Cornelius a Lapide
Table of Contents
Synopsis of the Chapter
John the Baptist preaches penance, so that through it he may prepare men for Christ and Christ's grace. Whence at verse 13 he baptizes Christ, when the Holy Spirit descending upon Him in the form of a dove, and the voice of the Father: "This is My beloved Son," declared Him to be the Messiah to the whole world.
Vulgate Text: Matthew 3:1-17
1. In those days John the Baptist came preaching in the desert of Judea, 2. and saying: Do penance, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand. 3. For this is he who was spoken of through Isaiah the Prophet, saying: The voice of one crying in the desert: Prepare the way of the Lord, make straight His paths. 4. And John himself had a garment of camel's hair, and a leather belt around his waist; and his food was locusts and wild honey. 5. Then Jerusalem went out to him, and all Judea, and all the region around the Jordan; 6. And they were baptized by him in the Jordan, confessing their sins. 7. But seeing many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming to his baptism, he said to them: Brood of vipers, who showed you how to flee from the wrath to come? 8. Therefore bring forth fruit worthy of penance, 9. And do not think to say within yourselves: We have Abraham for our father. For I tell you that God is able from these stones to raise up children to Abraham. 10. For now the axe is laid to the root of the trees. Every tree therefore that does not bear good fruit shall be cut down and cast into the fire. 11. I indeed baptize you in water for penance; but He who comes after me is mightier than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you in the Holy Spirit and fire. 12. His winnowing fan is in His hand, and He will thoroughly cleanse His threshing floor, and will gather His wheat into the barn, but the chaff He will burn with unquenchable fire. 13. Then Jesus came from Galilee to the Jordan, to John, to be baptized by him. 14. But John was preventing Him, saying: I ought to be baptized by You, and You come to me? 15. But Jesus answering said to him: Permit it now, for thus it is fitting for us to fulfill all justice. Then he allowed Him. 16. And when Jesus was baptized, He immediately came up out of the water, and behold, the heavens were opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and coming upon Him. 17. And behold, a voice from heaven saying: This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.
Verse 1: John the Baptist Preaches in the Desert of Judea
1. IN THOSE DAYS JOHN THE BAPTIST CAME PREACHING IN THE DESERT OF JUDEA. — As if to say: In that time, namely when Christ incarnate and born was living His life among men. For these things took place in the fifteenth year of Tiberius, as Luke says in chapter 3:1, when John and Christ were in their thirtieth year of age. Matthew therefore passes from the childhood of Christ to His adult age, in which He began to exercise the office of preaching and redemption for which He had been sent by the Father into flesh and into the world. And so He sent ahead John the Baptist so that John might point Him out to the Jews as the Messiah, lest if Christ appeared in Judea suddenly, without any herald or trustworthy witness, He would be rejected by all.
Moreover, Christ remained hidden (and practiced the carpenter's trade with His father Joseph) for nineteen years, to give the world a signal example of humility. He therefore began to preach at the age of thirty, to conform Himself to the customs and laws of the Jews; for among the Jews, no one was permitted to undertake the duties of a teacher or priest before the thirtieth year of age, as the Hebrews teach, and as can be gathered from 1 Chronicles 23:3. Hence John too began to preach in the same thirtieth year, but a little before Christ. Marveling at these long and deep concealments of Christ's humility, St. Bernard exclaims in Sermon 1 on Epiphany: «O humility, virtue of Christ, how greatly you put to shame the pride of our vanity! I know a little something, or rather I seem to myself to know, and already I cannot keep silent, shamelessly and imprudently thrusting myself forward and showing off — quick to speak, swift to teach, slow to listen. And Christ, for so long a time, was silent, was hiding Himself — was He perhaps afraid of vain glory? What would He fear from vain glory, He who is the true glory of the Father? Indeed He feared, but not for Himself. He feared for us, because of those things which He knew should be feared. He was being cautious for our sake, He was instructing us. He was silent in speech, but instructing by deed; and what He later taught by word, He was already proclaiming by example: Learn from Me, for I am meek and humble of heart.»
IN THE DESERT — not cultivated and inhabited, as if John had lived comfortably in his father's house, which was in the hill country of Judea, as our pampered innovators and deserters would have it. For Isaiah, in chapter 40:3, prophesying about John's desert, takes it in the proper sense of a wilderness, as is evident from the context. The same is confirmed by John's rough garment of camel's hair, and his haircloth, and his wild food, namely locusts and wild honey — so say the Greek and Latin Fathers everywhere, whom our Father Canisius extensively cites in his book On the Corruption of the Word of God, chapter 2. The reason was that John, as an emulator of Moses and Elijah and the precursor of Christ, dwelling in the desert far from the corruptions of men, might converse with God and angels, and from them draw great power of virtue and spirit, and gain for himself a reputation and fame for sanctity, so that all would believe him when he pointed out Christ, and, moved to compunction by his preaching, would repent. Hence the Fathers frequently call St. John the prince of monks and anchorites, as St. Jerome does in Letter 22 to Eustochium; likewise St. Chrysostom, Theophylactus, and Euthymius here; and Cassian in Conference 18, chapter 6. Hence John, living in the desert with the angels in an angelic manner, was esteemed to be an angel — indeed, by Malachi in chapter 3 and by Christ in Matthew 11:10, He is called an angel. "This is He," He says, "of whom it is written: Behold, I send My angel before Your face, who will prepare Your way before You."
Symbolically: St. John preaching in the desert signified that the Gospel was destined to be preached principally not in Jerusalem and Judea, but in the solitude and desert of the Gentile multitude. So says St. Jerome on Isaiah, chapter 40.
Tropologically: St. John by his example taught future apostolic men and preachers first to withdraw from the tumult of men and to devote themselves in secret to prayer and meditation, so that in it they might draw from heaven a great power of spirit, which they might then pour out upon their hearers when preaching. See what I said in praise of the desert on Hosea 2:18, on the words: "I will lead her into the wilderness and speak to her heart." Here is relevant that saying of St. Augustine in Letter 76: "He will not be a good cleric who was not first a good monk." Accordingly, Saints Augustine, Martin, Chrysostom, Nazianzen, Basil, Gregory, and very many others were taken from monasteries into the clergy, and, though unwilling, were raised to bishoprics.
Now this desert of Judea was near the Jordan, close to Aenon and Salim, as is clear from John 3:23, and it was very famous, both for its abundance of water for baptizing, and for the dwelling and miracles of the prophets and religious men who in the books of Kings are called the "sons of the prophets," that is, the disciples of Elijah, Elisha, and the like.
Finally, Nicephorus, Book I, chapter 14, attests that John, at the age of one and a half, was led by his mother into the desert, perhaps fleeing the wrath of Herod. Cedrenus adds in his Compendium of History that he hid in a certain cave, and that his mother died there, and an angel took charge of the care of the boy John. This cave was later frequented by hermits, as is evident from John Moschus in the Spiritual Meadow, chapter 1, where he relates that this cave was situated near the Jordan, and that Abbot John, being ill, turned aside to it by chance and was healed there by John the Baptist, with the condition that he would inhabit that same cave. For the Baptist appeared and said to him: "I am John the Baptist, and therefore I command you never to depart from here; for this small cave is greater than Mount Sinai, since into this cave our Lord Jesus often entered when He visited me. Promise me therefore that you will live here, and I will immediately restore your health." Hearing this, the old man gladly promised to remain in that cave. And immediately restored to health, he persevered there for the rest of his life. He turned that cave into a church and gathered brothers there. The place itself is called Sapsas.
Verse 2: Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven Is at Hand
2. AND SAYING: REPENT, FOR THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN IS AT HAND. — John therefore went into the desert so that, by practicing repentance and an austere life there, he might become a fitting herald of repentance, as one who taught it first by example rather than by word. St. Gregory of Nazianzen, imitating St. John, says in his oration On the Holy Lights of Epiphany, past the middle: «I strive, or rather I eagerly desire, to undertake the office — or rather the service — of the great John; and although I am not a precursor, I come nonetheless from the desert.» For he withdrew with St. Basil into the wilderness of Pontus, and there led an austere life, and having drawn from it a heavenly Spirit, came forth like a new Baptist, a herald of repentance. This was the theme, this was the sum of the Baptist's preaching: "Repent!" — because at that time nearly all were sinners and were living in their vices and desires; and for a sinner, repentance is necessary in order to receive grace and righteousness from Christ.
Moreover, repentance is not merely the amendment of morals and the beginning of a new life, as the heretics would have it; but also the detestation through sorrow of the old sinful life, its chastisement and destruction. For a new life cannot be begun unless the old one is destroyed. Hence the Interlinear Gloss explains it thus, as if to say: «Let each one punish the evils of his former life, because the salvation we lost will draw near, and the opportunity to return whence we fell.» St. Augustine, in his book On Repentance, says: «He cannot begin a new life who does not repent of the old.» The Gloss says: «This the herald announces, which the Truth later confirms. To repent is to weep over past deeds and not to commit again what must be wept over. He who truly repents punishes in himself his past errors and raises his mind to heavenly things. This virtue is conceived from fear, and it is called 'poenitentia' from punishing what was unlawfully committed.» Repentance is therefore called, as it were, "holding of punishment" (poenae tenentia). The Greek word metanoia means the same. Hence Ausonius:
"I am the goddess who exacts penalties for what was done and not done,
So that you may repent. Thus I am called Metanoia."
Hence St. Gregory, in Homily 34 on the Gospels, says: «Repentance is to lament past evils and not to commit again what must be lamented.» The same was signified by the Hebrew hinnachem, namely, to repent and grieve over evil committed. Hence God, seeing the men He had created rushing into wickedness: "He repented that He had made man on the earth, and, touched with sorrow of heart within, He said: I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth" (Genesis 6:6). Therefore the Hebrew Gospel attributed to St. Matthew by Munster, in place of hinnachem and nechumim (that is, to repent and repentances), simply puts teshuvah, that is, conversion, or shuvu, that is, "be converted to the Lord." But repentance is not bare conversion to God; it is also aversion from sins, that is, sorrow, compunction, and satisfaction, as the Apostle teaches in 2 Corinthians 7:10-11, and Joel 2:12: "Be converted to Me, with your whole heart, in fasting, and in weeping, and in mourning." From this it is clear that repentance comprises three duties: sorrow, a new life, and the chastisement of sins, to appease God.
FOR THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN IS AT HAND — by which, namely, God reigns in the faithful in this life through grace, and in the future through glory, and makes them kings and partakers of His eternal kingdom. «John was the first to preach the kingdom of heaven,» says the Gloss, «which the Jews had never heard,» says St. Chrysostom. And St. Jerome says here: «The Baptist John was the first to preach the kingdom of heaven, so that the Precursor of the Lord might be honored with this privilege.»
Note: The Jews were expecting a kingdom under King Messiah on earth, rich and splendid, like the one under Solomon; for the Messiah, or Christ, was the son and successor of Solomon, and such a kingdom the Jews still expect from their Messiah. St. John, therefore, and after him Christ and the Apostles, begin their preaching with the kingdom of the Messiah — but a heavenly one, not an earthly one — as if to say: The time for the opening of heaven is now at hand, for shortly Christ will open it for you by His death. Therefore repent of your past sins, and for the future correct your ways and change them for the better, so that you may deserve to be introduced by Him into this kingdom: "Behold, now is the acceptable time (predicted by Isaiah, chapter 49), behold, now is the day of salvation," when heaven, closed for four thousand years, is to be opened, and those who will may enter it — if, that is, they enter upon the path that Christ will propose, namely faith, hope, charity, and a heavenly life, and begin the heavenly or spiritual kingdom in the Church Militant, which they will most joyfully consummate in the Church Triumphant. So say Theophylactus, Jansenius, Maldonatus, and Franciscus Lucas, who says: «The kingdom of heaven is called the dominion of Christ, just as over the holy angels, so also over the society of those men whose rightly ordered life on earth follows God who rules from heaven, and in heaven eternally enjoys God who possesses it entirely.»
Verse 3: The Voice of One Crying in the Desert
3. FOR THIS IS HE OF WHOM IT WAS SPOKEN BY THE PROPHET ISAIAH (chapter 40:3), SAYING: THE VOICE OF ONE CRYING IN THE DESERT: PREPARE THE WAY OF THE LORD, MAKE HIS PATHS STRAIGHT. — I explained these things at length in my commentary on Isaiah 40:3; therefore I will not repeat here what was said there. For St. John was the voice of God: first, foretelling that Christ was coming; second, pointing out that He was already born, and inviting to repentance, and preparing men for the grace of Christ. By «the voice of one crying, the strength of the preaching is indicated,» says Rabanus; for one cries out to those who are far off and deaf, and this with indignation. Bede aptly says: «God indeed cried out through others, but this one alone is called 'the voice,' because he pointed to the Word who was present. 'Prepare the way of the Lord'» is the same as "repent," as was said before — as if to say: Act, O Jews, O inhabitants of the world, all of you! For Christ who is about to come, and who is, as it were, your Messiah-King about to be inaugurated — level the roads (as is customarily done for kings), that is, remove everything that might offend or dishonor Him. Take away your errors and sins through repentance, and bring it about that Christ may be received by each and every person promptly and eagerly — namely, that each one may diligently prepare their hearts and minds through repentance for the faith and grace of Christ, and for all holiness.
Verse 4: John's Garment of Camel's Hair and Leather Belt
4. NOW JOHN HIMSELF HAD A GARMENT OF CAMEL'S HAIR — not a smooth fabric, which is commonly called "camelot" (camlet), as Chytraeus and the pampered innovators would have it, who adorn themselves splendidly in their pulpits like suitors of Penelope. For Christ commends John for the roughness of his clothing, in Matthew 11:8: "What did you go out into the desert to see? A man clothed in soft garments?" As if to say, by no means; for "behold, those who wear soft clothing are in the houses of kings." But John fled the houses of Herod and withdrew into the desert, and preferred the sheepfold to the court. His garment was therefore cheap, rough, shaggy, coarse, eremitical, and made of haircloth — and this so that by his very appearance he might display and preach humility, contempt for the world, and repentance. Indeed, «his bodily habit spoke of the virtue of his soul,» says St. Chrysostom; so too all the other Fathers and commentators, and specifically St. Anselm and Eusebius of Emesa in Homily 1 on John the Baptist, who say that St. John's garment was a cilice made of camel hair; for in Syria there is an abundance of camels.
