Cornelius a Lapide
Table of Contents
Synopsis of the Chapter
First, Christ proves against the Scribes that on the Sabbath it is lawful for His disciples to pluck ears of grain, and that it is lawful for Himself to heal the sick. Secondly, at verse 22, He heals a demoniac, and proves that He does this not by the help of Beelzebub but by the finger of God: wherefore the Scribes, in attributing this to Beelzebub, commit blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, and thus an unforgivable one. Thirdly, at verse 39, to those asking a sign, He gives the sign of Jonah, and says that the Ninevites and the Queen of Sheba will condemn the unbelieving Jews on the day of judgment. Fourthly, at verse 46, He asserts that His brothers and mother are those who do the will of His Father.
Vulgate Text: Matthew 12:1-50
1. At that time Jesus went through the grainfields on the Sabbath; and His disciples, being hungry, began to pluck the ears of grain and to eat. 2. But when the Pharisees saw this, they said to Him: Behold, Your disciples are doing what is not lawful to do on the Sabbath. 3. But He said to them: Have you not read what David did when he was hungry, and those who were with him: 4. how he entered into the house of God and ate the showbread, which was not lawful for him to eat, nor for those with him, but only for the priests? 5. Or have you not read in the Law, that on the Sabbath the priests in the temple profane the Sabbath, and yet are blameless? 6. But I say to you, that a greater than the temple is here. 7. And if you knew what this means: I desire mercy, and not sacrifice, you would never have condemned the innocent. 8. For the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath. 9. And when He had passed on from there, He came into their synagogue: 10. and behold, there was a man who had a withered hand; and they questioned Him, saying: Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath? — so that they might accuse Him. 11. But He said to them: What man shall there be among you, who has one sheep; and if this should fall into a pit on the Sabbath, will he not take hold of it and lift it out? 12. How much more is a man better than a sheep! Therefore it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath. 13. Then He said to the man: Stretch out your hand. And he stretched it out, and it was restored to health like the other. 14. But the Pharisees, going out, took counsel against Him, how they might destroy Him. 15. But Jesus, knowing it, withdrew from there, and many followed Him, and He healed them all. 16. And He charged them not to make Him known: 17. that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Isaiah the prophet, saying: 18. Behold My servant whom I have chosen, My beloved in whom My soul has been well pleased. I will put My Spirit upon Him, and He shall proclaim judgment to the Gentiles. 19. He shall not strive nor cry out, nor shall anyone hear His voice in the streets; 20. a bruised reed He shall not break, and smoking flax He shall not quench, until He brings forth judgment to victory: 21. and in His name the Gentiles shall hope. 22. Then there was brought to Him a man possessed by a demon, blind and mute, and He healed him, so that he spoke and saw. 23. And all the crowds were amazed, and said: Is not this the Son of David? 24. But when the Pharisees heard this, they said: This man does not cast out demons except by Beelzebub the prince of demons. 25. But Jesus, knowing their thoughts, said to them: Every kingdom divided against itself will be laid waste; and every city or house divided against itself will not stand. 26. And if Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself: how then shall his kingdom stand? 27. And if I cast out demons by Beelzebub, by whom do your sons cast them out? Therefore they shall be your judges. 28. But if I cast out demons by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God has come upon you. 29. Or how can anyone enter into the house of the strong man and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man? And then he shall plunder his house. 30. He who is not with Me is against Me; and he who does not gather with Me, scatters. 31. Therefore I say to you: Every sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven men, but blasphemy against the Spirit shall not be forgiven. 32. And whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, nor in the world to come. 33. Either make the tree good, and its fruit good; or make the tree evil, and its fruit evil: for the tree is known by its fruit. 34. Brood of vipers, how can you speak good things, when you are evil? For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks. 35. A good man out of his good treasure brings forth good things; and an evil man out of his evil treasure brings forth evil things. 36. But I say to you that for every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give an account on the day of judgment. 37. For by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned. 38. Then some of the Scribes and Pharisees answered Him, saying: Master, we want to see a sign from You. 39. But He answering said to them: An evil and adulterous generation seeks a sign, and no sign shall be given to it except the sign of Jonah the prophet: 40. For as Jonah was in the belly of the whale three days and three nights; so shall the Son of Man be in the heart of the earth three days and three nights. 41. The men of Nineveh shall rise up in the judgment with this generation and condemn it: because they did penance at the preaching of Jonah. And behold, a greater than Jonah is here. 42. The Queen of the South shall rise up in the judgment with this generation, and condemn it: because she came from the ends of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon. And behold, a greater than Solomon is here. 43. And when an unclean spirit has gone out of a man, he walks through dry places seeking rest, and finds none. 44. Then he says: I will return into my house from which I came out; and coming, he finds it empty, swept clean, and adorned. 45. Then he goes and takes with him seven other spirits more wicked than himself, and they enter in and dwell there: and the last state of that man becomes worse than the first. So shall it also be with this most wicked generation. 46. While He was still speaking to the crowds, behold, His mother and brothers were standing outside, seeking to speak with Him. 47. And someone said to Him: Behold, Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside, seeking You. 48. But He answering him that told Him, said: Who is My mother, and who are My brothers? 49. And stretching out His hand toward His disciples, He said: Behold My mother, and My brothers. 50. For whoever shall do the will of My Father who is in heaven, he is My brother, and sister, and mother.
Verse 1: At That Time Jesus Went Through the Grainfields on the Sabbath
Luke (VI, 1) adds that this Sabbath was the "second-first"; what kind of Sabbath that was I shall explain in that place. Here again there is a hysterologia (a reversal of chronological order): for these things seem to have happened before the mission of the Apostles, of which in chapter X, 1 ff., and therefore before the Lord's Sermon on the Mount, of which in chapter V, 1, as is gathered from Mark II, 22, and Luke VI, 1. "That they rub the ears of grain from the crops with their hands and comfort their hunger," says St. Jerome, "is a sign of a more austere life, of those seeking not prepared banquets but simple food."
Verse 2: But the Pharisees Seeing It Said to Him
Luke, chapter VI, 2, has "they said to them," namely to Christ's disciples, because naturally they first objected this to the disciples and then to Christ. Note: they do not rebuke the disciples for plucking ears of grain or grapes, for this was permitted by the Law (Deuteronomy XXIII, 25), but for doing it on a feast day, namely the Sabbath. For plucking ears of grain seems to be servile work, and therefore violates the rest and sanctity of the Sabbath, which among the Jews had the highest observance and religious regard above other feasts.
Allegorically: St. Hilary, Ambrose, and Bede suppose that by this deed it was signified that the Apostles on the second-first Sabbath — that is, the Gospel Sabbath — and in the harvest of preaching were to gather the grains, that is, the faithful chosen from all the Gentiles, by whose faith and piety and advancement they would feed themselves, until they should lay them up with themselves in the heavenly granary; but the Pharisees and Jews, seeing the Gentiles preferred before them in the Gospel, envying them, in vain clamor and murmur against the Apostles.
Tropologically, Bede says: "Those who delight to meditate on the sacred words walk with the Lord through the grainfields. They hunger, when they desire to find in them the bread of life; and this on Sabbaths, when with mind at rest they rejoice to be free from turbulent thoughts. They pluck the ears of grain, and rub them to cleanse them, until they come to food, when they take up by meditation the testimonies of the Scriptures, to which they come by reading, and for so long discuss them, until they find in them the marrow of love. Yet this refreshment of minds displeases the foolish, but is approved by the Lord." Hence St. Augustine, in Book I of On Genesis According to the Letter, chapter XX, censures those who gape at the flowers of Sacred Scripture, but do not rub its ears of grain by meditating, so that they may come to the food of virtue.
Verse 3: Have You Not Read What David Did When He Was Hungry
The last clause seems to contradict 1 Samuel XXI, where it is said that David was alone. Reply: David, fleeing from Saul, went alone to Ahimelech, whom Mark calls Abiathar the High Priest, and from him he asked and received the loaves; but he carried them to his companions in flight, whom he had left waiting elsewhere, as is clear both from this passage and from 1 Samuel XXI, 2, where David says to the High Priest: "I have appointed my young men (my servants) to such and such a place." Thus St. Jerome.
Verse 4: How He Entered Into the House of God and Ate the Showbread
Into the court of the tabernacle; for to laymen, such as David was, it was not permitted to enter the Holy Place, but only to the priests, and to the High Priest alone the Holy of Holies, and that only once a year.
The Showbread — they are called the loaves always set forth in the Holy Place before the ark and the Holy of Holies, which was as the throne of God dwelling upon the mercy seat: that is, loaves set forth before the face of God. Hence the Septuagint calls them ἄρτους ἐνωπίους, that is, "face loaves"; the Syriac, "the bread of the Lord's table." In Hebrew they call them לחמי פנים lachme panim, that is, "loaves of the faces." For they were twelve, six on one side of the table, six on the other, just as there are two cheeks on the face. By these twelve loaves, the twelve tribes of Israel professed that they were continually fed and nourished by God. Hence they placed incense upon them, as is clear in Leviticus XXIV. For the incense was a symbol that they were the Lord's, and had been offered to the Lord. In turn, God showed by this thankful offering of twelve loaves that He was mindful of the twelve tribes, and always had them before His face and eyes. See what is said at Exodus XXV, 30. God had commanded that these sacred loaves be renewed every Sabbath; for then fresh ones were placed on the table, and the old ones were removed and eaten by the priests alone, and that only in the tabernacle, as is clear in Leviticus XXIV, 8–9. The force of the argument is this: David, a man according to God's own heart, in the need of hunger took and ate the holy showbread, which otherwise it was not lawful for laymen to eat, but only for priests — because he prudently judged that the positive law forbidding laymen to eat these loaves must yield to the law and right of nature, which dictates that in grave need of hunger life must be preserved by eating any loaves or foods, even those consecrated to God; and therefore St. Paulinus, St. Laurence, and others sold chalices and vessels consecrated to God, in order to relieve the grave need and hunger of the poor by their price. Therefore, in like manner — nay, much more — it is lawful for Me and My disciples to pluck ears of grain on the Sabbath, that by the grains gathered from them we may relieve our hunger: for the sanctity of the Sabbath, which forbids servile work such as plucking ears of grain, is of divine positive right, which must yield to the natural right that dictates that in hunger one must provide for life with any food, even sacred. This is the first reason. The second follows.
Verse 5: Or Have You Not Read in the Law That on the Sabbath the Priests Profane the Sabbath
The Arabic: "and there is no sin to them." "Violate"; the Syriac, "profane," by slaughtering the victims, by flaying, dissecting, washing, arranging the wood, kindling the fire by which the victims are burned in honor of God — works which, considered in themselves alone, are servile and violate the Sabbath, unless piety and sanctity excuse them, and out of servile and profane things make sacred and divine things, as happens in this case.
The sense is, as though He said: Just as necessity excused David, and piety the priests, so both things excuse My disciples from a violation of the Sabbath through this plucking of ears of grain: for they follow Me as Prophet and Messiah, and are so intent on My sacred teaching that they have forgotten to prepare loaves and food. Why then should they not relieve a hunger contracted from so pious a work by plucking ears of grain on the Sabbath?
Note Have You Not Read: for these words are nowhere read word-for-word in Sacred Scripture, but as regards their substance and meaning are found in Numbers XXVIII and elsewhere, where the rite of sacrificing on the Sabbath is prescribed. Hence the Jewish axiom: "In the temple there is no Sabbath," that is, no rest from work, because in the temple victims are continually being sacrificed — that is, slaughtered, flayed, cut up, washed, and burned. For the priests then were butchers.
Verse 6: But I Say to You, That a Greater Than the Temple Is Here
He who permits His disciples to pluck ears of grain, namely I Myself; for Christ speaks of Himself in the third person out of modesty. The sense is, as though He said: If the sanctity of the temple excuses the sacrificing priests from a violation of the Sabbath, then the same excuses Me and My companions plucking ears of grain on the Sabbath from its violation, because I am greater and holier than the temple — nay, I am the Lord of the temple, to whom indeed all the victims in the temple are offered and sacrificed. Wherefore I am intrinsically holy, and indeed am the very uncreated and immeasurable sanctity itself, and I impart to the temple all that external sanctity of its own.
