviour says, Ye do err not knowing the Scriptures, if He means that this text, They neither marry, nor are given in marriage, is in some Scripture, though it is not read in the Old Testament? We say that these very words are indeed not found, but that the truth is in a mystery implied in the moral sense of Scripture; the Law, which is a shadow of good things to come, whenever it speaks of husbands and wives, speaks chiefly of spiritual wedlock. But neither this do I find any where spoken in Scripture that the Saints shall be after their departure as the Angels of God, unless one will understand this also to be inferred morally; as where it is said, And thou shalt go to thy fathers, (Gen. 15:15.) and He was gathered to his people. (Gen. 25:8.) Or one may say; He blamed them that they read not the other Scriptures which are besides the Law, and therefore they erred. Another says, That they knew not the Scriptures of the Mosaic Law, for this reason, that they did not sift their divine sense.
Catena Aurea by AquinasWisely does He first convict them of folly, in that they did not read; and afterwards of ignorance, in that they did not know God. For of diligence in reading springs knowledge of God, but ignorance is the offspring of neglect.
Catena Aurea by AquinasOr, when He says, In the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, He referred to what He had said, Ye know not the power of God; but when the proceeded, I am the God of Abraham, &c. to that Ye know not the Scriptures. And thus ought we to do; to cavillers first to set forth Scripture authority on any question, and then to show the grounds of reason; but to those who ask out of ignorance to show first the reason, and then the authority. For cavillers ought to be refuted, enquirers taught. To these then who put their question in ignorance, the first shows the reason, saying, In the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage.
Catena Aurea by AquinasThese things which are spoken concerning the conditions of the resurrection He spoke in answer to their enquiry, but of the resurrection itself He replies aptly against their unbelief.
Catena Aurea by AquinasGod; who have restored the honour of their flesh, and who have already dedicated themselves as sons of that (future) age, by slaying in themselves the concupiscence of lust, and that whole (propensity) which could not be admitted within Paradise! Whence it is presumable that such as shall wish to be received within Paradise, ought at last to begin to cease from that thing from which Paradise is intact.
On Exhortation to ChastityThe Saviour shows that there will also be a resurrection, not such a resurrection of the flesh as they mistakenly imagine, but one more divine and more spiritual. Why then are you deluded, not knowing either the Scriptures or the power of God? For if you knew the Scriptures, you would understand that God is not God of the dead but of the living. If you knew the power of God, you would know that for God all things are possible, so that He can even make men to live as angels. See the Lord's wisdom! By using Moses they were intent on overturning the doctrine of the resurrection, but He, also by using Moses, convinces them, quoting, "I am the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob" (Ex. 3:6). What Christ means is this: God is not the God of that which is not, but of that which exists and is. For God did not say, "I was," but "I am." Even though they had died, they live in hope of the resurrection. But you may ask, "How is it, then, that he says in another place that He is Lord of both the dead and the living?" (Rom. 14:9). Learn, then, that "the dead" means, in that passage, those who have died but who shall live again. Here the Lord says, in opposing the heresy of the Sadducees who teach that there is no immortal soul but that it altogether perishes, that He is not God of the dead, that is, of those who appear to us to have utterly perished, but of the living, that is, of those who have an immortal soul and will be resurrected, though they are dead now.
Commentary on MatthewThere follows the response. And first he shows the error and its cause; secondly, he insinuates the truth. Hence he says, Jesus answering, said to them: you err, i.e., you hold an erroneous opinion; Wisdom 2:21: they devised, and they erred; for their own malice blinded them. And what is the cause of the error? Not knowing the Scriptures. Hence they did not meditate on the commands of God; Psalm 118:100: I have had understanding above ancients, because I have sought thy commandments. Hence he who meditates on the commands of God can avoid errors; hence John 5:39: search the Scriptures. But they did not search, and therefore they erred, as do some who understand badly. Likewise, some, not knowing the power of God, wish to measure the power of God according to inferior things; Romans 1:20: the invisible things of God from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made.
Commentary on MatthewFor in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.
ἐν γὰρ τῇ ἀναστάσει οὔτε γαμοῦσιν οὔτε ἐκγαμίζονται, ἀλλ᾿ ὡς ἄγγελοι Θεοῦ ἐν οὐρανῷ εἰσι.