For by this he tamed his flesh in youth, boiling with blood and heat, lest it flow into lust, as St. Paul also did, saying: "I chastise my body and bring it into subjection, lest perhaps after preaching to others, I myself should become a castaway" (1 Corinthians 9). For a haircloth, with its sharp bristles and barbs, piercing the flesh as with so many needles, greatly mortifies it and restrains its wantonness and lusts, as those who have experienced it know. Hence St. Giles, one of the first companions of St. Francis, when asked why St. John, who had committed no sin, had led such an austere life and done such penance, answered: «Just as meats are seasoned with salt lest they rot, so the body of the Baptist was seasoned with penance.» So the Franciscan Annals report. «For penance,» as St. Cyprian says in his sermon On the Reason for Circumcision, «is a corrosive salt, drying up the festering putrefactions of the flesh.» Hence Saints Hilary, Anthony, Paul, Pachomius, Barlaam, and the other anchorites, as Saints Jerome, Athanasius, Palladius, Cassian, and others testify, wore a haircloth or a sackcloth shirt, just as the Capuchins do today, and as Elijah, Elisha, and the other Prophets formerly wore, as I showed in the proem to the Minor Prophets. Indeed, God made for Adam not tunics of fine linen, wool, or cloth, but of skins and rough material, so that with them, as with haircloth, he might tame his flesh and do penance for his sin, as I said on Genesis 3:21. Famous is the maxim of Augustus Caesar in Suetonius: «Distinguished and soft clothing is the banner of pride and thence of luxury.»
Do you want examples? Take these: St. Ephrem concludes the life of St. Abraham the hermit thus: «In all fifty years of his abstinence, he never changed the haircloth garment with which he was clothed.» St. Clare wore a haircloth of pig bristles for twenty-eight years, even while ill. St. Josaphat the King, exchanging his kingdom for the hermitage, wore the rough haircloth given to him by Barlaam under his clothing against his bare flesh, as Damascene testifies in his History, chapter 37. Theodoret, in his Religious History, chapter 37, writes thus about St. Abraham the hermit: «The emperor also desired to see him, and summoned him to his presence; and when he came, he greeted and received him, and esteemed that rustic haircloth more excellent than his own purple.» St. William, Duke of Aquitaine, converted by St. Bernard, tamed his flesh with an iron breastplate and armed himself against temptations. St. Dominic did the same, and for this reason received the surname "Loricatus" (the Mailed) — a hard and iron cilice indeed. St. Martin's opinion, as Sulpicius testifies, was: «It befits a Christian to die in ashes.» Hence he himself died lying on ashes and in a haircloth, as did St. Anselm, St. Charles Borromeo, and many others. Moreover, Josaphat buried his father King Abenner in a haircloth, as Damascene testifies in his History, 1:35.
AND A LEATHER BELT AROUND HIS WAIST. — The prophets, indeed all Jews and Syrians, wore long garments; and so, lest these flow down loosely and impede their step, they girded them with a belt, so that they might be ready for travel and strong for work. Hence Christ admonishes us to have our loins girded (Luke 12:35; Ephesians 6:14). See what was said there. But John additionally girded his loins with a leather belt, so that it might press the haircloth garment more tightly against his body, and thus more fully prick and mortify his flesh and render it subject to the spirit; for in the loins is the origin of seed and lust. In this he imitated Elijah, whose epithet was: "A hairy man, and girded with a leather belt about his loins" (2 Kings 1:8). Well-known is the saying: «A girded garment, a girded mind; an ungirded garment, an ungirded mind.» For as Ecclesiasticus says in chapter 19:27: "The attire of the body, and the laughter of the teeth, and the gait of a man, reveal what he is." Hence Sulla warned Pompey and the Roman senators to beware of the loosely girded boy, for in him there were many Mariuses. That boy was Julius Caesar, who then was a child but later, as a man, crushed Pompey, the senate, and the Roman nobility. So Macrobius, Book II of the Saturnalia, chapter 9. See St. Chrysostom here, and Cassian, Book I of On the Monastic Habit, chapter 1, who begins thus: «And so it is necessary for a monk, as a soldier of Christ, always placed in the front line of battle, to march continually with girded loins» — and he proves this by the example of Elijah, John the Baptist, Peter, and Paul.
His Food Was Locusts and Wild Honey.
For "locust" in Greek is akrides, by which: First, Beza incorrectly understands wild pears; for these are not called akrides, but achrades. Achras is a wild pear tree, a type of thorny bush, and also a wild pear fruit. Hence Columella, Book 10:
"And the wild achrados rejoices in untamed shoots and rough forests."
That is, the pyraster, or wild pear tree.
Second, certain writers mentioned by Epiphanius in Heresy 30, that of the Ebionites, also incorrectly take akrides as enkrides, that is, pastries made from honey and oil.
Third, other innovators understand akrides as marine crabs. But these are not called akrides, but akarides or karides in Athenaeus, and in other authors karabis. And from where, I ask, would John have obtained sea crabs in the desert? Add that crabs, as creatures crawling on the ground, were forbidden to the Jews by law (Leviticus 11:41). Finally, these crabs are the delicacies of the rich, from which the Baptist recoiled.
Fourth, others translate akrides as herbs, or the tips of trees and leaves. Hence the Ethiopic version translates: «His food was attenda, that is, the tips of herbs with wild honey,» dipped in honey.
But I say that akrides are locusts, as our translator, the Syriac, and the Arabic render them (the Egyptian version translates "cicadas," but by these they mean locusts, for locusts are the ones that sing like cicadas). They are so called because they fly to and devour ta akra, that is, the tips of grain stalks and plants. So Theocritus and others commonly in their lexicons. Hence Origen, Hilary, Ambrose, Chrysostom, and Augustine, as cited by Canisius in Book I of On the Corruption of the Word of God, chapter 4, understand by akrides a kind of insect that flies by leaping, namely locusts, which Pliny in Book 11, chapter 35, and Book 6, chapter 30, teaches were customarily eaten by Ethiopians, Libyans, Parthians, and other Easterners. Hence they are called by Diodorus Siculus, Book III, chapter 3, akridophagoi, that is, locust-eaters. And St. Jerome, in Book II Against Jovinian, says: «Among Eastern and Libyan peoples, because clouds of locusts are found throughout the desert and the hot wasteland of the wilderness, it is the custom to eat locusts. That this is true, John the Baptist also proves.» Hence the locust, because it leaps like a clean animal, is placed among the foods permitted by God to the Jews (Leviticus 11:22). Nor is this surprising, since we read in histories that German soldiers once ate fried silkworms, Italians ate weasels, and Spaniards ate tortoises. Many today also eat oysters and shellfish even raw, which we know are bred from putrefaction.
Moreover, the ancients ate locusts either boiled, or toasted and ground into powder; indeed, they preserved them dried in the sun, or with salt and smoke, for an entire year.
Finally, the locust is a cheap food, an indication of temperance, poverty, and penance. Jerome Mercurialis, in Book II of Various Readings, chapter 20, teaches that locusts are a dry food that shortens life and generates lice and diseases. But by the grace of God, it was otherwise with John the Baptist, who, eating locusts, lived healthy and vigorous, and became a powerful herald of God, a sharp castigator of gluttony, lust, and all vices, and a preacher of the heavenly kingdom more by example than by word.
About John's drink nothing is said here, because it is established that he drank nothing but water; for in the desert he found nothing else. Hence the angel said of him: "He shall drink neither wine nor strong drink" (Luke 1:15).
«And wild honey.» — You may ask what kind of honey this was. First, Rabanus thinks it was the white and tender leaves of trees which, when rubbed and crushed by hand, give off a scent and flavor somewhat like honey.
Second, Jacques Lefevre d'Etaples thinks this honey was what Pliny, in Book 11, chapter 16, lists as the third kind of honey, calling it "ericaeum" (heather honey) from erica (heather), which is a shrub that flowers in autumn when other herbs and bushes have ceased blooming; and this honey is unpleasant in taste.
Third, others think this honey was a liquid collected from the leaves of trees.
Fourth, Suidas considers it to be dew which, gathered from bushes and trees, is called manna.
Fifth and genuinely, St. Chrysostom, Theophylactus, Euthymius here, and Isidore of Pelusium in Book I, Letters 3 and 132, judge that this honey was wild honey made by wild bees that produce honey in trees or in the crevices of rocks. Euthymius and Isidore of Pelusium teach that it was bitter and unpleasant in flavor. Furthermore, the Ethiopic text has sedena, a word signifying a particular kind of honey sweeter and healthier than ordinary honey, produced by a certain type of bee called tasma by the Ethiopians, smaller than other bees, about the size of a fly.
Verse 5: Jerusalem and All Judea Go Out to Him
5. THEN JERUSALEM WENT OUT TO HIM, AND ALL JUDEA, AND ALL THE REGION AROUND THE JORDAN. — "Then" — namely, when the fame of the eremitical, austere, and holy life of St. John, as well as of his preaching, so serious and ardent, was spread everywhere. For by this fame of John, the people of Jerusalem and the Jews, stirred up and impelled by the Spirit of God, came running to him, to see and hear a new man, as if fallen from heaven. So highly esteemed by all is sanctity and the reputation for sanctity; therefore those who strive to lead the people to a change of life must excel in it.
Now, "Jordan" in Hebrew is said to mean, as it were, iored min dan, that is, "descending from the city of Dan," which was later enlarged with buildings by Philip the tetrarch and, in honor of Tiberius Caesar, called Caesarea Philippi. Dan in Hebrew means "judgment." Hence mystically it signifies that those who fear God's judgment hasten to holy preachers, such as John was, to learn from them the way of salvation, so that on the day of judgment they may be adjudged to heaven by Christ the Judge.
Verse 6: Baptized in the Jordan, Confessing Their Sins
6. AND THEY WERE BAPTIZED BY HIM IN THE JORDAN, CONFESSING THEIR SINS. — Calvin ineptly interprets "they were baptized" as "they were taught the baptism of repentance." For there was indeed a true baptism of John, but only a catechesis and preparation for the baptism of Christ: for the baptism of John was not a Sacrament and did not confer grace, but was only a certain preparation and disposition for Christ and Christ's baptism.
To baptize is not to teach, but rather to wash the body with water, as is clear from verse 13. The baptism of John was different from the baptism of Christ, as I taught against the heretics, Acts 19:2. For the baptism of Christ by the work performed (ex opere operato) deletes all sins and confers grace and justification; John's baptism did nothing of the sort, but was only a sign of repentance and an incentive to it, by which they professed that they desired their soul to be washed from sins, just as they washed their body with water. John's baptism was therefore only a profession of repentance and a preparation for the baptism of Christ, so that through it they might be justified. Hence they came "confessing their sins." For repentance, that is, sorrow for sins, causes a person to confess them and seek their remedy and pardon. Thus the Jews in certain cases were required to confess their sins to the priest, as I showed in Leviticus 5:5, and chapters 6:6-7, and Numbers 5:7. Yet this confession was not a sacrament nor did it pardon sins, as happens in the confession instituted by Christ; for in that confession, as in a sacrament, the priest, by the power conferred on him by Christ in ordination, absolves the one confessing from sins. That confession of the Jews, therefore, was only an indication of repentance and compunction, that is, of internal contrition, which, if it was perfect — namely, proceeding from the love of God above all things — abolished sins and justified. "For charity covers a multitude of sins" (James 5). But if this contrition was imperfect, so that it was only attrition arising from fear of punishments, it did not remove sin nor confer justifying grace, but disposed one to contrition and stirred the attrite person to be justified through it.
Verse 7: Brood of Vipers — Who Showed You to Flee the Wrath to Come?
7. BUT SEEING MANY OF THE PHARISEES AND SADDUCEES COMING TO HIS BAPTISM, HE SAID TO THEM: BROOD OF VIPERS, WHO SHOWED YOU HOW TO FLEE FROM THE WRATH TO COME? — The Sadducees were so called, that is, "the just," because they arrogated to themselves the name of justice, or rather from Sadoc, their founder. The Pharisees were so called, that is, expositors and explainers of the law, or "the separated" (for the Hebrew root pharas means to separate and hence to expound, because when the individual parts of a complex matter are separated one from another, then the whole thing is set forth distinctly before the eyes, opened up and expounded) — separated from the common people on account of their learning and holiness. Their chief teachers and leaders were R. Hillel and Shammai, shortly before Christ, says St. Jerome on Isaiah 8. Both were always opposed to virtue and truth. Hence they are here most severely rebuked by St. John — first, because they were proud, puffed up with a vain opinion of their own learning and holiness; and second, because they were hypocrites and zealots for a pretended holiness. They sought baptism along with others from the most holy man John, so that they too might be considered holy by the people. So Origen in his sixth book on John. Add to this that for this reason they wished to bind John to themselves and to shut his mouth, lest he should thunder against their vices. The same thing is done today by politicians. Hence Christ, in Matthew 21:26 and throughout chapter 23, sharply rebukes their ambition, avarice, perverse and distorted interpretation of the law, and other crimes, and threatens them with the woe of eternal damnation. And therefore they plotted Christ's death and actually brought it about, and after Him persecuted holy Stephen and the first Christians to death, as is clear from Acts 4; and also because the old saying is true: «The potter envies the potter, the smith the smith, the teacher the teacher»; and also because Christian wisdom was contrary to and rebuked the Judaism of the Pharisees, their foolish interpretations of the law, and much more their impure and impious morals. Only the Essenes, on account of the piety of their faith and morals, favored Christ and the Christians; indeed, having become Christians, they were the first to practice the monastic life, under St. Mark, as I said at Acts 5:2.
In the beginning, in the time of Jonathan, who was the brother of Judas Maccabaeus, there were three sects of the Jews, namely the Pharisees, the Essenes, and the Sadducees, about whom Josephus writes thus in Book 13 of the Antiquities, chapter 9: «At this time (of Jonathan) there were three sects of the Jews, which disagreed among themselves about human affairs: one called that of the Pharisees, another of the Sadducees, and a third of the Essenes. Of these, the Pharisees attribute some things, but not all, to fate, and say that some things are in our own power, whether they happen or not. The Essenes affirm that all things are in the power of fate, and that nothing happens to men apart from the decree of fate. But the Sadducees deny fate altogether and remove it from things, saying that nothing happens to men by fate, and that all things are in our own power, so that we ourselves are the authors both of our happiness and of our misfortune, if we have followed worse counsels.» The same author treats these three sects and their doctrines and morals more fully in Book II of the Wars, chapter 7, where he teaches that the Pharisees professed a more exact knowledge of the legal rites; that the Sadducees denied divinity or providence, and rewards or punishments of souls after death, which is the only bridle to restrain oneself from sin and to live holily; once this is removed, men rush like unbridled horses into every pleasure. Hence St. Luke, Acts 23:8, says: «The Sadducees say there is no resurrection, neither angel nor spirit; but the Pharisees confess both.» For the Sadducees, following the fables of the Greek sophists and atheists (to whom Judea was then subject), ridiculed the Elysian fields of the blessed, Orcus, Cerberus, Gehenna, etc.: the Pharisees opposed them, following the faith and hope of the ancient fathers Abraham, Moses, and the Prophets, and the people followed them. The Sadducees, however, were the aristocrats — and, it seems, Herod, who lived as it were an atheist, was given over to every license and cruelty. When Christ came, both conspired against Him as if against a common enemy of the Jews. The Book of Wisdom and the second book of Maccabees were written against the Sadducees. See what was said in the argument of Wisdom.