Verse 7: If You Knew What This Means: I Desire Mercy, and Not Sacrifice
The Syriac: "you would not have condemned them (My disciples), since they are guiltless." He cites Hosea IX (actually Hosea VI, 6). See what is said there. The force of the argument is, as though He said: Mercy is more powerful than and surpasses sacrifice and the Sabbath; therefore on account of mercy it is lawful to violate the rest of the Sabbath. Wrongly therefore, O Scribes, do you accuse and condemn My disciples in this matter, since they are innocent in it and are free from all guilt because of the mercy here exercised. This mercy is that by which I permitted My poor and hungry disciples to pluck ears of grain on the Sabbath; likewise that which I instill and inculcate in them by both word and example: and so I prepare them to have mercy on so many wretched souls perishing, and to procure their salvation by teaching, admonishing, praying, with all care and zeal. To this belongs the golden maxim of just Simeon (whom the Hebrews reckon to be the one who took Christ in his arms, singing his swan-song: "Now You dismiss Your servant, O Lord," etc.) in Pirke Avot, that is, in the Sayings of the Fathers: "The world rests and is sustained upon three things: first, the Law; second, divine worship; third, mercy."
Furthermore, the Arabic reads the latter part in the singular: "You would not have judged him who has no sin," that is, you would not have judged Me who am innocent, who permitted these things to My Apostles. This is the third reason of Christ's defense of His disciples. The fourth follows.
Verse 8: For the Son of Man Is Lord Even of the Sabbath
As though He said: I, who by nature am the Son of God, and by condescension have been made the Son of Man, that is, man, by this very fact am Lord, that is, the author and legislator of the whole Mosaic Law, and consequently of the Sabbath as well: therefore I can dispense from it for My disciples.
Mark (II, 27) adds a fifth reason: "The Sabbath," he says, "was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath"; concerning which see there.
Verse 9: And When He Had Passed On From There, He Came Into Their Synagogue
Luke VI, 6, adds that this took place on another Sabbath. For Christ deliberately sought out the Sabbath day for a new miracle, in order to refute again and again this error of the Scribes, namely, that it was not lawful to heal the sick on the Sabbath. So dear to Him were truth and the free preaching of the truth, that He seized every occasion for it everywhere, even though He knew that because of this the Scribes would plot His death, and that He Himself would therefore have to die on the cross.
Verse 10: Behold, a Man Having a Withered Hand
The right one, as Luke has it. The Syriac: "whose hand had dried up." St. Jerome adds: "In the Gospel which the Nazarenes and Ebionites use (which I have recently translated from the Hebrew tongue into Greek, and which is called by many the authentic Matthew), that man who has the withered hand is described as a mason, beseeching help with words of this kind: 'I was a mason earning my living with my hands: I beseech You, Jesus, that You restore my health to me, that I may not shamefully beg for food.'" By "hand" understand the arm; for χείρ, that is, "hand," in Hippocrates extends from the shoulders to the fingers. This arm then suffered from a twofold ailment: first, a convulsion of the sinews; second, atrophy; for from want of nourishment it had withered, and was therefore naturally incurable, as the physician Guillaume Ader shows in his book On the Sick in the Gospels, chapter XI.
Furthermore, the hand is so noble an organ that God has given outstretched hands to man alone, denying them to beasts, by which he may easily carry out whatever the mind commands. So Galen, in Book I of On the Use of the Parts.
And They Questioned Him — namely, the Scribes and Pharisees questioned Christ, whether it was lawful to heal a sick man on the Sabbath. Then, as Mark III, 4, and Luke VI, 9, relate, Christ in turn asked the Scribes another question, which resolved their question: namely, whether it was lawful on the Sabbath to do good and to heal the withered hand; or to do evil, that is, not to heal and to harm? Tacitly signifying that not to do good to a wretched man when you can, is to do him harm; and not to save a soul or life when you can, is to destroy it. And consequently, since this is permitted — nay, commanded — by natural law, it is not forbidden by the positive law of the Sabbath: for it would be irrational if positive law forbade beneficence that is permitted on the Sabbath by natural right, or commanded maleficence and harm forbidden by natural right.
So That They Might Accuse Him — before the common people, as if powerless or unmerciful, if He did not heal the sick man; but if He did heal him, as a violator of the Sabbath and sacrilegious before the High Priest and the chief priests.
Verse 11: What Man Shall There Be Among You Who Has One Sheep
As though He said: You Scribes teach that the Sabbath is not violated if one catches and pulls out a sheep that has fallen into a pit on the Sabbath, lest the little sheep be forced to remain in the pit all day on the Sabbath, going hungry and being in distress. How much more then is it lawful on the Sabbath to relieve and heal a sick man afflicted by his illness.
Thus felt the Scribes in Christ's time; and to this day some Jews so superstitiously observe the rest on the Sabbath that they would not, on that day, pull out even a man who had fallen into a sewer or latrine, nor would those who had fallen allow themselves to be extracted. Amusing is what Volaterranus relates in Book III of his Geography, near the end: "In the time of Henry III, king of England," he says, "who began to reign in the year of the Lord 1208, a certain Jew in Tewkesbury in England, having fallen into a sewer on the Sabbath, refused to be pulled out on account of the religion of the day. Seeing this, the Christian count of the place did not permit him to be pulled out on the following day either, out of reverence for the Lord's Day: wherefore the Jew, before he could be pulled out, expired and was suffocated." For he used to say:
"The holy Sabbaths I observe, from the dung I will not rise."
To whom in turn the count replied:
"Our Sabbath (the Christian one, namely the Lord's Day), indeed, Solomon, you shall celebrate right there."
Verse 12: How Much More Is a Man Better Than a Sheep! Therefore It Is Lawful to Do Good on the Sabbath
In Greek, "how much then" (better, more excellent, more worthy, more noble). The Arabic: "therefore the working of good is lawful on the Sabbath." If it is lawful to relieve a sheep of its distress on the Sabbath, why not a man — especially when in lifting up a sheep great exertion of many men is needed, with labor, time, ropes, or ladders, whereas Christ was about to heal the sick man in an instant, by a mere word or command, without any medicine? What servile work is this? Wherefore to forbid it is stupid, savage, barbarous. Hence Mark adds: "And looking around upon them with anger, grieved at the blindness of their heart, He said to the man: Stretch out your hand."
Verse 13: Then He Said to the Man: Stretch Out Your Hand
Christ commanding and giving him power. The Syriac: "like its companion." Christ first by reasoning, and now by deed — that is, by a miracle — refutes the ignorance and envy of the Scribes, and makes His wisdom and beneficence attested and manifest to the whole people. Hear St. Athanasius, homily On the Sowing, which is found at the end of volume I: "Then Jesus said to him: Stretch out your hand; for I do not touch you, lest the Jews have anything to slander, lest to touch be the same to them as to work; I act only by word. For it has not been forbidden by God that anyone should speak on the Sabbath. But if a word effects a work, let Him be admired, who spoke this word: Stretch out your hand. See now with me the distinction of the deed. Peter, healing the paralytic at the Beautiful Gate, raising him up by taking hold of his right hand; the Lord on the contrary only commands: Stretch out your hand, I give you strength and efficacy for healing, and by commanding with words I implant in you this power. Stretch out your hand. So He said, so the man did, and the hand itself was restored."
Allegorically: first, Bede says: "Adam, plucking the forbidden fruit, dried up the hand of the human race — that is, he deprived the power and operation of man of the fruitfulness of good works: but Christ restored it by stretching out His hands on the cross."
Secondly, St. Jerome: "Until the coming of the Savior," he says, "the withered hand was in the synagogue of the Jews, and the works of God were not done in it: after He came into the lands, the right hand was restored in the believing Apostles, and was brought back to its original work."
Tropologically: in the synagogue and assembly of teachers, where knowledge is greater, that man has a withered right hand who does not stretch it out to God by prayer, to his neighbor by mercy, and to himself by good works, by which he may heap up merits and rewards for himself in heaven. So St. Athanasius in the homily already cited; Bede, Euthymius, Theophylact. Therefore the hand which sloth has numbed, which avarice has contracted, which inactivity has dried up — Christ by His grace brings it about that eagerness stretches it out, liberality enlarges it, zeal and fervor enliven it for carrying out every good work.
Hear St. Anselm: "The withered hand, about to be healed, is commanded to be stretched out, because the weakness of a fruitless soul is cured by no better means than by the generosity of almsgiving. Hence John the Baptist, when the crowds asked him what they should do so as not to be cast into the fire like dry trees, gives only this one command: Whoever has two tunics, let him give to him who has none; and whoever has food, let him do likewise (Luke III, 11). And in Ecclesiasticus it is said: Let not your hand be stretched out to receive, and drawn back when it is time to give (Sirach IV, 36). For in vain does he stretch out his hands to God to ask for pardon of sins, who does not extend them to give a benefit to the poor man asking."
Verse 14: But the Pharisees, Going Out, Took Counsel Against Him
Out of the synagogue, leaving behind the crowd, before whom in their confusion they dared not mutter, says Francisco Lucas — took counsel against Him, how they might destroy (that is, kill) Him. Great was this envy, ingratitude, and malice of the Pharisees, to plot death for the Author of life, so that because He Himself was restoring health to so many sick people, they would repay Him with death.
Verse 15: But Jesus, Knowing It, Withdrew From There, and Healed Them All
By divine power perceiving their secret counsels against Him, He withdrew from there; and many followed Him, and He healed them all — namely, those who were sick and in need of healing, of whom Mark III, 10, says there were many. Everywhere Christ commends His power and beneficence. For just as it belongs to the sun to enlighten all who do not set up an obstacle; so it belongs to Christ and to the Christian to do good to all who ask for a benefit.
Verse 16: And He Charged Them Not to Make Him Known
In Greek ἐπετίμησε, that is, He rebuked, He threatened, He commanded with threats, that they should not spread abroad the miracles done by Him; partly lest He should offend the Scribes and stir them up to greater envy and anger; partly to show how far removed He was from seeking human glory.
Verse 17: That It Might Be Fulfilled What Was Spoken by Isaiah the Prophet
Saying (Isaiah XLII, 1):
Verse 18: Behold My Servant Whom I Have Chosen, My Beloved
"The Messiah," says the Chaldean (Targum). "I will put My Spirit upon Him" — I will bestow on Him the gifts of the Holy Spirit at His conception. "My servant," in Hebrew עבדי abdi, that is, "My servant"; from which it is clear that Isaiah speaks of Christ, not as He is God, but as He is man: for thus He is the servant of God. He proves that Christ in very fact, by teaching and healing the sick, fulfilled Isaiah's prophecy about Himself and His meekness, mercy, and equity; and consequently that He Himself is the Messiah foretold by Isaiah, and marked out with these gifts as signs and tokens. Instead of Whom I Have Chosen, the Hebrew has "I will uphold Him"; the Septuagint, "I will receive Him"; the Chaldean, "I will bring Him near."
And He Shall Bring Forth Judgment to the Gentiles — "Judgment," that is, that which is just and equitable: for the judgment of the upright is a true judgment, as though He said: Christ, as the Legislator, will preach the Gospel law — most just, most upright, and most holy — not to the Jews alone as Moses did, but to all nations without exception, through the Apostles.
Verse 19: He Shall Not Strive, Nor Cry Out, Nor Shall Anyone Hear His Voice in the Streets
Christ's meekness is noted, and His gentle, calm, and mild manner of teaching. And it is for this reason that Matthew brings forward this testimony of Isaiah.
Verse 20: A Bruised Reed He Shall Not Break, and Smoking Flax He Shall Not Quench
The Syriac and Arabic: "And He shall not extinguish a lamp tending toward extinction." It is a twin proverb signifying the same thing: namely, that Christ would not contentiously rebuke and crush those weak and feeble in faith, hope, and charity with shouts, but would rather strengthen and enkindle them by His meekness, gentleness, and patience. So St. Hilary and St. Jerome. For all these things commend the wonderful and divine meekness of Christ. Hear the Fathers. St. Jerome: "He who does not stretch out a hand to the sinner, nor bear the burden of his brother, breaks the bruised reed; he who despises the spark of faith in little ones, extinguishes the smoking flax." St. Augustine, in Book XX of The City of God, chapter XXX: "The persecutors of Christ, with their integrity lost, are compared to a bruised reed and to smoking flax whose light has been lost, whom He spared because He did not come to judge." St. Hilary: "He shows that He could easily break them, like a crushed reed, and extinguish their fury." Rabanus: "The bruised nations were not crushed, but reserved for salvation; nor were the Jews, tossed about by the wind, condemned at once, but patiently supported. The nations, which — with the ardor of the natural law extinguished — were wrapped in the errors of bitterest smoke, harmful to the eyes and of gloomy darkness, were stirred up by Christ into the greatest fires of faith."
Until He Brings Forth Judgment to Victory — That is, until He brings judgment — that is, justice, or Gospel faith and holiness — to victory, so that it may rule over the whole world. Hence our Latin version in Isaiah translates: "He Himself," as Lord and Victor, "shall place judgment in the earth," namely as queen and mistress commanding all. The Hebrew is: "He shall bring forth judgment unto truth," that is, He shall bring forth true judgment.
