Matthew 12

Matthew 12:1

Augustine of Hippo ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (De Op. Monach. 23.) The Jews rather charged the Lord’s disciples with the breach of the sabbath than with theft; because it was commanded the people of Israel in the Law (Deut. 23:25.), that they should not lay hold of any as a thief in their fields, unless he sought to carry ought away with him; but if any touched only what he needed to eat, him they suffered to depart with impunity free. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Augustine of Hippo ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (cont. Faust. xvi. 28.) He did not forbid His disciples to pluck the ears of corn on the sabbath, that so He might convict both the Jews who then were, and the Manichæans who were to come, who will not pluck up a herb lest they should be committing a murder. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Augustine of Hippo ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (De Cons. Ev. ii. 34.) This which here follows is related both by Mark and Luke, without any question of discrepancy; indeed they do not say, At that time, so that Matthew has here perhaps preserved the order of time, they that of their recollection; unless we take the words in a wider sense, At that time, that is, the time in which these many and divers things were done, whence we may conceive that all these things happened after the death of John. For he is believed to have been beheaded a little after he sent his disciples to Christ. So that when he says at that time, he may mean only an indefinite time. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Augustine of Hippo ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (Quæst. Ev. i. 2.) But no man passes into the body of Christ, until he has been stripped of his fleshly raiment; according to that of the Apostle, Put ye off the old man. (Eph. 4:22.) — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Glossa Ordinaria ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (ord.) Having related the preaching together with the miracles of one year before John’s enquiry, He passes to those of another year, namely after the death of John, when Jesus is already in all things spoken against, and hence it is said, At that time Jesus passed through the corn fields on the sabbath day. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Hilary of Poitiers ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): Figuratively; First consider that this discourse was held at that time, namely, when He had given thanks to the Father for giving salvation to the Gentiles. The field is the world, the sabbath is rest, the corn the ripening of them that believe for the harvest; thus His passing through the corn field on the sabbath, is the coming of the Lord into the world in the rest of the Law; the hunger of the disciples is their desire for the salvation of men.

The Pharisees, who thought that the key of the kingdom of heaven was in their hands, accused the disciples of doing what was not lawful to do; whereon the Lord reminded them of deeds in which, under the guise of facts, a prophecy was concealed; and that He might show the power of all things, He further added, that it contained the form of that work which was to be, Had ye known what that meaneth, I will have mercy; for the work of our salvation is not in the sacrifice of the Law, but in mercy; and the Law having ceased, we are saved by the mercy of God. Which gift if they had understood they would not have condemned the innocent, that is His Apostles, whom in their jealousy they were to accuse of having transgressed the Law, where the old sacrifices having ceased, the new dispensation of mercy came through them to the aid of all. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Hilary of Poitiers: We must first point out the beginning of this passage: “At that time Jesus went through the standing grain.” This is set at the time he gave thanks to God the Father for having given salvation to the people. The same meaning is given to what went before (his thanksgiving) and what came after (his walking in the fields). Note the relationships. Spiritually viewed, the land is the world, the sabbath is the day of rest, and the crop is the effect of future believers upon the harvest. Therefore, having gone out to a field on the sabbath, the day of rest under God’s law, he proceeded into this world, to visiting the crop, the sown field of the human race. And since hunger is the craving for human salvation, the disciples hasten to pluck off the ears of corn, namely, the holy people, to get their fill of salvation. But the grain is not yet ready for human consumption. Rather, the crop upholds faith in the events to come. The added power of words completes the sacrament that implies both hunger and fullness. — Commentary on Matthew 12.2

Jerome ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): As we read in another Evangelist, they had no opportunity of taking food because of the thronging of the multitude, and therefore they hungred as men. That they rub the ears of corn in their hands, and with them satisfy themselves, is a proof of an austere life, and of men who needed not prepared meats, but sought only simple food.

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

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

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

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

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

Jerome: (Chapter 12, Verse 1) At that time, Jesus went through the grainfields on the Sabbath; and His disciples were hungry, and began to pluck heads of grain and to eat. In another Gospel, we also read that because of their great need, they did not even have a place to eat, and therefore they were hungry like men (Mark 2 and Luke 6). The fact that they rubbed the heads of grain with their hands and found solace in hunger is an indication of a more austere life; they sought simple food, not prepared feasts. — Commentary on Matthew

John Chrysostom ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (Hon. xxxix.) Why then did He lead them through the corn fields on the sabbath, seeing He knew all things, unless He desired to break the sabbath? This he desired indeed, but not absolutely, therefore He broke it not without cause, but furnished a sufficient reason; so that He both caused the Law to cease, and yet offended not against it. Thus in order to soften the Jews, He here introduces a natural necessity; this is what is said, And his disciples being an hungred, began to pluck the ears of corn, and to eat. Although in things which are manifestly sinful, there can be no excuse, he who kills another cannot plead rage, nor he who commits adultery, lust, or any other cause; yet here saying that the disciples were hungry, He delivers them from all accusation.

Here admire the disciples, who are so limited in their desires, that they have no care of the things of the body, but despise the support of the flesh; they are assailed by hunger, and yet they go not away from Christ; for had not they been hard pressed by hunger, they would not have done thus. What the Pharisees said to this is added, The Pharisees seeing it said unto Him, Behold, thy disciples do what is not lawful to do on the sabbath.

To clear His disciples, He brings forward the instance of David, whose glory as a Prophet was great among the Jews. Yet they could not here answer that this was lawful for him, because he was a Prophet; for it was not Prophets, but Priests only who might eat. And the greater was he who did this, the greater is the defence of the disciples; yet though David was a Prophet, they that were with him were not.

But some one will say, How is this instance applicable to the question in hand? For David did not transgress the sabbath. Herein is shown the wisdom of Christ, that He brings forward an instance stronger than the sabbath. For it is by no means the same thing to violate the sabbath, and to touch that sacred table, which is lawful for none. And again, He adds yet another answer, saying, Or have ye not read in the Law, that on the sabbath days the Priests in the temple profane the sabbath, and are blameless?

But that you should not say to me, that to find an instance of another’s sin is not to excuse our own—indeed where the thing done and not the doer of it is accused, we excuse the thing done. But this is not enough, He said what is yet more, that they are blameless. But see how great things He brings in; first, the place, in the Temple; secondly, the time, on the sabbath; the setting aside the Law, in the word profane, not merely break; and that they are not only free from punishment but from blame; and are blameless. And this second instance is not like the first which He gave respecting David; for that was done but once, by David who was not a Priest, and was a case of necessity; but this second is done every sabbath, and by the Priests, and according to the Law. So that not only by indulgence, as the first case would establish, but by the strict law the disciples are to be held blameless. But are the disciples Priests? yea, they are yet greater than Priests, forasmuch as He was there who is the Lord of the Temple, who is the reality and not the type; and therefore it is added, But I say unto you, one greater than the Temple is here.

And because what He had said seemed hard to those that heard it, He again exhorts to mercy, introducing His discourse with emphasis, saying, But had ye known what that meaneth, I will have mercy and not sacrifice, ye would never have condemned the innocent.