HE SAID TO THEM: BROOD OF VIPERS. — This is a Hebraism, meaning: You are vipers begotten of vipers, that is, the worst sons of the worst parents — plainly harmful, cunning, and venomous — who propagate to your disciples as if to your children the venomous morals and errors which you have imbibed and inherited from your venomous parents, by which you kill and destroy their souls. So St. Jerome on Isaiah 30, and Gregory, Homily 20 on the Gospels.
For the bite of the viper is so harmful and deadly that it brings death within seven hours, or at most on the third day. So Gesner in his book On Serpents, under "Viper." Thus Christ explains these words of John in Matthew 23:31, saying: "Therefore you are witnesses against yourselves that you are sons of those who killed the Prophets. And you fill up the measure of your fathers. Serpents, brood of vipers, how will you escape the judgment of Gehenna?"
Pliny adds, secondly, in Book 10, chapter 62, that the offspring of vipers, eager to be born, gnaw through the womb, and thus come into the light by killing their mother. Hear Pliny: «The male viper inserts his head into the female's mouth, which she bites off in the sweetness of pleasure. She alone among land creatures bears eggs within herself, of one color and soft, like those of fish. On the third day she hatches the young within the womb, then bears them one by one on successive days, about twenty in number.» The same is related by Nicander, Herodotus, Plutarch, Galen, Aelian, and also St. Jerome and St. Basil in Homily 9 on the Hexaemeron, whom Gesner cites under "Viper." Whence Lucan: «The viper's young are born with the body torn apart.» And Caelius Rhodiginus, Book 3 of the Various Readings, chapter 37, says that for this reason some think parricides were formerly sewn into a leather sack with a viper and suffocated, because the viper is a matricide — and hence the viper was so called because it gives birth by force (vi pariat), or dies by force (vi pereat).
In Greek, the viper is called echidna, from the phrase "to hold within itself offspring unto death," meaning that it retains its young within itself until death and destruction, say the lexicographers. Thus the sense will be more apt and deeper, meaning: You, O Pharisees and Sadducees, are like vipers, because just as the viper gnaws through and kills the belly of the male in order to come to life, so you tear apart and kill your mother the Synagogue and your spiritual fathers — namely, the true Prophets and Doctors of God — in order to live gloriously in your greed and ambition. So St. Chrysostom here, Homily 11; Euthymius; St. Jerome, Letter to Praesidius; Isidore of Pelusium, Book 1, Letter 105; St. Gregory, Book 15 of the Moralia, chapter 9; St. Augustine, Sermon 83 On the Seasons.
However, this tradition about the viper — that at birth it gnaws through its mother's belly — is refuted by Gesner in the passage cited, and by Matthiolus on Dioscorides Book 2, chapter 16, and by Albert the Great in Book 25 of the History of Animals, based on the experience of many who have seen vipers give birth in a box or glass vessel in the manner of other animals, without any gnawing or death of the mother giving birth. The same thing was affirmed to me at Rome by our pharmacist of the Roman College, who frequently raises vipers and observes them giving birth, and from them produces a remarkable theriac, which is eagerly sought by Romans, Italians, and those beyond the Alps.
Therefore Gesner thinks the viper is so called not because it dies by force (vi pereat), but as if it were a viviparous creature (vivipara), because alone among serpents it bears not eggs but a living animal, as Theophrastus testifies in Book 7, chapter 14, and Aristotle in Book 5 of the History of Animals, chapter 34, who says: «The viper alone among serpents brings forth a living animal, having first produced eggs within itself.» Aristotle adds that the offspring of the viper break through the membranes, not the mother's womb, just as chicks break the shell of the egg in which they are enclosed, in order to come into the light. Hear Aristotle: «It bears young wrapped in membranes, which are broken on the third day. It sometimes happens that those still in the womb, having gnawed through the membranes, burst forth. It bears them one by one on successive days, more than twenty.»
Pliny seems to have transcribed this from Aristotle in his usual manner, but incorrectly, and so he takes "membranes" to mean the sides of the mother, when Aristotle means the afterbirth membranes in which the viper is born, and once born, it breaks through them outside the mother's womb, in order to see the light.
In a similar way, many things were formerly believed which posterity has discovered to be false — such as that the salamander lives in fire (for it is consumed by fire, though not as quickly as other reptiles, because it is cold); that there is only one phoenix in the world which revives itself; that the chameleon lives on air (for it actually lives on dew and flies flying in the air). Likewise, it is a fable that vipers copulate through the mouth, that the female bites off the male's head, and that the young gnaw through the mother's womb and are born by killing her. Therefore the Doctors and Fathers, especially Epiphanius in Heresy 26, at the end, who assert these things, followed the common opinion in order to weave from it a fitting moral lesson (tropology).
Third, vipers love wine, and are accordingly caught by means of wine, says Aristotle in Book 8 of the History of Animals, chapter 4. Moreover, they are given over to lust, and therefore generate so many young. Aptly, then, St. John through the comparison with vipers censured the intemperance of the Pharisees, namely their gluttony and luxury.
Fourth, vipers devour scorpions, whose venom is supremely deadly, and therefore the bites of vipers are more venomous, as Aristotle testifies in Book 8 of the History of Animals, chapter 29. So the Pharisees and Sadducees, from the poisonous doctrines of their Rabbis, increased the venom of their errors. Again, vipers signify the slanders and calumnies which the Jews cast against John and Christ. For the symbol of slander is the serpentine and viperous tooth, according to Deuteronomy 32, in the mystical sense: "I will send the teeth of beasts upon them, with the fury of creatures that drag upon the ground and of serpents." The poets feign that «Cadmus, son of Agenor king of the Phoenicians, sowed serpents' teeth, and from them armed soldiers were immediately born, who rising against one another, all fell by mutual slaughter.» This fiction of the teeth represents slander, because the word "teeth" (dentes) is derived from "taking away" (demendo), says Cassiodorus on the Psalms. Therefore the tongues of slanderers are not improperly called teeth, because just as teeth tear away parts of food, so slanderers perpetually gnaw away at people's reputation and honor. From these teeth, therefore, sown by the devil in the world — that is, through the agency of slanderers — quarrels, wars, and contentions arise.
Fifth, St. Ambrose on Luke 3:7 thinks that in the vipers is noted the cunning of the Pharisees, according to Matthew 10: "Be therefore wise as serpents." «For the serpent by its cunning foresees the future, yet does not abandon its venom. So these men, with a certain provident devotion, voluntarily seek what will profit them — namely, John's baptism — yet they still do not abandon what is harmful and their sins.»
Sixth, vipers, once their venom is removed, cure sore throat, dimness of the eyes, elephantiasis, and many other diseases, as Dioscorides testifies in Book 1, chapter 16. Hence the Egyptians ate vipers, as Galen testifies in Book 3 of On the Properties of Foods, as did the Indians, according to Pliny, Book 7. Moreover, from vipers is made theriac, the most effective remedy against poisons, plague, and other diseases. So the Pharisees, once their errors were removed, taught the people the true faith, law, and piety. Hence Christ says: "The Scribes and Pharisees have sat upon the chair of Moses. Therefore, whatever they tell you, observe and do; but do not act according to their works, for they say and do not do" (Matthew 23:1-2).
WHO HAS SHOWN YOU TO FLEE FROM THE WRATH TO COME? — "To flee," that is, to escape. For the Hebrews by a simple verb signify all compound forms, since they lack them. Again, "to flee" here denotes not an incipient but a completed act, and means the same as to escape by flight from the wrath of God and Gehenna, according to Canon 12.
For "has shown" (demonstravit), the Greek is hypedeixen, which you may translate first as "forewarned"; second, "suggested, admonished"; third, "demonstrated by reasons and examples." Hence hypodeixis means a demonstration.
THE WRATH TO COME. — This is not so much the destruction of Judea by Titus as the wrath of Christ the Judge, which He will show to the impious who are to be condemned on the day of judgment, and the vengeance and sentence of damnation which He will pronounce upon them, and eternal damnation and Gehenna itself, as Christ explains in Matthew 23:33. For the impious will so dread this wrath of Christ and His wrathful countenance that they will say "to the mountains: Fall upon us, and hide us from the face of Him who sits upon the throne and from the wrath of the Lamb, for the great day of Their wrath has come, and who shall be able to stand?" (Revelation 6:16).
For St. John, just as he was a herald of the kingdom of heaven, promising it to the penitent, so too was he a herald of God and of Gehenna, threatening it to the impenitent, such as the Pharisees and Sadducees were. Let every preacher do the same, as did Isaiah (2:19), Hosea (10:8), and Christ (Luke 23:30).
The plain and genuine sense therefore is, meaning: "Who has shown you to flee" — that you will escape, or the way to escape the wrath to come, that is, the judgment, vengeance, and eternal damnation of the wrathful Christ? For Christ thus explains John when He threatens the same Scribes and Pharisees with Gehenna in Matthew 23:33, saying: "Serpents, brood of vipers, how will you escape the judgment of Gehenna?" — meaning: You will by no means escape or be able to escape the judgment of Gehenna, but will most assuredly fall into it, because you are a brood of vipers, that is, you have an inborn and long-confirmed hypocrisy and malice from which you cannot be torn away, because you do not wish it. For you come to me as pretended penitents, when either you do not believe in the providence, wrath, and vengeance of God, as the Sadducees did not believe; or if you do believe in it, as the Pharisees did, you do not fear it, because you proudly think yourselves righteous. John therefore severely rebukes them, meaning: Who has promised you that you will escape Gehenna? For your belief, O Sadducees, that there is no Gehenna is utterly false. And your presumption and security, O Pharisees, that you need not fear Gehenna because you proudly consider yourselves righteous, is utterly vain. The emphasis is on the word "has shown" (demonstravit), meaning: You live so securely and sleep so soundly in your lusts, as if there were no divine vengeance or punishment of crimes after this life, or at least as if you had nothing to fear from it. Whence comes this security of yours, whence this demonstration? Who has shown you this by certain and evident reasoning? Certainly no one, except your own proud and foolish self-persuasion.
Differently, Jansenius and Franciscus Lucas think these words are John's rebuke of the hypocrisy of the Pharisees and Sadducees, meaning: I do not believe you are coming sincerely to my baptism, but falsely and hypocritically. For who could have shown you that the wrath of God to come must be fled through my baptism of repentance, when you either do not believe in it, like the Sadducees, or do not fear it, like the Pharisees? For nothing can be demonstrated or persuaded to the unbelieving and arrogant that is contrary to their opinion and arrogance. Therefore you do not repent from the heart, but pretend and feign that you are fleeing the wrath of God.
In yet another way, Maldonatus, who thinks these words express John's admiration at so great and sudden a conversion of the Sadducees and Pharisees, meaning: Who has shown you that the judgment of God and Gehenna, which you formerly did not believe in or did not fear? «Whence so great a change in you? Surely not from yourselves, but from the powerful grace and working of God, says St. Chrysostom, and from your evil conscience, which accuses you as defendants and compels you to dread the judgment of God.»
Tropologically, St. Bernard in his Declamations teaches that the coming wrath — or, as the Greek has it, mellousan, that is, the future wrath — must be fled through present wrath, that is, through the penance which one inflicts upon oneself, or accepts when inflicted by God: «For who, O wretched ones,» he says, «has shown you to flee from the wrath to come? Why do you so greatly flee the present wrath (by which you escape the future), fear the scourge, turn aside from the rod? And indeed in this your day, which is for your peace; but if you also had known: you change, but you do not escape penance. For evil cannot go unpunished. If it is not punished here by one's own will, it will be punished elsewhere without end. A miserable exchange indeed, utterly full of madness — to shrink from human labor and to choose the everlasting gnashing of teeth prepared for the devil.» For the sinner who flees the rod of the chastising Father falls into the Gehenna of the condemning God who is Judge.
Verse 8: Bring Forth Fruits Worthy of Repentance
8. BRING FORTH THEREFORE FRUITS WORTHY (in Greek karpon axion, that is, worthy fruit in the singular) OF REPENTANCE. — That is, worthy of repentance. The translator Graecizes the expression, for the Greek axios, meaning "worthy," by Greek syntax requires the genitive. Add that the genitive "of repentance" is governed both by "fruits" and by "worthy." The Baptist teaches that the way and means of escaping the future wrath is present repentance — but a worthy one, that is, true, serious, and condign. Meaning: Because you, O Sadducees, do not believe in the providence and wrath of God against the impious — namely, His vengeance and Gehenna; and you, O Pharisees, trusting in your own works, do not fear it as though you were righteous — therefore both of you will certainly fall into it. In order, then, to avoid it, repent and change your errors and morals: you, O Sadducees, change the faithlessness of atheism into faith in the divine power; you, O Pharisees, change pride into humility; both of you, change gluttony into abstinence, lust into chastity, avarice into almsgiving, and outward Pharisaic righteousness and its ostentation into Christian and interior holiness. "Bring forth therefore fruits of repentance" — not pretended and false, not external, not just any kind, but true, internal, and worthy fruits, which befit one who is truly penitent and indicate serious repentance, and which proceed from a heart that truly repents — such as tears, detestation and punishment of sins, and a serious conversion of life and morals. See St. Gregory, Homily 20 on the Gospels.
