Cornelius a Lapide
Table of Contents
Synopsis of the Chapter
First, the Pharisees ask Christ for a sign from heaven, and He gives them the sign of Jonah. Secondly, at verse 8, He warns the disciples to beware of the leaven, that is, the evil doctrine of the Pharisees. Thirdly, at verse 13, He asks them whom they think Him to be. Peter answers: Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God; wherefore Christ promises him the Rock of the Church and the keys of heaven. Fourthly, at verse 21, He foretells His Passion and Resurrection, and calls His own to the cross.
Vulgate Text: Matthew 16:1-28
1. And the Pharisees and Sadducees came and, tempting Him, asked Him to show them a sign from heaven. 2. But He answered and said to them: When evening comes, you say: It will be fair weather, for the sky is red. 3. And in the morning: Today there will be a storm, for the sky is red and lowering. 4. You know then how to judge the face of the sky: but can you not know the signs of the times? An evil and adulterous generation seeks a sign; and a sign will not be given to it, except the sign of Jonah the prophet. And leaving them, He went away. 5. And when His disciples had come to the other side of the lake, they had forgotten to take bread. 6. And He said to them: Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees. 7. But they thought within themselves, saying: It is because we have taken no bread. 8. And Jesus, knowing it, said: Why do you think within yourselves, O you of little faith, that you have no bread? 9. Do you not yet understand, nor remember the five loaves among five thousand men, and how many baskets you took up? 10. Neither the seven loaves among four thousand men, and how many hampers you took up? 11. How do you not understand that it was not concerning bread that I said to you: Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees? 12. Then they understood that He did not say that they should beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and Sadducees. 13. And Jesus came into the parts of Caesarea Philippi, and He asked His disciples, saying: Whom do men say that the Son of Man is? 14. But they said: Some, John the Baptist, and others, Elijah, and others, Jeremiah, or one of the prophets. 15. Jesus says to them: But whom do you say that I am? 16. Simon Peter answered and said: Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. 17. And Jesus answering said to him: Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona: because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but My Father who is in heaven. 18. And I say to thee: That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build My Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. 19. And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven. 20. Then He commanded His disciples that they should tell no one that He was Jesus the Christ. 21. From that time Jesus began to show to His disciples that He must go to Jerusalem, and suffer many things from the elders and Scribes and chief priests, and be killed, and on the third day rise again. 22. And Peter, taking Him aside, began to rebuke Him, saying: Far be it from Thee, Lord: this shall not be unto Thee. 23. And turning, He said to Peter: Get thee behind Me, Satan, thou art a scandal unto Me: because thou savorest not the things that are of God, but the things that are of men. 24. Then Jesus said to His disciples: If any man will come after Me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow Me. 25. For whoever would save his soul shall lose it; but whoever loses his soul for My sake shall find it. 26. For what does it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, but suffer the loss of his own soul? Or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul? 27. For the Son of Man shall come in the glory of His Father with His Angels, and then He will render to every man according to his works. 28. Amen I say to you, there are some standing here who shall not taste death, until they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom.
Verse 1: And the Pharisees and Sadducees Came, Tempting Him
1. And There Came to Him (at Magedan, chapter XV, last verse) The Pharisees and Sadducees (of whom I spoke at chapter III, verse 7) Tempting Him; and They Asked Him to Show Them a Sign From Heaven. — They had already made the same request at chapter XII, 38. But here they ask again on occasion of the miracle of the multiplication of the loaves, which Christ had performed a little before. For when they saw this everywhere celebrated by the crowds who had been present and had partaken of the loaves, in order to discredit it before the people, they said that that sign was earthly, and could be wrought by a demon who rules over the earth: they insinuated therefore that Christ was a magician, and had multiplied the loaves by the aid of a demon, and had performed His other wonders in the same way, as is gathered from chapter XII, 24. They therefore ask of Christ a sign from heaven, so that God, who reigns in heaven, might by it attest that Christ had been sent by Him and that His doctrine was heavenly: and they promised that, if He would do so, they would believe in Him as the Messiah and would lead the people to the same faith. But the Sadducees, being atheists, held that no sign from heaven could be given by God — for in their opinion there was no God at all; the Pharisees held that such a sign could be given, but not by Christ, inasmuch as He either was not the Messiah, or, if He was, would be unwilling to accede to their request, as He had been unwilling at chapter XII, 38. Hence they supposed that they would persuade the people that Christ could not produce a sign from heaven, and consequently that He had not been sent from God but from a demon. For the rest, see the explanation at chapter XII, 38. Lyranus takes it otherwise: he holds that the Jews, being devoted to judicial astrology, asked of Christ a sign by which He might show from the stars that He was the Messiah; for God had, as it were, inscribed upon the stars all His providence concerning human affairs and the whole order of the universe. But Matthew suggests nothing of the sort here. More properly, the Pharisees seem to have alluded to the manna, as is gathered from John VI, 30, 31 — as if to say: O Jesus, Thou hast indeed multiplied bread upon the earth, but give a sign from heaven — namely, rain down manna from heaven, as Moses did; thus Thou wilt show Thyself to be like Moses, and the new lawgiver of Thy Gospel sent from God. So Remigius, Bede, Abulensis.
Verse 2: When Evening Is Come, You Say: It Will Be Fair Weather
2. But He Answering Said to Them: When Evening Is Come, You Say: It Will Be Fair Weather (tomorrow morning), For the Sky Is Red. — The physical reason is that the redness of the sky — that is, of the air — indicates that the clouds are thin, and therefore easily to be consumed or dispersed during the night, and consequently that the morning will be clear, as being void of cloud. For redness is a middle color between blackness and whiteness. Blackness of clouds signifies that they are thick and dense, such that the rays of the sun cannot penetrate them, and therefore opaque and hard to dissolve; whiteness indicates that they are very thin, such that the rays of the sun pass through and shine through them; redness indicates that they are neither wholly dense nor exceedingly thin, but are growing thin, and that therefore the sun partly shines through them and is partly shut out: for redness has in it something of blackness and something of whiteness, being composed of both. Insofar as it inclines to blackness, it shuts out the rays of the sun; insofar as it inclines to whiteness, it admits and transmits them.
Verse 3: And in the Morning: Today There Will Be a Storm
3. And in the Morning: Today There Will Be a Storm (of rain or wind), For the Sky Is Red and Lowering. — In Greek the word is the same as in verse 2, πυῤῥάζει, that is, "it is red"; στυγνάζων, that is, a sky bringing gloom. "Rutilat" therefore means "it reddens," as the Syriac and Arabic render it. For rutilus is an intense red color, since redness glows — that is, it shines. Thus Ovid, in Metamorph. Book V, says: "rutilus gore," meaning red; and "rutili locks," meaning red, in Metamorph. Book II. "And rutilus Mars," meaning red and bloody, in Cicero's Somnio Scipionis. "And a rutila flame," meaning red and shining, in Fast. Book II. The physical reason is that if the sky reddens in the evening, it indicates that the clouds are thin and therefore will be consumed in the night, since the night is long; for the setting and departing sun cannot melt them. But if it reddens in the morning, it indicates that the clouds are indeed thin, yet so dense that they cannot be consumed by the rising sun, but resist it; and therefore, as the sun grows stronger and hotter, they will soon be resolved into rain or wind. For from the very fact that they have been rarefied by the penetration of the sun's rays, it is clear that they are closer to being resolved by the sun into rain or wind than to being driven away in some other direction. Hear Pliny, Book XVIII, De Praesagiis temporum, chapter XXXV: "If the sun sets clear, it is a sign of fair weather. If it has set on the previous day in a bright sky, and rises in the same, then the argument for fair weather is more certain. If the sun at its rising appears larger than usual, if it comes forth or sets, as it were, imbued with a bluish color, it announces rain; if with a fiery color, the east wind. When before its rising the clouds grow red, there will be winds; when they grow pale, or black clouds are mixed with red ones, they promise rain." From the moon take similar presages: "If, when she rises, she shines bright and with pure brilliance, fair weather; if red, winds; if black, she is believed to portend rain," they say — so our Conimbricenses in their Meteor., tract. VII, ch. III. Another plainer cause for these two contrary things — namely, why the red sky at evening is a sign of fair weather, but at morning of a storm — Abulensis here gives, Quest. VIII. The reason, he says, of the first is that the redness which appears in the air in the evening signifies a drying out of the air, and therefore the gross matter of the vapors, which was convertible into water, is already dried up, so that it becomes inflamed, which is to redden; and thus it is not immediately disposed for rain to come from it, and so it is a proximate sign of fair weather. The reason of the second is that when the sky reddens in the morning, the matter is thickened and is not yet dried out, because it is not red like the red clouds which appear at sunset; but it is matter that is somewhat turbid and somewhat red, and thus it is irregular matter, which being loosed by the sun's heat falls into rain as regards the turbid and gross part, or is dissolved into winds as regards the part that is somewhat dried and ruddy; or on account of the moist matter surrounding it, the whole turns at once into rain, and thus a storm arises, because a storm signifies not only rains, but also violent winds with water; and this our author hints at when he wisely renders "rutilat".
Symbolically the same Abulensis, Quest. IX: "In the first," he says, "coming of Christ there was the fair weather of grace; in the second, at the judgment, there will be the storm of vengeance and hell, which Christ the Judge will thunder down upon the reprobate." So too St. Augustine in his Quaest. Evang. here.
The Face (that is, the outward form and appearance) of the Sky Ye Know How to Discern; but the Signs of the Times Ye Cannot Know. — By "signs of the times" He means the signs of the time of the coming of the Messiah; or "of the times," that is, of the seventy weeks of Daniel, of the prophecy of the Patriarch Jacob, Genesis XLIX, 10, and of the other Prophets. For these prophecies, like also the miracles which Christ performed day by day, plainly proved that the Messiah had already come and that He Himself was the Messiah. This verse is to be read as a question, not without it as an assertion, as Lyranus reads it, who explains it thus, as if to say: You Jews, given to astrology, wish to know from the stars the time of the Messiah's coming; but you are mistaken. For from the stars one may take forecasts of fair weather or of storm, but not of the coming of the Messiah. But this is beside the point: for here there is an argument from the lesser to the greater, as if to say: If from the signs of the sky, O Pharisees, you know how to discern future fair weather or storm, then much more from the oracles of the Prophets and My miracles you can and ought to recognize Me to be the Messiah. For these are clearer and more certain to them. So St. Hilary, Jerome, Euthymius; and it is plain enough from Luke XII, 56, where Christ says: "Hypocrites, ye know how to test the face of the sky and of the earth; but this time (of My coming, who am the Messiah) how is it that ye do not test it?" So also today many are lynxes in earthly things, and moles in divine; prudent in the world, foolish in heaven; most sharp-sighted in heaping up money, most ignorant in worshipping God. These are wise in the purse, foolish in conscience. St. Chrysostom, homily 54, explains these "signs of the times" differently, as if to say: Some are signs of the present time, others of the time to come: the signs of healings, which I work, are of the present time: but the signs of the time to come will be signs in heaven, which you demand, O Scribes: for then there will be signs in the sun, moon, and stars, Luke XXI. You therefore do as Thales, who while gazing at the sky as he walked fell into a pit: so too you, gazing at things to come and neglecting the present time of grace, fall into hell.
Verse 4: An Evil and Adulterous Generation Seeketh a Sign
4. An Evil and Adulterous Generation Seeketh a Sign, and a Sign Shall Not Be Given to It, Except the Sign of the Prophet Jonah. — Christ repeats this verse; for we have already heard it in ch. XII, v. 39, where I explained it.
And Leaving Them, He Went Away. — From Magedan He boarded a boat and crossed the Sea of Galilee, and returned to its nearer shore, from which He had come, as is clear from the following verse. Hence Mark, ch. VIII, 13, says: "And sending them away, He went up again into the boat, and passed to the other side." For Christ crossed this sea again and again, going to and fro and back again, that He might instruct the Galileans who lived both on this side of the sea and beyond it, according to the prophecy of Isaiah, ch. IX, 1, which Matthew cites in IV, 14.