Observe again how in leading the discourse towards an apology for them, He shows His disciples to be above the need of any apology, and to be indeed blameless, as He had said above of the Priests. And He adds yet another plea which clears them of blame, For the Son of Man is Lord also of the sabbath. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

John Chrysostom: “At that time Jesus went on the Sabbath day through the corn; and His disciples were a hungered, and began to pluck the ears of corn, and to eat.” But Luke saith, “On a double Sabbath.” Now what is a double Sabbath? When the cessation from toil is twofold, both that of the regular Sabbath, and that of another feast coming upon it. For they call every cessation from toil, a sabbath.

But why could He have led them away from it, who foreknew all, unless it had been His will that the Sabbath should be broken? It was His will indeed, but not simply so; wherefore He never breaks it without a cause, but giving reasonable excuses: that He might at once bring the law to an end, and not startle them. But there are occasions on which He even repeals it directly, and not with circumstance: as when He anoints with the clay the eyes of the blind man; as when He saith, “My Father worketh hitherto, and I work.” And He doth so, by this to glorify His own Father, by the other to soothe the infirmity of the Jews. At which last He is laboring here, putting forward as a plea the necessity of nature; although in the case of acknowledged sins, that could not of course ever be an excuse. For neither may the murderer make his anger a plea, nor the adulterer allege his lust, no, nor any other excuse; but here, by mentioning their hunger, He freed them from all blame.

But do thou, I pray thee, admire the disciples, how entirely they control themselves, and make no account of the things of the body, but esteem the table of the flesh a secondary thing, and though they have to struggle with continual hunger, do not even so withdraw themselves. For except hunger had sorely constrained them, they would not have done so much as this. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 39

Rabanus Maurus ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): They pluck the ears of corn when they withdraw men from devotion to the world; they rub them in their hands when they tear away their hearts from the lusts of the flesh; they eat the grain when they transfer such as are amended into the body of the Church.

This they do on the sabbath, that is in the hope of eternal rest, to which they invite others. Also they walk through the corn fields with the Lord, who have delight in meditating on the Scriptures; they are hungry while they desire to find the bread of life, that is the love of God, in them; they pluck the ears of corn and rub them in their hands, while they examine the testimonies to discover what lies hid under the letter, and this on the sabbath, that is, while they are free from disquieting thoughts. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Remigius of Rheims ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): He calls Himself the Son of Man, and the meaning is, He whom ye suppose a mere man is God, the Lord of all creatures, and also of the sabbath, and He has therefore power to change the law after His pleasure, because He made it. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Matthew 12:2

Cyril of Alexandria: For where nothing great or noble happens, the Pharisees remain quiet. But where they see certain people being healed, they are more offended than anyone else. In this way they are the enemies of humanity’s salvation and without understanding of the sacred writings. If the new covenant announced of old by Jeremiah differs from the first covenant, it ought by all means to make use not of old laws but of new ones. But the Pharisees, not willing to comprehend this, lay snares for the holy apostles and say about them to Christ: “Look here, we see those you’ve schooled opposing themselves to the stipulations of the law. For where the law commands everyone to rest on the sabbath and to touch no manner of work, your disciples pluck ears of wheat with their hands.” But tell me, O Pharisee, when you have set the sabbath table for yourself, don’t even you break the bread? Why then do you blame others? — FRAGMENT 152

Jerome: (V2.) But the Pharisees, seeing this, said to him: Behold, your disciples do what is not lawful for them to do on the Sabbath. Note that the first apostles of the Savior destroy the letter of the Sabbath against the Ebionites, who, while accepting the other apostles, reject Paul as a transgressor of the law. — Commentary on Matthew

John Chrysostom: What then do the Pharisees? “When they saw it,” it is said, “they said unto Him, Behold, Thy disciples do that which is not lawful to do upon the Sabbath day.”

Now here indeed with no great vehemence yet surely that would have been consistent in them)-nevertheless they are not vehemently provoked, but simply find fault. But when He stretched out the withered hand and healed it, then they were so infuriated, as even to consult together about slaying and destroying Him. For where nothing great and noble is done, they are calm; but where they see any made whole, they are savage, and fret themselves, and none so intolerable as they are: such enemies are they of the salvation of men. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 39

Matthew 12:3

Augustine of Hippo ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (Quæst. in Matt. q. 10.) It should be observed, that one example is taken from royal persons, as David, the other from priestly, as those who profane the sabbath for the service of the Temple, so that much less can the charge concerning the rubbing the ears of corn attach to Him who is indeed King and Priest. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Jerome: To put down the chicanery of the Pharisees it is recorded in ancient history that David was fleeing from Saul and came to Nob. Having been received by Ahimelech the priest, he asked him for food. Since Ahimelech had no common bread at hand, he gave David some holy bread, which only priests and Levites could lawfully eat. The priest asked whether the young men had kept themselves from women, and he received the answer “since yesterday and the day before.” He did not hesitate to give the bread, having thought it better, remembering that the prophet says, “I desire mercy and not sacrifice.” In view of the danger of hunger, Ahimelech judged it better to help people than to offer sacrifice to God. The slain victim pleasing to God is the salvation of humankind. If David is holy and the priest Ahimelech is not offensive to you, but they have broken both commandments of the law with a probable excuse—in this case, hunger—why do you not find acceptable the same hunger in the apostles that you find acceptable in others? However, in this there is a great difference: the disciples plucked grain on the sabbath, whereas David ate the levitical bread.… Note that neither David nor his young men accepted the loaves of the presence until they replied that they had kept themselves from women. — COMMENTARY ON Matthew 2.14.4

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

“And what is this to the question,” one may say; “for it was not surely the Sabbath, that he transgressed?” Thou tellest me of that which is greater, and which especially shows the wisdom of Christ, that letting go the Sabbath, He brings another example greater than the Sabbath. For it is by no means the same, to break in upon a day, and to touch that holy table, which it was not lawful for any man to touch. Since the Sabbath indeed hath been violated, and that often; nay rather it is continually being violated, both by circumcision, and by many other works; and at Jericho too one may see the same to have happened; but this happened then only. So that He more than obtains the victory. How then did no man blame David, although there was yet another ground of charge heavier than this, that of the priests’ murder, which had its origin from this? But He states it not, as applying himself to the present subject only. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 39

Matthew 12:4

Theophylact of Ohrid: . Setting aside for the while observances of the law, He leads His disciples through the grainfields, so that by eating they might set aside the law of the sabbath.

Again the Pharisees find fault with the physical passion, hunger, while they themselves committed worse sins, but the Lord reproves them with a story of David. For David dared, He says, because of hunger to do something even greater. The loaves of oblation, the showbread, are the twelve loaves which were set out each day on the altar, six on the right side and six on the left. Although David was a prophet, he ought not to have eaten them for it was only permitted for priests to eat them. And how much more so was it unlawful for those with him to eat? Nevertheless, because of hunger he could be forgiven. So, too, with the disciples.

Matthew 12:5

Jerome: You falsely accuse my disciples, Jesus says, for plucking ears of grain while passing through the standing fields. They did this because of their pangs of hunger. But you must violate the sabbath by immolating victims in the temple, slaughtering bulls and burning holocausts on a heap of firewood and, according to the testimony of the other Gospel, circumcising children on the sabbath. Thus, while you wish to observe the one law, you dishonor the sabbath. But God’s commands do not contradict each other. — COMMENTARY ON Matthew 2.12.5

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

“But they are not priests.” Nay, they are greater than priests. For the Lord of the temple Himself is here: the truth, not the type. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 39

Matthew 12:6

Hilary of Poitiers: Christ also reminded them of another prophecy so that they might learn that all things that were spoken of previously were accomplished in him through the law, that the priests in the temple broke the sabbath without offense, clearly revealing that Jesus himself was the temple. In him salvation was given to the Gentiles through the teaching of the apostles, while the people who were bound by the law wandered about faithlessly, so that he himself might be greater than the sabbath. Evangelical faith lived in Christ transcends the law. — Commentary on Matthew 12.4

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

John Chrysostom: Wherefore He said also, “But I say unto you, That in this place is one greater than the temple.”