Verse 21: And in His Name the Gentiles Shall Hope
For "Gentiles," the Hebrew has "Islands," as though He said: The most remote nations dwelling on islands will place all their hopes in Christ the Savior. I have explained all these things more fully at Isaiah XLII, 1. See what is said there.
Verse 22: Then There Was Brought to Him One Having a Demon, Blind and Mute
Luke XI, 14, says only that he was mute (wherefore St. Augustine, in Book II of On the Harmony of the Evangelists, chapter XXXVII, is of the opinion that Luke is speaking of another demoniac), but he does not deny that he was also blind, which Matthew here affirms. But he was not blind and mute from birth or from disease, as Abulensis here (Question L) and Barradius hold, but was deprived of the use of eyes and ears by the demon possessing him. The demon therefore had not blinded him, nor taken away the faculty of speaking from him, but only impeded the exercise and use of his eyes and tongue; wherefore, once the demon was cast out, without any other operation or miracle, he at once began to speak and see. So St. Chrysostom, Euthymius, Lyranus, Jansenius, Maldonatus.
Hear St. Chrysostom: "O baneful cunning of the demon: he seized and blocked both ways by which the man would have come to believe — sight and hearing." Hence St. Luke says: "It (the demon) was mute," that is, effectively, because it made the man whom it possessed mute; whence also the demon himself, though questioned or adjured, did not speak through the man's mouth, nor did he answer, as though he were tongue-tied and mute — though elsewhere he is usually talkative and makes others talkative, because in talkativeness many sins are committed. Therefore properly and in itself there was only one miracle, namely the casting out of the demon; but consequently and in effect it was threefold. For, as St. Jerome says: "Three signs were performed at once in one man: the blind sees, the mute speaks, the one possessed by a demon is freed."
Tropologically, St. Jerome says: "What was then done carnally, is daily fulfilled in the conversion of believers, that with the demon expelled they first behold the light of faith, then their mouths, previously silent, are loosed to the praises of God." And St. Hilary: "And not without reason, when He had said in general that all the crowds were cured, now separately there is presented one having a demon, blind and mute. For it was fitting that after the man with the withered hand, who was healed in the synagogue, had been brought forward, there should also be — in the form of one such man — salvation for the Gentiles: so that he who was the dwelling-place of a demon, and blind and mute, might be prepared as capable of God, and contain God in Christ, and praise the works of Christ by the confession of God."
St. Augustine: "For he who has a demon is blind and mute, who does not believe; and he is subject to the devil, who does not understand and does not confess the faith itself, or who does not give praise to God." This is from Augustine, Book I of Questions on the Gospels, Question III. The demon therefore makes men mute, lest they should confess their sins and so spit out the poison, lest they should praise God, nor teach nor correct their neighbors; but Christ by His grace loosens their mouths to confess, to praise, to teach, and to admonish, when it is necessary.
Wisely St. Bernard, in the Sentences: "Why," he says, "are you ashamed to tell your sin, which you were not ashamed to commit? Or why do you blush to confess to God, from whose eyes you cannot be hidden? But if perhaps it is shameful to you to reveal your sin to one man, a sinner, what will you do on the day of judgment, when your conscience will lie exposed to all?"
Furthermore, this history took place — like those which Matthew narrates in chapter XIII — before the mission of the Apostles; for the things he narrates in chapter XIV are clear from Mark and Luke to have happened immediately after the return of the Apostles to Christ. So Jansenius, Francisco Lucas, and others. Maldonatus, however, and Barradius say that there is no need to invert and disturb the simple order of history here, especially since the Fathers preserve it, as will be clear at verse 27. But the Fathers, intent on the substance and the history, are little concerned about the order.
Verse 23: And All the Crowds Were Amazed: Is Not This the Son of David?
In Greek ἐξίσταντο, that is, they were astonished with wonder, so that they were as it were carried out of themselves into ecstasy, seeing so many and such great miracles of Christ; wherefore they said: No prophet has done so many and such great wonders as Jesus has done. Therefore He is greater than all of them; and consequently He Himself must be the Son of David, that is, the Messiah promised to David, who was to be born as a son from his seed, whom we all eagerly await.
Verse 24: This Man Does Not Cast Out Demons Except by Beelzebub the Prince of Demons
The Pharisees, blinded by envy and hatred of Christ, because they could not deny His miracles, so clear and well attested, slander them as being magical, and as being done not by God but by Beelzebub. They make Christ therefore out to be a magician who has a familiar demon, by whose power He performs wonders. Who Beelzebub was, I have explained at chapter X, 25.
Verse 25: Every Kingdom Divided Against Itself Shall Be Laid Waste
But Jesus, knowing their thoughts (and much more the blasphemous words which they had spoken against Christ in their circles when He was absent, in verse 24), said to them: Every kingdom divided against itself shall be laid waste; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand. [Luke XI, 17; Mark III, 24.] That is to say, every kingdom, indeed every city and house whose inhabitants fight against one another in mutual quarrels, cannot stand, but will quickly be overthrown by internal sedition and war: "As by concord small things grow, so by discord the greatest things fall apart," says St. Jerome. For concord is as it were the mortar that unites and binds together the parts of a house: take away the mortar, the stones will fall apart and the whole house will collapse; take away concord, and citizens will flow apart and in their discord destroy one another. The center unites in itself all the diametrical lines of a circle: take away the center, and all of them flow apart. The center of a city, a household, and a college is unity and concord. Thus discord ruined the Roman empire, when the people fought against the magistrate, the soldiers against the senate, and the senate, divided against itself, fought against its own self. Read Livy, Lucan, and others on the civil wars, especially those of Julius Caesar and Pompey.
Verse 26: And If Satan Casts Out Satan, He Is Divided Against Himself
How then shall his kingdom stand? [Luke XI, 18; Mark III, 26.] That is to say: Satan's kingdom on earth could not stand if Satan — that is, one demon — were continually to rise up in hostility against another, and fight with opposing force, so that the superior should at once cast out the inferior, or the inferior the superior, from men (in whom the demons so eagerly desire to reign and to establish their kingdom), just as you, Scribes, see that I continually and constantly pursue the demons in hostility and with opposed front, and expel them from the minds and bodies of men. Therefore I cast them out not by the help of Beelzebub, as you say, but by the power of God. For neither is Beelzebub so foolish as to set the demons subject to himself against one another so that one should cast out another, since in that way he would destroy both their kingdom and his own. Hence even seditious soldiers, when they rebel against their prince, are highly united among themselves and of one mind, because they know that if they disagreed they would easily be seized and overthrown by the prince.
I said: in hostility; for Apollonius of Tyana (as Philostratus testifies in his Life), and magicians, do sometimes cast out demons, but by an arranged collusion, in order to draw men to magicians and to magic, that is, to fellowship with the demon. But Christ proves in what follows that He has no fellowship whatsoever with the demon. I said: continually; for sometimes strife and struggle arises between the demons themselves over possessing a man. An old priest worthy of trust told me at Rome — one who had served for many years in the office of exorcist and had expelled demons — that he had seen with his own eyes and heard with his own ears two men possessed by demons quarreling and contending with each other in the church of St. Matthew. For the demon possessing one was of a higher order and superior to the other; and this one wished to cast out the other, as an inferior to himself, from the man whom he possessed. But the inferior resisted face to face, and hurled various reproaches at the superior, and among other things said: "You are an infernal demon, and by the just judgment of God banished to hell: you are punished far more grievously than I, for I am not an infernal demon, but I am permitted to dwell in this air because I did not rebel against God as you did, but only, as a subordinate to my superior, simply adhered to Lucifer and consented to him." But such things are very rare, and in the end come to peace, as these two who were contending laid aside their quarrels shortly after, and were quiet and silent. For although the damned and the demons burn with pride, wrath, and hatred against one another, and growl and snarl at each other in hell like dogs, yet on earth, in order to establish their kingdom and dominion over men, they must agree among themselves.
Verse 27: And If I Cast Out Demons by Beelzebub, by Whom Do Your Sons Cast Them Out?
Therefore they shall be your judges. This is Christ's second argument, by which He proves that He casts out demons by the help of God, not of Satan. By "your sons," in the first place, St. Hilary, St. Chrysostom, Theophylact, and Euthymius take your Apostles, who were sons of the Jews. For they think that this took place after the mission of the Apostles given by Christ, in which the Apostles, by Christ's power, cast out demons and worked many miracles. But since, as I said on verse 22, it is more accurate that this took place before the mission of the Apostles, it is better here to take "sons" as the Jewish exorcists, who, by an art handed down from Solomon (as Josephus testifies in Book VIII, chapter II), used to expel demons — such as the seven sons of Sceva, chief of the priests, in Acts XIX, 14. So Jansenius, Toletus, Franciscus Lucas, and others.
Therefore They Shall Be Your Judges — That is to say: Therefore on the day of judgment they themselves, by their deed and example, will condemn you for having passed so perverse a judgment about them and about Me — namely, that you should have judged that they cast out demons by the help of God, but that I did so by the help of the devil, when yet you have seen in Me far greater tokens of the presence and operation of God than in your exorcists. For which of them healed so many sick or raised so many dead as I have healed and raised? Which of them preached so sublime and divine a doctrine as I preach? Which of them lived so pure and holy a life as I live? So too the Queen of Sheba and the Ninevites, by their very deed — that is, by their faith and repentance — will on the day of judgment condemn the Jews who are unbelieving and impenitent toward Christ, as in verses 41 and 42.
Verse 28: But If I Cast Out Demons by the Spirit of God, Then the Kingdom of God Has Come Upon You
That is to say: If I cast out demons by the power of God and of the Holy Spirit, and not by Beelzebub, as I have already proved, then it is true, and the Holy Spirit Himself, by His miraculous concurrence with My miracles and expulsion of demons, openly testifies that what I and John the Baptist have set as the head and sum of our preaching is true, namely: "The kingdom of heaven is at hand." For you see the kingdom of the demon everywhere destroyed through Me, in word and in deed, in the bodies and souls of men, and so the kingdom of God is begun through grace, which will be perfected in heaven, where God reigns in His saints through glory. This is what John says in 1 John III: "For this purpose the Son of God appeared, that He might destroy the works of the devil." For, as St. Leo says in sermon 10 On the Passion: "Those nails which pierced the hands and feet of the Lord fixed the devil with perpetual wounds; and the suffering of the holy members was the destruction of the enemy powers."
Verse 29: Or How Can Anyone Enter Into the House of a Strong Man
The Syriac: "of a mighty man." And plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man? And then he will plunder his house. [Luke XI, 21; Mark III, 27.] For "or," the Greek has ἤ, which Pagninus renders "otherwise"; the Arabic, "and"; others, "for"; others, "indeed," as I said above. Here a new reason is proposed — the third, namely — by which Christ proves that He casts out demons by the help of God, not of Beelzebub; and it is drawn from a comparison. That is to say: Just as one who invades the citadel or house of some strong or mighty man, or of a tyrant, say of Samson or Hercules, in order to plunder it, cannot do so unless he first overcomes and binds the strong master himself — otherwise the master will defend his own and with armed hand prevent the plunder — so likewise I, Christ, who plunder Satan's kingdom while I transfer the sinners subject to him to repentance and salvation, must necessarily have overcome and bound Satan himself. For otherwise he would not suffer this plunder to be taken from him by Me. Satan, therefore, is My enemy and has been overcome by Me, not My friend, not My partner in the casting out of demons, as you slander.
Therefore the "strong one" here is the devil; the "house" is the world; the "goods" are arms; the "furnishings" are household stuff. The devil's arms are the arts, frauds, and enticements by which he lures men to vices — such as wealth, honors, and pleasures — and likewise the lesser demons and wicked men (as St. Chrysostom says) whom the devil uses against us to tempt and harass us. The "household goods" are the souls and bodies of sinners possessed by the demon, and likewise the souls of the Fathers held in limbo before Christ. All these Christ plundered and snatched from him, having bound the devil in Gehenna; whence Luke XI, 21, explains the "goods" as arms and spoils.
Moreover, the devil is here called "strong," because, as St. Peter says, "like a roaring lion he goes about seeking whom he may devour"; hence Job in chapters XL and XLI depicts his strength and might under the figure of Behemoth and Leviathan. The devil is here and elsewhere called the head and prince of the evil spirits, who sends them into the world in order to subject it to himself. Therefore understand the "strong one" as Lucifer, who is the prince of demons and thus the antagonist of Christ and of St. Michael. For Lucifer, having been conquered by Christ on the cross, was cast down into Tartarus, that he might dwell there personally, bound until the day of judgment; for then he will be loosed for a little while, as John says in Apocalypse XX, 2 and following. So teach St. Gregory, Ambrose, Lactantius, Andrew of Crete, Viegas, and Ribera (whom I have cited in the same place), and Franciscus Suarez in Book VIII On the Angels, chapter XVII, number 8.