въ воскрⷭ҇нїе бо ни же́нѧтсѧ, ни посѧга́ютъ, но ꙗ҆́кѡ а҆́гг҃ли бж҃їи на нб҃сѝ сꙋ́ть:
(de Civ. Dei, xxii. 17.) To me they seem to think most justly, who doubt not that both sexes shall rise again. For there shall be no desire which is the cause of confusion, for before they had sinned they were naked; and that nature which they then had shall be preserved, which was quit both of conception and of child-birth. Also the members of the woman shall not be adapted to their former use, but framed for a new beauty, one by which the beholder is not allured to lust, which shall not then be, but God's wisdom and mercy shall be praised, which made that to be which was not, and delivered from corruption that which was made.
Catena Aurea by AquinasIf swiftness, or strength, or freedom of body, which nothing can resist: they shall be like the Angels of God, because it is sown a natural body, and shall rise a spiritual body, by power, assuredly, not by nature.
Breviloquium, Part 7For God divided the one place which extends from the earth to the higher heaven by interposing in the middle the second heaven, and thus made two places; and to this mortal and mutable state he assigned the lower place, and to the immortal and immutable state the higher, which is called also the Kingdom of Heaven, and about which the Lord Christ speaks thus in the Gospel of Matthew: For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven;
The Christian Topography, Book 3when the Lord in arguing with the Pharisees and Sadducees concerning the resurrection he speaks thus: For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.
The Christian Topography, Book 5the Jews acknowledge a resurrection for men, but say that we shall live upon the earth and eat and drink and marry and be given in marriage, as, in the Gospels, the Sadducees proposed a question to the Lord, saying: In the resurrection of which of the seven shall she be the wife? These the Lord very summarily convicted of error and of not knowing divine scripture, in which there is the power of God, saying to them: For, in the resurrection, they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven. It is therefore proved against these, both from what is written and from the figure of the world prepared from its foundation, that the upper place was not made without occasion—but that there is a second heavenly state prepared from the foundation of the world.
The Christian Topography, Book 6It had been enough to have cut off this opinion of the Sadducees of sensual enjoyment, that where the function ceased, the empty pleasure of the body accompanying it ceased also; but He adds, But are as the Angels of God in heaven.
Catena Aurea by AquinasThe same cavil that the Sadducees here offer respecting marriage is renewed by many who ask in what form the female sex shall rise again. But what the authority of Scripture leads us to think concerning the Angels, so must we suppose that it will be with women in the resurrection of our species.
Catena Aurea by Aquinas(Verse 30) For in the resurrection neither do they marry, nor are they given in marriage; but they are as the angels of God in heaven. The Latin custom does not correspond to the Greek idiom. For to marry is properly said of women, and to take wives of men; but let us simply understand the statement, that to marry is written of men, and to be given in marriage of women. If in the resurrection they do not marry, nor are they given in marriage, then the bodies that are able to marry and be given in marriage will rise again. For no one indeed says about a stone and a tree, and these things which do not have reproductive organs, that they do not marry, nor are they married; but about those things which can marry, they do not marry in a different way. But what is brought forth: But they are like the angels of God in heaven. A spiritual conversation is promised.
Commentary on MatthewIn these words the Latin language cannot follow the Greek idiom. For the Latin word 'nubere' is correctly said only of the woman. But we must take it so as to understand marry of men, to be given in marriage of women.
This that is added, But are as the Angels of God in heaven, is an assurance that our conversation in heaven shall be spiritual.
For none could say of a stone and a tree or inanimate things, that they shall not marry nor be given in marriage, but of such things only as having capacity for marriage, shall yet in a sort not marry.
Catena Aurea by Aquinas"For in the resurrection," saith He, "they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as angels of God in Heaven." But Luke saith, "As Sons of God."
If then they marry not, the question is vain. But not because they do not marry, therefore are they angels, but because they are as angels, therefore they do not marry. By this He removed many other difficulties also, all which things Paul intimated by one word, saying, "For the fashion of this world passeth away."
And by these words He declared how great a thing the resurrection is; and that moreover there is a resurrection, He proves. And indeed this too was demonstrated at the same time by what He had said, nevertheless over and above He adds again to His word by what He saith now. For neither at their question only did He stop, but at their thought. Thus when they are not dealing with great craft, but are asking in ignorance, He teaches even over and above, but when it is of wickedness only, not even to their question doth He answer.
Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 70Our Savior does not explain the meaning of the passage from Moses' law, rejecting them as unworthy of the knowledge of such a great mystery. He only represents matters in the simplest way as he speaks and teaches from the divine Scriptures concerning the resurrection of the dead. He teaches that there is no marriage in heaven but that those who are risen from the dead are like the angels in heaven. And, just as the angels in heaven neither marry nor are given in marriage, so he says it is with those who are risen from the dead. But I think he means that only those who are considered worthy of the resurrection of the dead neither marry nor are given in marriage as the angels in heaven. Furthermore, their "humble" bodies are changed to become like the bodies of the angels, ethereal and brilliant.
COMMENTARY ON MATTHEW 17.30In this life that we may die, therefore are we born; and we marry to the end that that which death consumes, birth may replenish; therefore where the law of death is taken away, the cause of birth is taken away likewise.
It should be noted, that when He spoke of fasting, alms, and other spiritual virtues, He did not bring in the comparison of Angels, but only here where He speaks of the ceasing of marriage. For as all acts of the flesh are animal acts, but this of lust especially so; so all the virtues are angelic acts, but especially chastity, by which our nature is bound to the other virtues.
Catena Aurea by Aquinas(de Divin. Nom. i.) For then when we shall be incorruptible and immortal, by the visible presence of God Himself we shall be filled with most chaste contemplations, and shall share the gift of light to the understanding in our impassible and immaterial soul after the fashion of the exalted souls in heaven; on which account it is said that we shall be equal to the Angels.
Catena Aurea by AquinasThe ogdoad, or eightfold number, therefore, is not concerned in our formation; for in the time it represents there will be no more marriage. We have already demonstrated the conjunction of the body and the soul, from the concretion of their very seminations to the complete formation of the f£tus.
A Treatise on the Soul"For this corruptible"-and as he spake, the apostle seemingly pointed to his own flesh-"must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality," in order, indeed, that it may be rendered a fit substance for the kingdom of God. "For we shall be like the angels." This will be the perfect change of our flesh-only after its resurrection. Now if, on the contrary, there is to be no flesh, how then shall it put on incorruption and immortality? Having then become something else by its change, it will obtain the kingdom of God, no longer the (old) flesh and blood, but the body which God shall have given it.
Against Marcion Book VTo this discussion, however, our Lord's declaration puts an effectual end: "They shall be," says He, "equal unto the angels." As by not marrying, because of not dying, so, of course, by not having to yield to any like necessity of our bodily state; even as the angels, too, sometimes were "equal unto" men, by eating and drinking, and submitting their feet to the washing of the bath-having clothed themselves in human guise, without the loss of their own intrinsic nature. If therefore angels, when they became as men, submitted in their own unaltered substance of spirit to be treated as if they were flesh, why shall not men in like manner, when they become "equal unto the angels," undergo in their unchanged substance of flesh the treatment of spiritual beings, no more exposed to the usual solicitations of the flesh in their angelic garb, than were the angels once to those of the spirit when encompassed in human form? We shall not therefore cease to continue in the flesh, because we cease to be importuned by the usual wants of the flesh; just as the angels ceased not therefore to remain in their spiritual substance, because of the suspension of their spiritual incidents. Lastly, Christ said not, "They shall be angels," in order not to repeal their existence as men; but He said, "They shall be equal unto the angels," that He might preserve their humanity unimpaired. When He ascribed an angelic likeness to the flesh, He took not from it its proper substance.
On the Resurrection of the FleshWith what consistency do we mount that (future) judgment-seat to pronounce sentence against those whose gifts we (now) seek after? For you too, (women as you are, ) have the self-same angelic nature promised as your reward, the self-same sex as men: the self-same advancement to the dignity of judging, does (the Lord) promise you.
On the Apparel of Women Book I"But if 'in that age they will neither marry nor be given in marriage, but will be equal to angels,' is not the fact that there will be no restitution of the conjugal relation a reason why we shall not be bound to our departed consorts? "Nay, but the more shall we be bound (to them), because we are destined to a better estate-destined (as we are) to rise to a spiritual consortship, to recognise as well our own selves as them who are ours. Else how shall we sing thanks to God to eternity, if there shall remain in us no sense and memory of this debt; if we shall be reformed in substance, not in consciousness? Consequently, we who shall be with God shall be together; since we shall all be with the one God-albeit the wages be various, albeit there be "many mansions", in the house of the same Father having laboured for the "one penny" of the self-same hire, that is, of eternal life; in which (eternal life) God will still less separate them whom He has conjoined, than in this lesser life He forbids them to be separated.