Add that repentance is worthy when the measure of sorrow and punishment corresponds to the measure of pleasure and guilt, so that as guilt increases, punishment also increases, and the gravity of the latter corresponds to the magnitude of the former. For an adulterer must perform far graver penance than a thief, a murderer than an adulterer, and a parricide than a murderer. Hence individual penalties have been decreed and measured out equally for individual sins in the Penitential Canons. "Equally" — understand with respect to crimes and persons, not with respect to God. For one mortal sin, since it is an offense against God and, as far as it is in itself, strips from Him the status of the supreme good and ultimate end (for the sinner implicitly places this in the creature he loves, so as to prefer it to God), and consequently as it were strips away His deity, and therefore sin is as it were a killing of Christ and a killing of God — hence it contains in itself a certain infinite malice, because it is an offense, injury, and violation of God who is immense and infinite. For this reason, no punishment or penance of any creature can make satisfaction to Him equally and condignly. Indeed, even if all humans and all angels of their own accord suffered all the torments of Gehenna for all eternity, they would never offer God worthy penance and satisfaction for one mortal sin. Only Christ could do this, inasmuch as He is the Son of God and true God, whose penance and satisfaction, by reason of His Person which is of infinite dignity, is likewise infinite and equal to and condign for the infinite offense and injury committed against the infinite God. So great is the malice of sin that if people fully perceived it, they would certainly not sin.
Finally, one who has converted produces worthy fruits of repentance when he serves the truth with as much zeal as he formerly served vanity and the devil, and loves God as fervently as he formerly loved the flesh and the world, according to the Apostle's words: "As you presented your members as slaves to impurity and to lawlessness leading to more lawlessness, so now present your members as slaves to righteousness leading to sanctification" (Romans 6:19). So did St. Mary Magdalene, St. Peter, St. Paul, St. Mary of Egypt, St. Pelagia, and other penitents. Read their lives and imitate them. Thus will be fulfilled that saying of St. Gregory: «Often a fervent life after sin is more pleasing to God than an innocence grown sluggish in security.» See St. Chrysostom, Tertullian, Pacian, Treatise on Penance; Climacus, Step 5, which is about exact penance, where he describes it thus: «Penance is the perpetual and constant rejection of bodily consolation. Penance is the voluntary endurance of all things that afflict. Penance is the ever-active creator of torments for oneself. Penance is a vigorous affliction of the belly and a constant rebuke of the soul in the firmest resolution.» Read what follows, and you will behold a living portrait of those who worthily do penance.
Verse 9: Do Not Say, We Have Abraham as Our Father
9. AND DO NOT THINK TO SAY WITHIN YOURSELVES: WE HAVE ABRAHAM AS OUR FATHER. FOR I SAY TO YOU THAT GOD IS ABLE FROM THESE STONES TO RAISE UP CHILDREN TO ABRAHAM. — For "do not think" (ne velitis), the Greek is me doxete, that is, do not seem, do not suppose, do not reckon, do not glory in saying within yourselves, in thinking in your mind, and flattering yourselves so that, relying on this thought, you may rest securely and sleep on both ears: "We have Abraham as our father." For the Jews were accustomed to trust and glory in the fact that they were children of Abraham; hence what they objected to Christ: "We are the seed of Abraham" (John 8:33). This was their proud estimation, this was their vain confidence, this foolish boasting, which St. John here strikes out of them. The sense therefore is, meaning: Abraham was a most holy Patriarch and friend of God, to whom God promised a blessing and salvation to be transmitted to his children (Genesis 12:2 and 22:17); and we are children of Abraham; therefore we are heirs of the blessing and salvation promised to Abraham and his seed. Even if, then, we live freely and do not perform condign repentance, we shall still be saved because we are children of Abraham — both because God is faithful in His promises, so that what He has promised He will certainly fulfill; and because otherwise Abraham, so great a Patriarch, would be deprived of his children and of the salvation of his children promised to him by God, and the line of Abraham would fail.
John responds — as does St. Paul in Romans 9 — that the children of Abraham, the heirs of the blessing and salvation promised to him, are not reckoned by carnal descent but by spiritual faith and virtue. Namely, those are considered children of Abraham not who are begotten from Abraham, but who imitate the faith and holiness of Abraham. Therefore, even if the Sadducees and Pharisees and the rest of the Jews, on account of their impiety, fall away from righteousness and salvation, God will nonetheless supply others in their place — namely, the Gentiles — and will give them to Abraham as children, who will succeed to his blessing, that is, to grace and glory. Meaning: Even if you, O Jews, perish, the blessing and salvation promised to the seed of Abraham will not perish on that account, but will be transferred from you who are unworthy to others who are worthy. Therefore do not boast and object: "We have Abraham as our father." Rather be more ashamed, because you do not imitate your father, says St. Chrysostom. «For it is not succession of the flesh that is sought,» says St. Hilary, «but the inheritance of faith, and the dignity of one's origin consists in the example of one's works, and the glory of one's lineage is retained by the imitation of faith.»
FOR GOD IS ABLE FROM THESE STONES TO RAISE UP CHILDREN TO ABRAHAM. — In Greek it is to Abraam. The word Abrahae is therefore in the dative case, not the genitive — meaning: When you, O Jews, perish, Abraham will not be deprived of his blessed offspring and lineage, because God, who is faithful in His promises, can, if necessary, from the stones which you see lying in heaps here on the bank of the Jordan, make children for Abraham.
Moreover, John was baptizing and preaching at Bethabara, that is, at the "house of the crossing," where the children of Israel, under the leadership of Joshua, crossed the Jordan on dry foot, miraculously divided and dried up by God. Hence, in memory of so great a miracle, Joshua erected twelve stones in that same place in the middle of the Jordan's channel. Remigius, St. Anselm, and following them Pineda (on Job 1:1, n. 38) think that John was pointing to and indicating these stones here. For these stones were a type and figure of the Gentiles, overwhelmed by the floods of errors and ignorance, but who were finally to be raised up by Christ and the Apostles from the depths of idolatry to the Church and the glory of the children of God through baptism.
You will ask, how is this true? For how can children of stones be children of Abraham who is already dead? And if they are raised up and given life from stones by God, how are they begotten by Abraham? Many take refuge in allegory, but I say that it is true properly, as the words sound.
First, because God can make human beings from stones, whom He may by His own intention and will adopt as children for Abraham, or whom Abraham may adopt for himself — no less than He was able to form Adam from the earth, and Eve from the rib of Adam, and to produce Isaac for Abraham from the barren Sarah (Genesis 18:11ff.). He alludes to Isaiah 51:1: "Look, to the rock (behold, the stones) from which you were hewn, and to the cavern of the pit from which you were cut" — that is, as he goes on to explain: "Look to Abraham your father, and to Sarah who bore you." Meaning: Abraham is like a rock, and Sarah is like a cavern of the pit, from which you, O Jews, were cut and born like living stones.
Second, physically and precisely, meaning: Just as God converted Lot's wife into a pillar of salt, so conversely He can immediately convert rocks into human beings and children of Abraham who are descended from Abraham. Indeed, God can by His absolute power transmute any created substance into another totally — both as to matter and as to form. For it suffices for a true conversion that only the accidents remain the same, as is clear in transubstantiation, by which the whole substance of bread is converted into the body of Christ in the Eucharist, with only the accidents of bread remaining. So St. Thomas, III Part, Q. 75, art. 4. Therefore God can raise up children of Abraham from stones — even those already deceased and dead — because He can convert stones into the bodies of the dead, and animate them and raise them from death.
St. John compares the Sadducees and Pharisees to stones, both to denote their hardness and obstinacy in evil, and to humble the proud, meaning: O puffed-up Pharisees, you are no better than stones, so far as it depends on you; but insofar as you surpass stones, you have that from God. For God made you children of Abraham, and if you are proud, He will strike you from Abraham's family and will raise up others in your place, even from stones if He wills.
The poets relate — or rather, fable — that Pyrrha with her husband Deucalion did the same, namely that they threw stones behind their backs which were converted into human beings, and thus they repaired the human race that had been destroyed by the flood. For the stones which Deucalion threw became men, and those which Pyrrha threw became women. Whence Ovid sings of them thus in Book 1 of the Metamorphoses:
"And they threw the bidden stones behind their footsteps, etc.
And in a brief space, by the power of the gods above, the stones
Thrown from the man's hands took on the features of men,
And from the woman's throw, woman was restored.
Hence we are a hard race, experienced in labors,
And we give evidence of the origin from which we were born."
Hence the Greeks derive the word laos, meaning "people," from laas, meaning "stone," because stones were converted into human beings, and from stones they derived their strength for labor and hardness for endurance. Moreover, John here by the stones stamps the hardness of repentance in the Sadducees and Pharisees, meaning: God can soften the hardest rocks and convert them into flesh, and in reality by a single word, saying "Let it be done," He will soften and convert them as often as He wills. And you, O Pharisees, by all these discourses of mine — indeed of God speaking through me — you are not softened, you are not converted. You must therefore be harder than rocks, because you have hearts of adamant. Such a heart the hardened have, as Pharaoh had, about whom I said more at Exodus 7:3.
Finally, third, God can convert any stones into human beings and instill in them the faith and piety of Abraham, and thus make them spiritual children of Abraham. For, as the Apostle says in Romans 9:7: "It is not the children of the flesh who are children of God, but the children of the promise who are counted as the seed" — that is, they are counted as the seed and children of Abraham.
Whence mystically: God raised up children for Abraham from stones when the Gentiles — who were rough and unpolished like stones, and worshipped stones and rocks as gods, and are therefore compared to rocks by David in Psalm 113:16, especially because they were hardened in their lusts and vices like rocks — when the Gentiles, I say, through the imitation of faith, obedience, and piety, He made children of Abraham; for he is the father of believers and of the righteous. So St. Jerome, St. Hilary, St. Augustine, St. Ambrose, St. Gregory (Homily 20), and all the ancients. Euthymius adds that this was fulfilled in the Passion of Christ, in which many hardened people, seeing the rocks split and other prodigies, were moved to compunction, repented, and believed in Christ.
Verse 10: The Axe Is Laid to the Root of the Trees
10. FOR NOW THE AXE IS LAID TO THE ROOT OF THE TREES. EVERY TREE THEREFORE THAT DOES NOT BEAR GOOD FRUIT SHALL BE CUT DOWN AND THROWN INTO THE FIRE. — So that He may cut down, like trees, those who do not bear worthy fruits of repentance, and throw them into the fire. For "now indeed" — in Greek ede de kai, that is, "already also" — this is another goad with which John prods the Pharisees to perform repentance, and to do it quickly, namely the imminent danger of being cut down and burned in Gehenna. So St. Chrysostom, Euthymius, and others. Among them, Euthymius says the axe is compared to death, the tree to the person, and the root to life. Hence in Greek for "shall be cut down" the word is ekkoptetai, that is, "is being cut down," in the present tense; and for "shall be thrown," it is balletai, that is, "is being thrown" — meaning: It is about to be cut down and thrown into the fire right now. Your situation, O Pharisees, hangs on the edge of a razor. The utmost danger threatens, destruction, death, and Gehenna loom over you: therefore at once bring forth worthy fruits of repentance, so that you may escape them.
The sense therefore is, meaning: The axe, that is, the judgment and vengeance of God, is laid to the roots of the trees, that is, to the life of each individual person, so that if they are unfruitful and do not bring forth worthy fruits of repentance — as you have done up to now, O Sadducees and Pharisees — it will soon cut them down from this life by death and throw them into eternal fire. But if they are fruitful and productive in repentance and good works, as are the penitent and the righteous, it will soon by death not so much cut them down as transfer and transplant them into the heavenly paradise, to produce the perennial fruits of eternal happiness, glory, and divine praise.
You will say: this was also true before Christ; how then does John say after the coming of Christ: "For now the axe, etc., is laid"? The answer is that this is truer and clearer after Christ than it was before Christ. For Christ came into the world for this purpose: that as Judge, King, and Lord of all, He might transfer believers who are obedient to Him into heaven, but punish the unbelieving and rebellious with present and eternal death. And therefore Christ was the first, through Himself, through John, and through the Apostles, to clearly preach and promise the kingdom of heaven to the pious, and to threaten the impious with Gehenna, so that they would know that their salvation and damnation lay in their own hands, and that by turning to Him they could avoid Gehenna and be enrolled by Him for heaven. And He could do this immediately and was about to do so soon, since there was no longer any excuse of weakness or ignorance in people, as there had been among the unlettered Jews before Christ, to whom present and temporal rewards and punishments — not future and eternal ones — were promised or threatened by Moses and the Prophets.
Second, and more aptly: the axe is the judgment and vengeance of Christ the King and Judge, by which He will immediately cut down from the garden of the Church not only harmful but also unfruitful trees — that is, unbelieving Jews — and from the lineage, salvation, and blessing promised to Abraham and his children, and will throw them into eternal fire. And in their place He will insert into the paradise of His Church the Gentiles who believe in Him, like fruitful trees, since the Church is, as it were, the estate and inheritance of Abraham, who is the father of believers and of the righteous. And therefore He will make them sharers and heirs of the same blessing and salvation promised to Abraham. John therefore threatens the Pharisees with the rejection of the Jews and the calling and substitution of the Gentiles, which was accomplished shortly afterward by Christ. For Christ rejected the Pharisees and the Jews on account of their unbelief from the family of Abraham, that is, from the Church of the faithful and consequently from the kingdom of God, and consigned them to death and Gehenna; but the Gentiles, on account of their faith, He engrafted into His Church and destined for heaven.
Moreover, Toledo, on Luke 9:9, criticizes St. Chrysostom for saying that the axe did not even spare the root. For, he says, the axe is said to be laid "to" the root, namely between the root and the trunk; otherwise it would not be cutting but uprooting. He therefore wants the sense to be, as if the Baptist said: The time is now at hand when the cutting down of unfruitful trees and the grafting in of fruitful ones must be done. Christ is near, who, like an axe, will preach to the unbelieving Jews and send them away from the root of Abraham and cast them into the fire; but into that same root He will engraft and inoculate the Gentiles who believe in Him, according to that saying of Paul, Romans 11: "If some of the branches were broken off, and you, though a wild olive, were grafted in among them and became a partaker of the root and the richness, do not boast against the branches; but if you do boast, it is not you that supports the root, but the root that supports you. You will say then: branches were broken off so that I might be grafted in; true, they were broken off because of unbelief." Rightly, however, were the infidel Gentiles compared to stones, while the Jews, before they were cut off, were compared to a tree; for a tree lives and bears fruit as long as it is united to its root: so the Jew lived in spirit by faith in the One to come, until through unbelief, because he refused to believe in the One who was coming, he was cut off. So says Toletus.