Verse 5: And When His Disciples Had Come Across the Lake, They Had Forgotten to Take Bread
5. And When His Disciples Had Come Across the Lake, They Had Forgotten to Take Bread. — "When they had come," in Greek ἐλθόντες, that is, when they had gone, namely when they had boarded the boat to cross over: for that this happened on the boat is clear from the circumstances; for on the boat and in the longer voyage they needed bread and food, since in port they would find it abundantly. The same is clear from Mark VIII, 16 and following. It is a Hebraism; for Hebrew words often signify not a completed action, but one that has begun or is intended, as I have said in the Canones. So here "when they had come" means "when they had begun to come," when they were setting out, "they had forgotten," because (says Anselm) the necessity of refreshing the body had slipped their mind, by reason of the Lord's company and the sweetness of the true bread who was with them, that is, Christ.
Across the Lake, — across the Sea of Galilee, namely to Bethsaida, as Mark says, ch. VIII, 22.
Verse 6: Take Heed and Beware of the Leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees
6. Who Said to Them: Take Heed (in Greek ὁρᾶτε, that is, see, as our author renders it in Mark) and Beware of the Leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees. — "Of the leaven," that is, of the doctrine, as He explains in verse 12; He bids this be guarded against, not insofar as the Pharisees were teaching and expounding the Law of Moses — for in that regard He bids them be heard and obeyed, ch. XXIII, 2 — but insofar as they were defiling them by their traditions, as by a sour leaven, and through them infecting and corrupting the minds of their hearers — which Luke, ch. XII, 1, calls hypocrisy: "Beware," He says, "of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy;" because the Pharisees regarded only external ceremonies and apparent holiness, neglecting the inward purity of the soul, says Bede. Hear Jerome: "This is the leaven of which the Apostle speaks: A little leaven corrupteth the whole lump. This kind of leaven (which is to be avoided by every means) was held by Marcion and Valentinus, and all the heretics. Leaven has this power: if it be mixed with flour, what seemed small grows into something greater, and draws the whole mass into a conversion to its own savor; so too heretical doctrine, if it cast even a little spark into thy breast, in a short time grows into a huge flame, and draws the whole possession of the man to itself."
Verse 7: But They Were Reasoning Among Themselves, Saying: Because We Have Not Taken Bread
7. But They Were Reasoning Among Themselves (Mark has, ch. VIII, 16, διελογίζοντο πρὸς ἀλλήλους, that is, they were disputing or arguing with one another), Saying: Because We Have Not Taken Bread. — Hugh and Dionysius explained it thus, as if to say: For this reason Christ said, "Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees," because we have not taken bread, nor does He wish us to take bread from the Pharisees. Others more simply, as if to say: The disciples, having heard Christ mention leaven, remembered that they had forgotten to bring bread into the boat, and, fearing that Christ might as usual sail to a desert place, were anxious how they might procure the necessary bread there, and were arguing about this among themselves, and perhaps one was casting the blame of forgetting the bread upon another — wherein they sinned doubly. First, that they were too anxious about bread, and did not trust Christ enough, though they had just before experienced His power and providence in multiplying loaves. Secondly, that they supposed Christ to be speaking of bodily leaven and bread, when He was speaking of spiritual: hence on both counts they are rebuked and corrected by Christ, as follows.
Verse 8: Why Are You Reasoning Among Yourselves, O You of Little Faith?
8. But Jesus, Knowing, Said: Why Are You Reasoning Among Yourselves, O You of Little Faith, That You Have No Bread? — In Greek, οὐκ ἐλάβετε, that is, you have not taken; so also the Syriac. "Knowing," by the power of His divinity, for He had not heard them speaking of this matter. "Of little faith," as though I had spoken of bodily loaves and wished you to be anxious about them; or as though I could not, or would not, provide these things for you, whether on the sea or in the desert?
Verse 9: Do You Not Yet Understand, Neither Remember the Five Loaves?
9. Do You Not Yet Understand (both My phrase about the leaven, and My care for providing bread for you), Neither Do You Remember the Five Loaves Among Five Thousand Men (namely, distributed. In Greek: Neither do you remember the five loaves of the five thousand, with which namely I fed five thousand men), and How Many Baskets (of the fragments) You Took Up? — Indeed twelve — as if to say: I, who then not only multiplied but also restored the loaves in the fragments which I caused to remain over, can now and at any time do the same.
Verse 10: Neither the Seven Loaves Among Four Thousand Men
10. Neither the Seven Loaves Among Four Thousand Men (in Greek τετρακισχιλίων, that is, of four thousand, with which namely I fed four thousand men), and How Many Baskets You Took Up? — Indeed seven, as many as the loaves had been. Both Matthew and Mark consistently here name sportas (hampers), but in the former miracle cophinos (baskets): whence it is clear that sportas were a different kind of vessel and measure from cophini.
Verse 11: Why Do You Not Understand That It Was Not Concerning Bread?
11. Why Do You Not Understand That It Was Not Concerning Bread That I Spoke to You (when I said what follows): Beware of the Leaven of the Scribes and Pharisees? — For from leaven is made common and ordinary bread; as if to say: You ought to have recognized from My words and deeds that I was speaking not of earthly leaven and bread, as being of little value and poor, but of the spiritual, such as doctrine is.
Verse 12: Then They Understood That He Did Not Say to Beware of the Leaven of Bread
12. Then They Understood That He Did Not Say They Should Beware of the Leaven of Bread, but of the Doctrine of the Pharisees and Sadducees. — For Christ's rebuke sharpened the minds of the disciples, and the vexation gave them understanding.
Verse 13: And Jesus Came Into the Parts of Caesarea Philippi
13. And Jesus Came (in Greek ἐλθών, that is, when He had come) Into the Parts (Syriac, into the places) of Caesarea Philippi; and He Asked His Disciples, Saying: Whom Do Men Say That the Son of Man Is? — Caesarea Philippi is a city of Phoenicia situated at the foot of Mt. Lebanon, which was first called Dan, because it was taken by cunning by the Danites, that is, by the tribe of Dan, Judges ch. XVIII; and because there is there the confluence of two streams, namely Jeor and Dan, which joined together form the Jordan: there therefore is the source of the Jordan. But because to the Gentiles Pan, the god of shepherds, was better known than Dan, a Hebrew tribe, hence by them it was called Paneas; afterwards Philip, son of Herod the Ascalonite and tetrarch of Ituraea and Trachonitis, having enlarged it, made it the metropolis of his tetrarchy, and in favor of Caesar Tiberius called it Caesarea, imitating his father Herod the Ascalonite, who called the city he had founded in the place previously called Strato's Tower, between Dor and Joppa, beside the Mediterranean Sea, Caesarea in honor of Caesar Augustus; and since that one was older and more renowned, it is so called absolutely "Caesarea of Palestine" in the Acts of the Apostles and by Josephus: therefore, to distinguish it, this was called Caesarea Philippi, which was the boundary of the land of Canaan promised by God to the Jews to the north, just as Beersheba was its boundary to the south. Hence so often in Scripture it is said "from Dan (that is, Caesarea Philippi) unto Beersheba." For this reason many neighboring Gentiles, especially Phoenicians, bordered on this city, as is customary on the borders of regions; and so Christ withdrew here to it, both that He might teach Gentiles as well as Jews, and that He might more freely speak of the Messiah, whom the Jews were awaiting as their king. For in Judea it would have been dangerous to speak of this matter, since it was; and the Scribes had accused Christ before the Roman governors of aspiring to kingship, and had pursued Him as guilty of high treason before Tiberius Caesar. Again, this Caesarea, once called Dan, had been a seat of idolatry, as is plain from Judges XVIII, 29 and following. Christ therefore wished to purge it from this stain, and to make it a worshipper of God, indeed the beginning and mother of the Christian Gentiles: whence a citizen of this city was the woman with an issue of blood, whom Christ healed of her flow of blood, and an image of which miracle, famous for daily miracles, erected by the same woman in that place, remained down to Julian the Apostate, who out of hatred of Christ cast it down, as Eusebius testifies, bk. V, ch. XX; afterwards this city, by Herod Agrippa courting the favor of Nero, was called Neronia or Neronias, and now, occupied by the Turks, is called Belinas.
Whom Do Men Say That the Son of Man Is? — So it is to be read with the Roman copies, without "me," which some add from the Greek; for this is understood in the phrase "the Son of Man," that is, Me, who am accustomed, out of love of humility, to call Myself the Son of Man, as I said in ch. VIII, and especially here I so name Myself, that I may test your faith concerning Me, O Apostles. Hence Luke, ch. IX, 18, has: "Who do the crowds say that I am?" Nor should weight be laid upon the Greek article τόν, as Beza wishes, who renders it "that Son of Man," namely the Messiah promised to the Jews. Less correctly the Syriac divides and reads this as a question thus: "What do men say of Me, that I am the Son of Man?" For Christ here is not asking, but asserting, and calls Himself the Son of Man; but He further asks what men, that is, the common people, think of Him.
Verse 14: Some, John the Baptist; Others, Elias; and Others, Jeremias
14. But They Said: Some, John the Baptist; Others, Elias; and Others, Jeremias, or One of the Prophets. — The common people of the Jews saw that already for some hundreds of years, namely a little after the Babylonian captivity (when Zechariah and Malachi prophesied, who were the last of the Prophets), prophecy and prophets had ceased among the Jews, just as had the Ark of the Covenant and the oracle from the mercy-seat. Wherefore they thought that Christ was not a new prophet, but one of the old: for they saw in Christ their virtues, miracles, and teaching. But few were those who firmly believed Him to be the Messiah; far more did not believe it, being offended by Christ's poverty and humility: for they supposed that the Messiah would come with royal pomp as another son of Solomon, as the Jews still suppose and await; wherefore, when some of the people said from time to time, having seen so many of Christ's miracles, "Is not this the Son of David?" Matt. XII; and, "This is indeed the Prophet who is to come into the world," John VI, this was a passing and sudden exclamation drawn forth by the present miracle, not a persevering and constant judgment. For the common people are fickle, and are swayed by every breeze. So Abulensis. They supposed therefore that the soul of some one of the Prophets had migrated into Christ by μετεμψύχωσις, that is, the Pythagorean transmigration of souls, by which the soul of the deceased was thought to pass into another body, better or meaner according to the merits of the former life. So Jansenius, Cajetan, and Baronius. Or rather they thought that one of the Prophets had risen again, and that He Himself was Jesus, as if Jesus were in reality John the Baptist, Elias, or Jeremias. For the Jews and Pharisees believed in the resurrection of the dead, as is clear from 2 Maccabees VII, although the Sadducees denied it, Acts XXIII, 8. That this is so is clear from Herod's opinion about Christ: "This," says he, "is John; he has risen from the dead, and therefore virtues (miracles) work in him." For they supposed that the soul of a Prophet after death became loftier, more powerful, and more divine for working miracles. They believed therefore that one of the Prophets had risen again in Jesus, and therefore worked mightier things than before; but the Pythagorean transmigration of souls, as a Gentile fiction, they shuddered at. Moreover, others supposed Jesus to be John the Baptist, because in age, holiness, and preaching He seemed very like him, and John, who shortly before had been unjustly killed by Herod, was fresh in their memory, and was deemed worthy of resurrection. Others thought Christ to be Elias on account of the similar zeal of both, and because Elias is not yet dead, and is awaited to return by all, even the Jews, from the oracle of Malachi, ch. IV, 5: "Behold," says he, "I will send you Elias the prophet." They supposed therefore that Elias had returned, and that Elias was Jesus. Others were of opinion that Christ was Jeremias, because Jeremias was a most holy man, and a mirror of patience and charity, and because some thought that Jeremias would return with Elias to preach to the Jews, moved by that saying: "I have appointed thee a prophet unto the Gentiles," Jeremiah I, 5. But that passage has another meaning, as I have there said.
Verse 15: But Whom Do You Say That I Am?
15. Jesus Said to Them: But Who Do You Say That I Am? — St. Jerome from the phrase "but you," by antithesis to "men," gathers that the Apostles are here tacitly called gods by Christ: "To those," says he, "who, being men, judge as men, but to you, who are gods, whom do you think Me to be?" As for the matter itself, St. Chrysostom says: "By this second question the Lord admonished the disciples to think greater things of Him. For by the very mode of questioning He showed that those common opinions were far from His dignity." He says therefore: "You, who, being always in My company, have seen Me do many things, and who in My name have yourselves wrought many mighty works, whom do you say that I am?"