For Lucifer in Scripture is called, by antonomasia, the dragon, the ancient serpent, the devil, Satan. Moreover, Lucifer is so bound in hell that not only can he not come out by himself, but also, through the demons whom he sends into the earth, he cannot harm men as much as before: for Christ has greatly restrained, diminished, and restricted their powers and faculties, as He Himself signifies here and in Apocalypse XX, 2, and elsewhere. See what has been said on Apocalypse XX, 2. St. Antony, taught the same by long experience (as Athanasius testifies in his Life, chapters VI and following), teaches this at length: "The devil," he says, "has been caught by the Lord like a dragon with the hook of the cross, and bound with a halter, and like a fugitive slave put in chains: pierced through with a ring and a clasp for his lip, he is not permitted to devour any of the faithful at all. Now, miserable as a sparrow caught for sport, he has been snared by Christ; now he groans that his companions have been laid under the heel of Christians like scorpions and serpents. He who used to boast that all the seas were wiped out by him, he who promised that the round earth was held in his hand — behold, he is conquered by you, behold, he cannot prevent me from disputing against him."
And in chapter XX, he confirms the same from the devil's own confession: "I saw," he says, "a man of enormous height, with his head stretched up to heaven. When I asked him who he was, he said: I am Satan. And I said: What, then, are you seeking here? He answered: Why do the monks accuse me without cause? Why do all Christian peoples curse me? I replied: They do so justly, for they are frequently harassed by your snares. But he said: I do nothing; they disturb themselves. For I have become miserable. I ask, have you not read: 'The swords of the enemy have failed in the end, and You have destroyed their cities'? See, I now have no place, I possess no city, I now have no arms; throughout all nations and all provinces the name of Christ resounds, and even the deserts are crowded with choirs of monks. Let them, I beg, defend themselves, and not tear me apart without cause." He adds that the devil prevails only over the indolent: "For as he finds us and our thoughts to be," he says, "so are they accustomed to appear to us. And if they find in our breasts any seed of an evil mind or of fear, like robbers that take over deserted places, they pile on the fears they have begun, and, pressing cruelly upon it, punish the unhappy soul." Hence he concludes: "There is, therefore, one way to conquer the enemy: spiritual joy and the continual recollection of a soul that is always thinking of the Lord, which, driving off the games of demons like smoke, will pursue its adversaries rather than fear them."
Verse 30: He Who Is Not With Me Is Against Me
And he who does not gather with Me, scatters. [Luke XI, 23.] In the first place, St. Hilary, St. Jerome, St. Chrysostom, Theophylact, Euthymius, and Toletus on Luke XI, 23, explain this of the strong one, that is, of the devil. That is to say: The devil, being from God, is not with Me, but is against Me, and strives to scatter what I gather. This is, therefore, a new and fourth argument of Christ against the Scribes, and it runs thus: Those whose works are contrary are themselves contrary; but My works and the devil's works are contrary; therefore I and he are contrary. For, as St. Jerome says: "He (the devil) desires to hold the souls of men captive; the Lord, to free them; he preaches idols, this one the knowledge of one God; he draws to vices, this one calls back to virtues. How, then, can those whose works are opposite have concord among themselves?"
Secondly, more simply, with St. Chrysostom and Theophylact, you may take this in a general sense, and apply it specifically to the Pharisees. That is to say: Just as when sedition arises in a kingdom or city, and one party rises up against another, so that wicked men try to seize and despoil the commonwealth — as Catiline did at Rome with his conspirators — then it is necessary that honest citizens defend the commonwealth, and whoever does not do so but wishes to be neutral is reckoned an enemy and an ally of the seditious men who are attacking it; because in that case all the citizens are bound to defend the city and the commonwealth with all zeal and force. So likewise I, who have declared universal war upon Satan in order to drive him from the empire of the world which he had tyrannically seized, regard all men as citizens of the world and subjects and bound to Me as to their lawful prince; and whoever is not with Me in this war, nor fights under Me, I count and decree as opposed to Me and as My enemies, and as such I will pursue, punish, and chastise. And such are you, O Pharisees, who, since you are My foremost subjects and indeed more learned than the others, ought to receive Me as the Messiah and Christ foreshadowed in your Law and Prophets, and commend Me as such to the people; yet secretly you oppose Me and openly dissimulate, as if you were judges inquiring about My doctrine and life. For this reason I hold you as enemies opposed to Me and conspiring with Satan for My destruction, because the men whom I gather to the unity of the faith, to charity, and to the religion of one God, you draw and scatter toward your manifold ceremonies, traditions, superstitions, and errors, and turn them away from Me, from salvation, and from God — just as heretics and schismatics do, to whom St. Cyprian aptly applies this maxim in Book III To Quirinus, number 86, and St. Ambrose in Book II On Penitence, chapter IV.
For this reason this saying of Christ is not contrary to another saying of the same Christ in Luke IX, 50: "He who is not against you is for you." For there He is speaking of one who in reality agrees in doctrine with the Apostles, and is therefore with them and for them, even though for a just cause he does not openly profess it, as is clear in that passage.
Moreover, Franciscus Lucas thinks that in the latter member of this sentence exactly the same is meant as in the former, as often happens in the Psalms and Proverbs. For he himself explains it thus: Christ recognizes as His own no one who does not adhere to Him with a whole and sincere heart; but the devil admits all without distinction to his camp, however diverse and opposed to one another, provided only they do not favor Christ. See above, chapter VI, 10: "He therefore who does not gather with Me," that is, does not join himself to Me, does not adhere to Me — "scatters," or as the Syriac has it, "by scattering he scatters," that is, he entirely scatters, withdraws from Me, goes off into dispersion with Satan, and sets himself up as My adversary. So says Franciscus Lucas.
But it is one thing to gather together with someone, and another thing to join oneself to someone: for which reason the former sense, which I gave, is more natural.
Verse 31: Every Sin and Blasphemy Shall Be Forgiven Men
But the blasphemy of the Spirit shall not be forgiven. [Mark III, 28, 29.] The word spiritus is in the genitive case, as is clear from the Greek πνεύματος. The "blasphemy of the Spirit," therefore, is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit; whence the Arabic renders: "Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit," and the Syriac: "Blasphemy against the Spirit of holiness."
You will ask: what, then, is this sin? First, Philastrius, in his treatment of the heresy of Rhetorius, thinks it is a heresy, especially that of Eunomius, who denied that the Holy Spirit is God. So also St. Ambrose in Book I On the Holy Spirit, chapter III, and Epiphanius, Heresy 50.
Secondly, St. Hilary thinks that the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is that by which someone denies that Christ is God: "The sin against the Holy Spirit," he says, "is to deny to God the power of His might, and to take from Christ the substance of eternity; since through Him, because God came into man, man will again become God, while God grants pardon to the rest; only this is beyond pardon."
Thirdly, St. Ambrose, in Book II On Penitence, chapter IV, holds it to be schism, and likewise simony, by which, for example, Simon Magus wished to buy the Holy Spirit from St. Peter with money, Acts VIII.
Fourthly, Origen says it is every mortal sin committed after baptism — that is, after the grace of the Holy Spirit received in baptism. Moreover, Pope Gelasius, in On the Bond of Anathema, understands only those sinners who are absolved neither in this age nor in the age to come — namely, those who remain sinners and are unwilling to come to their senses: "For he himself," he says, "has made the sentence against him unbreakable, who has chosen to remain such that he truly cannot be absolved."
Fifthly, St. Cyprian, in Book III To Quirinus, number 28, "says that blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is every sin committed against God, but blasphemy against the Son of Man is every sin perpetrated against man."
Sixthly, the same St. Cyprian, in Book III, Letter 14, thinks that blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is denial of the faith in persecution.
Seventhly, Richard of St. Victor, in his treatise On Blasphemy Against the Holy Spirit, says it is hatred of God and reviling of God. The expositions of eighteen Fathers, namely of eleven Latin Fathers and seven Greek Fathers, are listed in detail by Toletus on chapter XII of Luke, annotation 17, all of which — together with the seven already listed — I have here summed up in brief.
Finally, the theologians (and from them the catechists) from various expositions of St. Augustine gather six sins against the Holy Spirit, namely: presumption, despair, impugning of truth known, envy at the grace of another, impenitence, and obstinacy; and they say that these are called sins against the Holy Spirit because they are done from a certain malice against the goodness of God, which is appropriated to the Holy Spirit — just as sins that come from infirmity are said to be done against God the Father, because to Him is appropriated power; and those that come from ignorance are said to be done against the Son, because to Him is appropriated wisdom. These things are true, but they do not fit this passage and are not pertinent here.
Note therefore that Christ here is not speaking of every sin against the Holy Spirit, but only of the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit — which is committed in words (though the reasoning is the same for thought and for deeds) — namely, when someone slanders works that are manifestly divine and miraculous, and pious and holy works of God performed by Him for the salvation of men, by which He Himself confirms faith and truth (such as the casting out of demons); and since these are works of God's goodness and holiness, they are attributed to the Holy Spirit, who by the force of His procession and spiration proceeds from the Father and the Son as love, goodness, and holiness. When, I say, anyone slanders these and knowingly, out of malice, ascribes them to an unclean spirit, that is, the devil — as these Pharisees were doing — then he is said to commit blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. For such a one directly insults God and strips from Him His holiness and purity, which is appropriated to the Holy Spirit, and thus makes the devil out of God. For this is rightly concluded by the following reasoning:
The author of the miracles which Christ performs is, according to you, O Scribes, Beelzebub. But God and the Holy Spirit is in truth the author of these miracles. Therefore, according to you, God and the Holy Spirit is Beelzebub.
What more atrocious thing can be said? What greater blasphemy or insult against God can be conceived? So St. Jerome, St. Chrysostom, and St. Ambrose in the passages cited; St. Athanasius in his treatise On Blasphemy Against the Holy Spirit; St. Pacian in Letter 1; St. Basil in the Shorter Rules, question 273; Jansenius, Maldonatus, Toletus, Franciscus Lucas, and many others. St. Basil adds: There are still such people today, who ascribe the fruits and actions of the Holy Spirit to the opposite, unclean spirit. This is what most of us do, he says, when we call an ambitious man zealous, and charge with the slander of anger one who is moved by just indignation and zeal; and in the same way we say other things about a man, led on by unjust suspicions, under lying names.
Moreover, Christ contrasts this blasphemy against God and the Holy Spirit with blasphemy against the Son of Man, by which some, being offended at Christ's human conversation and manner of life, slandered His human deeds, calling Him a wine-drinker, a friend of sinners and publicans — because they saw that John the Baptist was abstemious, stern, and led an austere and solitary life. This blasphemy therefore was more excusable and less unworthy of pardon, because it touched the man, not God.
It Shall Not Be Forgiven — The Arabic: "It shall not be relaxed," that is, it shall be forgiven and relaxed only with difficulty and rarely. For this blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is most atrocious, inexcusable, and wholly unworthy of pardon; and, so far as it lies in itself, it takes away and excludes every medicine and every way of arriving at remission. For it sets itself directly and diametrically against the Holy Spirit, drives Him away from itself, and indeed, I say, blasphemes the Holy Spirit — the only one by whom it could and ought to be absolved, healed, and sanctified. By a similar phrase we call that disease "incurable" which admits no medicine and rejects all food. Yet the blasphemer does not close God's hands, but that God, even upon one unworthy, sometimes has mercy and converts him — as He converted St. Paul, who confesses that he had been a blasphemer against God, 1 Timothy I, 13.
Verse 32: Whoever Shall Speak a Word Against the Son of Man, It Shall Be Forgiven Him
But whoever shall speak against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, nor in the world to come. [Luke XII, 10; Mark III, 28, 29.] He says and drives home the same thing in clearer and weightier words. "A word" (some injurious, reproachful, blasphemous word) "shall be forgiven him," that is, it is remissible and is easily forgiven to one who repents. Hence it is clear against the Novatians that any who have fallen into grievous sins are to be admitted to penance.
But Whoever Shall Speak Against the Holy Spirit, It Shall Not Be Forgiven Him, Neither in This World, Nor in the World to Come — The Syriac: Whoever speaks against the Spirit of holiness, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this age, nor in the age to come.
Here, in the first place, Origen is condemned, who grants to all the fallen repentance, pardon, and salvation after this life. For he used to say that after the Great Year of Plato all things would be restored to their original state, so that even Judas would be saved, and Lucifer with the demons and the damned would be restored to heaven.