On MonogamyIn the resurrection they shall neither marry, nor be married. He makes his point clear. And because he had said two things, namely, that they did not know the Scriptures nor the power of God, therefore first he declares that they were ignorant of the power of God; secondly, that they were ignorant of the Scriptures. And since he mentioned the Scriptures first, why is this declared second? Chrysostom responds that when someone disputes with one who errs from malice, he should first cite authority; when with one who errs from ignorance, he should first propose a reason, and then authority. Thus the Lord does. First he proposes a reason; hence he says, in the resurrection they shall neither marry, nor be married. The first, according to the letter, is true. Neither shall they marry, etc., because then it will not be necessary as it is now. Jerome says: the word for marrying is understood differently in Latin and in Greek, because properly in Latin to marry pertains to women: hence it is said to be a neuter passive verb; but in Greek, men marry, i.e., take wives, and women are married, not marry. Therefore he says, they shall not marry, the men; nor be married, the women. For since marriage is for the procreation of offspring, so that man may be preserved in being in his likeness, who cannot be preserved in himself, therefore since the resurrection will be unto immortality, then marriage will not be necessary. Therefore these men erred and were ignorant of the power of God. But they are as the angels of God in heaven. That state is the state of reward, and the end of this life. Job 14:14: dost thou think that a man once dead shall live again? All the days in which I am now in warfare, I wait until my change come; and that change was the reward. That life will be of those shining with intellect. But why will they be like the angels? Because they will be free from passions; for now man has his intellect bound to the senses, and in this the angels surpass him, but then it will be purified, and therefore they will be like the angels: 2 Samuel 14:17: for as an angel of God, so is my lord the king, that he is neither moved with blessing nor cursing. Hence those who have their mind elevated above passions are like the angels. But the passions that most make men bestial are the passions of sexual pleasure, which are exercised through marriage; therefore then they will neither marry nor be married. Likewise, some have said that not all will rise, but only men. But Augustine refutes this, saying that the sexes will rise; but sex is not preserved in men alone. He removes this opinion when he says, neither shall they marry, nor be married. From this it is given to understand that both sexes will rise, but neither shall they marry, nor be married.
Commentary on MatthewBut as touching the resurrection of the dead, have ye not read that which was spoken unto you by God, saying,
περὶ δὲ τῆς ἀναστάσεως τῶν νεκρῶν οὐκ ἀνέγνωτε τὸ ρηθὲν ὑμῖν ὑπὸ τοῦ Θεοῦ λέγοντος,
ѡ҆ воскрⷭ҇нїи же ме́ртвыхъ нѣ́сте ли члѝ рече́ннагѡ ва́мъ бг҃омъ, гл҃ющимъ:
(in Joan. Tr. xi. 8.) God is therefore called in particular The God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, because in these three are expressed all the modes of begetting the sons of God. For God begets most times of a good preacher a good son, and of a bad preacher a bad son. This is signified in Abraham, who of a free woman had a believing son, and of a bondslave an unbelieving son. Sometimes indeed of a good preacher He begets both good and bad sons, which is signified in Isaac, who of the same free woman begot one good and the other bad. And sometimes He begets good sons both of good and bad preachers; which is signified in Jacob, who begot good sons both of free women and of bondmaids.
Catena Aurea by Aquinas(Vers. 31 seqq.) But concerning the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was spoken by God, saying to you: I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob: God is not the God of the dead, but of the living. And when the crowds heard this, they were amazed at his teaching. To prove the truth of the resurrection, he could have used many other more obvious examples, among which is: The dead will be raised up, and those who are in the graves will rise again (Isaiah 26:19). And in another place: Many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake: some unto everlasting life, and others unto shame and everlasting contempt (Dan. XII, 2). Therefore, it is asked what the Lord intended by this testimony, which seems ambiguous or not sufficiently related to the truth of the resurrection: I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob; and as if having proclaimed this, he proved what he wanted by immediately adding: God is not the God of the dead, but of the living. Those who also surrounded the turmoil, knowing the mystery, were amazed at his teaching and answers. We have already said above that the Sadducees, confessing neither angel, nor spirit, nor resurrection of bodies, also preached the destruction of souls. These accepted only the five books of Moses, rejecting the prophecies of the prophets. Therefore, it was foolish to present testimonies whose authority they did not follow. Furthermore, in order to prove the eternal nature of souls, he presents the example of Moses: 'I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob' (Exodus 3:6). And immediately he deduces: 'God is not the God of the dead, but of the living,' so that when he has proven that souls continue to exist after death (for it could not be that God would be their God if they did not exist at all), the resurrection of the bodies, which have carried out good or evil deeds along with the souls, would consequently be introduced. In the final part of the first Epistle to the Corinthians, the apostle Paul expands on this topic more fully (1 Cor. XV).