Verse 16: Thou Art Christ, the Son of the Living God
16. Simon Peter Answering, Said: Thou Art Christ, the Son of the Living God. — "Simon Peter," who at his circumcision was named Simon, was called by Christ Cephas, that is, Peter. Some think that Peter, as the mouth of the Apostles, answered not for himself alone, but for all. So St. Jerome: "Peter," he says, "in the person of all the Apostles confesses: Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God." So too St. Anselm, St. Thomas, the Gloss, Dionysius, Lyranus, Jansenius, and St. Augustine, De Verbis Domini, sermon 13, and St. Ambrose, book De Incarnatione, ch. IV. Better St. Hilary, Abulensis, Maldonatus, Franciscus Lucas, Barradius, and others judge that Peter spoke for himself and out of his own mind. For while the Apostles were silent and hesitating what to answer, Peter, wiser than the rest (as being enlightened and taught by God) and more fervent, lest any should answer something unworthy concerning Christ, was the first to snatch up the answer and replied for all: not because it was the opinion of the other Apostles (for he had spoken with no one about this matter), but because he wished his judgment to be shared by all, and to show that all ought to feel as he felt; and this alone is what St. Jerome and the others already cited mean, namely that Peter, as one already designated, and after the resurrection to be in fact established as the prince of the Apostles and of the whole Church, having been more deeply taught and inspired by God than the rest, knew Christ's divinity, and about it answered what all the others ought to have answered, and which he supposed they would answer more fervently than truly, as is gathered from John VI, 69 and following. This is clear from the fact that to Peter alone, for the merit of this confession, Christ promises the fullest reward and prerogative; for He says to him by name before the other Apostles: "Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona, because flesh and blood have not revealed it to thee, but My Father who is in heaven. And I say to thee that thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build My Church."
Further, St. Hilary, St. Chrysostom, and others judge that St. Peter was the first of all to confess Christ's divinity. Others deny this, saying that Nathanael had confessed the same before Peter by saying: "Rabbi, Thou art the Son of God, Thou art the King of Israel," John I, 49, concerning which it must be discussed in that place. Certainly that the Apostles before this confession of Peter had recognized Christ to be God from His own words and from the many great miracles done to prove this, is clear from the words of Peter, John VI, 69: "Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life, and we have believed and known that Thou art Christ the Son of God;" and from the words of the Apostles themselves: "Truly Thou art the Son of God," Matt. XIV, 33; and from Christ's continual disputation with the Jews on this matter in the presence of the Apostles, which St. John recounts in ch. V and following. Yet the Apostles, being still untrained, had formed a very slender and confused conception of this matter in their minds, and they believed in general that Christ was truly the Son of God above the other Prophets, indeed that He was God; but in what way this was, whether by eternal generation, or by some other mode or denomination, they did not know, and they could not distinctly conceive or explain it. But Peter distinctly, clearly, and sublimely, enlightened by God, recognized it, and being the first openly questioned about this matter, confessed and professed the same in this place, namely that Christ was properly the Son of God, that is, begotten from eternity by God the Father, and therefore consubstantial with Him, and the true and eternal God. Christ required this faith about Himself from Peter and the Apostles (for the Apostles by their silence approved Peter's confession, and tacitly professed the same), both because it is the foundation of our justification, and because Christ's passion and death were imminent, in which it was necessary that the Apostles should be sustained by this faith in Christ's divinity, lest when He had died they should suppose that faith and all other things had died with Him, as is plain from v. 21 and following.
Thou Art Christ, the Son of the Living God. — In Greek ὁ Χριστός, that is, that Christ, namely the Messiah promised by God so many ages ago to Adam, Abraham, Moses, and David, whom all the Patriarchs and Prophets most eagerly awaited, and all still await today. Thou, I say, art Christ or the Messiah, that is, anointed by God with the anointing of the grace of hypostatic union with the Word, and by this very fact consecrated the supreme Doctor, High Priest, Prophet, and King of the world: Doctor, that Thou mayest teach men the will and the law of God; High Priest, that by offering Thyself as a sacrifice to God Thou mayest reconcile the world to God; Prophet, that Thou mayest declare the secrets of God and foretell things to come, and especially proclaim the rewards laid up in heaven for the pious and the punishments in hell for the impious, and impress them on all; King, that Thou mayest rule heaven and earth and all that is in them.
The Son of God — not by grace and adoption, as are all the Saints, but by nature and the Godhead communicated to Thee by God the Father through eternal generation. Hence in the Greek there is an emphatic article, ὁ υἱός, that is, "that Son," namely the unique, natural, and ὁμοούσιος (consubstantial) with the Father: for otherwise John the Baptist also, Elias, and the Prophets were adoptive sons of God, to whom however He here opposes and prefers Christ. "Of the living," who so formally lives the divine, uncreated, and blessed life, that He causally imparts to all things created by Him their strength and vigor, and to living things their soul and life. For from Him as from a fountain and living sun flows all the light and life of all Angels, men, animals, and plants. See what is said on John I, 4, on the words: "In Him was." So St. Leo, Sermon On the Transfiguration: "St. Peter," he says, "through the revelation of the Most High Father, rising above bodily things and transcending the human, saw with the eyes of his mind the Son of the living God, and confessed the glory of the Godhead." So too St. Chrysostom, Hilary, Theophylact, Euthymius, St. Augustine, sermon 33 On the Words of the Apostle, and St. Athanasius, sermon 3 Against the Arians, and others everywhere, who from this passage prove Christ's divinity. Wrongly therefore does Erasmus judge that it cannot be clearly proved from this passage; for here and elsewhere he sowed the seeds of Arianism, which his followers brought to fruit.
Verse 17: Blessed Art Thou, Simon Bar-Jona
17. And Jesus Answering, Said to Him: Blessed Art Thou, Simon Bar-Jona, Because Flesh and Blood Hath Not Revealed It to Thee, but My Father Who Is in Heaven. — as if to say: Blessed and happy art thou, O Peter, for this new faith concerning Me; for this is an immense good that He is truly and properly the Son of God. Thus St. Jerome: "From his confession," he says, "Peter gains a name which shows that he has received his revelation from the Holy Spirit, whose son also he must be called. For Bar-Jona in our tongue means son of the dove. 'Because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee,'" that is, your fleshly parents, friends, and any human beings who are made of flesh and blood did not reveal to you that I am the Son of God, inasmuch as this far transcends all nature and the natural knowledge of all men and angels, but My heavenly Father accomplished this in you by the illumination of His grace: "What flesh and blood could not reveal, the grace of the Holy Spirit has revealed," says St. Jerome. So "flesh" is taken by synecdoche for carnal man, Galatians I, 16; John I, 13 and 1 Corinthians XV, 50. St. Hilary, however, takes "flesh" to mean Peter's bodily eyes: for these reported to Peter that Christ was man, but that He was God — nothing but the revelation of the Father made known to him. For although Peter outwardly heard the words of Christ saying that He was the Son of God, and confirming it by miracles, still for believing there was need of the inward illumination and grace of the Holy Spirit.
And it is a gift, not of flesh and blood, that is, of nature, but of the grace of God inspiring and revealing this very thing to you; for this faith is the beginning and basis of all grace and glory, and therefore it will lead you, and many through you and your example and preaching, to eternal beatitude. For the beatitude of the way consists in the faith and love of Christ; but the beatitude of the fatherland in His vision and enjoyment, according to that saying, John XVII, 3: "Now this is eternal life, that they may know Thee, the only true God, and Him whom Thou hast sent, Jesus Christ." Hence the Synod of Ephesus, in its third session: "This most blessed Peter the Apostle," it says, "worthy of all praise, is the rock and base of the Catholic Church, and the foundation of the right faith."
Hence too has grown the custom among the faithful, that when they speak to the Pontiff they say, "Most Blessed Father." Whence St. Jerome to Pope Damasus: "I," he says, "am in communion with thy Beatitude, that is with the chair of Peter."
Simon Bar-Jona — that is, son of Jonah. For the father of Simon Peter was called Johanna, that is, Johannes (John), as is clear from John XXI, 15 — that is, "God has given" or "God has had mercy," or "the gift of God, grace and mercy," from יהוה Jehova, which is contracted from Jehovah, that is God, and חנן chanan, meaning "He has had mercy, He has given." Peter therefore was the son of Johanna, or John, that is, of the grace of God, because he was most pleasing to God and most full of His grace: just as the Gentiles used to call one who was loaded with every gift "son of the graces." Furthermore, by crasis for Johanna it is said Jona, which properly signifies a dove.
Thus Emmanuel is contracted into Manuel and Noel. So Jesaiahu, Jirmiahu, Eliahu, and similar Hebrew names are contracted into Isaias (Isaiah), Jeremias (Jeremiah), Elias (Elijah). So for Joannes the Germans say in contracted form Hans, the Belgians Jan, the Spaniards Juan, the French Jean. Unless you prefer that Johannan and Jona are two distinct names: for they differ both in sound and in meaning; yet so that Jona alludes to Johannan, and on that occasion was given to Peter, with the result that Peter's father had two names, and was first called Johannan, and then for the sake of a shorter pronunciation was called Jona, as if by another or alien name. For many names have been thus bent and shortened, so as to seem altogether different. St. Chrysostom notes that Christ adds to Simon the word "Bar-Jona" not only according to the Hebrew custom, by which the father's name is always added to the sons, but also because of a special reference to Peter's reply, as though Christ were confirming it and saying: You have said truly, O Peter, that I am the Son of God, for just as you are Bar-Jona, that is son of Jonah, inasmuch as you were naturally born from him as to your substance, as man from man, so I am the Son of God the Father, inasmuch as I was naturally begotten from Him from eternity, as God from God, of the same substance and deity with Him.
Symbolically: Jonah, that is, a dove, is a symbol of the Holy Spirit, who descended upon Christ in the form of a dove, Matthew III, 16; for He came down also upon Peter, and revealed to him Christ to be truly and properly the Son of God.
Verse 18: Thou Art Peter, and Upon This Rock I Will Build My Church
But that Peter is here called the rock, all the rest of the Fathers as it were unanimously agree; these are cited at length here by that scourge of Calvin, Maldonatus, and by Bellarmine, De Romano Pontifice, book I, ch. X. The sense therefore is, as if to say: You are Kepha, or Cephas, that is, a rock, or a very hard stone, and a most firm crag (for this is what the Hebrew כף keph, and the Chaldee and Syriac כפא kepha signify) — designated and destined by Me, so that after My death, when the Holy Spirit has been received at Pentecost, you may be fully strengthened and fortified as the foundation of the Church, which I will build upon you; for before the coming of the Holy Spirit Peter was not yet the rock of the Church, indeed in the Passion he denied Christ out of fear. The name "Peter" and "rock" therefore denotes the firmness and constancy of St. Peter, as it were the prince of the Church, and of his successors the Pontiffs, in the faith and religion of Christ, as among others Angelus Caninius teaches in his Nomina Hebraica novi Testamenti, ch. XIII, 1.
Furthermore, that Peter is here called the rock is proved: First, from the pronoun "this," when He says: "Upon this rock;" for this, being demonstrative, must be understood thus, namely "this which I have just said, and to whom I am speaking," as if to say: You are Peter, that is, the rock of the Church, and upon you as upon a rock I will build My Church. For no other rock has been mentioned to which the pronoun "this" could point, except Peter; it is otherwise in 1 Corinthians X; for there it is said: "They drank of the spiritual rock that followed them: and the rock was Christ," for the word "rock" had already been used, and explaining it Paul says that it had been — typically, that is, representing — Christ; as if Christ had spoken in French He would have said: "Tu es Pierre, et sur cette pierre je bâtirai mon Eglise."