Nevertheless, great as the sayings were which they heard, they made no reply, for the salvation of men was not their object. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 39

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

Matthew 12:7

Hilary of Poitiers: In order to show that this appearance of his work anticipated all the power of things to come, he added, “If you understood what the saying means: ‘I want mercy, not sacrifice,’ you would never have condemned the blameless.” The business of our salvation lies not in sacrifice but in mercy. When law is made void, we are saved by the goodness of God. If they had understood the grace of this statement, they would never have condemned the blameless. They would not have condemned the apostles whom they were going to accuse falsely, out of envy, of transgressing the law. When the ancient practice of sacrifices was stopped, the strangeness of mercy became more clearly known. Had this been known, they would not have thought that the Lord of the sabbath was confined by the law of the sabbath. — Commentary on Matthew 12.5

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

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

Seest thou how again He inclines His speech to lenity, yet again shows them to be out of the reach of lenity? “For ye would not have condemned,” saith He, “the guiltless.” Before indeed He inferred the same from what is said of the priests, in the words, “they are guiltless;” but here He states it on His own authority; or rather, this too is out of the law, for He was quoting a prophetic saying. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 39

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

Tertullian: “But,” say they, “God is good, 'and most good, ’ and pitiful-hearted, 'and a pitier, ‘and abundant in pitiful-heartedness, ' which He holds dearer than all sacrifice, ’ not thinking the sinner's death of so much worth as his repentance', a Saviour of all men, most of all of believers. — On Modesty

Matthew 12:8

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

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

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

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

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

Did Christ then, it will be said, repeal a thing so highly profitable? Far from it; nay, He greatly enhanced it. For it was time for them to be trained in all things by the higher rules, and it was unnecessary that his hands should be bound, who was freed from wickedness, winged for all good works; or that men should hereby learn that God made all things; or that they should so be made gentle, who are called to imitate God’s own love to mankind (for He saith, “Be ye merciful, as your Heavenly Father”); or that they should make one day a festival, who are commanded to keep a feast all their life long; (“For let us keep the feast,” it is said, “not with old leaven, neither with leaven of malice and wickedness; but with unleavened bread of sincerity and truth”); as neither need they stand by an ark and a golden altar, who have the very Lord of all for their inmate, and in all things hold communion with Him; by prayer, and by oblation, and by scriptures, and by almsgiving, and by having Him within them. Lo now, why is any Sabbath required, by him who is always keeping the feast, whose conversation is in Heaven? — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 39

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

Theodore Stratelates: You will also thus observe that knowing God is more necessary than resting on the sabbath. The sabbath was given to the Jews when, in Egypt, they were turned toward idolatry. And the sabbath was given for this reason: so that they would not call the world uncreated and outside the sphere of providence, but that they would acknowledge that God is both the One who planned it and that it is he himself who made the world in six days and on the seventh day rested. When God commanded them to do no work on the sabbath, it was to remind them of this. Subsequently, the fact that God is the Maker of the universe has become known to all, and so much of the detailed sabbath law has become superficial. If these extreme arguments about the sabbath were truly useful, they would have been applied not only to human beings but even to the sun and moon. Imagine that the very sun would cease working its benefits to us on the sabbath day. No. This commandment has been given to human beings, even from the foundation of the world. — FRAGMENT 84

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

Matthew 12:9

Augustine of Hippo ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (De Cons. Ev. ii. 35.) It might have been supposed that the matter of the ears of corn, and this cure following, had been done on the same day, for it is mentioned to have been the sabbath day in both cases, had not Luke shown us that they were on different days. So that what Matthew says, And when he had passed thence, he came into their syna-gogue, is to be taken as that He did not enter into the synagogue till He had passed thence; but whether several days intervened or He went thither straight is not expressed in this Gospel, so that place is given to the relation of Luke, who tells of the healing of this kind of palsy on another sabbath. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Glossa Ordinaria ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (ord.) Thus He answers their question with a suitable example, so as to show that they profane the sabbath by works of covetousness who were charging Him with profaning it by works of charity; evil interpreters of the Law, who say that on the sabbath we ought to rest from good deeds, when it is only evil deeds from which we ought to rest. As it is said, Ye shall do no servile work therein, (Lev. 23:3) that is, no sin. Thus in the everlasting rest, we shall rest only from evil, and not from good. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Hilary of Poitiers ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): The Pharisees, who thought that the key of the kingdom of heaven was in their hands, accused the disciples of doing what was not lawful to do; whereon the Lord reminded them of deeds in which, under the guise of facts, a prophecy was concealed; and that He might show the power of all things, He further added, that it contained the form of that work which was to be, Had ye known what that meaneth, I will have mercy; for the work of our salvation is not in the sacrifice of the Law, but in mercy; and the Law having ceased, we are saved by the mercy of God. Which gift if they had understood they would not have condemned the innocent, that is His Apostles, whom in their jealousy they were to accuse of having transgressed the Law, where the old sacrifices having ceased, the new dispensation of mercy came through them to the aid of all.

For the things that had gone before were said and done in the open air, and after this He entered the synagogue.

When He was entered into the synagogue, they bring a man of a withered hand, asking Him whether it was lawful to heal on the sabbath day, seeking an occasion of convicting Him out of His answer; as it follows, And they brought him a man haring a withered hand, and asked him, saying, Is it lawful to heal on the sabbath day?

Figuratively After their departure from the corn field, from which the Apostles had received the fruits of their sowing, He came to the Synagogue, there also to make ready the work of His harvest; for there were afterwards many with the Apostles who were healed.

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

Jerome ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): Because by fair instances He had vindicated His disciples from the charge of breaking the sabbath, the Pharisees seek to bring false accusation against Himself; whence it is said, And passing thence, he came into their synagogue.

And they ask Him whether it is lawful to heal on the sabbath day, that if He should refuse, they might charge Him with cruelty, or want of power; if He should heal him, they might charge Him with transgressing the Law.

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

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

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

Jerome: (Verse 9.) And they asked him, saying: Is it lawful to heal on the sabbath day? that they might accuse him. Because he had previously defended himself and his disciples against the accusation of breaking the sabbath by a valid example, the Pharisees now want to falsely accuse him. They ask whether it is lawful to heal on the sabbath day, so that if he does not heal, they can accuse him of cruelty or weakness; but if he does heal, they can accuse him of transgression. — Commentary on Matthew

John Chrysostom: Again He heals on a Sabbath day, vindicating what had been done by His disciples. And the other evangelists indeed say, that He “set” the man “in the midst,” and asked them, “If it was lawful to do good on the Sabbath days.”