Secondly, St. Augustine (Book XXI On the City of God, chapter XXIV), St. Gregory (Book IV of the Dialogues, chapter XXXIX), Isidore, Bede, St. Bernard, and others cited by Bellarmine (Book II On Purgatory, chapter IV) prove from this passage that there is a purgatory after this life. For it would be vain and pointless to say, "It shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, nor in the world to come," if in the world to come no sin is forgiven; just as anyone would speak vainly and foolishly who would say, "I shall not marry a wife at all, neither in this age nor in the age to come," since in the age to come no wife at all can be married. For although Mark III, 29, simply says: "He shall not have forgiveness forever," yet Matthew explains it clearly and expressly, and divides the "forever" into two parts, namely into the present age and the age to come. Mark adds, and makes the saying heavier: "But he shall be guilty of an eternal sin." Moreover, mortal sins are expiated in purgatory only as to their punishment, but venial sins as to their guilt and punishment at once.
Verse 33: Either Make the Tree Good, and Its Fruit Good
Or make the tree bad, and its fruit bad; for by the fruit the tree is known. [Luke VI, 43.] The Arabic: "Either you set down the tree as good and its fruit good, or as a bad tree and its fruit bad," etc.
This is Christ's fifth argument, and a "horned" dilemma, and, as St. Jerome says, ἄφυκτον, that is, inescapable. First of all, and plainly, this tree is Christ. "Make," that is, establish, decree, assert; as if He said: Either approve and praise Me together with My works, which seem praiseworthy to you, or condemn Me as a bad tree together with My works. As if He said: You, O Pharisees, praise My works, and yet you condemn Me, their author. But if you praise the works, you must also praise the author. Or if you condemn this one, you must also condemn the works; otherwise you are saying things that are ἀσύστατα and contrary. Therefore, since you cannot find fault with My works, but are compelled to approve them, you must confess that I am acting by a good spirit. So St. Hilary, Chrysostom, Theophylact, and Euthymius.
Secondly, St. Jerome takes the "tree" to mean the devil, to whom the Scribes were attributing Christ's works and miracles, as if to say: If you praise My works, then you must also praise the devil, to whom you ascribe them — which is utterly absurd.
Thirdly, St. Augustine in sermon 12 On the Words of the Lord, and Maldonatus, understand by the "tree" the Pharisees themselves; as if to say: If you wish to be and to be reckoned good, do good works — that is, praise the good and good things; for if you do evil things (as you in fact do when you condemn Me and My divine works), you must confess that you are wicked and dishonest slanderers. For a slanderer is known by his slanders, just as a tree by its fruit. Hence follows: "Offspring of vipers," and so on. All these senses are probable and come to the same thing. Hence St. Augustine draws a moral lesson: "The man," he says, "must first be changed so that his works may be changed. For if a man remains in what is evil, he cannot have good works; if he remains in what is good, he cannot have evil works."
Verse 34: Offspring of Vipers, How Can You Speak Good Things, Since You Are Evil?
For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks. He calls the Pharisees vipers, as John the Baptist did before Him in chapter III, 7, for the reasons stated there; but here properly, because, like vipers, they were bringing forth viperous speeches and slanders, with which they were trying to defame Christ and take Him out of the way. For they had a viperous heart — that is, one full of the venom of envy, pride, malice, and hatred toward Christ — which belched forth these viperous and death-bearing slanders.
For Out of the Abundance of the Heart (that is, from that which abounds in the heart, which the heart often turns over, thinks upon, and loves) the Mouth Speaks — If the heart — that is, the mind and will — abounds in goodness and charity, it speaks good and loving things; if in the gall of malice and envy, it speaks bitter, spiteful, and biting things, as you, O Pharisees, are doing against Me. For just as the stomach belches forth what it has eaten, so that from the breath and belch you recognize what someone has eaten — for he who has eaten garlic smells of garlic, he who has drunk wine smells of wine, and so on — so likewise the heart is known from the mouth, that is, the mind's affections from its speech. Hence St. Chrysostom says: "If the things said by these men," he says, "are so evil, how much malice, do we suppose, did they have in their heart, where God alone is witness! Therefore, when you hear a man speaking ill, reckon his wickedness to be far greater than what his words reveal. For what is said outwardly is the overflow of what is within, in which overflow He struck them vehemently. For if what they said is so evil, how great the hidden root of the words must be!" Do you then wish to know what a man has in his heart, and what affection abounds in it? See what he says, what he has often in his mouth — for that abounds in the heart, and from the heart it belches forth into the mouth.
Verse 35: The Good Man Out of the Good Treasure Brings Forth Good Things
And the evil man out of the evil treasure brings forth evil things. He explains the abundance of the heart by a "treasure," that is, a heap or store. The good man, therefore, from the good heap of good thoughts and affections which he stores up and accumulates in his mind, brings forth good words and works; but the evil man from the evil treasure and heap of evil affections brings forth evil words and works. Hear St. Chrysostom: "Either He is showing that the Jews themselves, blaspheming God, are revealing from what sort of treasure they bring forth their blasphemy. Or the saying hangs together with the preceding question: just as a good man cannot bring forth evil things, nor an evil man good things, so Christ cannot do evil works, nor the devil good ones."
Verse 36: Every Idle Word That Men Shall Speak, They Shall Render an Account
The Arabic: "a response" — for it on the day of judgment. "They shall render an account" to Christ the judge — that is, Christ will demand from them an account of the idle word, and because they will not be able to render it (for that is "idle" which is said without cause), they will for this reason be punished by Him. There is a catachresis and metalepsis here, as is clear from the following verse. So St. Hilary, Chrysostom, Jerome, and others. It is a Hebrew syntax. For the Hebrews set the relative along with its antecedent in the nominative: "Every idle word" — that is, they shall render an account of every idle word. The sense is, as St. Jerome says: "If an idle word, which in no way edifies the hearers, is not without danger to the one speaking, and each person on the day of judgment will render an account of his words; how much more you, who slander the works of the Holy Spirit, and say that I cast out demons by Beelzebub, you will have to render an account of your slander!" Again, just as an idle word, so also any idle thought, willing, or action is a sin, at least venial.
You will ask: What, then, is an "idle word"? In Greek it is ἀργόν, as if ἀεργόν, that is, inactive, without skill and work, lacking fruit and usefulness. First, Theophylact and Euthymius render "idle" as "slanderous." They derived this from St. Chrysostom, who says: "An idle word is so called because it is lying, because it has slander in it." He adds, however: "Some say: 'Or also a vain word, such as one that provokes unrestrained laughter, or one that is shameful, or bashful.'"
Secondly, and properly, an "idle word" is one that is vain, frivolous, playful, which brings no usefulness either to the speaker or to the hearer, even though it is harmful to no one and not reprehensible in itself. So St. Hilary interprets "idle word" as "silly and useless." St. Jerome: "An idle word," he says, "is one that is said without usefulness to either the speaker or the hearer, when, laying aside serious things, we speak about frivolous matters and tell old stories. Moreover, he who repeats scurrilous things, breaks out into fits of laughter, and utters something shameful, will be held guilty not of an idle word but of a criminal one." St. Gregory, in homily 6 on the Gospels, toward the end: "An idle word," he says, "is one that lacks either the usefulness of uprightness or the reason of just necessity. Therefore turn your idle conversations to the pursuit of edification; consider how swiftly the times of this life flee away; attend to how strict the judge shall come." The same, in the third part of the Pastoral Rule, admonition 15: "An idle word," he says, "is one that lacks either the reason of just necessity or the intention of pious usefulness." St. Bernard, in his sermon On the Threefold Guarding of the Hand, the Tongue, and the Heart: "An idle word," he says, "is one that has no rational cause: what account shall we be able to render for something that is beyond reason? Let none of us, brothers, reckon as of little importance the time which is consumed in idle words. Since the time is acceptable, and these are the days of salvation. The irrevocable word flies away. The irrecoverable time flies away, and the fool does not notice what he loses. 'It pleases us to chat,' they say, 'till the hour passes.' O, till the hour passes! O, till the time passes by! Till the hour passes that the mercy of the Creator grants you for doing penance, for obtaining pardon, for acquiring grace, for earning glory; till that time passes in which you ought to have made divine goodness favorable to yourself again, to hasten to angelic fellowship, to sigh for the lost inheritance, to aspire to the promised happiness, to rouse up a slackened will, to weep for committed iniquity." An idle word, therefore, according to St. Bernard, is one that lacks a reasonable cause. Such therefore is not what is said playfully to console the afflicted, or to cheer up the sick and sorrowful; nor what befits human prudence, as when the sayings or deeds of others are told with the purpose that from them we may learn to act and speak prudently.
Further, St. Basil requires pious intention in order that a word not be idle. But he is speaking of religious, whose profession is to treat of and to speak of pious things: "An idle word," he says, "is one that does not conduce to the purpose of use in the Lord — that is, to the edification of faith; for such a word saddens the Holy Spirit." For just as it belongs to the man to act according to the rule of right reason, and to the Christian to act according to the law of Christ, so it belongs to the religious to act and speak according to the dictate of religion and piety. Hence St. Bernard, in On Consideration: "You have consecrated," he says, "your mouth to the Gospel; to open it now to such things (frivolities) is unlawful, and to become accustomed to it is sacrilege."
First, therefore, absolutely speaking, a pious intention is not required so that a word not be idle; it is enough that in any way it conduces to human use and prudence. So: "The sailor speaks of winds, the plowman of oxen." Otherwise nearly all the speech of craftsmen, merchants, and laymen would be idle. Let this be said of the act considered in its species; now let us speak of the individual word and act.
Secondly, therefore, Gabriel Vasquez, in the Prima Secundae, disputation 52, at the end, teaches that an idle word is not one that is spoken only for this end, namely to provide for some weakness or need of nature — for example, if in cold weather, only because of a natural need, someone says: "I am cold, I want a fire to drive the sensation of cold away from me." For he himself holds that there is given an act which, considered in the individual, is indifferent, that is, neither good nor evil — for instance, when through it something is sought for the convenience and requirement of nature. The same is taught by Bonaventure and Scotus in Book II, distinction 41; Ockham in Book III, question XIII; Gabriel and Almain in Moral Treatise 2, chapter XIV.
But this is denied by St. Thomas, Prima Secundae, question XVIII, article IX, and his followers; likewise Durandus in Book II, distinction 40, question 1; Ariminensis in Book II, distinction 38; and others generally. With them it must be said that an act (whether of the heart, of the mouth, or of the other members — for the same reasoning applies to willing and to action as to word and speech) is idle in the particular, whenever it is not referred to the good of reason, that is, to some honest good. Therefore when you say: "I am hungry, I am cold, let food be given to me, let a fire be prepared" — in order that this act and speech not be idle but honest, you must explicitly or implicitly refer it to some honest end, namely, that you may be the better able to study, to pray, to discharge your other duties, and to serve God. Much more is the act and the speech idle if you say: "I do or say this solely because it pleases me, or because this action or this speech delights me." For such an action and speech lacks its due end as well as measure, and is therefore idle. For delight is not the rule of our actions; whence to apply it as a rule is against right reason, and therefore evil, at least venially so. Wherefore it is evil to will anything for the sake of pleasure alone, especially since it is against the institution of pleasure, to seek pleasure for its own sake: for pleasure itself was instituted for something else, namely for the sake of the operation to which it is joined, and is therefore ordered to a greater good.
The reason a priori for all these things is that man, insofar as he is man, is a rational animal, and therefore must live, act, and speak according to reason in all things. For the rule and measure of action and life given to him by nature and God is right reason, which he must follow in all things. Therefore it is disordered for man to apply to his operations any other measure and rule than the judgment of right reason — for example, pleasure, health, natural advantage, or anything of the sort.
It is confirmed first, because, although natural good confers much upon nature, nevertheless it is not to be sought by man for its own sake, but is to be referred to the good of reason, which properly is the good of man, insofar as he is man, and which is useful for the end of man: for a good agreeable or pleasing to nature is not honorable in itself, but only accidentally.
It is confirmed secondly, because man, insofar as he is rational, is bound to act according to the dictate of right reason; and this dictates to man that only honorable good is to be loved and pursued. For reason is, as it were, the lamp of the whole man and of all his operations, as Christ says, Matthew VI, 22. Therefore just as one who walks in the dark without a lamp in front of him exposes himself to the danger of stumbling, so too does he who acts without the prior dictate of reason, and therefore he sins.
It is confirmed thirdly, because one who wills and acts in this way exposes himself to the danger of erring; for he does not use the right rule of reason. Hence, by the force of such a will, he could will what is dishonorable — for example, to preserve his life when it must be poured out for the faith, to delight himself in that thing, or in that manner, place, and time which is forbidden by law. Finally, such appetite is idle, because it contributes nothing to attaining the ultimate end of human life.
Secondly, this idleness of words, thoughts, and operations is a certain prodigality of time and of human actions, which, all else being equal, is greater than that of wealth and fortunes. For only a little time of life has been given to us by God for obtaining blessed eternity, and at every single moment of it, by thinking, speaking, and acting well, we can obtain for ourselves the greatest degrees and treasures of blessedness and glory — all of which we squander through the idleness of words and works, as St. Bernard rightly noted in the words cited above: for time once idly spent is irrevocable and irreparable, so that it is a marvel that time so precious should be passed so idly by many, and spent on base things and trifles.