You will say: Christ does not say "You are the rock," but "You are Peter (Petrus)," therefore the pronoun "this" cannot refer to Peter. I answer that Christ, speaking in Syriac, said: "You are kepha, and upon this kepha I will build," etc. For kepha means rock, and thence Peter was called Kepha in Syriac. But the Greek translator, and the Latin following him, gave him a name as it were masculine, namely Petrus, rather than petra, which is feminine; but πέτρος in Greek, just like πέτρα, signifies a rock or a stone. So Petrus is the same as petra, but the translator varied the word for the sake of elegance, and rendered: "You are Petrus, and upon this petra," not "upon this Petrus" (as he might have said in the true and proper sense), both because petra to the Greeks more usually means a stone or rock than Petrus does; and because houses are properly built upon rocks, not upon men. Beza here admits this: "The Lord," he says, "speaking in Syriac, made no play on the name, but in both places said Cepha: just as also the vernacular name Pierre is used both as a proper name and as an appellative. In the Greek tongue likewise πέτρος and πέτρα differ not in meaning but only in ending." So far he is right, but he errs when he adds: "But it seems that Matthew (or whoever was his translator) by this difference of ending intended to distinguish Peter (who is a part of the building) from the rock itself upon which the building rests, that is, from Christ Himself, and so to distinguish Peter from the promise of faith, which is common to the whole Church, which even the ancients openly attest; so that Antichrist (so the heretic calls the Roman Pontiff) is plainly ridiculous, when from this passage he tries to establish his tyranny." How petulantly and falsely he says this, see and learn from the very original passages of the Fathers whom Bellarmine and Maldonatus cite, as I said. Again, to the translator the very text of Scripture must be preferred, nor did the Greek translator mean anything other than what the Syriac text itself does, as I said a little before. I pass over many other points which from what has been said, and from what will soon be said, will appear to be false.
Second, this same thing is clear from the fact that there would be no connection in saying: "You are Peter, and upon Me, the rock, I will build My Church." Indeed, it would be a weakening of the saying and an overturning of the gift bestowed. For then Peter would say to Christ: I am Peter, that is, the rock of the Church: how then are You building Your Church not upon me but upon Yourself?
Third, because all that precedes and follows looks only to Peter: "And I," He says, "say to thee," O Peter, that is, I give and assign to you as the reward and prerogative of so great a faith and confession, that after Me and My death and resurrection I will make you the rock and foundation of the Church; for this is what "I will build My Church" means.
Fourth, because the original and oriental versions agree in this, that Petrus is the same as petra, and petra the same as Petrus; whence they give the same name Kepha to Peter and to the rock. Christ therefore, says Angelus Caninius in his Nomina Hebraica of the New Testament, chapter XIII, said in Syriac: אנת כפא ועל הדא כפא אבני ית עדתי Ant kepha, Veal hadden ebne iat edti; or as the Syriac Gospel now has it: Ant hu kipha, Veal hada kipha ebne eidti, that is, "Thou art Cepha, that is, a rock, and upon this Cepha, that is, rock (that is upon thee, who art Peter or rock), I will build My Church." Moreover, the Hebrew Gospel, which Sebastian Münster published as the authentic and original of Matthew, has it in a similar way: אתה כיפא ועל כיפא הזאת אבנה את מקהלי Atta kepha, Veal kepha hazzot ebne eth macheli. So too the Armenian Gospel: "Isbim," it says, from vera "ais bim," that is, "Thou art a rock, and upon this rock I will build," etc. And the Arabic Gospel: Ant alsachra, va ala hada alsachra ebni baiati — "Thou art a rock, and upon this rock I will build My Church." The Ethiopic Gospel has: Anto quoquh va dibazati, quoqh annesa lebeita Christianei, that is: "Thou art a rock, and upon this rock I will build the Christian house," that is the Church. The Egyptian Coptic: "But I say to thee, that thou art this Peter, I will found My Church upon this rock, which is none other than" Peter — otherwise there would be no connection; for the word "because" gives the reason why He is to build the Church upon a rock, namely because Peter will be a solid rock, on whom the whole Church, as upon a firm foundation, may safely rest. The Persian version: "I say to you, that you are sanac, that is, rock, and upon this sanac, that is, rock, I will build My Church." Moreover, the Persian paraphrast explains sanac, that is, rock, adding: "You are a rock, that is, a foundation and a judge." See Peter Victor in his Annotations on the New Testament, pp. 101 and 102, where he relates all these versions at length.
To St. Augustine the reply is that he was misled by his ignorance of the Hebrew and Syriac languages, and therefore thought that Peter was something different from the rock, and was called from it denominatively, as it were Petreius, whereas from the Syriac it is clear that Petrus is the same as petra. Again, St. Augustine admits as probable the exposition of those who say that Peter is the rock of the Church — by which he slays Calvin, who thinks that to say this is blasphemy against Christ. Hear St. Augustine, in his sermon De Cathedra Petri: "Finally, for the firmness of the devotion of the Churches he is called a rock; as the Lord says: Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build My Church. For he is called rock because he was the first to lay the foundations of the faith among the nations, and like an immovable rock to hold together the whole structure and mass of the Christian work. So Peter is named rock for his devotion, and the Lord is called rock for His power; as the Apostle says: They drank of the spiritual rock that followed them; and the rock was Christ. Rightly does he deserve a sharing of the name who deserves a sharing of the work. Peter lays the foundation, Peter plants, the Lord gives the increase, the Lord supplies the watering." The same Augustine, sermon 16 De Sanctis: "Worthy indeed was he," he says, "that, for the building up of the peoples of God, Peter should be a rock for foundation, a column for support, a key for the kingdom."
Lastly, even if that exposition of St. Augustine were admitted — which however is not his genuine view — namely that the rock denotes Christ, still from it one is forced to conclude that Peter, next to Christ, who is the rock and cornerstone of the Church, is the next foundational rock of the Church. For the sense would be: I am the rock upon which I will build the Church; but you, O Peter, are nearest to Me, and are the rock of the Church next to Me, upon which I will build My Church next after Myself; therefore I alone call you Peter, although you were previously called Simon. By the same arguments the Centuriators of Magdeburg are refuted (book I, Cent. I, ch. IV), and the ministers of Geneva, who in their Bibles expound thus: "Upon this rock" — that is, upon this confession or faith, namely that I am the Son of God. For nowhere previously was this confession called a rock, just as Peter immediately before was called Cephas, that is, rock.
You will say: Some of the Fathers take "the rock" to mean the faith which Peter confessed and professed. So St. Chrysostom, St. Hilary in his book VI On the Trinity, St. Cyril in his book IV On the Trinity, St. Ambrose in book VI On Luke, ch. IX. I answer: These Fathers do not take faith abstractly, but faith as it existed in Peter, and consequently they make Peter himself the rock of the Church, as they soon expressly explain. For they mean to say that Peter, on account of the merit of his faith, received the dignity of being the rock in the Church, as St. Hilary and St. Chrysostom expressly say; for on account of it he deserved to be the foundation of the Church, and his faith could not fail, so that he himself should confirm and sustain others in the faith, Luke XXII, 32. For the Church is made up and completed not of faith itself but of the faithful men themselves as its parts (for the Church is nothing other than the gathering of the faithful); whence the head of the Church itself, that it may be homogeneous with the body, must be a faithful man, namely Peter, and a Pontiff. Faith therefore is the reason for the foundation, but the foundation itself is Peter. So St. Chrysostom, Cyril in book IV On the Trinity, and St. Ambrose in book VI On Luke, ch. IX; Bellarmine in book I De Pontifice, ch. X, where he likewise refutes Erasmus and Chytraeus, who, after Origen's allegorizing manner, take "the rock" to mean all the faithful. For thus the whole Church would be a rock, since the whole Church consists of none but the faithful; where then will the walls, floors, and roof of the Church be? Out of what will these be built? See also Gretser in his Defense of Bellarmine, book III, ch. V.
Finally, Christ grants this to Peter as to the future Pontiff of the Church; therefore He grants the same to the rest of the Pontiffs, His successors, and this for the good of the Church, namely that the Church may by them, as by a rock, be made firm in the Christian faith and religion. Wherefore St. Bernard in his book II On Consideration to Pope Eugene says: "Who are you? He says, A great priest, the supreme Pontiff. You are the prince of bishops, the heir of the Apostles; in primacy an Abel, in governance a Noah, in patriarchate an Abraham, in the order of Melchizedek, in dignity an Aaron, in authority a Moses, in judgment a Samuel, in power a Peter, in anointing a Christ. You are he to whom the keys have been handed, to whom the sheep have been entrusted."
And Upon This Rock. — From this it is clear that just as Cephas is called from Cepha, so Petrus is called from petra — nay rather, is the same as petra, as I have already shown. Wherefore when Optatus of Milevis (book II against Parmenian) and others derive Cephas from the Greek κεφαλή, that is head, this is done by a suitable allusion, not by the true etymology of the name. By a similar allusion St. Gregory of Nazianzus, Oration 2 On Easter, derives Phase or Pascha, which is a Hebrew word — as all know from Exodus ch. XII — from the Greek πάσχειν, that is, to suffer. For at Passover Christ's Passion took place, and His immolation, as it were, as the Paschal Lamb. Moreover, Christ bestowed on Peter this name of "rock," rather than other names such as "column," "tower," "anchor," "base," etc., because in Scripture the name of Christ Himself is celebrated as "rock": Isaiah XXVIII, 16; Psalm CXVII, 22; Matthew XXI, 42, and elsewhere: therefore He shared His own name together with its dignity and office with Peter. Thus Peter, on account of so sublime a confession of faith, merited to be made and constituted by Christ the foundation rock. And this alone St. Hilary, Chrysostom, Cyril, and Nyssen (at the end of his book Against the Jews) mean to say, when they say that the Church was built by Christ upon the faith and confession of Peter, as I explained above. Moreover, St. Chrysostom here stresses the word "I will build," and says it is like that saying, "God said," in Genesis I, by which all things were created and subsist. For in like manner, he says, the word "I will build" effected all things, even when tyrants were attacking, soldiers were bearing arms, peoples were raging, custom was resisting. For the word of God coming like a strong fire consumed the thorns, cleansed the fields, prepared the ground, and raised the building on high, etc. Wherefore St. Jerome in epistle 57, when consulting Pope Damasus whether in the Holy Trinity three hypostases are to be spoken of, or only one, addresses him thus: "I am speaking with the successor of the fisherman and the disciple of the cross. Following no first except Christ, I am in communion with your Beatitude, that is, with the chair of Peter; I know that the Church is built upon that rock. Whoever shall have eaten the lamb outside this house is profane: if anyone has not been in the ark of Noah, he will perish when the flood reigns."
I Will Build My Church. — As if to say: Therefore I call you Peter and rock, because just as a house is built upon a rock so that, resting on it, it may be firm and immovable against all the blasts of the winds, so I will build My Church upon you, Peter, as upon a most firm rock, so that resting on you it may stand firm against all the assaults of heretics and the wicked, and that you may hold and sustain it in the true faith and worship of God, just as a rock as a foundation sustains and holds the whole house built upon it. So St. Ambrose, sermon 4: "Peter," he says, "is called rock, because like an unmovable stone he sustains the whole framework and mass of the Christian work."
You will say: The foundation of the Church is all the Apostles, as is clear from Ephesians II, 20 and Apocalypse XXI, 19. Therefore Peter alone is not the rock of the Church. I answer that Peter is the rock and foundation of the whole Church and of all the faithful whatsoever, and therefore of the Apostles themselves: for it belonged to Peter, as the chief and prince, to hold the Apostles together in faith, religion, and office, to direct them, to strengthen them, and, where they erred, to correct them. Hence St. Jerome in book I Against Jovinian: "For this reason," he says, "among the twelve one is chosen, so that, with a head established, occasion for schism might be taken away." And St. Cyprian in the treatise On the Unity of the Church: "Primacy," he says, "is given to Peter, that the one Church of Christ and the one chair may be shown forth."
Note first: Christ here promises Peter, as St. Jerome says, by two metaphors, that the principate of the Church is to be given to him after His own death and resurrection, John XXI, 16, when He said to him: "Feed My sheep." The first metaphor is that of a foundation or foundational rock: for what in a building is the rock and foundation, the same is in a body the head, in a city the ruler, in a kingdom the king, in the Church the Pontiff. The second is that of the keys: for the keys are given only to kings or governors.
Note secondly, to build the Church upon this rock signifies two things: first, that the care and governance of all the Apostles and of the whole Church, next after Christ, rests upon this rational stone, namely upon Peter as the head; so St. Chrysostom, homily 55; St. Ambrose, sermon 47; St. Gregory, book IV, epistle 32; secondly, that the Church leans upon Peter, as the vicar of Christ, and is made firm upon him as upon a foundation, so that it cannot err in faith. Whence to the Roman Pontiffs, the successors of Peter. For Christ in this passage looked forward to the perpetual continuance of His Church in a matter most necessary and of the highest moment, namely the perpetual head, and instituted the best and perpetual regime in it, namely the monarchic, so that by one Roman Pontiff the one Church of Christ might be governed, as St. Cyprian teaches in On the Unity of the Church, St. Jerome in book I Against Jovinian, and others everywhere. The cavils of the innovators, the followers of Calvin, around this passage, our Gretser rightly dilutes and refutes, and after him Adam Contzen, a distinguished scourge of heretics.