But the Baptist here presses only the cutting off or rather the excision of the Jews, not the engrafting or inoculation of the Gentiles into the same root of Abraham, that is, into the same faith and Church; for the inoculation of trees is not done at the root, but in the branches. Hence Paul says: "Branches were broken off so that I might be grafted in." But here the Baptist says: "For now the axe is laid to the root of the trees: every tree therefore that does not bear good fruit will be cut down." Therefore he is speaking not of engrafting or inoculation, but of the excision by which a fruitless tree is uprooted from the garden and another fruit-bearing one is planted in its place. For thus the Jews were cut out of the garden of the Church, which is as it were the estate of Abraham, and the Gentiles were planted in the same by Christ and the Apostles, according to what Christ says about those same Jews and their Synagogue, under the metaphor of the barren fig tree, Luke 13:7: "Cut it down; why should it even use up the ground?" The Jews, therefore, were uprooted from the garden of Abraham, that is, from the Church, because they lost the faith which was, as it were, the root by which they were fixed in the garden of the Church.
Verse 11: He Will Baptize You with the Holy Spirit and Fire
11. I INDEED BAPTIZE YOU IN WATER UNTO REPENTANCE: BUT HE WHO COMES AFTER ME IS MIGHTIER THAN I, WHOSE SANDALS I AM NOT WORTHY TO CARRY; HE WILL BAPTIZE YOU WITH THE HOLY SPIRIT AND WITH FIRE. — These words are not to be connected with the preceding ones, nor were they spoken by John immediately after them, but on a separate occasion, which Luke supplies and explains, saying, chapter 3, verse 16: "Now as the people were in expectation, and all were reasoning in their hearts about John, whether he might be the Christ, John answered them all, saying: I indeed baptize you with water; but One mightier than I is coming, the strap of whose sandals I am not worthy to loose: He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire." The people, therefore, from the holiness of his life, the fervor of his preaching, and from the baptism, suspected that John was the Messiah, that is, the Christ. For none of the other prophets had used baptism except John; and Ezekiel, chapter 36, had foretold that baptism would be proper to Christ: "I will pour upon you clean water," He says, "and you shall be cleansed from all your defilements." John therefore removes this suspicion from them and denies that he is the Christ, but professes himself to be Christ's forerunner and herald, and signifies that his own baptism is a prelude to and preparation for the baptism of Christ. He says therefore:
I INDEED BAPTIZE YOU IN WATER — that is, with water alone. This is a Hebraism. For the Hebrews denote the instrument by the preposition or letter beth, that is "in," which the Latins leave unexpressed; hence they say bammajim, that is "in water," meaning "with water"; unto repentance, that is, so that I may stir you to do penance and, by washing your body, prepare you to receive the cleansing of the soul in the baptism of Christ. The baptism of John, therefore, was a profession of repentance. Hence those who were to be baptized in it confessed their sins, but it was not a forgiveness of guilt; for that they had to await from Christ through His baptism, or through true contrition of heart.
BUT HE WHO COMES AFTER ME — In Greek, ho erchomenos, that is, "the one who is coming" in the present tense, who is arriving, who is now imminent and close to us.
MIGHTIER — In Greek, Ischyroteros, that is, stronger, more powerful, more mighty, more excellent; He far surpasses me in powers and gifts; for He is endowed with heavenly and divine force and efficacy, by which He pervades not only the body, as I do, but also the soul with the spirit of His grace, and purges and cleanses it from every sin. Hence Isaiah, chapter 9, among other titles gives Christ the epithet of "mighty": "His name," he says, "shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, God the Mighty." «Truly mighty was He who wrought the wondrous works of His divinity, who conquered the devil, snatched the spoil from his hand, overthrew his kingdom and transferred it to Himself, opened the gates of heaven, swallowed up death in victory, blotted out sins, and won grace and glory,» says Toletus on Luke chapter 3, verse 19.
Again, Christ was mightier than John in miracles, because by a mere nod He raised the dead, drove out demons, healed the sick, and changed the elements, while John subdued the flesh by penances in order to subject it to the spirit. This was the power of Christ and the weakness of John.
WHOSE SANDALS I AM NOT WORTHY TO CARRY. — St. Luke, chapter 3, verse 16: "The strap of whose sandals I am not worthy to loose;" Mark, chapter 1, verse 7, adds "stooping down." Both are true, and both are the menial service of servants, who shoe and unshoe their master, especially a prince, by stooping at his feet, and carry his sandals when he himself puts on boots or slippers. John therefore confesses here that he is the servant and slave of Christ, but that Christ is his Lord, indeed his God.
Mystically: the sandal signifies the humanity of Christ, which to serve, and to carry on his shoulders or support with his hands, the Baptist professes himself unworthy; for this humanity, by its union with the Word, was of supreme and, as it were, immeasurable dignity and majesty. Hence St. Bernard says: «With the sandal of our humanity the majesty of the Word was shod;» for since sandals are on the lowest part of the body and are made from the skins of dead animals, therefore, according to St. Gregory and St. Jerome on Mark chapter 1, verse 7, they rightly signify the Incarnation of Christ, which St. John here confesses he cannot explain, nor is worthy for this task. Theophylactus takes the sandals to mean Christ's descent to earth, and after death into the Limbo of the Fathers. Tropologically: John, humbling himself below the feet and sandals of Christ, by this humility merited to be exalted above the head of Christ, and to wash and baptize it.
HE WILL BAPTIZE YOU WITH THE HOLY SPIRIT. — That is, with the Holy Spirit, as if to say: Christ will pour out the Holy Spirit with all His gifts upon you so abundantly that He will wash you from all sins, and fill you, indeed overwhelm you, with grace and charity and the rest of His charisms. Christ did this visibly at Pentecost. Hence, as He was about to ascend into heaven, alluding to these words of John and promising the same to the Apostles, He said: "John indeed baptized with water, but you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit, not many days from now" (Acts 1:5).
But invisibly He does this in the sacrament of Baptism and Confirmation, which is, as it were, the perfection and consummation of Baptism. The antithesis, therefore, between John and Christ is that John baptized only with water, but Christ with water and the Holy Spirit; and that John washed the body, while Christ washes the soul: as much, therefore, as the Holy Spirit surpasses water, and the soul surpasses the body, so much does the baptism of Christ excel the baptism of John, which was merely preparatory. So the Council of Trent, Session VII, canon 1, and the Fathers generally, whom Bellarmine cites, Treatise on Baptism, chapter 21.
Hence the Doctors assign a threefold baptism: of water, of desire, and of blood. Baptism of water is when one is baptized with water; of desire or spirit is when a catechumen in prison or in the desert, where there is no water, is truly contrite for his sins and desires to be baptized: for such a person is justified by contrition which includes the desire for baptism; of blood is when one not yet baptized dies as a martyr for the faith: for such a one is baptized in his own blood and cleansed of all sins.
WITH THE HOLY SPIRIT AND WITH FIRE. — So read consistently the Greek, Latin, Syriac, Arabic, Persian, Egyptian, and Ethiopic texts. The meaning is, as if the Baptist were saying: my baptism is of water, but that of Christ is of fire; as much, therefore, as fire is more efficacious than water, so much more powerful is the baptism of Christ than mine. Hence the heretics called the Hermians and Seleucians baptized their followers not with water but with fire, as St. Augustine attests, Heresies 59. Surely this fiery baptism was worthy of heresy and heretics, and the torture worthy of such executioners: they can no longer complain that heretics are burned by Catholics, since they themselves baptize their own with fire.
You will ask, what is this fire? First, Origen, homily 23 on Luke, takes it as the fire of purgatory, as if to say: Christ will purify His faithful who die with venial sins by the fire of purgatory, according to the saying: "The fire will test the work of each one." And: "He will be saved, yet so as through fire" (1 Corinthians 3).
Second, St. Hilary takes the fire to mean the judgment of Christ, which will be sharp, clear, and dreadful like fire.
Third, St. Basil, on Isaiah chapter 4; Damascenus, book 4 On the Faith, chapter 10; and Toletus, on Luke chapter 3, verse 16, take it as the fire of Gehenna, with which Christ punishes the reprobate in hell; hence, explaining further, he adds: "But the chaff He will burn with unquenchable fire."
Fourth, the Author of the Incomplete Work understands by fire the tribulations by which, as if by fire, Christ afflicts His faithful and washes them from sins.
Fifth and genuinely, "with the Holy Spirit and with fire," that is, with the Holy Spirit who is fiery and who sets on fire; with the Holy Spirit who is fire, that is, who is like fire and, as fire, burns and ignites. It is a hendiadys. For the Holy Spirit, like fire, purges the faithful from sins, illuminates, kindles, snatches them upward to heaven, and strengthens them to overcome all adversity. Finally, He unites them intimately to Himself and, like fire, transforms them into Himself. For these are the properties of fire: to purge, to dispel darkness, to shine, to inflame, to snatch upward, to strengthen, to transform into itself. Hence at Pentecost the Holy Spirit descended upon the Apostles in the form of fire and tongues of fire. Wherefore St. Chrysostom says: «By the mention of fire He signified the efficacy of the Holy Spirit, the mighty and invincible power of His grace.» So also Euthymius and the Ethiopic interpreters take fire to mean the Holy Spirit. Hence in the early Church the Holy Spirit often descended in the visible form of fire upon the baptized and confirmed, to signify the complete purging of sins; likewise the fiery charity and fiery words that the Holy Spirit inspired in them, according to the saying in Deuteronomy 4:24: "Your God is a consuming fire." And Jeremiah 23:29: "Are not My words like fire, says the Lord, and like a hammer that breaks the rock?"
Finally, twelve kinds or species of baptisms are gathered from Scripture, from Damascenus, St. Athanasius, and others. See Toletus, on Luke chapter 3, annotation 31.
Verse 12: His Winnowing Fan Is in His Hand
12. WHOSE WINNOWING FAN IS IN HIS HAND, AND HE WILL THOROUGHLY CLEANSE HIS THRESHING FLOOR, AND WILL GATHER HIS WHEAT INTO THE BARN: BUT THE CHAFF HE WILL BURN WITH UNQUENCHABLE FIRE. — A winnowing fan is a winnowing shovel (or as at Rome, a sieve) with which farmers winnow the threshed grain shaken from the ears, fan it, and toss it into the wind, so that when the chaff is carried away by the wind, only the pure grains of wheat, separated from the chaff, remain. In Greek it is called ptyon, because it, as it were, "spits out" the chaff: ptyo means "I spit out." The winnowing fan represents the judgment of Christ and His judicial power; for just as the winnowing fan separates the wheat from the chaff, so Christ in the judgment will separate the good from the wicked: for He will place the good on the right and the wicked on the left; He will assign the good to heaven and the wicked to hell. The threshing floor signifies not so much the place as the grain, that is, the crops gathered on the threshing floor; for these are cleaned so that the chaff may be separated from the wheat. It is a metonymy; the container is put for the thing contained. The threshing floor, therefore, denotes the Church or the assembly of the faithful.
Therefore the winnower is Christ the Judge; the winnowing fan is His judgment, by which He will winnow and examine the thoughts, words, and deeds of each person, and will separate the good and the righteous from the wicked. The threshing floor is the Church; the chaff are the wicked, whom Christ will burn with the fire of Gehenna; the wheat are the just and holy, whom Christ will gather into His barn, that is, into the kingdom of heaven, so that with them, as with wheat, He may feed and delight the Holy Trinity, all the Angels, and the entire Church Triumphant.
John rises from the first coming of Christ in grace to the second coming of judgment; for then He will thoroughly cleanse the threshing floor, that is, His Church, and this in order to shake the Sadducees and Pharisees with the terror of judgment and Gehenna and drive them to repentance.
Moreover, he signifies that this judgment is imminent and near when he says that this winnowing fan is in the hand of Christ, so that He may immediately winnow the crops with it and separate the chaff from the wheat, that is, the wicked from the good: so St. Ambrose, on Luke chapter 3, verse 17; for although many hundreds of years remain until the day of judgment, yet all these, if compared with eternity, are little and as it were nothing. Furthermore, Christ the Lord and Judge holds in His hand the spirit, soul, and life of each person, so that He may instantly take it away if He wills, judge, bless, condemn, and send to heaven or to Gehenna.
BUT THE CHAFF (and how much more the tares) HE WILL BURN WITH UNQUENCHABLE FIRE. — The wicked and those destined for damnation are called chaff, because like chaff they are exceedingly light, worthless, useless, and good for almost nothing except fire, so that they serve as the bellows and fuel of Gehenna.
For "unquenchable," the Greek is asbesto, that is, "unextinguished," meaning eternal. Hence the asbestos stone is so called, which always burns and is not extinguished: it is a litotes, for less is said than is meant. For the fire of Gehenna is called asbestos, that is, unquenchable, not only because it cannot be extinguished, but also because, while burning the wicked, it does not destroy them; rather, it continually torments them as they live forever and continues to burn them. Therefore the error of Origen is here condemned, who thought that the punishments of hell would not be perpetual, but would end after the great Platonic year (when all things would be renewed). Again, the word asbesto, that is, "unextinguished," meaning unquenchable, indicates that the fire of Gehenna does not consume or reduce to ashes the bodies of the damned, nor is it fed with fuel of coals or wood; for what material could be great enough to suffice to feed it through all eternity? Rather, that very same fire, numerically identical, is preserved by God in the same sulfur and in the same bodies, so that it especially burns them yet never consumes them.
He alludes to Isaiah 66:24: "Their worm will not die, and their fire will not be quenched." And chapter 33:14: "Who among you can dwell with the devouring fire? Who among you can dwell with everlasting burnings?" See what was said there. St. Chrysostom gives examples: «Do you not see,» he says, «this sun always burning and never at all extinguished? (for many think the sun is fire) Have you not read (Exodus 3) of the bush that was on fire yet was not consumed by the burning?» And St. Augustine, in the book Against the Donatists, after the Conference, chapter 9: «I have already sufficiently argued above, that animals (which are therefore called fire-flies) can even live in fires, burn without being consumed, suffer pain without death, by the miracle of the most omnipotent Creator; whoever denies that this is possible for Him, by whom is made whatever one marvels at in all natures, is ignorant.»
Consider and shudder at this fire of Gehenna, which no waters, no tears, indeed all rivers, all abysses, all seas gathered together, all demons, all creatures with all their powers cannot extinguish, nor even diminish in the slightest: "For the breath of the Lord, like a torrent of sulfur, kindles it" (Isaiah 30:33).