Thirdly, because each one is bound to do and say all his things in such a way that they may be apt to be referred to God — namely, apt as things by which we may please Him and obey Him — according to that word of the Apostle: "Whether you eat, or drink, or whatever else you do, do all to the glory of God." 1 Corinthians X, 31. Otherwise they are idle, that is, useless for the end of man.
For this, however, it is required that they be directed by right reason, so that they may be honorable. For everything honorable, and only what is honorable, pleases God.
Fourthly, because God has given us a mouth that we may pray to Him and praise Him, and that we may speak those things which are useful and salutary for us or our neighbors; therefore he who speaks idle and useless things abuses his mouth, contrary to the mind and institution of God: "For it is no small danger," as St. Ambrose says, sermon 22 on Psalm CXVIII, "to speak of worldly and idle matters, when we have such wondrous works of God to speak about." And therefore let the just man resolve within himself with St. David: "My tongue shall pronounce Thy word, for all Thy commandments are equity"; and thus exclude all idle things from himself.
From what has been said, it is clear that very many idle things are said and done by most men, for which they will have to give an account to God. Therefore, first, that they may apply a remedy to this evil, let them learn and become accustomed to do and say nothing except what has been premeditated and previously weighed by reason. Secondly, let them accustom themselves to speak sparingly, and only of good and salutary matters. Thirdly, let them for some days collect their mind, and seriously consider the actions, reasons, ends, and intentions of their life, so that if they are wicked or idle, they may correct them, and prescribe to their whole life and to all their actions the due end, so that in all things they may intend the glory of God and their own salvation and perfection, and may order all their words and actions to both. Furthermore, let them conceive this intention every morning and offer it to God, and renew it more frequently throughout the day, so that they may thus put on the habit of referring all those things to this end, from which afterwards they may at least virtually always be referred to it, even if they do not actually think of it. Therefore a good intention changes words and actions so that from being indifferent and idle they become honorable, holy, and meritorious of heavenly glory. See what is said on chapter IX, 22.
Cassian, in Book V of the Institutes of Those Who Renounce the World, chapters XXIX and XXXI, records that Abbot Machetes, who — when idle matters were being related — fell asleep, but when spiritual matters were spoken of, woke up, used to say that the author of idle words is the devil, and that he proved this by this experience. For, while he was discussing spiritual matters, he saw nearly all fall asleep; then, telling an idle tale, he saw all wake up; whereupon, groaning, he said: "Who is the author of this, but he to whom idle things are pleasing and spiritual things displeasing; who rejoices in those things and opposes these — namely, the devil?"
Verse 37: For by Your Words You Shall Be Justified, and by Your Words You Shall Be Condemned
The Arabic: "Judgment shall be given against thee"; as if to say: Great care must be had not only of works, but also of words, and an account shall have to be rendered to God for both of them, since both are the fruits of the same tree, that is, of a good or evil will: wherefore your words no less than your works shall either justify you, if they be just and holy, or will condemn you, if they be wicked and perverse: justify you, I say, that is, they will not only declare you just, but will also make you just or more just, if they proceed from the love of God or from compunction; but they will condemn you and make you liable to punishment if they are idle, luxurious, slanderous, quarrelsome, etc. See what I have said about the benefits and harms of the tongue in Ecclesiasticus XXVIII, 29; Proverbs XXI, 23; James III, 2 and following. For those condemned by Christ on the day of judgment will be punished not only for mortal sins, but also for venial sins, yet more severely or more lightly according to the gravity and desert of each.
Verse 38: Master, We Would See a Sign From You
From heaven, as Luke adds (XI, 16). These were among those who had calumniated Christ as casting out demons by the help of Beelzebub, as is clear from Luke XI, 16; for these, having been refuted by Christ, since they did not wish to seem vanquished and convicted, insist that He confirm this very thing by a sign — that is, by some heavenly miracle — as if to say: You say that you work miracles by the power of God, not of the devil. If so, make God testify from heaven that this is true, by some heavenly sign, by which He may signify that you have been sent by Him, and therefore that you cast out demons by His power. But so many healings of diseases, so many raisings of the dead performed by Christ, should have sufficed them to this end, that He might show Himself to be the Messiah sent by God the Father; but nothing suffices for unbelievers and slanderers, and having been given one thing, by way of evasion they demand another and another without end. The meaning therefore is, as if to say: Your miracles, O Christ, on earth are earthly; but we wish to see heavenly things in heaven; for God dwells in heaven, whom You declare to be the author of Your miracles. Therefore cause fire to descend from heaven, as Elijah did, 3 Kings XVIII; or cause heaven to flash with new and wondrous thunders and lightnings, as Samuel did, 1 Samuel VII, 10; or cause the sun to stand still in its place, as Joshua did, chapter X, 13. Thus St. Jerome. Tacitly therefore they disparage the miracles of Christ done on earth, as though they were the tricks of a demon, and they tempt Christ in order to slander Him. For even if He had produced a similar sign in heaven, they would immediately have sought another evasion and demanded yet another sign. For this is the character of the curious and the cavilers, but most of all of unbelievers and heretics.
Verse 39: An Evil and Adulterous Generation Seeks a Sign
And (that is, but) a sign shall not be given it, but the sign of Jonas the prophet. "Generation" (in Greek γενεά, that is, nation, people), "adulterous," that is, faithless and unfaithful, because, having forsaken God her spouse — to whom she once betrothed herself in circumcision — she clings to the devil and to his suggestion: hence unfaithfulness and idolatry are often called adultery by Ezekiel, chapter XVI, and others. So St. Jerome, St. Chrysostom, Euthymius, and Theophylact, who says: "He calls it an adulterous generation, because they had fallen away from God and had clung to the devil." Secondly, "adulterous," that is, adulterine and degenerate from the faith and morals of Abraham, Isaac, and the other Patriarchs: for those believed in the Messiah to come, but these Jews refuse to acknowledge Him present and proving Himself to be the Messiah by so many miracles. For the Messiah was the spouse of the Synagogue of the Jews, and now is the spouse of the Church of Christians, as is clear from Ephesians V, 32. So Barradius, Maldonatus, Franciscus Lucas, and others. For thus the Hebrews call בני נכר bene nechar, that is "sons of a stranger," or rather of a strange father — namely, of an adulterer — spurious, that is, degenerate.
And a Sign Shall Not Be Given It, but the Sign of Jonas the Prophet — As if to say: This wicked nation of the Jews demands of Me a sign from heaven, but I will not give it any sign except one from the earth — that is, from the deep, not from the height, says the Interlinear Gloss — the sign of the Passion and burial through three days, not of glory; yet this will terminate in a heavenly sign, namely, in the Resurrection, which was accomplished by heavenly power, and after Christ gloriously ascended into heaven. As if to say: I will assign to the Jews no other sign than that which I formerly assigned, John II, 19, saying: "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up: but He spoke of the temple of His body," namely, the sign of the Resurrection, which is the sign of the prophet Jonas, because it was prefigured in Jonas and actually prophesied. For this clearly shows who I am, why I died, why I was crucified — the things in which they themselves are scandalized: namely, that I am the Messiah, the vanquisher of death and sin, the Savior of the world, and the Lord of heaven and earth. For the guards of the tomb reported to the Jews that Christ had risen from the sepulcher, and the Jews themselves saw the empty sepulcher, and the Apostles proved Christ's resurrection by many miracles. Hence many Jews at that time, and afterwards all nations, believed in the now-risen Christ. For the Jews were expecting a Messiah not humble and poor, but rich and glorious: and such they saw Christ to be in His Resurrection, Ascension, and sending of the Holy Spirit: hence at that time they recognized Him and received Him as Messiah, according to that saying of Christ, John VIII, 28: "When you shall have lifted up the Son of Man (on the cross), then shall you know that I am He"; for from the cross and death I shall rise gloriously. But the Jews, unbelieving that He was the Messiah, at that same time, constrained, recognized it, because Christ after the resurrection sent from heaven Titus and Vespasian, who would destroy Jerusalem and Judea on account of the death unjustly inflicted upon Him by the Jews. Thus St. Chrysostom. For then was the complete destruction of the nation, which lasts even now and will last until the end of the world; which certainly God the just avenger inflicted upon them for no other reason than the greatest crime, namely, for Christ-killing and God-killing. This destruction therefore is the clearest sign that Jesus, slain by them, was the Messiah or Christ. Hence Christ, verse 41, brings forward this sign of Jonas as the sign of the condemnation of the Jews by the Ninevites, who believed Jonas and did penance, whereas the Jews refused to believe Christ, and therefore were destroyed and damned. On this account Maldonatus judges that to the Jews asking a sign from heaven for ostentation, Christ gave a sign from the earth to their condemnation: for it was fitting that those who deceitfully asked for a sign should be repelled and confounded by Him in this way.
Verse 40: As Jonas Was in the Whale's Belly Three Days and Three Nights
So shall the Son of Man be in the heart of the earth three days and three nights. "In the heart," that is, in the inmost part of the earth, that is, within the earth, just as the heart is within a man's body; because Christ, having died on the cross, was placed as to His body in the sepulcher, and as to His soul descended into the Limbo of the Fathers, which is near the center of the earth. So St. Jerome, Chrysostom, Theophylact, Euthymius, St. Irenaeus (Book V, chapter XXXI), Tertullian (On the Soul, chapter LV), and others.
You will ask: How was Christ three days and three nights in the sepulcher and in limbo? For He was in it only during the night of the Sabbath and of Sunday, and rose straightway at dawn.
First, Alcuin, in his book On the Divine Offices, chapter On the Lord's Supper; and Paulus of Fossombrone, as Marcellus testifies in his book On the Canonical Hours, chapter I, gather from this passage that Christ lay in the sepulcher three entire days and nights — that is, 72 hours — and consequently rose at the end of the second weekday (Monday). But this is a certain error, for the common tradition and mind of the Church is that Christ rose on the Lord's Day (Sunday), and this will be clear from Matthew, the last chapter, verse 1.
Secondly, Gregory of Nyssa, Orations 1 and 2 On the Resurrection, reckons these three days from the fifth weekday — that is, from Thursday: for he himself supposes that, when Christ on the evening of that day instituted the Eucharist and offered Himself to God under the species of bread and wine by an unbloody sacrifice, the soul of Christ was separated from His body — just as happened in the immolations of oxen, when they were sacrificed and slain unto God — but that this took place in a hidden and invisible manner; and then the soul of Christ went to the place of the dead, and thus anticipated His own death, which the next day, namely on Holy Friday, the Jews were visibly to inflict upon Him on the cross. But this too is an error. For the soul of the living Christ is really in the Eucharist — that is, in His body and blood contained under the species of bread and wine; it is there, I say, not indeed by the force of the words of consecration, but by natural concomitance: for Christ in the Eucharist is animate and living, just as He is outside it, as the Council of Trent defines, Session XIII, chapter III. It would have been otherwise if St. Peter, or any other Apostle, had celebrated and consecrated the Eucharist during the three days of Christ's passion and death: for then the body and blood of Christ would have been in it separated from His soul, because thus they really were in Christ Himself, now buried. For then Christ was dead, not living.
I say therefore that "three days and three nights" is here merely a periphrasis and description of a natural, or ordinary, day. For the two integral parts of this are day and night, or light and darkness: and Christ uses that periphrasis because Jonas, His antitype, had used the same, chapter II, verse 1; and lest anyone should understand these three days as artificial days, which are opposed to nights — as though Christ had been in the sepulcher for three days during which light was present and the sun was above the horizon: for this is false.
Now these three natural days take not as entire, but as partial by synecdoche, namely the last part of Friday, during which Christ was taken down from the cross and buried, the whole Sabbath, and a part of Sunday; for He rose as its dawn was brightening. For the Hebrews, although they reckoned civil days from one sunrise to the next — as do the Chaldeans and Persians too, according to Bede, On the Reckoning of Times (and this is gathered from Genesis I, 5) — nevertheless reckoned sacred days (such as Passover was here, and the days of unleavened bread, on which Christ suffered and rose) from evening to evening. Thus St. Jerome, Theophylact, Euthymius, and St. Augustine (Epistle 6, Question VI), and commentators here and there, explain and fit these three days. Hence elsewhere it is often said simply that Christ rose on the third day, or after three days, with no mention of nights.