And the Gates of Hell Shall Not Prevail Against It. — Diocletian, etc. Therefore by this saying Christ first of all encourages the Church, so that she should not be fainthearted when she sees herself being attacked with all their might by Satan and the wicked; second, He sounds the war-trumpet for her, that she should ever keep watch, armed against so many enemies who pursue her with deadly hatreds; third, He promises to her, as well as to her head Peter, that is, the Pontiff, victory and triumph over all. The reason is that Christ stands by her and fights for her. Again, Christ and the Holy Spirit by a special care stand by her head, the Roman Pontiff, that he may not err in faith but be firm like adamant, as St. Chrysostom says, and that he may rightly administer and rule the Church, and direct her into the way of salvation, just as He directed Noah and the ark, that it should not be overwhelmed by the flood. Wherefore St. Chrysostom, in homily 4 On the Words of Isaiah: "It is easier," he says, "for the sun to be extinguished than for the Church to be obscured." And in volume V, in the oration On Not Despising the Church: "What can be more powerful than the Church of God? Barbarians destroy city walls, but not even the demons can overcome the Church. When she is attacked, she conquers; when she is assailed with stratagems, she prevails." St. Augustine in his Psalm Against the Donatists: "Count," he says, "the priests even from the very seat of Peter. That itself is the rock which the proud gates of hell do not overcome." This was especially clear in the conversion of all nations, and especially of Rome and the Romans. For Rome, the head of the world, as also of idolatry, where the idols of all nations were worshiped, was converted from them by St. Peter and his successors, and subjected its proud head to the cross of Christ — which was the greatest of miracles.
Verse 19: And I Will Give to Thee the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven
19. And I Will Give to Thee the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven. — "To thee," inasmuch as you are one person, namely Bar-Jona, that is, the son of Jonah, as is clear from everything that precedes and follows. Therefore the keys of heaven were not here promised by Christ primarily to Peter in the person of the Church, that is, to the Church itself, as the heretics would have it, but to Peter himself as the head of the Church, and through him to the Church and its ministers; as also they were specifically given and consigned to him by Christ after the Resurrection, when He said: "Feed My sheep," John, the last chapter. So the Greek and Latin Fathers hold everywhere; whose words Bellarmine cites in his book De Pontifice, ch. XII, where he likewise at length shows that St. Augustine meant nothing else, when he says that Peter bore the figure of the Church, namely because Peter represented the Church as a king represents his kingdom; for so St. Augustine himself explains it in his last treatise on John, when he says: "Peter the Apostle bore, in a figurative universality, the person of that Church, on account of the primacy of his apostolate." And on Psalm CVIII: "Whose person (that is, the Church's) he is acknowledged to have borne on account of the primacy which he had among the disciples;" because for the good of the Church Peter, as its head, received the keys from Christ: from which it is also clear that Christ promised the keys to Peter as the future Pontiff, and consequently promised the same to the rest of the Roman Pontiffs.
The Keys. — You will ask, what do the keys here signify? Calvin, in book IV of his Institutes, ch. VI, §3, and his followers reply that they signify the power of announcing both the Gospel and the remission of sins to him who only believes in the Gospel promising that remission. But this is insipid and ridiculous. For by keys doors are opened, not the mouths of preachers. Whence the keys are the emblem of kings and rulers, not of teachers and instructors, nor of preachers. Wherefore keys properly signify the right of ruling, to which belongs not only the power of preaching the Gospel, but also of absolving from sins, commanding, ordaining priests, interpreting holy Scripture, excommunicating, and of performing all other things that pertain to the good government of the Church.
I say therefore that by "keys" here is signified the supreme power both of order and of jurisdiction over the whole Church, here promised to Peter by Christ and given to him in John, the last chapter, verse 16. For this is the purpose for which the keys of cities are given to kings and princes. And Christ explains the keys thus in what follows, saying: "Whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven," etc. For he who has the keys of a house or a city is also the lord of it, so that he may open or shut it at will, and may admit into it whom he wishes, and exclude whom he wishes. It alludes to Isaiah ch. XXII, where God, promising to Eliakim, the Pontiff of the Old Testament, the principate of the Synagogue, says: "And I will lay the key of the house of David upon his shoulder; and he shall open, and none shall shut; and he shall shut, and none shall open." See what I have said there. Moreover, Eliakim was a type of Christ the Pontiff, of whom it is said in Apocalypse XXI, 2: "I saw the holy city Jerusalem new, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband." The sense therefore is, as if to say: I, Christ, O Peter, will give to you as to the Pontiff, and consequently to the other Pontiffs succeeding you, the keys of the kingdom of heaven, that is, the supreme power of governing the whole Church dispersed throughout the world, so that with the keys, that is with your power of opening or closing the Church to men, you may also open or close heaven to the same. Here note that Christ did not say: "I will give thee the keys of the kingdom of the lands," lest this power should be thought earthly and temporal, but "of the kingdom of the heavens," that it might be signified that this power properly and directly extends to spiritual things, which pertain to the kingdom of heaven; but to temporal things only indirectly, insofar, namely, as they are referred to the spiritual as necessary or very useful. Thus St. Chrysostom here, homily 55, teaches that by these keys handed by Christ to Peter, the whole world was committed to Peter's care and governance, and that he was constituted shepherd and head of the whole Church. So too St. Gregory, book IV, epistle 32: "It is clear," he says, "to all who know the Gospel that by the voice of the Lord the care of the whole Church was committed to the holy Peter, the prince of all the Apostles." And he immediately gives the reason: "For to him it is said: I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven." So too St. Hilary here, and St. Leo, sermon 2 in Annivers. Assumpt., and others everywhere. Hear St. Augustine, sermon 28 De Sanctis: "Peter alone among the Apostles merited to hear: Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build My Church. Worthy was he indeed, who among the peoples to be built up in the house of God was to be a stone for the foundation, a column for support, a key for the kingdom."
Hence St. Ambrose, in book XX, epistle 13 to his sister Marcellina, relating the struggle he had with the Arians, who were demanding that the keys of the basilica of Milan, over which Ambrose presided, be handed over to them — and this by the order of Emperor Valentinian the Younger, who was under the influence of his Arian mother Justina: "Command is given," he says, "Hand over the basilica. I reply: It is neither lawful for me to hand it over, nor does it profit you, O Emperor, to receive it. You can by no right violate the house of a private man: do you think the house of God should be taken away? It is alleged that all things are lawful to the Emperor, that all things belong to him. I reply: Do not burden yourself, Emperor, by thinking that you have any imperial right in those things which are divine. Do not exalt yourself, but if you wish to reign longer, be subject to God. It is written: Render to God the things that are God's, and to Caesar the things that are Caesar's: the palaces pertain to the Emperor, the churches to the priest. The right of the public walls has been committed to you, not that of sacred places."
So Hosius, bishop of Cordoba, who presided over the Council of Nicaea, constantly replied to the Arian Emperor Constantius when he demanded the same, that to him were owed the keys of cities, but the keys of the church to the Pontiff alone: "To thee," he said, "God has committed the empire; to us He has entrusted what belongs to the church."
Tropologically: the keys denote the industry, dexterity, and wisdom of ruling, which ought to be in the Pontiff; for a key must be skillfully placed upon the lock, fitted, and turned, that the door may be opened; thus "the art of arts is the government of souls," says St. Gregory in his Pastoral Rule.
And Whatsoever Thou Shalt Bind Upon Earth, It Shall Be Bound Also in the Heavens; and Whatsoever Thou Shalt Loose Upon Earth, It Shall Be Loosed Also in the Heavens. — "Whatsoever," that is, whomsoever; but He says "whatsoever," because the neuter gender is wider and more universal than the masculine. For the Pontiff not only binds and looses men, but also sins, vows, oaths, etc. He passes from the metaphor of keys to the neighboring metaphor of binding and loosing: for to open and shut, to bind and loose, are neighboring ideas. Hence by this metaphor He signifies the same thing as by the keys and by the rock, namely, the supreme power of Peter and of the Pontiffs in the governance of the Church.
The power of binding, therefore, is most ample, and is exercised in various ways by Peter and the Pontiff. First, by not absolving fault and sin, but retaining it, and by refusing sacramental absolution in the Sacrament of Penance to one who is unworthy and indisposed, as also the Eucharist and the other sacraments, John XX, 21; secondly, by imposing penance on the lapsed; thirdly, by binding a guilty man by excommunication and other ecclesiastical censures; fourthly, by binding the faithful with laws and precepts, for example concerning feasts, fasts, tithes, etc.; fifthly, by binding Christians with definitions of faith, when the Pontiff ex cathedra defines and declares what must be believed, and what is to be rejected as erroneous and heretical, which religion is good and which not, which state of life is honorable and lawful and which not, etc. Hence on the contrary it is clear what it is to loose: namely, to absolve and free from the obligations just mentioned.
Christ therefore here explains the power of the keys by a metaphor, not of opening and shutting (which are the two proper functions of keys), but by another more effective one, namely that of bonds — binding men with them, or loosing those already bound: which power Peter received from Christ over all men whatsoever of the whole world, and after him the Roman Pontiff, his successor; who however derives it, as he pleases, to the bishops, pastors, and other ministers of the Church subject to him. And therefore Christ also said to the other Apostles, Matthew XVIII, 18: "Whatsoever you shall bind upon earth shall be bound also in heaven; and whatsoever you shall loose upon earth shall be loosed also in heaven." By which words the same power is given by Christ to the Apostles over the whole world that is given here to Peter; but here it is given specially to Peter alone, so that it may be signified that he is in this power the first and the prince, that he may direct, restrain, correct the other Apostles as it were subject to him and committed to his care, and that he may and should sometimes do so, nay even, if need be, take it away from them and remove it. Hence the Synod of Alexandria, over which St. Athanasius presided, from the judgment of the Council of Nicaea, wrote to Pope Felix: "To the Roman See the power of binding and loosing was granted by the Lord Himself, by a special privilege above others."
Upon Earth. — Note: the power of Peter and of the Pontiff also extends to those who are beneath the earth in hell or purgatory; as when, on account of a crime committed in life, he excommunicates one already departed from life and deprives him of the suffrages of the Church, just as he excommunicates heretics; or when one who has been excommunicated in life he absolves from excommunication after death, as St. Gregory absolved a monk who had died with money, according to John the Deacon in his Life, book II, ch. XLV; likewise when he grants indulgences for the departed, whether he gives them by — he therefore cannot be absolved, unless while living upon earth he has repented and turned himself back. Wherefore in such a case the word "upon" is to be taken strictly, when He says "upon earth." And so in general it is true that the Pontiff cannot bind or absolve one who is under the earth, except him who, while he lived upon earth, merited to be bound or absolved, and made himself worthy of binding or capable of absolution.
Finally, it is more truly said that the Pontiff juridically binds and looses only the living on earth, and not the dead. He therefore grants indulgences to the departed, not by way of juridical absolution (because the departed are no longer His subjects), but "by way of suffrage," as He Himself is accustomed expressly to set forth in His bulls — that is, by paying for them out of the treasury of the Church, of which he is the dispenser, only so much of the penalties as the departed owe to God. For this treasury is upon earth, and is in the hand and power of the Pontiff. So think St. Thomas, Bonaventure, Alensis, Gabriel, Major, Richard, Cajetan, D. Soto, Navarrus and Bellarmine, in his treatise On Indulgences, whom Suarez cites and follows in On Penance, disputation LIII, section II, numbers 4 and following; he also adds that the Pontiff does not properly and directly excommunicate the departed, nor absolve them from excommunication, but only indirectly — because, that is, he directly forbids the living to pray for the departed, or permits them to pray for him. For by this very act he indirectly deprives the departed of the suffrages of the Church, just as if they were excommunicated; or else he grants them these, just as if he absolved them from excommunication. When, therefore, Christ here says to Peter: "Whatsoever thou shalt loose," etc., by loosing is understood not only juridical absolution, but also every dispensation, favor, and grace, by virtue of that power conferred upon him by Christ. And such is this dispensation of the treasury of the Church, which the Pontiff expends and applies to the departed by way of suffrage. This, then, which I have described, is what "upon earth" signifies.