Commentary on MatthewIn proof of the resurrection there were many plainer passages which He might have cited; among others that of Isaiah, The dead shall be raised; they that are in the tombs shall rise again: (Is. 26:19. juxta LXX.) and in another place, Many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake. (Dan. 12:2.) It is enquired therefore why the Lord should have chosen this testimony which seems ambiguous, and not sufficiently belonging to the truth of the resurrection; and as if by this He had proved the point adds, He is not the God of the dead, but of the living. We have said above that the Sadducees confessed neither Angel, nor spirit, nor resurrection of the body, and taught also the death of the soul. But they also received only the five books of Moses, rejecting the Prophets. It would have been foolish therefore to have brought forward testimonies whose authority they did not admit. To prove the immortality of souls therefore, He brings forward an instance out of Moses, I am the God of Abraham, &c. and then straight subjoins, He is not the God of the dead, but of the living; so that having established that souls abide after death, (forasmuch as God could not be the God of those who had no existence any where,) there might fitly come in the resurrection of bodies which had together with their souls done good or evil.
Catena Aurea by AquinasAnd again by Moses doth He stop their mouths, since they too had brought forward Moses; and He saith, "But as touching the resurrection of the dead, have ye not read, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? He is not the God of the dead, but of the living." Not of them that are not His meaning is, and that are utterly blotted out, and are to rise no more. For He said not, I was, but, I am; of them that are, and them that live. For like as Adam, although he lived on the day that he ate of the tree, died in the sentence: even so also these, although they had died, lived in the promise of the resurrection.
How then doth He say elsewhere, "That He might be Lord both of the dead and of the living?" But this is not contrary to that. For here He speaks of the dead, who are also themselves to live. And moreover too, "I am the God of Abraham," is another thing from, "That He might be Lord both of the dead and of the living." He knew of another death too, concerning which He saith, "Let the dead bury their dead."
Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 70But as concerning the resurrection of the dead, etc. After he showed that they were ignorant of the power of God, here he shows that they were ignorant of the Scriptures. Hence, have you not read that which was said by God, saying to you: I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? This is written in Exodus 3:6. But Jerome asks, since there are other authorities more explicit about the resurrection, as is found in Isaiah 6 and Ezekiel 33 and Daniel 12, why did he cite this one which is ambiguous? He responds that they did not accept the prophets, but only the five books of Moses.
Commentary on MatthewI am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.
ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ Θεὸς Ἀβραὰμ καὶ ὁ Θεὸς Ἰσαὰκ καὶ ὁ Θεὸς Ἰακώβ; οὐκ ἔστιν ὁ Θεὸς Θεὸς νεκρῶν, ἀλλὰ ζώντων.
а҆́зъ є҆́смь бг҃ъ а҆враа́мовъ, и҆ бг҃ъ і҆саа́ковъ, и҆ бг҃ъ і҆а́кѡвль; нѣ́сть бг҃ъ бг҃ъ ме́ртвыхъ, но (бг҃ъ) живы́хъ.
It should be further considered, that this was said to Moses at a time when those holy Patriarchs had gone to their rest. They therefore of whom He was the God were in being; for they could have had nothing, if they had not been in being; for in the nature of things that, of which somewhat else is, must have itself a being; so they who have a God must themselves be alive, since God is eternal, and it is not possible that that which is dead should have that which is eternal. How then shall it be affirmed that those do not, and shall not hereafter, exist, of whom Eternity itself has said that He is?