See the tender bowels of the Lord. “He set him in the midst,” that by the sight He might subdue them; that overcome by the spectacle they might cast away their wickedness, and out of a kind of shame towards the man, cease from their savage ways. But they, ungentle and inhuman, choose rather to hurt the fame of Christ, than to see this person made whole: in both ways betraying their wickedness; by their warring against Christ, and by their doing so with such contentiousness, as even to treat with despite His mercies to other men. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 40

John Chrysostom ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (Hom. xl.) They do not ask that they may learn, but that they may accuse Him; as it follows, that they might accuse him. Though the action itself would have been enough, yet they sought occasion against Him in His words also, thus providing for themselves greater matter of complaint.

Observe how He shows many reasons for this breaking of the sabbath. But forasmuch as the man was incurably sick, He proceeds straightway to the work, as it follows, Then saith he to the man, Reach forth thy hand: and he reached it forth, and it was restored whole as the other. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

John Chrysostom: Again He heals on a Sabbath day, vindicating what had been done by His disciples. And the other evangelists indeed say, that He “set” the man “in the midst,” and asked them, “If it was lawful to do good on the Sabbath days.”

See the tender bowels of the Lord. “He set him in the midst,” that by the sight He might subdue them; that overcome by the spectacle they might cast away their wickedness, and out of a kind of shame towards the man, cease from their savage ways. But they, ungentle and inhuman, choose rather to hurt the fame of Christ, than to see this person made whole: in both ways betraying their wickedness; by their warring against Christ, and by their doing so with such contentiousness, as even to treat with despite His mercies to other men.

And while the other evangelists say, He asked the question, this one saith, it was asked of Him. “And they asked Him,” so it stands, “saying, Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath days? that they might accuse Him.” And it is likely that both took place. For being unholy wretches, and well assured that He would doubtless proceed to the healing, they hastened to take Him beforehand with their question, thinking in this way to hinder Him. And this is why they asked, “Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath days?” not for information, but that “they might accuse Him.” Yet surely the work was enough, if it were really their wish to accuse Him; but they desired to find a handle in His words too, preparing for themselves beforehand an abundance of arguments.

But He in His love towards man doth this also: He answers them, teaching His own meekness, and turning it all back upon them; and points out their inhumanity. And He “setteth” the man “in the midst;” not in fear of them, but endeavoring to profit them, and move them to pity.

But when not even so did He prevail with them, then was He grieved, it is said, and wroth with them for the hardness of their heart, and He saith, “What man is there among you that shall have one sheep, and if this fall into a pit on the Sabbath days, will he not lay hold of it, and lift it out? How much then is a man better than a sheep? Wherefore it is lawful to do well on the Sabbath days.”

Thus, lest they have ground of obstinacy, and of accusing him again of transgression, He convicts them by this example. And do thou mark, I pray thee, how variously and suitably in each case, He introduces His pleas for the breaking of the sabbath.

For His desire indeed was to cure them before him, and He tried innumerable ways of healing, both by what He did in their presence, and by what He said: but since their malady after all was incurable, He proceeded to the work. “Then saith He to the man, Stretch forth thine hand. And he stretched it forth, and it was restored whole, like as the other.” — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 40

Origen of Alexandria: The spiritual sense of the expression “he went on from there” can be understood in this way: When he establishes a new covenant and the sabbath no longer is in force, then he goes over or departs to another place. For this reason they accuse him and his disciples, not outside but within the synagogue. Their offenses are thereby increased to the brim. They brought to the Savior the barrenness of their hands. For having a withered hand indicated unfruitfulness. But that which is unfruitful is coming near to being reversed. — FRAGMENT 249

Rabanus Maurus ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): Jesus teaches and works chiefly on the sabbath, not only on account of the spiritual sabbath, but on account of the gathering together of the people, seeking that all should be saved.

Otherwise; The man who had the withered hand denotes the human race in its barrenness of good works dried up by the hand which was stretched out to the fruit; (Gen. 3:6.) this was healed by the stretching out of the innocent hand on the Cross. And well is this withered hand said to have been in the Synagogue, for where the gift of knowledge is greater, there is the greater danger of an irrecoverable infliction. The withered hand when it is to be healed is first bid to be stretched out, because the weakness of a barren mind is healed by no means better than by liberality of almsgiving. A man’s right hand is affected when he is remiss in giving alms, his left whole when he is attentive to his own interests. But when the Lord comes, the right hand is restored whole as the left, because what he had got together greedily, that he distributes freely. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Matthew 12:10

Augustine of Hippo ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (De Cons. Ev. ii. 35.) But it may raise enquiry how Matthew can say that they asked the Lord, Whether it were lawful to heal on the sabbath, seeing Mark and Luke relate that it was the Lord who asked them, Whether it is lawful on the sabbath day to do good or to do evil? (Luke 6:9) It is to be understood then that they first asked the Lord, Is it lawful to heal on the sabbath day? Then understanding their thoughts that they sought an occasion to accuse Him, He placed in the midst him whom He was about to heal, and put to them the question which Mark and Luke say that He did ask; and when they remained silent, He made the comparison respecting the sheep, and concluded that they might do good on the sabbath day; as it follows, But he said unto them, What man shall there be among you, that shall have one sheep, and if it fall into a pit on the sabbath day, will he not lay hold on it, and lift it out?

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

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

John Chrysostom: And while the other evangelists say, He asked the question, this one saith, it was asked of Him. “And they asked Him,” so it stands, “saying, Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath days? that they might accuse Him.” And it is likely that both took place. For being unholy wretches, and well assured that He would doubtless proceed to the healing, they hastened to take Him beforehand with their question, thinking in this way to hinder Him. And this is why they asked, “Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath days?” not for information, but that “they might accuse Him.” Yet surely the work was enough, if it were really their wish to accuse Him; but they desired to find a handle in His words too, preparing for themselves beforehand an abundance of arguments.

But He in His love towards man doth this also: He answers them, teaching His own meekness, and turning it all back upon them; and points out their inhumanity. And He “setteth” the man “in the midst;” not in fear of them, but endeavoring to profit them, and move them to pity.

But when not even so did He prevail with them, then was He grieved, it is said, and wroth with them for the hardness of their heart. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 40

Theophylact of Ohrid: . The other evangelists say that Jesus put the question to the Pharisees. It can be said that the Pharisees out of spite first asked Him, as Matthew says. Then Christ in turn asks them the same, mocking them and ridiculing their callousness, as the other evangelists say. The Pharisees asked Him this question so that they might have a pretext to slander Him.

Matthew 12:11

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

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

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

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

And yet here He speaks only; whereas elsewhere in many cases He heals by laying on of hands also. But nevertheless none of these things made them meek; rather, while the man was healed, they by his health became worse. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 40

Matthew 12:12

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

Matthew 12:13

Hilary of Poitiers: Such healing is rightly attributed to our Lord. After his return from the cornfield from which his apostles had gotten the produce, he went to the synagogue. From there Jesus intended to acquire laborers for his own harvest. Many of them afterwards lived with the apostles. Many were healed, as in the case of the maimed man. Yet the leaders of the synagogue did not believe in the grace of salvation. The use of the man’s hand had atrophied. That function of his body had withered, by which he was able to do or share in certain tasks. So the Lord ordered him to stretch out his hand, and it was restored to him as the other one was. His whole cure rested on the word of the healer alone. The hand was restored to the same condition as the other hand. It was made a partner in the service of the apostles in their duty of granting salvation. — Commentary on Matthew 12.7

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

John Chrysostom: For His desire indeed was to cure them before him, and He tried innumerable ways of healing, both by what He did in their presence, and by what He said: but since their malady after all was incurable, He proceeded to the work. “Then saith He to the man, Stretch forth thine hand. And he stretched it forth, and it was restored whole, like as the other.” — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 40

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

Matthew 12:14

Hilary of Poitiers ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): The Pharisees are moved with jealousy at what had been done; because beholding the outward body of a man, they did not recognize the God in His works; The Pharisees went out and sought counsel against him, how they might destroy him.