But because, according to this reckoning, only two nights are found in which Christ was in the sepulcher — namely, the night of the Sabbath and the night of the Lord's Day — while here it is expressly said "three nights," others more plainly and fully answer that these three days and nights are reckoned after the manner of the Romans, who in the time of Christ ruled Judea and had introduced their own calendar there in civil matters. For the Romans reckoned from midnight into the next day, as Christians also do on feasts and fasts. A witness is Macrobius, Saturnalia, Book I, chapter III; Aulus Gellius, Book III, chapter II; Pliny, Book II, chapter LXXVII, and others. By this reckoning it is clear that Christ was in the sepulcher for three partial days and nights: for He was buried on Friday before sunset, and remained in the sepulcher until midnight, which belonged to Friday; thence from midnight the Sabbath began, during the whole of which He remained in the sepulcher for an entire day and an entire night; there succeeded the Lord's Day, likewise from midnight, during the remainder of which, for about six hours, He remained in the sepulcher until the dawn, when light and day began, on which He rose — so that during the whole midnight of the Lord's Day, and during some part of the dawn, that is, of the day and daybreak, Christ was in the sepulcher, until, as the dawn grew and brightened more, He rose. For then the Passover was around the equinox, in which days are equal to nights, and therefore nights are of twelve hours just as days. But the soul of Christ, the moment He expired on the cross at the ninth hour — that is, the third of the afternoon — descended to limbo, and remained there with the Fathers until the dawn of the Lord's Day. Furthermore, that the Jews used this Roman reckoning is gathered both from other things and from the fact that they took from the Roman army camps four watches of the night, as is clear from Matthew XIV, 25, and elsewhere. For the beginnings of the day among various peoples were varied. The Persians and Babylonians counted the day from the rising of the sun to the next rising of it. The Athenians and Italians from sunset to sunset. Astronomers from noon to noon. But the Egyptians and the Roman priests reckoned from midnight to the next midnight, a custom which has remained in the Roman Church. So Christopher Clavius, on chapter II of the Sphere, and Alexander of Alexandria, Geniales, Book IV, chapter XX. Therefore the Hebrews in the time of Christ followed the reckoning of the Egyptians and Romans, to whom they were subject.
Wherefore Franciscus Lucas teaches that the Jews reckoned non-feast days from midnight to midnight, as Christians do. Thus St. Anselm here, Isidore of Pelusium (Book I, epistles 114 and 212), St. Thomas (III part, Question XLVI, article IX, ad 1), Franciscus Suarez (III part, Question XLIII, disputation XLVI, section 3, at the end), and Baronius (in the year of Christ 34) compute these three days from midnight to midnight.
Finally, Christ willed to remain in the sepulcher for three days, in order to show that He was truly dead, and consequently that on the third day He truly rose from death. So Bede and Anselm here, and St. Augustine, in Book IV On the Trinity, chapter III, and sermon 181 On the Season. I have assigned several other reasons for this on Hosea VI, 3, on the words: "He will revive us after two days."
Verse 41: The Men of Nineveh Shall Rise in Judgment With This Generation
And shall condemn it: because they did penance at the preaching of Jonas. And behold, a greater than Jonas here. As if to say: The Ninevites, who along with their king Sardanapalus had cast themselves into crimes and had given themselves wholly to Venus and the belly, when they heard Jonas thundering against them and threatening destruction, believed him and did penance: these therefore on the day of judgment will accuse and condemn the Scribes and the Jews, who refused to believe Christ, God and Lord, through so many miracles, and to do penance: they will condemn them, I say, not so much by words as by deeds, namely by their example of faith and penance. Yet from this it does not follow that the Ninevites were saved, because shortly after their penance they returned to their vomit: whence along with their king Sardanapalus they were subdued and subjugated by Arbaces the Mede. For Jonas prophesied under Jeroboam king of Israel, and Uzziah king of Judah, who were contemporaries of Sardanapalus, and reigned a little before the founding of Rome, when Procas Silvius, grandfather of Romulus, was reigning in Latium, as Eusebius testifies in his Chronicle. Add: after Jonas, Nahum was sent to the Ninevites, who would chastise them when relapsed and threaten them with destruction through the Chaldeans: whence they were in fact destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar, king of the Chaldeans. See what is said in the proemium to Jonas and Nahum.
And Behold a Greater Than Jonas Here — For Jonas was a prophet and a servant; but Christ is the Messiah and Lord. Jonas, living in the whale, came forth alive; Christ rose from death and hell, and came forth alive again. Jonas was reluctant and unwilling; Christ preached willingly. Jonas among the Ninevites was a stranger; Christ was a kinsman of the Jews. Jonas threatened the overthrow of Nineveh; Christ promised the kingdom of heaven. Jonas did no miracle; Christ did very many. No one prophesied concerning Jonas; concerning Christ all the Prophets prophesied. Jonas cried out: "Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown"; Christ cried out through the Apostles: "Yet forty years, and Jerusalem shall be overthrown by Titus." More analogies of Jonas and Christ were gathered by Eusebius of Emesa, Homily 2 On the Passover, and St. Augustine, Epistle 49, Question VI, which I have reviewed on Jonas II, 20.
Verse 42: The Queen of the South Shall Rise in Judgment With This Generation
And shall condemn it: because she came from the ends of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon, and behold a greater than Solomon here. The Egyptian version reads "Queen of the South"; the Persian, "Queen of Themanitis," for Theman in Hebrew, and thence in other Eastern languages, signifies the south; the Ethiopic, "Queen of Aseb." It seems therefore that the name of this queen was Aseb, taken from the place of her kingdom — namely, from Saba, as if to say Sabea. So some suspect. But I say: "Aseb" in Ethiopic means the same as in Latin "of the South" (Austri), as the Ethiopians told me at Rome. This is the Queen of Saba, which is to the south of Judea, 3 Kings X.
Saba is a region, and is twofold: one in neighboring Arabia; the other in far-off Ethiopia, whose metropolis was afterwards called Meroe by Cambyses after the name of his sister, as Josephus testifies in Book II of the Antiquities, chapter X, and Strabo in Book XVI.
This queen seems to many to have come rather from Ethiopian Saba than from the Arabian, because the Ethiopian is the most remote, and because Josephus, in Book VIII of the Antiquities, chapter II, calls her queen of Ethiopia and Egypt. Hence afterwards the fame of Scripture and of the true God of the Hebrews remained among the Ethiopians. For from these came to Jerusalem to worship the God of the Hebrews the Eunuch of Candace, queen of the Ethiopians, Acts VIII. That queens reigned over the Ethiopians and were called "Candaces" — just as the Romans called their rulers "Caesars" — is witnessed by Pliny in Book VI, chapter XXIX. Indeed, the Emperor of the Ethiopians or Abyssinians writes himself to be a son of Solomon. For the Ethiopians maintain that the Queen of Saba conceived from Solomon as from a husband, and that thence were born the kings of the Abyssinians, who are now called Prester John, although Pineda, in Book V On the Deeds of Solomon, chapter XIV, number 8, refutes this tradition. The Abyssinians add that this Queen Azeb reigned in Tigre, which kingdom is the largest of Abyssinia, and that her son was called Menile, that is, "like," because he was very like his father Solomon. So Euthymius, Jansenius, Maldonatus, Toletus, Barradius, Franciscus Lucas here, and St. Augustine in sermon 252 On the Season; Gregory Nazianzen, Oration 40; Gregory of Nyssa, Homily 7 on the Canticle; Origen, Homily 1 on the Canticle, and others, think that this queen came from Ethiopia. But others with probability think that she came from Saba, which is in Arabia Felix, where the Homerites are: for in it there is an abundance of aromatics and gold, as well as camels. Again she is said "to have come from the ends of the earth"; both because Sabean Arabia is distant from Jerusalem 606 French leagues, as Adrichomius testifies in his Description of the Holy Land, under "Manasses"; and because it is the farthest region of the land toward the Indian or Arabian sea, for there the land ends and the sea begins; whence in the Scriptures it is often called "a far country," as Jeremiah VI, Isaiah XLIII, and elsewhere. Whence Nicephorus, Book VIII, chapter XXXV, says that Arabia Felix is Sabean, and that its borders reach to the farthest ocean. So St. Jerome, Cyril, Theodoret, Eucherius, Caesarius, Salmeron, Pererius, Eugubinus, Cajetan, and others, whom Pineda cites and follows, and fully proves, in Book V On the Deeds of Solomon, chapter XIV, number 5 and following.
To Hear the Wisdom of Solomon, and Behold a Greater Than Solomon Here — "Here," that is, I Myself; for Christ speaks of Himself in the third person out of modesty, as if to say: The Queen of Saba believed Solomon, but the Jews refuse to believe Me, who am far greater and wiser than Solomon, because I am the Messiah and the Son of God. Therefore this queen, by her deed, on the day of judgment will condemn the hardness and unbelief of the Jews. Moreover, this comparison of the Queen of Saba with the Jews has great emphases, which Franciscus Lucas vigorously expresses: A woman, he says, a Gentile, not at all educated in the school of God, but occupied with the affairs of a vast kingdom, having been stirred by the fame of the wisdom spoken of Solomon, undertook a most difficult journey from the remotest parts of the earth to Jerusalem, in order to put his wisdom to the test; and admiring it beyond measure, although Solomon discoursed only of earthly and humble things, she received his counsels: but the Jews, nurslings of the divine law, devoted to the sacred writings, do not receive Christ, the power and wisdom of God, in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge, the supreme teacher of each one, who brings forth the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven and eternal salvation hidden for ages and the true wisdom of God, who offers Himself freely, asking and inviting — they do not receive Him, nay, they plainly reject Him, even after that most serious sign of the Resurrection was given, when He communicated and imparted that wisdom of His to those who believed and obeyed Him: wherefore He alone is to be admired.
How much then did the Queen of Saba surpass the Jews, and with how much right and weight will Christ on the day of judgment be able to reproach them to their face for their obstinacy, ingratitude, unbelief, and disobedience! This example of the Queen of Saba, just as earlier that of the Ninevites, clearly shows that on the day of judgment each one will be more severely chastised by Christ the judge according to the measure of the benefits and graces received from God which he himself neglected or despised. Let priests, religious, and others who abound in the graces of God therefore take heed that they use them rightly and diligently; for otherwise they will be punished the more grievously in proportion as they received the more: indeed, laymen on the day of judgment will reproach them, just as Gentiles and Turks will reproach Christians, saying that if they had had those graces, they would have lived far more religiously and holily than they. Let them hear St. Gregory, Homily 9 on the Gospels:
"The reading of the Holy Gospel (about the talents distributed by God to each), brothers, solicitously admonishes us to consider, lest we, who are seen to have received something more than others in this world from the author of the world, be the more severely judged for it. For when gifts are increased, the accountings for the gifts also grow. Each one therefore ought to be the more humble and the more prompt to serve, by reason of the gift, the more obligated he sees himself to be in rendering an account."
Verse 43: When an Unclean Spirit Is Gone Out of a Man, He Walks Through Dry Places
Seeking rest, and finds none. Then he says: I will return into my house from whence I came out. And coming he finds it empty, swept, and garnished. Then he goes, and takes with him seven other spirits more wicked than himself, and they enter in and dwell there: and the last state of that man is made worse than the first. So shall it be also with this wicked generation. Here the whole parable and its meaning are explained, which must be reviewed as a whole and explained in a few words.
Note that Christ continues in the subject of the expulsion of demons: for the possessed whom He was healing were possessed by the devil bodily; but the Scribes and Jews, who calumniated the miracles of Christ, were possessed spiritually in their soul. Moreover, here, as also elsewhere, He often speaks not properly but parabolically after the manner of the Syrians. The sense therefore is, as if to say: Just as a man who is an exile and a fugitive wanders through dry and uncultivated places, so the devil, driven out of a man — that is, out of you, O Jews, who were the people of God (in whom, namely, He dwelt and was worshiped, and who revealed Himself through oracles and miracles) — wanders through deserted places and seeks rest; but since he has it only in man, and sees you now despise the grace of God offered through Me, and therefore sees a place being prepared and adorned for himself in you, as though in an empty and swept house, he eagerly runs back to you, having taken seven — that is, many other companions more wicked than himself — both that together they may pleasantly enjoy this house (that is, your souls), and so that they may not easily be driven out again, and finally so that they may make you more wicked; as indeed they do, when they make you blaspheme Me, My teaching, and My miracles, so that you say that I cast out demons by Beelzebub, and so that you continually pursue Me to death, and finally crucify Me — which is the highest and greatest of all crimes. Wherefore God will punish you with the final destruction through Titus, and will make you to be without God, without the Messiah, without the law, without the temple, without sacrifice, without a kingdom, without faith; nay, so that you will obstinately suppose your perfidy and blindness to be the true faith and light. Thus St. Hilary, St. Jerome, Bede, and others; and it is clear from the application of the parable, when He says: "And the last state of that man is worse than the first. So shall it be also with this wicked generation."