Catena Aurea by Aquinas(Vers. 31 seqq.) But concerning the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was spoken by God, saying to you: I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob: God is not the God of the dead, but of the living. And when the crowds heard this, they were amazed at his teaching. To prove the truth of the resurrection, he could have used many other more obvious examples, among which is: The dead will be raised up, and those who are in the graves will rise again (Isaiah 26:19). And in another place: Many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake: some unto everlasting life, and others unto shame and everlasting contempt (Dan. XII, 2). Therefore, it is asked what the Lord intended by this testimony, which seems ambiguous or not sufficiently related to the truth of the resurrection: I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob; and as if having proclaimed this, he proved what he wanted by immediately adding: God is not the God of the dead, but of the living. Those who also surrounded the turmoil, knowing the mystery, were amazed at his teaching and answers. We have already said above that the Sadducees, confessing neither angel, nor spirit, nor resurrection of bodies, also preached the destruction of souls. These accepted only the five books of Moses, rejecting the prophecies of the prophets. Therefore, it was foolish to present testimonies whose authority they did not follow. Furthermore, in order to prove the eternal nature of souls, he presents the example of Moses: 'I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob' (Exodus 3:6). And immediately he deduces: 'God is not the God of the dead, but of the living,' so that when he has proven that souls continue to exist after death (for it could not be that God would be their God if they did not exist at all), the resurrection of the bodies, which have carried out good or evil deeds along with the souls, would consequently be introduced. In the final part of the first Epistle to the Corinthians, the apostle Paul expands on this topic more fully (1 Cor. XV).
Commentary on MatthewGod moreover is He who says, I am that I am; (Ex. 3:14.) so that it is impossible that He should be called the God of those who are not. And see that He said not, I am the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, but The God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. But in another place He said thus, The God of the Hebrews hath sent me unto thee. (Exod. 7:16.) For they who in comparison of other men are most perfect before God, have God entirely in them, wherefore He is not said to be their God in common, but of each in particular. As when we say, That farm is theirs, we show that each of them does not own the whole of it; but when we say, That farm is his, we mean that he is owner of the whole of it. When then it is said, The God of the Hebrews, this shows their imperfection, that each of them has some small portion in God. But it is said, The God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, because each one of these possessed God entirely. And it is to the no small honour of the Patriarehs that they lived to God.
Catena Aurea by AquinasAnd how does it serve the purpose? He says, I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. God is said to be the God of certain ones in their worshiping him. These, therefore, worship him. But to worship God does not belong to the dead, but to the living. Therefore Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are alive; but not according to the body: therefore according to the soul. But what does this avail for the resurrection? It avails, because these men said the soul does not exist; but he shows the soul to remain: and if the soul remains, therefore also the resurrection, because naturally the soul is inclined toward the body. But what does it mean when he says that he is not the God of the dead? This is true according to the body. Yet he is also the God of the dead, because they live according to the spirit; Romans 14:8: whether we live or whether we die, we are the Lord's. Likewise, this is against the heretics who condemn the fathers of the Old Testament, because here it says that they live according to the soul. Likewise, he says it in the singular, because among the other nations each one had his own god. Hear, O Israel: the Lord thy God is one, Deuteronomy 6:4.
Commentary on MatthewAnd when the multitude heard this, they were astonished at his doctrine.
καὶ ἀκούσαντες οἱ ὄχλοι ἐξεπλήσσοντο ἐπὶ τῇ διδαχῇ αὐτοῦ.
И҆ слы́шавше наро́ди дивлѧ́хꙋсѧ ѡ҆ ᲂу҆ч҃нїи є҆гѡ̀.
De Divin., Nom. i: For then when we shall be incorruptible and immortal, by the visible presence of God Himself we shall be filled with most chaste contemplations, and shall share the gift of light to the understanding in our impassible and immaterial soul after the fashion of the exalted souls in heaven; on which account it is said that we shall be equal to the Angels.
"And when the multitudes heard this, they were astonished at His doctrine." Yet not even here the Sadducees; but these go away defeated, while the impartial multitude reap the benefit.
Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 70And see how the assault of the Jews against Christ becomes more faint. Their first challenge was in a threatening tone, By what authority doest thou these things, to oppose which firmness of spirit was needed. Their second was with guile, to meet which was needed wisdom. This last was with ignorant presumption which is easier to cope with than the others. For he that thinks he knows somewhat, when he knows nothing, is an easy conquest for one who has understanding. Thus the attacks of an enemy are vehement at first, but if one endure them with a courageous spirit, he will find them more feeble. And when the multitudes heard this, they were astonished at his doctrine.
Catena Aurea by AquinasNot the Sadducees but the multitudes were astonished. This is daily done in the Church; when by Divine inspiration the adversaries of the Church are overcome, the multitude of the faithful rejoice.
Catena Aurea by AquinasThere follows the effect, for they wondered: and the multitudes hearing it were in admiration at his doctrine. Psalm 118:129: thy testimonies are wonderful, O Lord, etc.