Verse 13: Jesus Comes from Galilee to Be Baptized
13. THEN JESUS CAME FROM GALILEE TO THE JORDAN, TO JOHN, TO BE BAPTIZED BY HIM. — Then, at the opportune moment, that is, when John was preaching about Christ and pointing to Him as superior to himself, saying he was not worthy to carry His sandals, and when he was stirring all to repentance and by baptizing was preparing them to receive grace from Christ — then, I say, Christ arrived, so that the one whom John had commended in His absence, he might now point out as present and indicate with his finger: just as the morning star precedes and shows forth the rising sun.
FROM GALILEE — namely from Nazareth, says Mark, chapter 1, verse 9, His homeland, where He had lived privately with His mother until now and had practiced the carpenter's trade with His father Joseph until the age of thirty. Hence, when that age was now complete, He went to John, so that He might be declared by him to be the Messiah, that is, the teacher and redeemer of the world, and so that, having received testimony from John, He might begin this public office of teaching and establishing the Evangelical law, for which He had been sent by the Father. To the Jordan, that is, to the Jordan River, namely into Judea, to that place on the Jordan where John was baptizing. For God had decreed that Christ, who had been promised to the Jews, should begin His preaching in Judea: for otherwise the Jordan also flows through Galilee.
TO BE BAPTIZED BY HIM. — You will ask, what were the reasons for the preaching and baptism of John, and why did Christ wish to be baptized by John? «For a threefold reason,» says St. Jerome, «the Savior received baptism from John: First, because He was born a man, He might fulfill all the justice and humility of the law; second, that by His own baptism He might approve the baptism of John; third, that by sanctifying the waters of the Jordan, through the descent of the dove, He might show the coming of the Holy Spirit in the washing of believers.»
The fourth reason is that Christ might add authority to John and approve his baptism, which some were disparaging, says Bede: and so that in return He might receive from him testimony of greater authority, namely that John might show to all who were coming to him that this was the true Messiah, according to what John himself says: "That He might be made manifest to Israel, for this reason I came baptizing with water" (John 1:31), and that by inviting men to repentance through his baptism he might prepare and accustom them to the baptism of Christ, as he indicates here in verse 11.
The fifth is that in the baptism the Holy Spirit, descending upon Christ in the form of a dove, and the Father thundering from heaven: "This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased," might bear irrefutable testimony to Him. So St. Jerome.
The sixth is that Christ, receiving baptism from John, might by His own example draw all to His own baptism and show its fruit, namely the gift and descent of the Holy Spirit.
Seventh, Christ had taken upon Himself our sins, and therefore, as if a guilty man and penitent, He presents Himself to John, so that, baptized by him, He might, as it were, expiate and wash away our sins in Himself. Hence Gregory of Nazianzus, in his oration On the Holy Lights, says: «John baptizes, and Jesus comes, sanctifying indeed the one who baptizes, but especially that He might bury the old Adam in the waters.» And shortly after: «Jesus ascends from the water, in a certain way drawing up with Himself and elevating the sunken world.» By humbling Himself before John, Christ merited to teach us that he who devotes himself to the profit of souls must first pave the way through manifold humiliation.
Eighth, that Christ, who had determined to found the new commonwealth of Christians, into which none would be enrolled unless baptized, might Himself also be the first to be baptized, so that in all things He might be made like His brethren, but without sin. Famous is that saying of Cato: «Submit to the law which you yourself have enacted.»
Ninth, that just as Abraham of old established circumcision as the sign of the Old Synagogue by God's command, so Christ would give and ratify baptism as the new token of the new Church. Wherefore St. Thomas, Part III, Question 66, article 2, holds that Christ, when He was baptized, instituted the sacrament of Baptism not by words but by action, as the washing away of all sins; for then the entire Holy Trinity appeared, which we profess in the form of Baptism, saying: "I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit." For the Father appeared in the voice, the Son in the Jordan, the Holy Spirit in the form of a dove. More truly, however, Christ when He was baptized only designated His own baptism and its matter, namely water; but He instituted it shortly after, when He began to preach publicly, as Suarez and many others teach: hence He does not seem to have instituted it when He said to Nicodemus, who came to Him secretly and by night: "Unless one is born again of water and the Holy Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God" (John 3:5). For this was a private word of Christ to Nicodemus alone; but the public sacrament of Baptism had to be publicly instituted and promulgated. Therefore this baptism was merely indicated by Christ, soon to be instituted by Him with formal words in a public assembly and gathering of the people.
This is what St. Chrysostom here, St. Augustine in Sermons 36 and 37 On the Seasons, St. Gregory of Nazianzus in his oration On the Holy Nativity, and others mean when they say that Christ by His baptism sanctified the waters and imparted to them a regenerative power by the contact of His body — not as if He imparted a physical quality to the waters, but a moral one, because at that very moment, by the fact itself and by Christ's intention, the waters were designated and appointed for sanctifying men to be washed in them in the sacrament of Baptism soon to be instituted by Christ.
Tropologically: Christ by His baptism here wished to teach us that the holy and perfect way must be begun from baptism, that is, from repentance, tears, and the purification of one's affections, and that this must especially be done by those who intend to baptize others, that is, to purify, convert, and sanctify them, such as teachers and preachers.
Verse 14: John Tries to Prevent Him
14. BUT JOHN TRIED TO PREVENT HIM. — John recognized Christ by a private divine instinct and revelation, by which, seeing Christ, he recognized Him by face — the same one whom thirty years earlier, as an infant hidden in his mother's womb, while he himself was also hidden in the womb of his own mother, he had recognized in mind and spirit, greeted, and leaped for joy (Luke 1:41).
You will object: how then, in John 1:33, is a sign given to the Baptist by God by which he might recognize Christ, namely the descent and remaining of the Holy Spirit upon Him? The answer is that this sign was given to the Baptist not so that he might first come to know Christ, but so that he might more fully confirm himself in this knowledge and faith, and so that by this, as it were certain testimony of God, he might point out and commend Christ to the people.
SAYING: I HAVE NEED TO BE BAPTIZED BY YOU, AND DO YOU COME TO ME? — For "debeo" (I ought), the Greek is chreian echo, that is, "I have need," "I need to be baptized by You," that is, to be spiritually washed from light sins and to be perfected by Your spirit and grace: therefore it does not signify an obligation of precept, as if the Baptist were obliged to receive the baptism of Christ. For this precept of the baptism of Christ was issued and promulgated by St. Peter after the death of the Baptist and of Christ, at Pentecost.
From this, however, some conclude that the Baptist was baptized by Christ shortly afterward, just as the Blessed Virgin, St. Peter, James, John, and the rest of the Apostles were baptized by Him, as St. Evodius testifies, who succeeded St. Peter in the See of Antioch, in the epistle entitled To Phos, that is, "The Light"; but it was not fitting for Christ to be baptized by His own baptism, because He Himself, as the hierarch, instituted baptism as a remedy for sin and as the mark and character of Himself and His Church. So St. Thomas, Suarez, and others generally, in the Treatise on Baptism.
Gregory of Nazianzus supports this view, Oration 39, toward the end: «Christ knew,» he says, «that shortly after He Himself would baptize the Baptist;» likewise St. Chrysostom, who say that John baptized Christ with water, but Christ baptized John with the Spirit. Hence the Author of the Incomplete Work here, homily 4: «When,» he says, «to John saying: 'I need to be baptized by You,' He answered: 'Permit it for now,' He showed that afterward Christ baptized John, although in more secret books it was clearly written: 'John indeed baptized Him with water, but He baptized John in the Spirit.'»
It could be said, however, that Christ baptized John with the spirit, not in the sacrament of baptism, but spiritually, that is, in a spiritual manner, because He poured into him a greater abundance of spirit and caused him to advance greatly in grace and charity. Hence Abulensis here, on Matthew chapter 3, question 78, holds that John was not baptized by Christ, and proves this from the surprise of John's disciples, who shortly afterward reported to John that Christ, to whom John had borne testimony, was baptizing, and that all were going to Him (John 3:26). For they would have reported this to him in vain if John had already been baptized by Christ, and John would surely have answered them to that effect: unless you say that after this report from his disciples, John asked Christ for baptism, in order to likewise lead his own disciples to Christ and His baptism. Therefore the matter remains doubtful, and so it is a question whether John was baptized by Christ or not.
Verse 15: Thus It Is Fitting to Fulfill All Righteousness
15. BUT JESUS ANSWERING SAID TO HIM: PERMIT IT NOW (allow Me now to be baptized by you), FOR THUS IT IS FITTING FOR US TO FULFILL ALL RIGHTEOUSNESS. — Us, namely Me by receiving, and you by giving baptism. Others explain: us, that is, as many of us as are teachers of others, it befits them to go before by example. Nothing, however small, is to be passed over: I intend to institute baptism; it belongs to the one who commands to fulfill what he commands before others. Hence Luke says of Christ: "Jesus began to do and then to teach" (Acts 1:1).
«This is justice,» says St. Ambrose, book 2 on Luke chapter 3, last chapter, «that what you want another to do, you yourself begin first, and encourage others by your example.» Hence St. Gregory, book 31 of the Morals, chapter 1: «From true humility,» he says, «secure authority is always born.»
Moreover, not only Christ by receiving, but also John by conferring baptism upon Him, was fulfilling all righteousness, both because, contending with Christ about humility and the humble reception of baptism, he allowed himself to be conquered by Him, as was fitting: hence, conquered by Christ in humility, he conquered Christ, as it were, in obedience, by yielding and obeying Him; just as St. Dominic, wishing to give the right hand to St. Francis, when the latter firmly resisted and took the left, said to him: «You conquer me in humility, I conquer you in obedience,» because I yield and obey you: then because John was exercising a very holy thing, namely the baptism of repentance, in order to prepare men for the grace of Christ; then because he was cooperating with the supreme humiliation of Christ by giving Him the baptism which He Himself was requesting, and which He could receive from no one other than John; then because he was the cause that Christ was declared by the Holy Trinity to be the Son of God; for this happened at the baptism. It is also likely that John pointed Christ out to the people in the very baptism itself; for since the form of John's baptism was this, or something similar: «I baptize you in the name of the One who is to come,» or «Believe in the Messiah who is about to come,» as is gathered from chapter 19:4, it seems that when Christ came and received baptism, he said: «This is the Messiah whom I said was coming;» all of which was most holy, so that John too is rightly said here to have fulfilled all righteousness.
Again St. Jerome says: «Beautifully He said: 'Permit it now,' to show that Christ was to be baptized in water, and John was to be baptized by Christ in the Spirit.» And shortly after: «You baptize Me in water, so that I may baptize you for My sake in your blood,» as if to say: You baptize Me with the baptism of water, I baptize you with the baptism of desire and of blood.
FOR THUS IT IS FITTING FOR US TO FULFILL (the Arabic has "to perfect") ALL RIGHTEOUSNESS. — First: all righteousness, the Syriac has: all rectitude, that is, whatever is just, right, holy, and pleasing to God; and not to refuse anything of this kind, even if it be humble and lowly, and not prescribed by any law but merely a counsel and not a precept — as is the case here, that I, Christ, should be baptized by you, O John, who are My servant and creature: therefore all righteousness means every virtue, holiness, and perfection. Again, all righteousness, that is, whatever God the Father has commanded, says Vatablus. For what God ordains and commands is just. For it seems that God the Father gave Christ a command both to die and to receive baptism from John.
Hence second, the Gloss says: All righteousness is humility, which subjects itself to all, that is, to superiors, equals, and inferiors alike. Conversely, all unrighteousness is pride, by which one places oneself above not only inferiors and equals, but even superiors. For it takes away the right and subjection owed to them. For just as in every act of justice, that is, of virtue, humility intervenes, by which one submits to reason and virtue; so in every act of sin, pride mixes itself in, by which one places oneself, one's own will and desire, above reason, law, and the will of God. Humility therefore fulfills all righteousness, because it pays, indeed surpasses, every right and duty that man owes to God, to neighbor, and to himself. For it subjects itself to God through religion, to the neighbor through charity, the body to the soul, the soul to the law of God. Hence the humble person has peace with all, while the proud person has conflict and war with all. How many today are the dissensions and quarrels, even among clerics and prelates, about place, titles, and precedence, which each party stubbornly contends is owed to itself, to the scandal of the laity, and with no or little profit from the victory? For what do you gain if you win the dispute, except a small and empty point of honor? And meanwhile you suffer a far greater loss of reputation, peace, and often conscience. Learn, O Christian, from Christ here, to yield, indeed even to seek the lowest place; thus with Christ you will be exalted and will merit the highest. For Christ, by subjecting Himself to John, was declared by him, indeed by the entire Holy Trinity, to be greater than John, indeed the Son of God. Say therefore with Christ: "Thus it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness," in imitation of which St. Ignatius, the founder of our Society, gave this golden axiom:
Resist no one, not even the least, for any reason;
Let it please you rather to yield than to prevail.
For the glory, honor, and distinction of a Christian is humility, namely to yield, to let oneself be overcome, to give first place to another: therefore the greater is the one who is more humble, who yields, who prefers another to himself. For, as St. Gregory says, book 3 of the Morals, chapter 13: «The place of the wicked is pride; the place of the good is humility.»
Christ therefore here teaches us to follow the common life, not to seek exemptions from the common law and custom, to be regarded as one of the crowd, according to the saying: «If you are distinguished, be as one of the flock;» indeed to descend to the lowest place and subject oneself to all, according to Sirach 3:20: "The greater you are, humble yourself in all things, and before God you will find grace; for the great power of God alone is honored by the humble." See what was said there.
Third: all righteousness, that is, the highest righteousness. So in Exodus 33:19, God says to Moses: I will show you every, that is, the highest good, namely Myself: for the lowest level of righteousness is to subject oneself to one's superior; the middle level, to subject oneself to one's equal; the highest, to subject oneself to one's inferior, as Christ subjected Himself to John: Christ, I say, who is the Holy of Holies, bowed His head to John for baptism, as if seeking from him purification and sanctification like a sinner and penitent, just as the others were who sought baptism from John. St. Gregory says splendidly, Part 3 of the Pastoral Rule, Admonition 18: «Let the humble hear,» he says, «that the Son of Man came not to be served, but to serve; let the proud hear that the beginning of all sin is pride. Let the humble hear that our Redeemer humbled Himself, being made obedient unto death; let the proud hear what is written about their head: He is King over all the children of pride. The occasion of our perdition, therefore, was the pride of the devil, and the means of our redemption was found in the humility of God.»