And He knowing their plots withdrew, that He might be far from the counsels of the evil hearted, as it follows, Jesus knowing it departed thence.

On those whom He healed He enjoined silence, whence it follows, And he charged them that they should not make him known. For his restored health was a witness to each man. And by commanding them to hold their peace, He avoids all ostentation of Himself, and at the same time notwithstanding affords a knowledge of Himself in that very admonition to hold their peace; for the observance of silence proceeds from that very thing which is to be kept silent.

Or, he means this bruised reed that is not broken, to show that the perishing and bruised bodies of the Gentiles, are not to be broken, but are rather reserved for salvation. He shall not quench a smoking flax, shows the feebleness of that spark which though not quenched, only moulders in the flax, and that among the remnants of that ancient grace, the Spirit is yet not quite taken away from Israel, but power still remains to them of resuming the whole flame thereof in a day of penitence.

Or, Until he shall send forth judgment to victory, that is, Until He shall take away the power of death, and bring in judgment and the return of His splendour. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Jerome ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): Knowing, that is, their designs against Him withdrew Himself, that He might remove from the Pharisees all opportunity of sin.

But the Holy Spirit is put, not on the Word of God, but on the Only-Begotten, who came forth from the bosom of the Father; on Him, that is, of whom it is said, Behold my servant. And what He will do by Him He adds, And he shall declare judgment to the Gentiles.

For the way is broad and wide which leads to destruction, and many walk in it; and being many, they will not hear the voice of the Saviour, because they are not in the narrow but in the broad way.

He that holds not out his hand to a sinner, nor bears his brother’s burden, he breaks a bruised reed; and he who despises a weak spark of faith in a little one, he quenches a smoking flax.

(Ep. 121.2.) Or, the reverse, He calls the Jews a bruised reed, whom tossed by the wind and shaken from one another, the Lord did not immediately condemn, but patiently endured; and the smoking flax He calls the people gathered out of the Gentiles, who, having extinguished the light of the natural law, were involved in the wandering mazes of thick darkness of smoke, bitter and hurtful to the eyes; this He not only did not extinguish, by reducing them to ashes, but on the contrary from a small spark and one almost dead He raised a mighty flame. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Jerome: Envy is responsible for the fact that they set a trap for our Lord. What had he done to incite the Pharisees to kill him? Certainly it was because the man had stretched out his hand. Who of the Pharisees did not stretch out his hand on the sabbath day when he was carrying food, when he was offering a drinking cup or performing the other actions that are necessary for nourishment? So if stretching forth one’s hand and lifting up food or drink on the sabbath are not offenses, why should they make this accusation? They themselves are found guilty of doing the same, especially since that stonecutter had not carried anything of the sort that they had but had only stretched out his hand at the order of our Lord. — COMMENTARY ON Matthew 2.12.14

Jerome: (Verse 14) But the Pharisees went out and plotted against him, how they might destroy him. The reason they plot against the Lord is envy. For what had he done to provoke the Pharisees to kill him? It was because he had stretched out his hand. For who among the Pharisees does not stretch out their hand on the Sabbath, carrying food and extending a cup, and all the other things that are necessary for sustenance? Therefore, if it is not a crime to stretch out one’s hand and lift up food or drink on the Sabbath, why do they accuse him of doing something they themselves are guilty of, especially when this builder did not carry such things, but only stretched out his hand in accordance with the command of the Lord? — Commentary on Matthew

John Chrysostom ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): And that you may not be troubled at those things which are done, and at the incredible madness of the Pharisees, He introduces the Prophet’s words. For such was the carefulness of the Prophets, that they had not omitted even this, but had noted all His ways and movements, and the meaning with which He did this; that you might learn that He spoke all things by the Holy Spirit, for if it be impossible to know the thoughts of men, much more to know the meaning of Christ, unless the Holy Spirit revealed it. Therefore it follows, That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the Prophet, saying, Behold my servant whom I have chosen.

This the Prophet puts in the beginning, that you might learn that that which is here said was according to the counsel of the Father. For he that is beloved does according to his will who loveth him. And again, he that is chosen, does not as an enemy break the law, nor as one being an adversary of the legislator, but as one in agreement with Him. Because therefore He is beloved, I will put my Spirit upon him.

Further, to show His lowliness, He says, He shall not strive; and so He was offered up as the Father had willed, and gave Himself willingly into the hands of His persecutors. Neither shall he cry; so He was dumb as a lamb before his shearer. Nor shall any hear voice in the streets.

The Lord sought to heal the Jews by this mildness. But though they rejected Him, yet He did not resist them by destroying them; whence the Prophet, displaying His power and their weakness, says, A bruised reed he shall not break, and a smoking flax he shall not quench.

Or this, He shall not break a bruised reed, shows that it was as easy for Him to break them all, as to break a reed, and that a bruised reed. And, He shall not quench a smoking flax, shows that their rage was fired, and that the power of Christ was strong to quench such rage with all readiness; hence in this is shown the great mercy of Christ.

But one might say, What then, shall these things be always thus? Will He endure for ever those who thus lay snares, and are mad against Him? Far from it; when His own work shall be all complete, then shall He work these things also. And. this He signifies, saying, Until he shall send forth judgment to victory; as much as to say, When He shall have accomplished all things which are of Himself, then shall He bring in perfect vengeance; then shall they receive punishment when He has made his victory illustrious, that there be not left to them any irreverent opportunity of contradiction,

But the things of this dispensation will not rest in this only, that they who have not believed should be punished, but He will also draw the world to Him; whence it follows, And in his name shall the Gentiles hope. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

John Chrysostom: What then did they? They go forth, it is said, and take counsel together to slay Him. For “the Pharisees,” saith the Scripture, “went out and held a council against Him, how they might destroy Him.” They had received no injury, yet they went about to slay Him. So great an evil is envy. For not against strangers only, but even against our own, is it ever warring. And Mark saith, they took this counsel with the Herodians.

What then doth the gentle and meek One? He withdrew, on being aware of it. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 40

Rabanus Maurus ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): Otherwise; The man who had the withered hand denotes the human race in its barrenness of good works dried up by the hand which was stretched out to the fruit; (Gen. 3:6.) this was healed by the stretching out of the innocent hand on the Cross. And well is this withered hand said to have been in the Synagogue, for where the gift of knowledge is greater, there is the greater danger of an irrecoverable infliction. The withered hand when it is to be healed is first bid to be stretched out, because the weakness of a barren mind is healed by no means better than by liberality of almsgiving. A man’s right hand is affected when he is remiss in giving alms, his left whole when he is attentive to his own interests. But when the Lord comes, the right hand is restored whole as the left, because what he had got together greedily, that he distributes freely.

He says, went out because their mind was alien from the Lord. They took counsel how they might destroy life, not how themselves might find life.

In this also He instructs us, that when we have done any thing great we are not to seek praise abroad.