Furthermore, the house — that is, the soul — is empty, because it is without God and God's grace; and therefore it is capable and fit to become a house of the devil. It is "swept with brooms" because every virtue, piety, and goodness has been overthrown from it, and the poisons of impurity and the tapestries of pride are scattered about. For this is the cleanness — that is, the uncleanness — which is "clean" and pleases the devil, to whom nothing smells but what is fetid, and nothing tastes but what is unclean and rotten.
Again, the demons are driven by God and the Saints into desert places, lest they harm men, or, driven out and sorrowful, they go there of their own accord. Thus Raphael bound Asmodeus in the desert of upper Egypt, Tobit VIII. Thus Isaiah XIII, 21, and XXXIV, 14, says that Babylon is to be laid waste by the Persians and reduced to a desert, so that there hairy ones may dwell — that is, Satyrs and Onocentaurs, that is, demons in the form of he-goats and monsters. But the devil does not find rest there, because, as Abulensis says, "The demon cannot be at rest, because he will be tormented eternally, but he seeks the rest of his evil will; for he is envious, and desires to harm man; and when he is able to harm, he rests in a certain manner." And Chrysologus, sermon 92: "The devil," he says, "reckons the loss of men his gain, and whatever has perished to men, this he counts as having been acquired by himself." And he does this both out of envy, by which he envies man heaven and happiness, from which he himself fell; and out of hatred of God, with which he burns; for because he cannot harm God Himself, hence he harms man, who is the creature and image of God, so that in this way he may harm God as far as he can — just as St. Basil beautifully shows by the example of the leopard, which, when it cannot hurt a man, tears his image to pieces, in Homily 21 on certain passages of Scripture.
Mystically: the dry places are the souls of the Gentiles, in which, through the grace of Christ, the moisture of concupiscence has been dried up. Hear St. Jerome: "The unclean spirit went out from the Jews when they received the law, and having been driven out from the Jews he walked through the solitudes of the Gentiles, which, after they had believed in the Lord, and he having found no place among the nations, said: I will go to the Jews." And St. Gregory, Morals XXXIII, chapter III: "The dry and waterless places," he says, "are the hearts of the just, which by the strength of discipline are dried up from all the moisture of carnal concupiscence." And Euthymius: "He signifies that the souls of the Saints of God have no moisture of disordered affection," etc. Therefore, just as a pig finds no rest in what is dry but in mud, so the demon does not rest in a body made dry by fastings and chastity, but in one defiled with the mire of gluttony and luxury.
And the Last State of That Man Is Made Worse Than the First — The Arabic: And the last state of that man will become worse than his beginning. This is the end and aim of the parable — namely, that one may be taught that to relapse into sin is worse than the first fall: just as "a relapse of a disease is worse than the disease." Tertullian gives the cause in his book On Penance, chapter V, because "the penitent, when he slides back into his former sins and licks up the vomit again like a dog, prefers the devil to the Lord. For he would seem to have made a comparison, having known both, and to have pronounced by judgment him the better, whose he has preferred once again to be. Thus he who by the penance of sins had arranged to make satisfaction to the Lord, will make satisfaction to the devil by another penance — the penance of penance."
Hence St. Augustine, Epistle 137: "Plainly," he says, "I confess before the Lord our God, who is witness over my soul, that from the time I began to serve God, I have with difficulty found any better than those who have made progress in monasteries; yet I have found none worse than those who have fallen in monasteries — so that from this I think it is written in the Apocalypse: Let the just become still more just, and the filthy become yet more filthy. Apocalypse XXII."
Thus Lucifer, who was a most beautiful Angel, became a most hideous demon; thus Judas from being an Apostle became an apostate and the betrayer of Christ; thus of old Nestorius, Eutyches, Pelagius, Arius, Jovinian, and in this age Luther, Calvin, Menno, and the rest of their fellow initiates, from being monks and priests became apostates and heresiarchs; it is commonly said: from the best wine is made the sharpest vinegar; from a beautiful Angel is made a most hideous devil; from a most holy man is made a most worthless man, if he falls and perseveres in his fall.
So Shall It Be With This Wicked Generation — As if to say: Just as the devil does other things to men, so that, driven out by them, he may return to them more wicked with a greater retinue, fury, and onset; so too will he do to the Scribes and Pharisees, that he may drive them into extreme envy, hatred, and rage, so that they may kill Me — that is, their Messiah and God — because I rebuke and blame their crimes: wherefore God will punish them with the final destruction, both of the body through Titus, and of the soul in Gehenna through the very demons, by whose furies they are driven into such crimes.
Verse 46: As He Was Yet Speaking to the Multitudes, Behold His Mother and Brethren Stood Without
You will ask: Who are called "brethren of Christ" in the Gospels?
First, the foul heresiarch Helvidius used to answer that they were those who had been born of the same mother, the Blessed Virgin, after Christ. For he denied that she had remained perpetually a virgin; but St. Jerome sharply and learnedly refuted him, in his book Against Helvidius.
Secondly, the Greeks generally, with Eusebius (Book II of the History, chapter I), and among the Latins St. Hilary and Ambrose, whom Baronius cites in the Apparatus to the Annals, chapter XLVI, think that they were those who had been born of Joseph's earlier marriage, before he took the Blessed Mary as his wife. But that Joseph had no other wife than the Blessed Virgin, and that with her he remained continually a virgin, is taught by St. Jerome, Against Helvidius; St. Augustine, sermon 14 On the Nativity; Theodoret on chapter 1 of Galatians; Bede, Anselm, Rupert, St. Thomas, and many other Latins here; so much so that Blessed Peter Damian, Epistle 11 to Pope Nicholas, chapter IV, says this is the faith of the Church.
Thirdly, Hugh of St. Victor, and the Gloss on chapter 1 of Galatians; Eck in his Homily On St. Anne (and Bede favors this, Acts I), think that these were born from St. Anne, the mother of the Blessed Virgin; for that St. Anne, besides Joachim — by whom she bore the Blessed Virgin — had two other husbands, from whom these who are called the "brethren" of the Lord were begotten. But that St. Anne had Joachim alone as her husband, and from him only one offspring, the Blessed Virgin, is taught by St. Hippolytus in Nicephorus, Book II, chapter III; and our Christophorus a Castro proves this at length in his book On the Mother of God, chapter 1; and Baronius in the Apparatus, chapter XLVI and following; and Suarez, Part III, Question XXVIII, article 1, disputation 5, section 4.
I say therefore that these were not properly speaking brothers of Christ, nor were they begotten of the Blessed Virgin, or of Joseph, or of St. Anne, but are called brothers — that is, cousins, paternal-cousins, and kinsmen of Christ — by a phrase familiar to the Hebrews: namely, they were either kinsmen, or indeed brothers of St. Joachim, or of St. Anne, or rather they were sons of the brothers or sisters of St. Joachim or of St. Anne — for instance, sons of Cleophas, who was the brother of Joseph, the spouse of the Blessed Virgin, according to the testimony of Hegesippus, who was near to the age of the Apostles, in Eusebius, Book III of the History, chapter XI. For Joseph and Cleophas were sons of Jacob, who was the brother of St. Anne — concerning which there is more in chapter XIII, verse 55, and in Luke III, at the end. Hear St. Jerome here: "We," he says, "as is contained in the book which we wrote against Helvidius, understand the brothers of the Lord, not as the sons of Joseph, but as cousins of the Savior, children of Mary, the Lord's maternal aunt, who is said to be the mother of James and Joseph and Judas." The same is asserted by Isidore, in the book On the Life and Death of the Holy Fathers; Bede, on chapter 1 of Acts; and Anselm, on 1 Corinthians IX and Galatians I.
Verse 47: And One Said to Him: Behold Your Mother and Your Brethren Stand Without
Seeking You. That is, seeking to speak with You, as the Greek and the Syriac have it; this "certain man" was a messenger sent by the brethren to summon Christ.
They Stood Without — They therefore sent a messenger into the house to Christ, to call Him out.
Seeking to Speak With Him — not from ambition and vanity, that they might appear to be kinsmen of so great a teacher and prophet as Christ was (as St. Chrysostom and Theophylact would have it), but that they might take Him and carry Him away with them to Nazareth. For they were saying that He had become mad, as Mark says (III, 21); "For neither did His brethren believe in Him," John VII, 5 (although afterwards many of them came to believe in Christ); whether they said this because they truly thought Him to be mad, or feignedly and in pretense, in order that they might snatch Him out of the hands of the Pharisees, lest He be crushed by them. For it is for this reason, or some similar one, that the Blessed Virgin summoned Christ — let no pious person doubt it. If they wished to seize Him as though furious, they hid this plan of theirs from the Blessed Virgin, and brought her along with them under the guise of honor, so that they might more easily and more secretly call Christ out and carry Him away with them. For it is certain that the Blessed Virgin knew well that Christ was of a sound and holy mind; wherefore she accompanied these brethren — that is, kinsmen — of Christ only out of desire to see Him. St. Paula imitated Christ the Lord, who, as St. Jerome writes in her Epitaph: "When, on account of the excessive fervor of her virtues, she seemed to some to be insane, and they were saying that her brain needed to be warmed, she replied: We are made a spectacle unto the world, and to angels, and to men. And we are fools for Christ's sake; but the foolishness of God is wiser than men. Whence also the Savior speaks to Peter: Thou knowest my foolishness. And again: I am become a wonder unto many, and Thou art my strong helper: I am become as a beast of burden before Thee, and I am always with Thee. Him whom in the Gospel His kinsmen, as though He were of unsound mind, wanted to bind, and His adversaries reviled, saying: He hath a devil, and is a Samaritan. And: By Beelzebub, the prince of devils, He casteth out devils."
Verse 48: But He Answering Him That Told Him, Said: Who Is My Mother?
And who are My brethren? Note that Christ speaks thus, not as if He denied that He had a true mother — as though Christ were not a true man, but phantastic, or a phantasm born of a phantasm, as Marcion and the Manichaeans taught; nor as if He were ashamed of His mother and His poor brethren; but either because this messenger was too boldly and importunately interrupting Him, calling Him away from the preaching He had already begun (as St. Chrysostom and Epiphanius would have it), or rather, "that He might show," as St. Ambrose says, "that He owed Himself more to His Father's ministries (thus it seems should be read, not 'mysteries') than to maternal affections," and that He might prefer the spiritual kinship to the carnal, in which there is neither sex nor order, but all approach Christ most closely and in every way, as father, sister, and brother. For this is what Matthew adds concerning Christ.
Verse 49: And Stretching Out His Hand Toward His Disciples, He Said: Behold My Mother and My Brethren
The Arabic: "And He nodded with His hand toward the disciples." He said: Behold My mother and My brethren — pointing out and indicating the disciples. Hence the Arabic: "And He nodded with His hand toward the disciples."
Verse 50: Whoever Shall Do the Will of My Father, He Is My Brother, and Sister, and Mother
Spiritual, as I have already said, not carnal. He says "brother and sister" on account of both sexes: for faithful men are the brothers of Christ, and faithful women are the sisters of Christ, as St. Gregory teaches. Therefore a faithful person obedient to God is the adoptive brother of Christ, because by grace he is the son of the same God the Father. He is likewise the mother of Christ, because by teaching, exhorting, and counseling he brings forth Christ in himself and in others. So St. Gregory, Bede, and Euthymius. Hear St. Gregory, Homily 3 on the Gospels: "But we must know that he who is Christ's brother and sister by believing becomes His mother by preaching. For he as it were gives birth to the Lord, whom he infuses into the heart of his hearer. And he becomes His mother if, by his voice, the love of the Lord is begotten in the mind of his neighbor."
He adds the example of St. Felicitas, who brought forth in the Spirit to God the seven sons whom she had borne in the flesh to the world, when she strengthened them in persecution and roused them to martyrdom. And St. Augustine, On Holy Virginity, chapter III: "The mother of Christ," he says, "is every pious soul doing the will of His Father, by a most fruitful charity in those whom she gives birth to, until He Himself be formed in them. Mary therefore, doing the will of God, is bodily the mother of Christ only, but spiritually both His sister and mother. And by this one woman alone is both mother and virgin not only in spirit but also in body." He subjoins the reason: "But she is plainly mother of His members, which we are, because she cooperated by charity, so that faithful ones might be born in the Church, who are the members of that Head — while bodily she is the mother of the Head Himself." Following this oracle of Christ, St. Victoria, virgin and martyr under the Emperor Diocletian, when the proconsul asked her: "Do you wish to go with Fortunatianus your brother?" (who was a Gentile), answered: "I do not wish to, because I am a Christian, and they are my brethren who keep the commandments of God." Wherefore, being shut up in prison with other martyrs, and there starved to death, she obtained the laurel of martyrdom. So her Acts record, in Surius, the 11th day of February.