Commentary on Matthew
The same day came to him the Sadducees, which say that there is no resurrection, and asked him,
Ἐν ἐκείνῃ τῇ ἡμέρᾳ προσῆλθον αὐτῷ Σαδδουκαῖοι, οἱ λέγοντες μὴ εἶναι ἀνάστασιν, καὶ ἐπηρώτησαν αὐτὸν
[Заⷱ҇ 91] Въ то́й де́нь пристꙋпи́ша къ немꙋ̀ саддꙋке́є, и҆̀же глаго́лютъ не бы́ти воскрⷭ҇нїю, и҆ вопроси́ша є҆го̀,
What then? did they believe? By no means, but they "left Him, and went their way;" and after them, "came to Him the Sadducees."
O folly! When the others had been put to silence, these made the attack, when they ought to have been the more backward. But such is the nature of rashness, shameless, and importunate, and attempting things impossible. Therefore the evangelist also, amazed at their folly, signified this very thing, by saying, "On that day came to Him." On that day. On what day? In which He had convicted their craftiness, and put them to shame. But who are these? A sect of the Jews different from the Pharisees, and much worse than they, who said, "that there is no resurrection, nor angel, nor spirit." For these were some of a grosser sort, and eager after the things of the body. For there were many sects even amongst the Jews. Wherefore Paul also saith, "I am a Pharisee, of the strictest sect amongst us."
And they say nothing indeed directly about a resurrection; but they feign a story, and make up a case, which, as I suppose, never so much as had an existence; thinking to drive Him to perplexity, and desiring to overthrow both things, both the existence of a resurrection, and of such a resurrection.
Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 70When they heard these things, their mouths were stopped, and they "marvelled" at His wisdom. Ought they not then to have believed, ought they not to have been amazed. For indeed, He gave them proof of His Godhead, by revealing the secrets of their hearts, and with gentleness did He silence them.
Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 70(Mor. xiv. 55.) But there are who observing that the spirit is loosed from the body, that the flesh is turned to corruption, that the corruption is reduced to dust, and that the dust again is resolved into the elements, so as to be unseen by human eyes, despair of the possibility of a resurrection, and while they look upon the dry bones, doubt that they can be clothed with flesh, and be quickened anew to life.
Catena Aurea by AquinasThere were two heresies among the Jews: one of the Pharisees and the other of the Sadducees. The Pharisees preferred tradition and the observance of the law, which two things they referred to as "divine service." They preferred them over justice. The Sadducees, however, were thought to be just and punished themselves because they were not. Hence the two parties were thought by the people to be quite different. The Sadducees denied everything about the resurrection. As we find in the Acts of the Apostles, they were opposed to the believers and confessors of the resurrection of the body and soul. These are the two houses about which Isaiah clearly teaches that because they had climbed high they would surely be knocked down on the ground.
COMMENTARY ON MATTHEW 3.22.23(Verse 23) On that day the Sadducees approached him, who say that there is no resurrection. There were two sects among the Jews: the Pharisees and the Sadducees. The Pharisees prioritized the righteousness of traditions and observances, which they call 'second law', and this is why they were referred to as 'separated' from the people. However, the Sadducees, who are referred to as 'just', claimed for themselves what they were not: while the former believed in the resurrection of the body and soul and confessed angels and spirits, the Sadducees denied all of these (according to the Acts of the Apostles). These are two houses, of which Isaiah teaches more clearly that they are causes of offense in the stumbling block (Isaiah 8).
Commentary on MatthewI say nothing of the Jewish heretics who before the coming of Christ destroyed the law delivered to them: of Dositheus, the leader of the Samaritans who rejected the prophets: of the Sadducees who sprang from his root and denied even the resurrection of the flesh: of the Pharisees who separated themselves from the Jews on account of certain superfluous observances, and took their name from the fact of their dissent: of the Herodians who accepted Herod as the Christ.
The Dialogue Against the Luciferians, Section 23There were two sects among the Jews, the Pharisees and the Sadducees; the Pharisees pretended to the righteousness of traditions and observances, whence they were called by the people 'separate.' The Sadducees (the word is interpreted 'righteous') also passed themselves for what they were not; and whereas the first believed the resurrection of body and soul, and confessed both Angel and spirit, these, according to the Acts of the Apostles, denied them all, as it is here also said, Who say that there is no resurrection. (Acts 23:8.)