And shortly after: «Let it be said, therefore, to the humble, that when they cast themselves down, they ascend to the likeness of God; let it be said to the proud, that when they exalt themselves, they fall in imitation of the apostate Angel. What, therefore, is more debased than haughtiness, which, while it strains above itself, is removed from the height of true greatness? And what is more sublime than humility, which, while it casts itself down to the lowest, unites itself to its Author who remains above the highest?»
The same says elsewhere: This, he says, is the highest justice and holiness — if by the merit of virtue we are the greatest, and by humility we are the least. St. Thomas Aquinas (as is recorded among his axioms in his Life), when asked by what sign a truly holy and perfect person could be recognized, answered: by humility, contempt of self, contempt of honor and praise, endurance of disgrace and reproach. «For if,» he says, «you see someone, when he is neglected, despised, or passed over, showing a sense of pain or indignation, dropping his countenance, wrinkling his nose, furrowing his brow, know that this person is not holy, not great, even if he were to work miracles. For in being neglected he reveals his pride, sadness, anger, impatience, and thereby makes himself worthless and contemptible. Conversely, the humble person who rejoices in being despised is worthy to be praised and glorified by all.»
Fourth: all righteousness, that is, every increase of righteousness, that is, of virtue and holiness: for Christ, although He could not grow interiorly in grace, since He was full of it from the first instant of His conception and union with the Word, nevertheless outwardly He daily gave greater signs of virtue and humbled Himself more and more. For Christ descended from heaven into the womb of the Virgin, from the womb into the manger, from the manger to the Jordan, from the Jordan to the Cross, to teach us the words of Psalm 84:8: "They shall go from virtue to virtue; the God of gods shall be seen in Zion." So Blessed Teresa fulfilled all righteousness, because in every matter she did what was more just, more holy, more perfect, and more pleasing to God; indeed she bound herself to this by vow. Wherefore St. Augustine, Epistle 56 to Dioscorus: «To this (to Christ and Christian discipline),» he says, «I would have you, my dear Dioscorus, submit with all piety, and not prepare for yourself any other way to grasp and obtain the truth than the one that has been prepared by Him who, as God, saw the weakness of our steps. And that way is: first humility, second humility, third humility, and as often as you would ask, I would say the same.» And after some other things: «And so, just as the most noble orator (Demosthenes), when asked what seemed to him first to be observed in the precepts of eloquence, is said to have answered 'delivery'; when asked what second, the same 'delivery'; what third, nothing other than 'delivery': if you were to ask me, and however often you were to ask, about the precepts of the Christian religion, I would choose to answer nothing other than humility, even though perhaps necessity might compel me to say other things. Against this most salutary humility, which our Lord Jesus Christ was humbled in order to teach, there is most strongly opposed a certain, if I may say so, most unskilled knowledge.»
Finally, in the fifth place, he fulfills all justice who surpasses all others in honor, who tolerates the difficult, troublesome, and injurious ways of others, according to the words of Paul: "Bear one another's burdens, and so you will fulfill the law of Christ" (Galatians 6). Likewise, he who loves those who hate him, blesses those who curse him, does good to those who do evil to him, who praises those who slander him, who honors those who despise him, who by the ardor of charity conquers his enemies and makes them friends, who repays injuries with kindnesses, who with Paul wishes to be anathema for the sake of his enemies (Romans 9), and becomes all things to all people so that he might win all for Christ (1 Corinthians 9:22). All these things Christ both taught and first practiced Himself.
THEN HE PERMITTED HIM — that is, having heard this, John yielded to Christ requesting baptism and baptized Him: «So that if God accepted baptism from a man, no one should disdain to receive it from a fellow servant,» says St. Jerome. And St. Ambrose, Book II on Luke, last chapter: «Let no one flee from the washing of grace, since Christ did not flee from the washing of penance.» Beautifully St. Bernard, Sermon 1 On Epiphany: «John acquiesced,» he says, «and obeyed; he baptized the Lamb of God, and washed the waters: we were washed, not He, because the waters are known to have been washed for the purpose of washing us.»
Moreover, St. Augustine, Sermon 454 On the Seasons, relates that the day on which Christ was baptized was a Sunday, although Joannes Lucidus, Book VII, chapter 11, considers that Christ was baptized on a Friday. It is virtually certain from tradition that Christ was baptized on the sixth day of January, the same day on which thirty years earlier He had been adored by the Magi. Hence the Church commemorates the memory of Christ's baptism on that same day. For this reason, the Ethiopians on January 6, in memory of Christ's baptism, not only sprinkle themselves with water but also fully immerse themselves. The faithful in Greece also, around midnight preceding the sixth day, drew water from any available spring or river, which by God's gift remained uncorrupted for many years, as St. Chrysostom expressly testifies in his Homily On the Baptism of Christ, volume V of the Greek works. St. Epiphanius adds, Heresy 31, that on that day the Nile was turned into wine: «Around the eleventh itself (of the month Tybi, which is the sixth of our January), after thirty years the first sign was performed at Cana of Galilee, when water was made wine. For this reason even in many places to this day this occurs, which was then done — a divine sign as a testimony to unbelievers, as fountains and rivers in many places testify by being turned into wine: for example, the spring of the city of Cibyra in Caria, at the hour when the servants drew water, and He Himself said: 'Give to the steward of the feast'; and a spring similarly in Gerasa of Arabia testifies it. We drank from the spring of Cibyra: our brethren truly from that which is in Gerasa, at the temple of the Martyrs. And many also testify this of the Nile.» He therefore names three waters which on the said feast are turned into wine: the first, the spring of Cibyra; the second, the spring in Gerasa; the third, the Nile. Since therefore these three springs with their wine-like flavor have never flowed except on this day, it becomes clear that this miracle was not performed except to recall the memory of the wine produced from water by Christ at Cana of Galilee, says our Gretser in Curenalaten, page 236 and following, who together with St. Epiphanius holds that Christ turned water into wine at Cana on the sixth day of January; for others think it was done on another day, as I discussed in the Chronotaxis of the Monotessaron.
Moreover, Gretser teaches in the same place that the water of the Jordan received the gift of incorruption from Christ's baptism in it: «Let us add this also,» he says, «that the water of the Jordan, after Christ consecrated it by His touch and His baptism, was endowed with the gift of incorruption.» The most illustrious prince Nicholas Christopher Radzivil asserts this in his Jerusalem Itinerary: «The Jordan,» he says, «has very turbid water, but it is wholesome; when preserved in a vessel it never becomes corrupted, as I have indubitably experienced in the water which I brought back with me.»
Again, it appears that Christ was not only baptized and washed by John on His head, but also on His entire body, both because this was the rite of the Jews and still is; and because they had to purify the whole body with water, so that each member that might sin would be washed; and so that they might represent the purification of the entire soul and all its sins. They therefore stripped off their garments and were baptized naked; Jesus therefore deigned to strip Himself before John, and to undergo for our sake this modesty at which the chaste blush — so that by His grace He might cover and clothe the nakedness and shame of Adam and ours, which sin had brought upon us. Hence a church was erected by the faithful at the very place where Christ's garments were deposited when He was baptized, as Bede testifies in On the Holy Places, chapter XIII, who also adds that the place by the Jordan where Christ was baptized was adorned with a noble monastery and a church dedicated in honor of John the Baptist. Gregory of Tours writes thus about the same place in his book On the Glory of the Martyrs, chapter XVII: «In the Jordan there is a place where the Lord was baptized. In one of its bends the water revolves upon itself, in which lepers are now cleansed. For when they arrive, they wash frequently in the river until they are purged of their infirmity; meanwhile, as long as they remain there, they receive sustenance from the public fund; but when healed, they depart to their own homes. The Jordan itself, five miles from that place, is mingled with the Dead Sea and loses its name.»
John Moschus, in The Spiritual Meadow, chapter I, relates that Christ frequently visited St. John baptizing in the same place after His baptism. Now Christ was baptized in the Jordan by John at Ennon near Salim (John 3:23): not far from Sarthan and Jericho, where the children of Israel, under the leadership of Joshua, crossed the Jordan dry-shod when it was miraculously divided by God (Joshua 3:16-17), to signify that the same Christ, who once led the Hebrews through the Jordan into the Promised Land, would likewise lead His faithful and Christians through baptism into heaven. Whence «just as under the leadership of Joshua the waters of the Jordan were turned backward, so under the leadership of Christ when baptized, sins were turned backward,» says St. Augustine. Again, Elijah divided the waters of the Jordan when he was about to be carried away in a fiery chariot into heaven (2 Kings 2), to signify that for those passing through the water of Christ's baptism, through the fire of the Holy Spirit an entrance to heaven would be opened, says St. Thomas, III Part, Question XXXIX, article 4.
Verse 16: The Heavens Opened and the Spirit Descending Like a Dove
16. AND WHEN JESUS WAS BAPTIZED, HE WENT UP IMMEDIATELY FROM THE WATER, AND BEHOLD, THE HEAVENS WERE OPENED TO HIM, AND HE SAW THE SPIRIT OF GOD DESCENDING LIKE A DOVE, AND COMING UPON HIM. — Luke, chapter 3:21, adds: "When Jesus had been baptized and was praying, heaven was opened, and the Holy Spirit descended in bodily form like a dove upon Him." From this it is clear that it was not by the power of John's baptism, but by the merit of Christ's humility and prayer, that heaven was opened and the Holy Spirit descended upon Him; for the Holy Spirit presents Himself to prayer and to those who pray.
Immediately. — Refer this word more to what follows, namely "the heavens were opened to Him," etc., than to "He went up from the water." For as soon as Christ came out of the waters, the heavens were immediately opened; hence Mark, chapter 1:9, says: "And immediately coming up from the water, He saw the heavens opened."
AND BEHOLD, THE HEAVENS WERE OPENED TO HIM. — Mark: "He saw the heavens opened." He saw — that is, Jesus Himself: there is no doubt that John also saw the same thing, and the rest who were present, since it was for their sake that these things were happening. Hence Matthew says: "They were opened to Him," that is, on His account; the heavens, namely, were seen to open in His favor and honor, and this for the following reasons: first, so that the voice of the Father descending from heaven — "This is My beloved Son" — might signify that Christ's dignity was greater than John's dignity; second, so that God might indicate that through Christ heaven is opened to all, as St. Chrysostom says; third, so that the heavenly power of baptism might be suggested, namely that through it carnal men become spiritual and heavenly, and through it are called to heaven and, as it were, led by the hand. So St. Thomas, III Part, Question XXXIX, article 5.
One asks: how were the heavens opened to Christ? The answer is that the solidity of the heavens was not really opened and split apart (for this is naturally impossible, and supernaturally would be superfluous; nor were the heavens opened by a merely imaginary vision, as they were opened to Ezekiel, chapter 1:1); but rather, in the uppermost region of the air there was sensibly seen a certain opening, or the appearance of a sensible aperture, from which the dove as well as the voice of the Father seemed to descend upon Christ — that is to say, so that the outermost parts of the air appeared denser, in such a way that the sight could terminate at them; while the intervening air remained thin and was not visible, but appeared as a kind of luminous opening, or a certain void, an aperture casting rays upon Christ, from which the dove with the voice descended upon Christ.
For by this method painters are accustomed to depict and represent such an opening. For all things here were sensible. So Euthymius, Jansenius, and Suarez, III Part, Question XXXIX, article 5. Such openings frequently appear in the atmosphere, concerning which Aristotle writes in his Meteorology.
Our Hieronymus Prado adds, on Ezekiel chapter 5, concerning the words "the heavens were opened," that through lightning and flashes of light the sky seemed to be divided and opened, and from it the voice of the Father burst forth like thunder. For thunder is always mingled with lightning — indeed, it is the cause of lightning — even though it is heard after lightning, because the hearing of thunder is slower than the sight of lightning, since the object of sight produces its image more quickly than sound does; for sight is the subtlest and swiftest of all the senses. And this was done so that the people might be aroused by the flash of lightning and the terror of thunder to hear the voice of the Father from heaven: "This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased." Psalm 28:3 and 6 favors this in the allegorical sense. And Psalm 76: "Your lightnings illuminated the world."
Thus among the poets, for the sky or heaven to be opened, divided, rent, or broken is the same as lightning. So Ovid, Book II of the Fasti:
"From here it thunders, from here the sky is torn asunder by hurled fires."
Silius Italicus, Book I:
"— and the sky gleams with fires through the broken vault."
Statius, Book I of the Thebaid:
"— The broken lightning flashes tremble, and the air is shattered by a sudden blaze of friction."
Manilius, Book I:
"— And the sky broken by the thunderbolt."
In a similar manner St. Stephen, while he was being stoned, saw the heavens opened (Acts 7:55). See what was said there.
AND HE SAW (Syriac, He looked up) THE SPIRIT OF GOD DESCENDING LIKE A DOVE. — The Egyptian version: «And he saw the Spirit of God descending in the form of a dove.» One asks first: was this a true and real dove, or merely the appearance and likeness of a dove? St. Jerome, St. Anselm, and from them St. Thomas, III Part, Question XXXIX, article 7, along with Salmeron and others, hold that it was a true dove, and this is probable; yet it is equally probable, indeed more probable, that it was not a true dove, but only the appearance or form of a dove fashioned, moved, and directed by an angel so as to descend upon Christ. The reason is that all the Evangelists indicate this; for Matthew says "like a dove," Mark: "as a dove," John, chapter 1:32: "as it were a dove," Luke, chapter 3: "in bodily form like a dove." Therefore it was merely the appearance and likeness, not a real dove; for a real dove was not needed here, but a likeness for symbolic signification, namely, so that through the appearance and symbol of the dove the qualities of Christ might be designated, which I shall presently enumerate.
In a similar way "the heavens were opened" — not really, but through mere appearance and semblance only, as I explained just above. So hold St. Augustine, Epistle 102; St. Ambrose, Book I On the Sacraments, chapter 5; St. Chrysostom, Theophylact, Euthymius, Lyranus, Cajetan, Jansenius here; Abulensis, Questions LXXXIV, LXXXV; Suarez, III Part, Question XXXIX, article 7.
You will object: Was this then a phantom and a phantastic dove? The answer is: By no means; for it was a true and solid body, having the form of a dove, as St. Augustine teaches in On Christian Doctrine, chapter XXII — not assumed hypostatically by the Holy Spirit, as the humanity of Christ was assumed by the Word (as Tertullian seems to have thought, in his book On the Flesh of Christ, chapter 3), but merely the sign and symbol of the Holy Spirit, because the dove is the gentlest, simplest, most innocent, most fruitful, supremely lovable, and most zealous of birds. Such likewise is the Holy Spirit, who had most perfectly infused this His gentleness, simplicity, innocence, fruitfulness, charity, and zeal into the soul of Christ from the very first instant of His conception, and was now merely signifying by this external sign what He had already accomplished, and publicly declaring it to the whole people.