Secondly, however, the phrase "upon earth" can also be referred to the things themselves — namely, to the men to be bound or loosed — so that Christ's words may have their full sense; but in that case "upon earth" comprehends also those who are in the earth, or beneath the earth: for it is opposed to "in heaven," because the Greek ἐπὶ, and the Latin super, and the Hebrew על hal are taken broadly; hence it can here be taken for "in," and so the Syriac translates it "in the earth." For thus the loosing of Peter on earth is directly opposed to the loosing of God in heaven. In like manner the Greeks say ἐπὶ ξένης εἶναι, that is, "to be in a foreign land." Salmeron interprets it differently: The dead, he says, in respect of something of themselves — namely in respect of their reputation and their body — are upon the earth; whence in these things they can be punished by the Pontiff upon earth. But not only the body, but also their soul, which is beneath the earth, can be bound or loosed by the Pontiff, as I have shown a little before. Moreover, Pope Gelasius, in causa XXIV, quaestio II, chapter II Igitur, from these words of Christ proves that he who has died in excommunication cannot be absolved by the Church, that is, by the Pontiff. Hence he seems to take "upon earth" in the strict sense; but he is speaking of the obstinate man, who died in his defiance: for this man, as impenitent, cannot be absolved, because he is incapable of absolution. Such a one
Verse 20: Then He Commanded His Disciples That They Should Tell No One
20. Then He Commanded His Disciples That They Should Tell No One That He Was Jesus the Christ. — Some Greek copies and the Syriac omit the word "Jesus," and then the sentence flows more smoothly. For all knew that He was called Jesus, but they did not know that He was the Messiah, or Christ, the true Son of God. Christ did not wish the Apostles to say this to others and to preach it, both because they themselves were not yet sufficiently instructed and confirmed in this matter — for otherwise Christ Himself openly preached that He was the Christ, the Son of God, as appears in John V and following, and He was slain and lay down as a martyr for the confession of this truth (John XVIII, 37) — and also because Christ was soon to suffer, to be crucified and put to death by the Jews. For this reason the Jews would have been scandalized if the Apostles had preached that He was the Messiah and God, and had said to them: "Be gone with your Christ to an evil cross, you who make us Christ-killers and God-killers" — as the Jews now say to Christians. Accordingly, once the faith of Christ had been cast aside, they would not have been willing to hear it. Therefore the death, resurrection, and glory of Christ had to be awaited, so that they might then preach that He was the Messiah and the Son of God, and might confirm it by miracles, and thus persuade the people of so great a matter — as they did on Pentecost (Acts II), according to the saying: "Wherefore God also hath exalted Him, and hath given Him a name which is above every name, that in the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven, of those on earth, and of those under the earth" (Philippians II, 9). So say St. Chrysostom, Theophylact, and Euthymius. Likewise St. Jerome: "Preach Me then," He says, "when I have suffered these things; for it does no good that Christ be publicly preached and His majesty published among the peoples, when after a little while they will see Him scourged and crucified." St. Chrysostom adds: "For what has once taken root, and afterward been torn up, if it is planted again, will hardly be kept by most; but what has been once fixed in and remained, is afterward easily carried forward unmoved to growth." These matters will become clearer from what follows.
Verse 21: From That Time Forth Began Jesus to Show Unto His Disciples
21. From That Time Forth Began Jesus to Show Unto His Disciples That He Must Go to Jerusalem, and Suffer Many Things of the Elders and Chief Priests and Scribes, and Be Killed, and Be Raised Again the Third Day. — "From that time forth," in Greek ἀπὸ τότε, that is, from that time when He had made known to them His divinity, He began to teach them of His passion and death: both that He might perfectly instruct them in the faith — for there are two principles of the faith, namely the divinity of Christ and the humanity of Christ, and His passion and cross, by which He redeemed the world — and also lest the Apostles, hearing or seeing Christ put to death and die, should doubt His divinity (as Theophylact says); and likewise to show that this was fitting: first, to God the Father, that by Christ's death He might equally satisfy His will and justice, wounded and offended by the sin of Adam and his posterity; secondly, to Christ Himself, whom it befitted to enter into His glory through His passion (Luke XXIV, 26); thirdly, to men, whom it befitted to be redeemed by Christ's death and instructed to imitate and bear His cross.
Verse 22: And Peter Took Him, and Began to Rebuke Him
22. And Peter Took Him, and Began to Rebuke Him. — "Taking Him," that is, apart (as though about to rebuke Him more familiarly and secretly out of vehement love, which he did not dare to do in the presence of others), drawing Christ back. So St. Chrysostom, Euthymius, and St. Jerome, whom hear: "He (Peter), not wishing his own confession to be undone (by which he had said: Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God), nor thinking it possible that the Son of God should be slain, takes Him into his own affection, or leads Him aside, lest in the presence of the other fellow-disciples he seem to reprove his Master; and he began to rebuke Him with the affection of one loving and wishing, saying: Be it far from Thee, Lord; or, as is better in the Greek: Be Thou propitious to Thyself, Lord, this shall not be." "As if," says St. Thomas, "He needed propitiation: whose affection Christ indeed accepts, while He reproves his ignorance."
Be It Far From Thee, Lord, This Shall Not Be Unto Thee, — such an unworthy death shall not befall Thee. For who could bear that the Son of God should be crucified and die? In Greek it is ἵλεώς σοι, that is, "be propitious to Thyself," namely, mayest Thou be, or may God be. Thus the Septuagint is accustomed to translate the Hebrew חלילה לך halilalach, that is, "be it a forbidden thing to Thee," which people commonly used of old to say: "May the gods forbid it, may the gods grant better." The Syriac: "Spare Thyself." Peter speaks out of human prudence and affection, not out of the divine, out of which a little before he had said: "Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God." Here, therefore, left to himself, he falls short, and for this reason is rebuked by Christ.
Verse 23: Get Thee Behind Me, Satan, Thou Art a Scandal Unto Me
23. But He Turned, and Said Unto Peter: Get Thee Behind Me, Satan, Thou Art a Scandal Unto Me (Syriac: thou art a stumbling-block unto Me), Because Thou Savorest Not the Things That Are of God, but Those That Are of Men. — St. Hilary refers the phrase "Get thee behind Me" to Peter; but "Satan, thou art a scandal unto Me" he refers not to Peter, but to the devil, who had suggested to Peter that he should say: "Be it far from Thee, Lord." Hear him: "For the Lord, knowing the prompting of the diabolical art, said to Peter: Get thee behind Me, that is, that he should follow the example of His passion. But turning toward him through whom this opinion was being suggested, He added: Satan, thou art a scandal unto Me: for it is not fitting to suppose that the name of Satan and the reproach of scandal should be assigned to Peter, after those so great proclamations of blessedness and power had been bestowed."
But all the rest join "Satan" with "Get thee behind Me," and consider the whole to be said to Peter. Christ therefore says to Peter: "Get thee behind Me," that is, depart from Me, get away hence, go from My sight; because in this matter thou art not My friend, but a satan, that is, an adversary (for this is what the Hebrew שטן satan means, and so our translator renders it at 2 Samuel XIX, 22 and 1 Kings V, 4), and thou art a "scandal," that is, a stumbling-block and hindrance unto Me. For thou wishest to hinder My passion, and consequently the redemption and salvation of men, which I am about to merit and procure by My passion. So say St. Chrysostom, Euthymius, and St. Jerome, whom hear: "It is of My will and of the Father's that I should die for the salvation of men: thou, considering only thine own will, dost not wish the grain of wheat to fall into the earth, that it may bring forth much fruit." "And therefore," says D. Thomas, "because thou art contrary to My will, thou oughtest to be called adversary: for Satanas is interpreted adversary or contrary; yet Satan and Peter are not, as most suppose, condemned by the same sentence. For to Peter it is said: Get thee behind Me, Satan, that is, follow Me, who art contrary to My will. The other hears: Get thee gone, Satan, and it is not said to him 'behind,' so that it may be understood: Go into eternal fire."
Calvin and his followers object: Christ here calls Peter a satan; therefore a little before He did not call him the rock, nor appoint him head of the Church. St. Jerome answers first that Peter is called a satan, that is, an adversary, for the present time, in which he was opposing Christ who willed to suffer and be crucified; but that he is appointed the rock for a time not of the present but of the future, namely, that after the death and resurrection of Christ he should become the rock and head of the Church. Secondly, St. Augustine, in sermon 13 On the Words of the Lord according to Matthew, and Theophylact reply that Peter is called blessed and constituted the rock of the Church, inasmuch as, enlightened by God's revelation, he had confessed Christ, the Son of the living God, and on that account was by Him constituted the rock of the Church; but is here called a satan, inasmuch as, departing from God and God's decree (of which he was ignorant), he was following a human affection by which he did not wish Christ, so loved by him, to die. Moreover, the Fifth Ecumenical Council of Constantinople, in the Constitut. Vigilii Papae, pronounces anathema upon those who will have Christ's saying "Get thee behind Me, Satan" to have been said to Peter lest by his dissuasion the mind of Christ, being disturbed, should flee the passion — because these people do not believe that by His passion He profited us, and therefore do not believe that His death conferred on us the rewards of eternal life. In a similar manner, Blessed Peter Damian, in book I, epistle 16 to Pope Alexander II, calls Cardinal Hildebrand — who was afterward created Pope Gregory the Seventh — "his holy satan": a satan, because he was opposing him, so that he should not renounce his cardinalate and return to his Camaldolese hermitage; but holy, because he was doing this with a holy end, namely, because he saw that Peter's [Damian's] labor would be most useful to the Church.
Because Thou Savorest Not (Arabic, thou thinkest not) the Things That Are of God, but Those That Are of Men. — Here is the fount and cause of the error of Peter and of the rest of mankind, "because thou savorest not." In Greek οὐ φρονεῖς, that is, thou dost not grasp, dost not savor, dost not approve either with thy intellect or with thy affection, the things that are pleasing to God, but those which human prudence — that is, flesh and blood — suggests to men. For thou wishest to take thought for My flesh and for My life, and thence for thy own human consolation, against the decree of God, by which He most wisely decreed that I must die for the salvation of mankind. Thus men sin, when they prefer the slight judgment of the flesh to the lofty and most wise judgment of God. For "the animal man perceiveth not the things that are of the Spirit of God; for it is foolishness unto him, and he cannot understand," 1 Corinthians II, 14.
Verse 24: If Any Man Will Come After Me, Let Him Deny Himself
24. Then Said Jesus Unto His Disciples: If Any Man Will Come After Me, Let Him Deny Himself, and Take Up His Cross, and Follow Me. — This medicine of self-denial and the cross Christ sets against the private and natural love which Peter had shown toward Christ in verse 22, wishing to hinder His passion. Therefore He proclaimed it not to Peter alone, but to the other Apostles whom He had called together, and even to the crowds (as Mark says, chapter VIII, 34); and He established it as an axiom of the Christian school, saying: "If any man will come," etc. — as if to say, in Chrysostom's words, "Thou, O Peter, sayest to Me: Be propitious to Thyself (spare Thine own life); but I say to thee, that not only is it harmful to thee to hinder Me from the passion, but thou canst not even be saved, unless thou suffer and die, and always renounce thy life." For Christ wishes to confirm what He had said — that He must die, by God's decree, for the salvation of mankind — and further, that this death and this cross must be imitated by every faithful soul that would be held as His follower and disciple. And He enjoins three things, says Chrysostom: the first is, "let him deny himself"; the second, "let him take up his cross"; the third, "let him follow Me."
If Any Man Will Come After Me. — Christ does not compel, nor does He use force, says Chrysostom, but He invites the willing, and thereby the more gently and the more vehemently draws and entices them. For who would not eagerly and ardently desire to follow Christ the Son of God? But as God commands all men to follow Christ, so likewise He commands that they should freely choose and embrace the self-denial which He here enjoins. Again Christ draws all, saying: "Come after Me"; as if to say: You shall not be the first upon the cross, in death, and in martyrdom. I Myself will go before you as your leader; wherefore follow Me only as I go before, because I will go ahead of you not only by example but also by help, and will make you sure of triumph and crown, if only you will follow Me and cooperate vigorously with My grace. So Cato, going before his soldiers through the sands of Libya, used to say: "Try out your perils by mine first"; for I will command nothing but what I have myself first done; I will enjoin nothing but for which I will be your own leader and guide. A great spur to the soldier is the example of the leader going before.