Whom I have chosen, he says, for a work which none else has done, that He should redeem the human race, and make peace between God and the world. It follows, My beloved, in whom my soul is well pleased, for He alone is the Lamb without spot of sin, of whom the Father speaks, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. (Mat. 17:5)

Or, Until that judgment which was being done in Him should come forth to victory. For after that by His resurrection He had overcome death, and driven forth the prince of this world, He returned as conqueror to His kingdom to sit on the right hand of the Father, until He shall put all His enemies under His feet. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Remigius of Rheims ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): Or, He withdrew from thence as avoiding the designs of His own when they persecuted Him; or because that was not the time or place for Him to suffer, for It cannot he that a Prophet should perish out of Jerusalem, (Luke 13:33) as He Himself spake. The Lord also shunned those who persecuted Him through hatred, and went thither where He found many who were attached to Him from affection, whence it follows, And there followed him many. Him whom the Pharisees with one consent plotted against to destroy, the untaught multitude with one consent love and follow; whence they soon received the fulfilment of their desires, for it follows, And he healed them all.

And He also gives them command that they should not make Him known, that they might not by persecuting Him be put into a worse state.

The Lord Jesus Christ is called the servant of the Almighty Godb, not in respect of His divinity, but in respect of the dispensation of the flesh which He took upon Him, because by the cooperation of the Holy Spirit He took flesh of the Virgin without stain of sin. Some books have, Elect, whom I have chosen, for He was chosen by God the Father, that is, predestinated that He should be the Son of God, proper, not adopted.

That he says, My soul, is not to be understood as though God the Father had a soul, but by way of adaptation, showing how God is disposed towards Him. And it is no wonder that a soul is ascribed to God in this manner, seeing that all other members of the body are likewise.

Then also God the Father put His Spirit upon Him, when by the working of the Holy Spirit He took flesh of the Virgin; and as soon as He became man, He took the fulness of the Holy Spirit.

The Greek πλατεῖα, is in Latin called ’latitudo.’ No one therefore has heard His voice in the streets, because He has not promised pleasant things in this world to those that love Him, but hardships.

And it should be known, that the meaning not only of this passage, but of many others also, is supported by this testimony from the Prophet. The words, Behold my servant, may be referred to the place in which the Father had said above, This is my Son. (Mat. 3:17.) The words, I will put my Spirit upon him, is referred to the descent of the Holy Spirit upon the Lord at His baptism; He shall declare judgment to the Gentiles, to that which He says below, When the Son of Man shall sit in the seat of his Majesty. (Mat. 25:31) What he adds, He shall not strive nor cry, refers to the Lord how He answered but little to the Chief Priests, and to Pilate, but to Herod nothing at all. He shall not break the bruised reed, refers to His shunning His persecutors that they might not be made worse; and that In his name shall the Gentiles hope, refers to what Himself says below, Go ye, and teach all nations. (Mat. 28:19) — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Matthew 12:15

Jerome: (Verse 15 and following) But Jesus, knowing this, departed from there, and many followed him, and he healed them all. And he commanded them not to make him known, so that what was spoken by the prophet Isaiah might be fulfilled, saying, Knowing their plot, that they wanted to destroy their Savior, he departed from there, in order to take away from the Pharisees the opportunity for wickedness against himself. — Commentary on Matthew

Jerome: What does it mean that it is written in Matthew: ‘A bruised reed shall he not break, and smoking flax shall he not quench’ (Matthew 12:20). For the explanation of this passage, the whole testimony that Matthew takes from the Prophet Isaiah must be set forth, even the words of Isaiah (Isaiah 42): according to the Septuagint interpreters and the Hebrew itself, to which Theodotus, Aquila, and Symmachus agree. Thus of the four Evangelists, only Matthew relates: “And Jesus knowing it, retired from thence: and many followed him, and he healed them all. And he charged them that they should not make him known. That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Isaias the prophet, saying: Behold my servant whom I have chosen, my beloved in whom my soul hath been well pleased. I will put my spirit upon him, and he shall shew judgment to the Gentiles.” (Chapter 12, verses 15-18) He will not strive, nor cry out, nor will anyone hear his voice in the streets. A bruised reed he will not break, and smoking flax he will not extinguish, until he brings forth judgment unto victory. And in his name the Gentiles will hope” (Matthew 12:15 and following). For which in Isaiah, according to the Septuagint interpreters, it is thus written: “Jacob my servant, I will uplift him. My chosen one, my soul has received him. I have given my spirit upon him, he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles. He shall not cry, nor have respect to person, neither shall his voice be heard abroad. The bruised reed he shall not break: and smoking flax he shall not extinguish: but he shall bring forth judgment unto truth. He shall shine, and shall not be broken, until he set judgment in the earth: and the countries shall wait for his law.” However, we translate it from Hebrew like this, “Behold my servant, I will uphold him; my chosen, my soul has delighted in him. I have given my spirit upon him: he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles. “He will not cry out, nor raise his voice, nor make it heard in the street. A bruised reed he will not break, and a smoldering wick he will not snuff out. In truth he will bring forth justice. He will not grow faint or be discouraged till he has established justice on the earth; and the islands will put their hope in his law.” This shows that the Gospel writer Matthew, not bound by authority of the old interpretation, dismissed the Hebrew truth and brought forth to the nations, educated in the Law of the Lord, the things he had read in Hebrew as if he were a Hebrew among Hebrews. For if it is to be taken thus, as the Seventy Interpreters have given it: Jacob is my servant, I will receive him; Israel is my chosen, my soul has received him, how do we understand that it has been fulfilled in Jesus, what has been written concerning Jacob and Israel? We read that Blessed Matthew did this not only in this testimony, but also in another place: Out of Egypt I called my son (Hosea 11:2): for which the Seventy translated: Out of Egypt I called his sons. Certainly, if we do not follow the Hebrew truth, it is evident that it does not pertain to the Lord and Savior. For it follows: but they sacrificed to Baalim. And that which is less in the assumed testimony in the Gospel: it shall shine and not be shaken, until he shall place judgment upon the earth, seems to have happened by the error of the first writer who, reading the higher sentence to be finished in the word judgment, thought that the final word of the lower sentence was judgment, and he omitted a few words which were in the middle, that is, between judgment and judgment. And again, that which is read among the Hebrews: And in his law shall the islands hope, Matthew, interpreting the sense rather than the words, put for law and islands, a name and nations. And not only in the present place, but wherever the testimonies of the Evangelists and Apostles from the old Instrument have been brought forth, it should be observed more diligently: not that they followed words, but the sense: and where they differ from the Hebrew in the Septuagint, they expressed the Hebrew sense in their own words. Therefore, the Child of the almighty God, according to the dispensation of assumed flesh, which is sent to us, is called the Savior. To whom and in another place the Father says: It is great for you to be called my child, to gather the tribes of Jacob (Isai. 49.3). This is the vineyard of Sorec, which is interpreted as chosen. This is the beloved son, in whom the soul of God is pleased; not because God has a soul, but because every affection of God is shown in the soul. And it is not surprising if the soul is named in God, when all the members of the human body, according to the laws of tropology, and various intelligences, are said to have it. He also placed his spirit upon him: the Spirit of Wisdom and Understanding, the Spirit of Counsel and Strength, the Spirit of Knowledge and Piety, and the Spirit of the Fear of the Lord (Isaiah 11): He who descends upon him in the form of a dove, about whom John the Baptist narrates having heard from God the Father: “The One upon whom you see the Holy Spirit descending and remaining upon, He is” (John 1:33). And He will announce judgment to the Gentiles; concerning whom it is also written in the Psalms: “Give the king your justice, O God, and your righteousness to the son of a king” (Psalms 71:1). He Himself speaks about it in the Gospel: “For the Father judges no one, but has given all judgment to the Son” (John 5:22). He will not contend: like a lamb led to the slaughter: He will not argue in the hearing. Nor will he cry out, in accordance with what the Apostle Paul writes: Let all clamor, and anger, and bitterness be taken away from you (Ephesians 4:31). He will not cry out: because Israel did not do justice, but cry out. Nor will anyone hear his voice in the streets or outdoors. For all the glory of the daughter of the king is within (Psalms 44:14): And, Narrow, and cramped is the way that leads to life (Matthew 7:14). Therefore his voice is not heard in the streets, where wisdom confidently acts, not entering a broad and spacious way, but accusing and condemning. And so he spoke to those who were outside, not in his own voice, but in parables: ‘The reed, he said, shaken does not break; or, as the Septuagint translated, the broken reed not to be crushed. The broken reed that was once vocal, and sang in praise of the Lord, is called Israel, who, because he stumbled on a corner stone and fell on it, was broken in it; therefore it is said of him: Rebuke, O Lord, the beasts of the reed (Ps. 67. 31): and in the volume of Jesus he is called the torrent of the cane, that is, of the reed; who has turbid waters, which Israel chose, despising the purest streams of the Jordan: and turning his mind back to Egypt, and desiring the marshy and swampy region, and pumpkins, and onions, and garlic, and cucumbers, and the pots of Egyptian flesh, is rightly called a broken reed by Isaiah: he who wants to lean on which, his hand will be pierced. For whoever, after the advent of the Lord and Savior and leaving behind the spirit of interpreting the Gospel, rests in the death of Jewish literature, all the works of that person are harmed. Even smoking linen will not extinguish a people gathered from the nations who, with the ardor of natural law extinguished, are wrapped in the bitter smoke, which is hurtful to the eyes, and enveloped in the darkness of errors. He who not only did not restrain and reduce to ashes, but on the contrary, from a small spark, and almost dying, raised the greatest fire; so that the whole world burned with the fire of the Lord and Savior, whom he came to send upon the earth, and in all desires to burn (Luke 12:49). According to the tropology, what we see in this place, we have briefly noted in the Commentaries of Matthew. But he who has not broken the bruised reed, and has not extinguished the smoking flax, has also brought judgment unto victory (Isai. 42:3), whose judgments are true, justified in themselves (Psalms 18), so that he may be justified in his words and may overcome in judgment (Psalms 50), and so that the light of his preaching may shine in the world, not be crushed by anyone, and may overcome all snares, until he establishes judgment on earth and that which is written may be fulfilled: ‘Thy will be done on earth, as it is in heaven’ (Matthew 6:10). And, in his name shall the Gentiles hope (Isaiah 11:10); or the islands shall hope in his law (Ibid. 42:4). For just as the islands are struck by the blast and rush of winds and frequently buffeted by storms, but they are not overturned, as an example of the Gospel house built on a sturdy foundation of rock (Matthew 7; and Luke 6), so the Churches, which hope in the law and in the name of the Lord and Savior, speak through Isaiah: I am a strong city, a city that cannot be taken (Isaiah 27:3, LXX). — Letter 121, Chapter 2