One asks secondly: why did the Holy Spirit descend upon Christ in the form of a dove, but upon the Apostles in the form of fire and tongues of fire (Acts 2)? St. Chrysostom answers first: because Christ came into the flesh and into the world gentle as a dove, to remit sins and to loose sinners. But on the day of judgment He will come as a severe judge, to punish the wicked through fire. Again, and more literally: the Holy Spirit was given to the Apostles in the form of fire because He was imparting to them the fervor and ardor of preaching, says St. Augustine, Tractate VI on John.
Secondly, because the dove perfectly represents the sevenfold Holy Spirit, or His seven gifts, which He poured into Christ, as Isaiah foretold, chapter 11:2, saying: "And the Spirit of the Lord shall rest upon Him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and fortitude, the spirit of knowledge and piety, and the spirit of the fear of the Lord shall fill Him." For all these things are fittingly symbolized by the dove. For, as St. Thomas explains, III Part, Question XXXIX, article 6, reply to objection 4: first, the dove dwells beside flowing waters, and in them as in a mirror watches for the hawk, and upon seeing it flees — by which the gift of wisdom is signified; second, the dove selects the better grains from a heap — behold the gift of knowledge; third, the dove nourishes others' chicks — behold the gift of counsel; fourth, the dove does not tear with its beak — behold the gift of understanding; fifth, the dove lacks gall and bile — behold the gift of piety; sixth, the dove nests in rocks — behold the gift of fortitude; seventh, the dove utters groaning instead of song — behold the gift of fear, by which Christ and the saints groan for sins, whether their own or others'.
Third, the dove is a symbol of the reconciliation and restoration of the world which the Holy Spirit accomplished through Christ: hence its symbol was the dove bearing a branch of green olive to Noah, thereby signifying that the flood and the wrath of God had ceased, that dryness had been restored to the earth, and peace to mankind (Genesis 9:12). So St. Chrysostom.
Fourth, the dove, because it is a friendly and gregarious bird, signifies the union and fellowship of the faithful in the Church, which the Holy Spirit brings about through the baptism of Christ. So St. Thomas in the passage already cited. Finally, the dove is white, feeds on sweet fragrance, and wonderfully loves its young. So Christ is most pure, feeds on the fragrance of virtues, and loves His children intimately.
For this reason the Holy Spirit, as He descended here upon Christ, so also frequently descended in the form of a dove upon distinguished Christians, and especially authorized and, as it were, consecrated Doctors, Bishops, and Pontiffs of the Church. St. Eleucadius, a disciple of St. Apollinaris, the apostle of the Ravennese, was ordained Bishop of Ravenna when a dove alighted upon his head — he, illustrious for sanctity, departed to heaven in the year of the Lord 115. So Philippus Ferrariensis in the Catalogue of the Saints of Italy.
Likewise a dove, flying down upon the head of St. Aderit before the clergy, designated him as the successor of St. Apollinaris and the second Bishop of Ravenna.
St. Marcellinus was likewise designated Bishop of the same city by the sign of a dove in the year of the Lord 230. So Hieronymus Rabeus in the History of Ravenna, and Philippus Ferrariensis in the Catalogue of the Saints of Italy.
St. Fabian was elected Roman Pontiff through a dove settling upon his head.
The Holy Spirit was seen in the form of a dove whispering into the ear of St. Gregory as he wrote his books, suggesting what he should write.
St. Basil, celebrating Mass at the very Jordan in which Christ willed to be baptized, surrounded by heavenly light, ordered a dove to be fashioned from pure gold, and placed in it a portion of the consecrated Host and suspended it over the altar — and this in the likeness of the dove that appeared at the Jordan when Christ was baptized, says Amphilochius. And St. Ephrem adds that he saw the Holy Spirit in the form of a fiery dove resting upon St. Basil, and therefore exclaimed: «Truly Basil is a dove of fire; truly the Holy Spirit speaks through his mouth.»
The Patriarch Flavian, ordaining St. John Chrysostom by the command of an angel and consecrating him as a priest, saw a white dove fly down upon the head of St. John, as Leo Augustus reports in his Life, and from him Baronius, in the year of Christ 456, number 7.
For this reason Mohammed the impostor trained and accustomed a dove to fly to his ear, by placing in his ear a grain of wheat or other grain for the dove to eat, so that by this device he might persuade the people that the Holy Spirit was familiar to him, and was suggesting to him his law, and dictating the Koran, indeed revealing the most secret counsels of God. He likewise contrived that the dove would bring him a slip of paper, on which was written in golden letters: «Whoever tames the bull, let him be king.» He himself then easily tamed the bull which he had previously raised, and was therefore hailed as king by the foolish populace. So relate the authors of the Life of Mohammed.
AND COMING UPON HIM. — In Greek it is ep' auton, that is, "upon Him," meaning that John saw the Holy Spirit in the form of a dove descending upon the head of Jesus and alighting upon Him. Our translator took auton for heauton; for the Hebrews have the same pronoun for both the absolute and the reflexive; hence alau signifies both "upon Himself" and "upon Him." Both are true, both are fitting. Hence John afterwards, pointing out Christ to the various crowds coming to His baptism, said: "Because I saw the Spirit descending like a dove from heaven, and He remained upon Him" (John 1:32). Therefore this dove alighted upon the sacred head of Christ, and declared and, as it were, proclaimed to the whole world that He was the Messiah, the Teacher and Savior of the Church. Hence Christ and the Church, and the holy soul, are like a male dove and a female dove, according to that passage of the Song of Songs 6: "One is my dove, my perfect one." See what was said there.
Fittingly and piously St. Bernard, Sermon 1 On Epiphany: «Not unfittingly,» he says, «did the dove come to point out the Lamb of God, because nothing suits the lamb better than the dove. What the lamb is among animals, the dove is among birds. Supreme is the innocence of both, supreme the gentleness, supreme the simplicity. For what is so foreign to all malice as the lamb and the dove? They know not how to harm anyone; they have not learned how to injure.»
Verse 17: This Is My Beloved Son, in Whom I Am Well Pleased
17. AND BEHOLD A VOICE FROM THE HEAVENS SAYING: THIS IS MY BELOVED SON, IN WHOM I AM WELL PLEASED. — From the opened and flashing heavens a luminous dove descended upon the head of Christ, and while it rested upon Him, from the same heavens the voice descended: "This is My Son." This voice explained the symbol of the dove; and the dove in turn signified that the voice was directed and addressed to Christ, upon whom it was resting, not to John or anyone else: therefore both signs were needed to declare Christ to the world. This voice «in the person of the Father was formed by the ministry of angels,» says Victor of Antioch, on chapter 1 of St. Mark.
Here for the first time the mystery of the Holy Trinity is revealed to the world, which had been obscurely intimated to the Jews — since the Father showed Himself in the voice, the Son in the flesh, and the Holy Spirit in the form of a dove — to signify that the faith of the Holy Trinity was now to be explicitly proclaimed, and accordingly that Christ's baptism was to be conferred in its name. For although all these things — namely, the opening of the heavens, the formation of the voice, the descent of the dove — being works ad extra (as theologians speak), were common to the entire Holy Trinity, as St. Augustine teaches in his Sermon On the Seasons, nevertheless each individual Person was specifically represented by the symbols just described.
THIS IS THE SON. — In Greek ho huios; that is, "the Son" of God the Father, namely par excellence — the Son by nature, not by adoption, as are the angels and holy men. And therefore He is not a creature but the Creator, equal and consubstantial with God the Father, as was defined at the Council of Nicaea and at subsequent councils.
Mark and Luke have different words but the same meaning: "You are My Son." And it is likely that it was said in this way, both because two Evangelists agree on this, and because it was fitting that, as Jesus was looking toward heaven and praying to the Father, and the Holy Spirit was descending upon Him, the voice of the Father should also be directed to Him, and should embrace and address Him as a Son. And thus should present Him to the whole world as one to be venerated, loved, and heeded. So Jansenius, Maldonatus, Francis Lucas, and others.
BELOVED. — In Greek ho agapetos; that is, "the beloved" — that is, uniquely and supremely beloved, through whom all others are loved, and no one is loved by God unless He has first loved that person and bestowed His grace upon them; hence the Syriac translates it "most beloved."
IN WHOM I AM WELL PLEASED. — That is, so that You alone, O Christ, perfectly in all things, supremely and infinitely please Me, and no one pleases Me except through You — indeed, so that through You I am reconciled to the entire human race, against which I was previously offended because of the sin of Adam and his descendants. For the Hebrew ratsa signifies both "to please" and "to be appeased" or "to be reconciled."
"You therefore ARE MY BELOVED SON IN WHOM I AM WELL PLEASED" — as Mark and Luke have it — because You alone, since You are "the brightness of glory and the figure of My substance" (Hebrews 1:3), singularly and immeasurably please Me, so that nothing in You displeases, but all things supremely please: You are He in whom I find rest, in whom I feed and delight: on Your account all Your disciples and followers, that is, all Christians and saints, are pleasing to Me. This alludes to Noah, who alone in his age pleased God, according to the words: "Noah was a just and perfect man in his generations; he walked with God" (Genesis 6:9); and in chapter 8:20, when the flood ceased, "Noah offered holocausts upon the altar, and the Lord smelled the sweet odor, and said: 'I will no more curse the earth on account of men.'" For just as Noah so pleased God, especially when he offered Him a sacrifice which so appeased Him that He promised never again to destroy the world by a flood, so much more did Christ, offering Himself to God as a propitiatory victim, appease and reconcile God to the entire human race.
By this voice Christ was established by God as the public teacher and lawgiver of the world. Hence when this voice was repeated by the Father at Christ's transfiguration (Matthew 17:5), He adds: "Hear Him" — as if to say: Hear Christ, who is My only-begotten; not Plato, not Apollonius, not Socrates. Hear Christ, I say; believe in Him; obey Him. He from My bosom will reveal to you My hidden things, the secrets hidden from the foundation of the world; He will open for you the way of peace, the way to heaven, the way to happiness; He will proclaim to you the kingdom of heaven and heavenly goods — indeed, divine goods — which neither eye has seen, nor ear heard, nor have they entered into the heart of man. Hence Mary Magdalene, sitting at the feet of Jesus and hearing Him constantly and attentively, heard from Him: "Mary has chosen the best part, which shall not be taken from her" (Luke 10:42).
St. Leo says admirably in his Sermon On the Transfiguration: «This is,» he says, «My Son, whose being from Me and with Me is without time. This is My Son, whom divinity does not separate from Me, whom power does not divide, whom eternity does not distinguish. This is My Son, not adopted but His own; not created from elsewhere, but begotten from Me. This is My Son, through whom all things were made.» And shortly after: «This is My Son, who did not seize by robbery the equality which He has with Me, nor presume it by usurpation, but remaining in the form of My glory, in order to carry out our common plan for the restoration of the human race, He inclined His unchangeable divinity even to the form of a servant.» Hence he concludes: «Hear then without hesitation Him in whom I am fully well pleased in all things, by whose preaching I am made manifest, by whose humility I am glorified — for He Himself is the truth and the life, He is My power and wisdom. Hear Him, whom the mouths of the Prophets sang of; hear Him, who redeemed the world by His blood, who opens the way to heaven and by the torment of the cross prepares for you the steps of ascent to the kingdom.»
Finally, it is very probable that Christ, at this place and time when He was baptized in the Jordan, by this very baptism of His instituted the sacrament of baptism and gave it the power of justifying; however, the obligation to receive it He imposed only after His death, at Pentecost. So St. Thomas expressly teaches first, III Part, Question XXVI, article 2; Cajetan and the rest of his followers; and our Gabriel Vasquez proves the same at length in the same place. St. Augustine likewise intimates this in Sermon 37 On the Seasons: «The new man is baptized,» he says, «in order to establish the sacrament of the new baptism.»
The Fathers also commonly teach that Christ by His baptism sanctified the waters and that they received the power of regeneration through the touch of His body: St. Ambrose, Book II on Luke, chapter 31, and Sermons 15 and 20; St. Jerome, Dialogue against the Luciferians; St. Chrysostom, Homily 2 on Matthew; Nazianzen, Oration on the Nativity, and the commentators passim on this chapter 3 of Matthew. This is to be understood not as meaning that the waters received some physical quality, but because at that time, by that act and by the intention of Christ, they were appointed for sanctification; for just as something can be instituted by words, so also something can be instituted by an act alone. Moreover, it is credible that the form of baptism was also then instituted and designated, by the fact that the entire Trinity then appeared: therefore the entire sacrament was then instituted.
This is confirmed, because if Christ had then said in words: «I will that men be baptized in water in the name of the Trinity,» all would admit that He then instituted baptism; but He said this very thing by His action, for this is what He willed to signify by His act. St. Chrysostom adds, in the homily already cited, asserting that just as Christ at the same table approved the shadow and added the reality, when at the same supper He ate the lamb and instituted the Eucharist, so in the same river He joined the shadow and the reality — namely, John's baptism with His own baptism.
It is proved secondly, because from the very beginning of His preaching Christ was baptizing through His disciples, as is clear from John 3 and 4. Therefore His baptism had already been instituted. And it does not appear where it could more suitably have been instituted than when Christ consecrated the water by the touch of His most holy flesh and designated the form by the manifestation of the Trinity.
Thirdly, because the Feast of Lights among the Greeks is celebrated as if our baptism had then been instituted. See Nazianzen, in his Oration on the Holy Lights. Hence in the hymn of that day the Church sings: «Today in the Jordan Christ washed our sins.» Moreover, this institution of baptism, accomplished by Christ by His very act, He explained and promulgated by word when He began to preach and baptize. Hence Suarez here holds that His baptism was then instituted.
Finally, the baptism of Christ, although already instituted, did not oblige men to receive it until the coming of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost: for until that time it was a counsel; from then on it became a precept. The reason is that at Pentecost the promulgation of the new law took place, whose beginning is baptism. Therefore until Pentecost the old law and circumcision remained binding, which ceased to bind when the new law promulgated at Pentecost succeeded it (Acts 2), as St. Augustine teaches, Epistle 19; St. Thomas and theologians generally. For at Pentecost all the mysteries of Christ and of Christianity were fulfilled; hence then the new law began to bind, while the old law ceased to bind, since it was merely the type and figure of the new, just as a shadow ceases in the presence of truth and light.