Let Him Deny Himself, — that is, let him put away from himself his own judgment and human affection: for that which lives in a man is what is dearest to him, in which he delights and is fed, so that it is reckoned to be the very man himself. For a man is that which flourishes and lives in him. He commands therefore that everyone lay aside, mortify, and cut off his natural and sensual affections and loves which are contrary to the law and will of God, and take on, put on, and in all things follow the law and will of God. See what was said at chapter X, 38 and 39. For Christ says this on the occasion of Peter, who, through his natural affection for Christ, wished to hinder His death; so that He may chastise him in this and all other men, as if to say: If thou wilt come after Me and follow Me, O Peter, deny and renounce this thy human judgment and affection concerning Me, that thou mayest follow and embrace the decree and will of God, who wills that I should suffer and die. Do the same in all thy other judgments, desires, and affections, and especially in the death of the cross which God has decreed for thee, that thou mayest embrace it, although nature and sensual affection flee from it and shrink in horror — according to the saying: "When thou wast younger, thou didst gird thyself, and walk where thou wouldst; but when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands (on the cross), and another shall gird thee, and lead thee whither thou wouldst not," John XXI, 18. Whence Origen expounds "let him deny himself" as if to say: Let him deny his own life, by taking up death for Me and My faith, as I take up the death of the cross for God. In like manner let every faithful one "deny himself," that is, his own desires, his imaginations, the itchings of his concupiscence, his human reasonings, his own will, and let him turn and conform it in all things to the will of God: for example, sight, hearing, taste suggest to thee that thou shouldst see, hear, and taste curious things, slanders, and delicacies, so that thou mayest fill and inebriate thyself with them; deny them these their desires, forbidden by God, and say to them: I do not wish to see, hear, or taste these things, because I wish to follow the law of God and to please God, and not to satisfy my senses and carnal appetites. Thus a wise mother (for concupiscence is like a child, who is led by sense and not by reason, as Aristotle says in the Ethics) refuses her child harmful things when he asks for them — for instance, a knife, which, because he cannot hold it with his weak hand, he will wound himself with.
St. Gregory notes, in homily 32 on the Gospels, that Christ does not say: Let him deny his own wealth, but "let him deny himself," so that a man may depart from himself and become alien to himself — indeed, may cease to be what he was, and begin to be what he was not, and may become, as it were, a new and different man: "For it is a lesser thing," says St. Gregory, "to renounce what one has, but it is a very great thing to renounce what one is; that is, it is not enough to leave our own things unless we leave also ourselves." Gregory then objects to himself: "Whither shall we go outside ourselves?" and answers: "We are one thing as fallen through sin, another as created by nature; one thing what we have made ourselves, another what we have been made. Let us leave ourselves such as we have made ourselves by sinning; and let us remain ourselves such as we have been made by grace. For behold, whoever was proud, if converted to Christ he has become humble, has left himself. If any lustful man has changed his life to continence, he has indeed denied what he was. If any greedy man has ceased to be ambitious and has learned to give away his own things, who before was snatching at what belonged to others, he has without doubt left himself. He indeed is himself by nature, but he is not himself by malice." He illustrates the same by the example of Paul: "Let us consider," he says, "how Paul had denied himself, who said: I live, now not I; for that savage persecutor was extinguished, and a devout preacher had begun to live. But Christ liveth in me. As if he were openly to say: I indeed am extinguished from myself, because I live not carnally; yet I am not essentially dead, because I live spiritually in Christ. Let truth therefore say, let it say: If any man will come after Me, let him deny himself; for unless one depart from himself, he does not draw near to Him who is above him; nor is he able to lay hold on what is beyond himself, if he knows not how to slay what he is."
St. Chrysostom illustrates the same thing by a similitude, in homily 56: "If thou understand," he says, "what it means to deny another, then thou wilt rightly perceive what it means to deny oneself. He who has denied another, if he should see him beaten with rods, or bound with chains, or perceive him suffering any other evil, does not run to help, is not moved, does not bend, nor is stirred in any way at all, as one who is utterly estranged from him. Thus therefore He wishes us in no way to spare our own body, so that neither if it is beaten, nor if it is struck, nor if it is burned, nor if it suffers anything else of the kind, should we spare it." Victor of Antioch adds, on chapter VIII of Mark: "He did not say: Let him not indulge too much, or let him not spare his flesh too much, but rising up more vehemently: Let him deny or forswear himself — that is, let him have no dealing with himself or with his own flesh, but let him so bear himself as if not he, but some other, were bearing the cross."
Here note the word "forswear": for just as in baptism we renounce Satan and as it were forswear him, so we ought clearly to deny and as it were forswear ourselves, that is, our desires; for these are greater enemies to us and to our salvation than the demons themselves are. For we of ourselves shudder at a demon, but our desires deceive us by their flatteries, and we congratulate and flatter them as though they were our friends. For there is greater danger from the hidden traitor than from the open. Moreover, Christ speaks and commands self-denial not only to Apostles, religious, clerics, and priests, but to every faithful soul, that he should deny himself — that is, his sensual and excessive love for his own flesh, his honor, his wife, his children, his kinsmen, etc. — and subject it to the love, law, and will of God.
But religious ought further to deny all secular affairs, their own will, dominion and property, and all else that is opposed to their vows, to their religious profession, and to the perfection of life, so that they may conform themselves not only to Christ's law but also to His evangelical counsels. This denial ought to extend to life itself and to death, even the most ignominious death of the cross, says St. Chrysostom, so that we should rather undergo it than depart even a single point from the will of God; whence He adds: "And let him take up his cross." Wherefore St. Basil, in the Regulis fusius explicatis at interrogation VI, defines self-denial thus: "Self-denial is nothing else but the utter forgetfulness of all the things of the former life (spent in vices), and a withdrawal from one's own wills," and an approach to the will of God. The same saint, at interrogation VIII: "Perfect renunciation," he says, "consists in this, that one has so advanced that he is not in the least attached to his own life, even though he bears the sentence of death." And lower down: "Renunciation is nothing else but the loosing of the bonds of this earthly and temporal way of life, which, while it withdraws us from the anxious affairs that attend human life, makes us more ready and more fit for a gentle life directed to the contemplation of God." In the Lives of the Fathers, book V, little book I On the Progress of the Fathers, number 7, abbot John gives these documents of self-denial and of a holy life: "Be enduring of injury, and not wrathful; peaceable, and not rendering evil for evil; not attending to the vices of others, nor exalting thyself, but being subject and more humble than every creature; renouncing every bodily thing and whatever is according to the flesh — in torment, in struggle, in humility of spirit, in fasting, in patience, in weeping, in hunger and thirst, in cold and nakedness, in labors, enclosing himself in the sepulchre as one already dead, so that death may seem to thee close at hand every day." Saint Giles, the companion of St. Francis, a man exceedingly holy and enlightened by God, used to give these paradoxes of the denial of the senses:
"If thou wouldst see well, pluck out thy eyes, and be blind. If thou wouldst hear well, be deaf. If thou wouldst speak well, be mute. If thou wouldst walk well, cut off thy feet. If thou wouldst work well, mutilate thy hands. If thou wouldst love well, hold thyself in hatred. If thou wouldst live this life, mortify thyself. If thou wouldst gain well, learn to lose. If thou wouldst be rich, be poor. If thou wouldst be in delights, afflict thyself. If thou wouldst be secure, always be in fear. If thou wouldst be exalted, humble thyself. If thou wouldst be honored, despise thyself, and honor those who despise thee. If thou wouldst have the good, endure the evil. If thou wouldst be in quiet, labor. If thou wouldst be blessed, desire to be cursed. O how great a wisdom it is to know how to do these things! and because they are great, they are not given to all. No one ought to hear or speak anything, except to the profit of another, nor to go on in any way further."
The same Giles used to give this way of salvation and perfection through self-denial: "If thou wouldst be saved, seek no account from any human creature concerning the things that happen to thee. If thou wouldst be saved, labor to separate thyself from every consolation and honor which any creature can give thee. Woe to those who wish to be honored for their malice. If anyone contends with thee, if thou wouldst conquer, lose; otherwise, when thou shalt believe thou hast conquered, thou hast lost."
And soon he adds these as an antistrophe: "If thou love, thou shalt be loved. If thou fear, thou shalt be feared. If thou serve, thou shalt be served. If thou bear thyself well toward others, others will bear themselves well toward thee. Blessed is he who loves, and does not desire to be loved in return. Blessed is he who serves, and does not desire to be served. And because these things are great, fools do not attain to them. Three things above all ought to cling to thy mind: the first is, that thou mayest willingly endure every tribulation which befalls; the second, that of all thou doest and receivest thou mayest be more humbled; the third is, that thou mayest faithfully love those goods which cannot be seen with bodily eyes." So it is in the Seraphic Evangelical History, book I, page 63. See more in Climacus, Dorotheus, and Cassian, who among other places in book V On the Institutes of Renunciants, chapter 28, relates that a certain abbot, when about to die, left this example and document of perfect self-denial to his disciples: "Never," he said, "did I do my own will, nor did I teach anyone anything that I had not first done myself."
And Let Him Take Up His Cross. — Just as I have borne Mine — so that Me, Christ, as the first cross-bearer and the leader and captain of cross-bearers, who with sorrow and groaning bore on My own shoulders My cross, upon which I was to be crucified, unto Mount Calvary — let the Christian cross-bearer himself earnestly and eagerly follow continually, even unto the death of the cross, and from thence unto the glory of paradise. Whence Luke adds "daily," to signify that every day and often every hour something troublesome will befall each one, which must be patiently and bravely endured, and that continually through one's whole life; and accordingly that each must live on a cross and die on a cross with Christ. "He takes up his cross," says St. Jerome, "who is crucified to the world; and he to whom the world is crucified, follows the crucified Lord." This cross is, first, persecution and martyrdom; second, any affliction and tribulation inflicted by God; third, temptation sent by the devil and permitted by God for our proving, humility, virtue, and for increasing our crown; fourth, self-denial and mortification of desires. So St. Jerome.
His Own, — that is, first, his own proper cross; for to each person his own cross is proper: to one from wife, children, and kinsmen; to another from morals; to a third from rivals; to a fourth from misfortunes; to a fifth from poverty; to a sixth from exile, imprisonment, and chains, and so on.
Secondly, "his own," that is, proportioned to his own strength, and equally to his desires: for God "does not suffer you to be tempted above that you are able," says Paul, 1 Corinthians X, 13; but to each, according to the vice with which he labors, He sends or permits a cross as a medicine. Thus to one who is inclined to pride, or who excels in some matter, He allows some humiliation or temptation of the flesh that may humble him, as He permitted in St. Paul, 2 Corinthians XII, 7; to the greedy man He sends loss of wares and wealth; to the handsome and vigorous, He sends sickness; to the learned, He permits a fall into some error or into infamy, so that he may not be puffed up and presume upon himself.
Thirdly, "his own," that is, decreed for him by God from eternity for his own good. When therefore thou feelest a cross, and often a new one, think of God and resign it to Him, and say: Lord, this cross I willingly accept from Thy fatherly hand: for this cross has been appointed to me from eternity, and decreed by Thee to scour off the rust of my vices, wherefore I give Thee boundless thanks for it. For I know and believe that it was laid upon me by Thee out of paternal love, that Thou mightest conform me here in patience, and afterwards in glory, to Thy beloved Son, Christ crucified. For: "Those whom He foreknew and predestinated to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren," etc. Romans VIII, 29.
Fourthly, "his own," that is, the cross which each person has in himself through suffering, or which he imposes upon himself through self-denial, or which he has made his own through compassion. For, as St. Gregory says in homily 32 on the Gospels: "The cross is taken up in two ways, either when by abstinence the body is afflicted, or, by compassion for one's neighbor, the mind is distressed. Let us consider in what manner Paul bore his cross in both ways, who said: I chastise my body and bring it into subjection, lest perhaps when preaching to others I myself should be rejected. Behold, in the affliction of the body we have heard of the cross of the flesh: let us now hear in compassion for our neighbor the cross of the mind; for he says: Who is weak, and I am not weak? Who is scandalized, and I do not burn? For the perfect preacher, that he might give an example of abstinence, bore the cross in his body. And because he drew into himself the sufferings of another's weakness, he bore the cross in his heart."