John Chrysostom: “But when Jesus knew their devices, He withdrew Himself,” it is said, “from them.” Where now are they who say, miracles ought to be done? Nay, by these things He signified, that the uncandid soul is not even thereby persuaded; and He made it plain that His disciples too were blamed by them without cause. This however we should observe, that they grow fierce especially at the benefits done to their neighbors; and when they see any one delivered either from disease or from wickedness, then is the time for them to find fault, and become wild beasts. Thus did they calumniate Him, both when He was about to save the harlot, and when He was eating with publicans, and now again, when they saw the hand restored.

But do thou observe, I pray thee, how He neither desists from His tender care over the infirm, and yet allays their envy. “And great multitudes followed Him, and He healed them all; and He charged them that were healed, that they should make Him known to no man.” Because, while the multitudes everywhere both admire and follow Him, they desist not from their wickedness. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 40

Origen of Alexandria: To the extent that one draws near to Jesus, one does not hold counsel, for no counselor of evil things draws near to Jesus. But when others go out, departing from Jesus, they hold counsel to destroy Jesus, to destroy the Light, the good Way, the Life, the Treasure, the Pearl, Love itself and Peace. If anyone destroys these, he is called a “son of destruction.” But “Jesus, aware of this, withdrew from there.” He had no reason to remain around the sons of destruction. They sought to destroy him, but we, who were not seeking, have found him. This recalls the words of the prophet: “I am found by those who do not seek for me; I have been made manifest to those who were not asking after me.” For he came “to the lost sheep of the house of Israel” who had forgotten their own Shepherd. So Jesus withdraws, not fearing their judgment but to dispel evil. And, lest anyone should suppose that it was through fear that he had withdrawn, Jesus healed everyone, displaying his almighty power. But, as one who does what is fitting, without pride, he sent them away, telling them not to publicize this. — FRAGMENT 252

Theophylact of Ohrid: What spite! When good is done to them they become enraged. Jesus withdrew, as it was not yet the time for His Passion, and also to spare them from falling to the crime of murder. He did this to show that it is not God-pleasing to throw oneself into danger. Notice the word “departed”; it is when they departed from God that they plotted to destroy Jesus. For no one who abides in God would plot such things.

Matthew 12:16

Hilary of Poitiers: He ordered those whom he healed to be silent. Was it silence about the healing that he ordered? Not at all. For the salvation that was given to each one was its own testimony. But by ordering it to be kept secret Jesus also shunned boasting about himself. It was better that knowledge of him remains in himself. So he admonished them to remain silent about him. The observance of silence springs from that about which one must keep silent. — Commentary on Matthew 12.9

Theophylact of Ohrid: He does not want to be made known so that He might soften the spite of the Pharisees, for He was eager to heal them in any way possible.

Matthew 12:17

John Chrysostom: Then, lest thou shouldest be confounded at what is going on, and at their strange frenzy, He introduces the prophet also, foretelling all this. For so great was the accuracy of the prophets, that they omit not even these things, but foretell His very journeyings, and changes of place, and the intent with which He acted therein; that thou mightest learn, how they spake all by the Spirit. For if the secrets of men cannot by any art be known, much more were it impossible to learn Christ’s purpose, except the Spirit revealed it.

What then saith the prophet? Nay, it is subjoined: “That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the Prophet, saying, Behold my servant, whom I have chosen; my beloved, in whom my soul is well pleased. I will put my Spirit upon Him, and He shall show judgment to the Gentiles. He shall not strive nor cry, neither shall any man hear His voice in the streets. A bruised reed shall He not break, and smoking flax shall He not quench, till He send forth judgment unto victory. And in His name shall the Gentiles trust.”