Catena Aurea by AquinasNow it is not one of the prophets merely who predicted the advent of Christ. But although the Samaritans and Sadducees, who receive the books of Moses alone, would say that there were contained in them predictions regarding Christ, yet certainly not in Jerusalem, which is not even mentioned in the times of Moses, was the prophecy uttered.
Against Celsus, Book 1They not only denied the resurrection of the body, but took away the immortality of the soul.
Catena Aurea by AquinasAs soon as the Pharisees were gone, came the Sadducees; perhaps with like intent, for there was a strife among them who should be the first to seize Him. Or if by argument they should not be able to overcome Him, they might at least by perseverance wear out His understanding.
For the Devil finding himself unable to crush utterly the religion of God, brought in the sect of the Sadducees denying the resurrection of the dead, thus breaking down all purpose of a righteous life, for who is there would endure a daily struggle against himself, unless he looked to the hope of the resurrection?
But the Sadducees thought they had now discovered a most convincing argument in favour of their error.
Catena Aurea by AquinasFor of Judaism's heretics I am silent - Dositheus the Samaritan, I mean, who was the first who had the hardihood to repudiate the prophets, on the ground that they had not spoken under inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Of the Sadducees I am silent, who, springing from the root of this error, had the hardihood to adjoin to this heresy the denial likewise of the resurrection of the flesh.
Against all Heresies 1.1They who are so anxious to shake that belief in the resurrection which was firmly settled before the appearance of our modern Sadducees, as even to deny that the expectation thereof has any relation whatever to the flesh, have great cause for besetting the flesh of Christ also with doubtful questions, as if it either had no existence at all, or possessed a nature altogether different from human flesh.
On the Flesh of ChristTheir specious inquiry concerned the flesh, whether or not it would be subject to marriage after the resurrection; and they assumed the case of a woman who had married seven brothers, so that it was a doubtful point to which of them she should be restored. Now, let the purport both of the question and the answer be kept steadily in view, and the discussion is settled at once.
On the Resurrection of the FleshTherefore no solicitude arising from carnal jealousy will, in the day of the resurrection, even in the case of her whom they chose to represent as having been married to seven brothers successively, wound any one of her so many husbands; nor is any (husband) awaiting her to put her to confusion. The question raised by the Sadducees has yielded to the Lord's sentence.
To His Wife Book IIf, then, forasmuch as there is in the law a precept that a man is to take in marriage the wife of his brother if he have died without children, for the purpose of raising up seed to his brother; and this may happen repeatedly to the same person, according to that crafty question of the Sadducees; men for that reason think that frequency of marriage is permitted in other cases as well: it will be their duty to understand first the reason of the precept itself; and thus they will come to know that that reason, now ceasing, is among those parts of the law which have been cancelled.
On MonogamyWhen the mouths of the Pharisees and the Herodians had been shut, again the Sadducees put Him to the test. Their heresy was this: they believed neither in a resurrection of the dead, nor in the existence of an immaterial spirit, nor in angels, and in general took a position opposite to that of the Pharisees. Here they contrive an impossible situation. For supposing that two brothers took her and then died, would not the third consider it an omen and refuse the marriage, learning from those who had preceded him? So the Sadducees invent a situation, intending to perplex Christ and so to refute the resurrection. They even draw Moses as an advocate into their invention. They speak of seven brothers so as to ridicule the mystery of the resurrection even more. "Whose wife shall she be?" they ask. One could answer, "O foul Sadducees, she shall be the wife of him who first married her, if we concede that there is marriage in the resurrection; for the others are surrogates and not true and lawful husbands" (Deut. 25:5-6).
Commentary on MatthewThat day. Here the second question is presented, and he does three things. First, the question is presented; secondly, the response; thirdly, the effect. The second is at but Jesus answering, etc.; the third at and the multitudes hearing it were in admiration. Concerning the first, first the disposition and condition of the questioner is presented; secondly, the question. He says, therefore, that day. And why that day? Not without reason, because when they saw the others confounded, they sought him out not without presumption. But according to Chrysostom, they had agreed among themselves to ensnare him in his speech, and each wanted the honor of victory: therefore when the others were confounded, these wished to approach; Job 19:12: his robbers came together, and made themselves a way through me. For there were two sects: the Pharisees, i.e., the separated, and the Sadducees, i.e., the just. And these erred in their doctrines, because they did not accept the prophecies, nor did they believe in the resurrection. Likewise, they believed that when the body died, the whole man died: and this is what it means when it says, who say there is no resurrection.
Commentary on Matthew