And Let Him Follow Me, — through the cross unto death, and through death unto blessed immortality. For we must persevere on the cross with Christ for our whole life, even unto death and crown: "For he that shall persevere unto the end, he shall be saved." Hear St. Chrysostom in homily 56 on chapter XVI of Matthew: "Robbers," he says, "suffer many such things. Therefore do not believe that the nature of the suffering itself is sufficient in itself: He added the cause. What is that? That thou mayest follow Him, doing and suffering all the things that have been said, so that for His sake thou mayest endure all things and have every sum of virtue. For he follows Christ who not only shows fortitude in dangers, but embraces modesty, humility, and every kind of loftier philosophy. For this is rightly to follow the Lord: that for His sake thou mayest endure all things and not neglect the other virtues. Many who follow the devil suffer many things and lose their life for his sake — which let us lose for Christ's sake, or rather for our own sake."
Verse 25: Whosoever Will Save His Life Shall Lose It
25. For Whosoever Will Save His Life Shall Lose It; but Whosoever Shall Lose His Life for My Sake Shall Find It. — Because the cross is bitter and tormenting, Christ here encourages the faithful to take it up, says Chrysostom, by promising an immense reward and crown of glory; as if it were said to a farmer, says St. Gregory in homily 32: "If thou keepest thy wheat, thou losest it; if thou sowest it, thou dost renew it. For who does not know that wheat, when it is cast as seed, perishes from sight and fails in the earth? But whence it rots in the dust, thence it greens again in renewal."
Origen expounds this sentence in two ways. First, thus — as if to say: "If anyone," he says, "being a lover of the present life, spares his own soul, fearing to die and thinking that his soul will perish through this death, then he who wishes thus to save his soul shall lose it, making it an alien from eternal life. But if anyone, despising the present life, shall contend even unto death for the truth, he indeed will lose his soul as far as the present life is concerned; but because he will lose it for Christ's sake, he will the more surely save it unto eternal life." In another way thus: "If anyone understands what is true salvation, and wishes to acquire it for the salvation of his soul, such a one, denying himself, loses his soul as far as carnal pleasures are concerned, for Christ's sake; and sparing his soul in this way, he saves it by works of piety. For by saying 'whosoever will,' He shows that the preceding and following sentences have one meaning; if, therefore, what He said above — 'let him deny himself' — was said of bodily death, then consequently this too must be understood to be said of death alone; but if to deny oneself is to reject the carnal manner of life, then to lose the soul is to lay aside carnal pleasures." So far Origen.
The former exposition seems the more genuine, but should be broadened in this way, as if to say: He who in this life, fleeing the cross and the denial of himself, wishes to save his own soul, that is, his own life, and so denies Me and My faith in persecution; or wishes to save his own soul, that is, the desires of his own soul — as if to say: He who wishes to satisfy his own desires — this man in the future life shall lose his soul in hell. But he who shall lose his soul in this life for Christ's sake, either by dying in persecution for Him, or by denying his desires out of love of Him, shall in the future life find that soul — which he lost by dying or by mortifying — safe in eternal glory and in the bosom of Christ, who will raise up and glorify the soul exposed to death for Him. This sense is demanded by the antithesis between losing and saving — or finding, namely, whole and safe; likewise by what follows: "For what doth it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his soul?" — that is, lose his soul in hell.
Verse 26: What Doth It Profit a Man, If He Gain the Whole World?
26. For What Doth It Profit a Man, If He Gain the Whole World, and Suffer the Loss of His Own Soul (that is, of himself, as Luke IX, 25 explains)? — In Greek ζημιωθῇ, that is, "suffer loss," "be fined". As if to say: What shall it avail thee (for this is the meaning of the Greek ὠφελεῖ) to have gained all the wealth, honors, and delights of the whole world, if for this cause thou losest thyself, and thy soul, which thou hast as one and innermost, is condemned to the eternal torments of hell? According to the saying:
Omnia si perdas, animam servare memento. (If thou lose all things, remember to save thy soul.)
For wealth, honors, and lost delights thou canst recover; but a soul once lost thou canst never recover unto eternity. Those things are extrinsic, and they tickle only the outer senses; this soul is intrinsic and inmost to thee, whence its sorrow or joy is likewise intrinsic to thee, highest and deepest; those things are temporal and perishable, this is immortal and eternal. O foolish sons of Adam, then, why do you so love these perishing things that for their sake you lose your soul and are handed over to the eternal fires of hell? O senseless ones, who for a drop of pleasure or honor buy everlasting sorrows and the perpetual reproach of hell! Surely at far too cheap and paltry a price you buy them, for which you will in the end repent unto eternity. I do not buy repentance at so great a price.
Or What Shall a Man Give in Exchange for His Soul? — In Greek ἀντάλλαγμα, that is, ransom, exchange, price, redemption. Whence the Syriac renders it, the exchange of his soul, as if to say: Your soul surpasses every price, every compensation, for it has been bought and redeemed with the precious blood of Christ the Lord our God; wherefore the entire universe is not a sufficient price for the soul of a single man, says Euthymius on Psalm 48. Therefore, if once you have lost it and handed it over to hell, you will be able to redeem it at no price, nor will you be able to redeem your soul with another soul, because you have only one, and though you had many, for their sake hell would not release your soul which it already holds in its hand. Here one can redeem the soul's falls through penitence, tears, and good works; but on the day of judgment there will no longer be any place for penitence and redemption. See therefore the fraud of Satan and the folly of man, who buys from him the soul of a sinner for the cheapest and briefest pleasure of gluttony, luxury, etc. "He offers an apple, and snatches away paradise," says St. Bernard, in his treatise On the Degrees of Humility, in the chapter On Curiosity. Luke 9:26 adds: "For whoever shall be ashamed of Me (as the Jews and many of the Gentiles are ashamed of Christ and His law as cheap and poor) and of My words, of him shall the Son of Man be ashamed, when He shall come in His majesty, and of His Father, and of the holy angels;" instead of which Matthew has what follows.
Verse 27: The Son of Man Shall Come in the Glory of His Father
27. For the Son of Man Shall Come in the Glory of His Father With His Angels, and Then Shall He Render to Every Man According to His Works. — The Arabic has, according to his working, that is, according to what he has done, not according to what he knew, understood, or believed.
He Shall Come (on the day of judgment, to judge men from their works) in the Glory (that is, with the glory and majesty, as Luke has it) of the Father, — partly that created glory, which namely as man He received from the Father infused into His body and soul, or outwardly shall receive on the day of judgment poured forth in the company of all the Angels; partly that glory which as God He has in common with the Father, His essence and deity, and which He shall then show Himself to possess before the whole world. Thus St. Chrysostom and Euthymius. This is a sharp spur to heroic works of self-denial, the cross, and virtue, to which Christ urged all in verse 24, as if to say: Come, O Apostles, O My faithful, deny yourselves, take up your cross, and follow Me, because for these your arduous and heroic works on the day of judgment before the whole world I will praise you, and will share with you My happiness and the glory of the heavenly kingdom; but those who shall have fled from self-denial, the cross, and following Me, and shall have followed their own pleasures and concupiscences, I will rebuke and condemn to hell, and that forever. One of these two lots must be chosen by you: for one or the other infallibly awaits you. Therefore St. Jerome, in Epistle 1 to Heliodorus, thus invites him to the solitary life and its cross: "Do you fear poverty? But He calls the poor blessed. Are you frightened by labor? Yet no athlete is crowned without sweat. Do you think about food? But faith fears no famine. Do you fear to bruise on the bare ground limbs wasted by fasts? But the Lord lies with you. Does the unkempt hair of a squalid body horrify you? But your head is Christ. Does the infinite vastness of the desert terrify you? But walk paradise in your mind." And after some intervening words: "You are delicate, brother, if you wish both here to rejoice with the world, and afterwards to reign with Christ. That day shall come, shall come, when this corruptible shall put on incorruption, and mortality immortality. Blessed is the servant whom the Lord shall find watching. Then at the voice of the trumpet the earth shall tremble together with its peoples, and you shall rejoice. When the Lord comes to judge, the world shall groan mournfully: tribe shall beat their breasts at tribe; once most powerful kings shall quiver with naked sides; then shall truly fiery Jupiter be displayed with his offspring; and foolish Plato shall be led forth with his disciples; the arguments of Aristotle shall not avail; then you, rustic and poor, shall exult and shall laugh, and shall say: Behold the crucified, my God; behold the judge, who wrapped in swaddling clothes wailed in the manger, etc., that it may befall you then to share in those things for which now labor is harsh." Thus far St. Jerome, pathetically but truly.
Verse 28: There Are Some Standing Here Who Shall Not Taste Death
28. Verily I Say to You, There Are Some Standing Here Who Shall Not Taste Death, Till They See the Son of Man Coming in His Kingdom. — The Syriac has, into His kingdom. For often these two are confused in Scripture, and they signify the same thing. Christ promised a reward to be given in the heavenly kingdom for good works of self-denial and the cross: now lest anyone object that it is far off and to be deferred for many ages, He meets the objection and demonstrates in fact that it is near, when while some were still living, after a few days, He showed it very thing in the Transfiguration.
They Shall Not Taste Death, — that is, they shall not die. It is a metaphor from the death-dealing cup which is given to one condemned to death, that he may die by poison: for it is not drunk with pleasure, but bitterly tasted as bitter and full of gall.
In His Kingdom. — You will ask, what is this kingdom of Christ, and when shall some of the Apostles standing by Christ have seen it? St. Gregory, in Homily 32 on the Gospels, and Bede respond first that this kingdom of Christ is the Church and her propagation throughout all nations, which the Apostles indeed saw, indeed effected. Christ says this, says St. Gregory, so that from the propagation of the kingdom of the Church, which they were to see, they might learn how great would be their glory in the heavenly kingdom, which in this life is invisible; for otherwise men esteem only the visible things, they do not desire the invisible, because they do not even suspect them to exist. God therefore, through the visible things which He displays, confirms the hope of the invisible things promised. Secondly, others think that this will happen at the resurrection and day of judgment, about which Christ spoke in the preceding verse. But I say that this happened in the Transfiguration of Christ: for in that event the three Apostles, namely Peter, James, and John, saw as through a lattice the glorious kingdom of Christ, and had a foretaste of it. And that this is so is plain from what follows: for all the Evangelists who mention this matter, namely Matthew, Mark, and Luke, immediately after this promise of Christ, add that it was fulfilled, namely on the sixth day after. So say St. Hilary, St. Chrysostom, St. Jerome, St. Ambrose, Theophylact, Euthymius, and others commonly. Whence St. Leo, in his sermon On the Transfiguration, says: "In the kingdom, that is, in royal splendor." For in the Transfiguration Christ gave the Apostles a specimen of the glory, brightness, magnificence, joy, and happiness which the Saints shall obtain in the heavenly kingdom, so that through it they might be animated to evangelical labors and sufferings, to the cross and martyrdom, and might animate others to the same. Thus through it St. Jerome in like manner animates Eustochium, in Epistle 18 On the Custody of Virginity, at the end: "Come forth," he says, "for a little while from your prison, and paint before the eyes of your present labor the reward which eye has not seen, nor ear heard, nor has it entered into the heart of man. What a day will that be, when Mary, mother of the Lord, shall run to meet you, accompanied by choirs of virgins! When after the Red Sea, with Pharaoh and his army drowned, holding her timbrel, she shall lead those about to respond: Let us sing to the Lord, for He is gloriously honored: horse and rider He has cast into the sea. Then Thecla shall fly joyfully into your embraces, then even the Bridegroom Himself shall come forth and say: Arise, come, My near one, My beautiful one; for behold, the winter is past, the rain has gone away from you. Then the Angels shall wonder and say: Who is this that looks forth as the dawn, beautiful as the moon, chosen as the sun." And after some intervening words: "Then the little ones, etc., lifting up palms of victory, shall sing with one voice: Hosanna in the highest. Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord. Hosanna in the highest. Then one hundred forty-four thousand in sight of the throne and in sight of the elders shall hold harps, and shall sing a new song."