The prophet celebrates His meekness, and His unspeakable power, and opens to the Gentiles “a great door and effectual;” he foretells also the ills that are to overtake the Jews, and signifies His unanimity with the Father. For “behold,” saith He, “my servant, whom I have chosen, my beloved, in whom my soul is well pleased.” Now if He chose Him, not as an adversary doth Christ set aside the law, nor as being an enemy of the lawgiver, but as having the same mind with Him, and the same objects.

Then proclaiming His meekness, he saith, “He shall not strive nor cry.” For His desire indeed was to heal in their presence; but since they thrust Him away, not even against this did He contend.

And intimating both His might, and their weakness, he saith, “A bruised reed shall He not break.” For indeed it was easy to break them all to pieces like a reed, and not a reed merely, but one already bruised.

“And smoking flax shall He not quench.” Here he sets forth both their anger that is kindled, and His might that is able to put down their anger, and to quench it with all ease; whereby His great mildness is signified.

What then? Shall these things always be? And will He endure them perpetually, forming such frantic plots against Him? Far from it; but when He hath performed His part, then shall He execute the other purposes also. For this He declared by saying “Till He send forth judgment unto victory: and in His name shall the Gentiles trust.” As Paul likewise saith, “Having in a readiness to revenge all disobedience, when your obedience is fulfilled.”

But what is, “when He sends forth judgment unto victory?” When He hath fulfilled all His own part, then, we are told, He will bring down upon them His vengeance also, and that a perfect vengeance. Then shall they suffer His terrors, when His trophy is gloriously set up, and the ordinances that proceed from Him have prevailed, and He hath left them no plea of contradiction, however shameless. For He is wont to call righteousness, “judgment.”

But not to this will His dispensation be confined, to the punishment of unbelievers only, but He will also win to Himself the whole world. Wherefore He added, “And in His name shall the Gentiles trust.”

Then, to inform thee that this too is according to the purpose of the Father, in the beginning the prophet had assured us of this likewise, together with what had gone before; saying, “My well-beloved, in whom my soul is well pleased.” For of the well-beloved it is quite evident that He did these things also according to the mind of the beloved. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 40

Matthew 12:18

Augustine of Hippo ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (De Civ. Dei, xx. 30.) Seeing He preached the judgment to come which was hidden from the Gentiles. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Jerome: Through Isaiah the prophet the person of the Father states this: “I shall put my Spirit upon him.” The Spirit is not placed upon the Word of God nor upon the only begotten Son who proceeds from the Father but upon the One about whom it is said, “Here is my Son.” — COMMENTARY ON Matthew 2.12.18

Jerome: (Verse 18.) Behold my servant, whom I have chosen; my beloved, in whom my soul is well pleased. I will put my spirit upon him, and he shall show judgment to the Gentiles. He shall not strive, nor cry out. Through the prophet Isaiah, this is spoken in the person of the Father: I will put my spirit upon him (Isaiah 42:1). The spirit is not placed upon the Word of God, nor upon the only begotten, who proceeded from the Father’s bosom, but upon him of whom it is said: Behold my servant (ibidem). — Commentary on Matthew

Matthew 12:19

Apollinaris of Laodicea: Those who teach “in the streets” do this, not for the sake of helping anyone but out of egotism and to hoodwink the gullible. The result of this is that everyone views them with suspicion and they fail to reach the goal of their teaching. Thus the Savior taught us these lessons not only by word. His way of life also taught us not to scream nor to show off but to lead a public life in respect to virtuous actions. For a talkative disposition would be most harmful for us. It is the opposite that is most useful and beneficial. — FRAGMENT 71.9

Jerome: (Verse 19.) Neither will anyone hear his voice in the streets. For the way is broad and spacious that leads to destruction, and many enter through it (Mat. 7:13). Those who do not hear the voice of the Savior are many, because they are not on the narrow path, but on the spacious one. — Commentary on Matthew

Tertullian: If He “neither did contend nor shout, nor was His voice heard abroad,” who “crushed not the bruised reed”-Israel’s faith, who “quenched not the burning flax” -that is, the momentary glow of the Gentiles-but made it shine more by the rising of His own light,-He can be none other than He who was predicted. — An Answer to the Jews

Theophylact of Ohrid: Matthew brings in the prophet as a witness to Jesus’ meekness (Ms. 42:1-4). For whatever the Jews want, he says, Christ will do. If they do not want Him io be made known, then He will not make Himself known. He will not stand up against them like one seeking renown, nor will He dispute contentiously. He will bid the multitudes not to make Him known, but He will also proclaim judgement to the Gentiles, that is, He will teach the Gentiles. For “judgement” (krisis) is teaching, knowledge, and discernment (diakrisis) of the good. Or, in another sense, He will also proclaim the coming judgement to the Gentiles who have never heard of this judgement. “Neither shall any man hear His voice in the streets.” For He did not teach in the middle of the market place, as did the vainglorious, but in the temple and in the synagogues and on the mountain and along the shores.

Matthew 12:20

Augustine of Hippo ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (ubi sup) So He neither bruised nor quenched the Jewish persecutors, who are here likened to a bruised reed which has lost its wholeness, and to a smoking flax which has lost its flame; but He spared them because He was not come to judge them, but to be judged by them.

(Quaest. Ev. i. 3.) In the smoking flax it is observed, that when the flame is out it causes a stink. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Desert Fathers: There was once a brother who was very eager to seek goodness. Being very disturbed by the demon of lust, he came to a hermit and told him about his thoughts. The hermit was inexperienced and when he heard all this, he was shocked, and said he was a wicked brother, unworthy of his monk’s habit because he had thoughts like that. When the brother heard this, he despaired, left his cell and started on his way back to the world. But by God’s providence, Apollo met him. Seeing he was so upset and sad, he said to him, ‘Son, why are you so unhappy?’ The brother was very embarrassed, and at first said nothing. But when Apollo pressed him to say what was happening to him, he admitted everything and said, ‘It is because lustful thoughts trouble me. I confessed them to that hermit, and he says I now have no hope of salvation. So I have despaired, and am on my way back to the world.’ When Apollo heard this, he went on asking questions like a wise doctor, and gave him this counsel, ‘Do not be cast down, son, nor despair of yourself. Even at my age and with my experience of the spiritual life, I am still troubled by thoughts like yours. Do not fail now; this trouble cannot be cured by our efforts, but only by God’s mercy. Do as I say and go back to your cell.’ The brother did so. Then Apollo went to the cell of the hermit who had made the brother despair. He stood outside the cell, and prayed to the Lord with tears, saying, ‘Lord, you permit men to be tempted for their good; transfer the war that brother is suffering to this hermit: let him learn by experience in his old age what many years have not taught him, and so let him find out how to sympathize with people undergoing this kind of temptation.’ As soon as he ended his prayer he saw a black man standing by the cell firing arrows at the hermit. As though he had been wounded, the hermit began to totter and lurch like a drunken man. When he could bear it no longer, he came out of his cell, and set out on the same road by which the young man started to return to the world. Apollo understood what had happened, and went to meet him. He came up to him and said, ‘Where are you going? Why are you so upset?’ When the hermit saw that the holy Apollo understood what had happened, he was ashamed and said nothing. Apollo said to him, ‘Go back to your cell and see in others your own weakness and keep your own heart in order. For either you were ignorant of the devil in spite of your age, or you were contemptuous, and did not deserve to gain strength by struggling with the devil as all other men must. But struggle is not the right word, when you could not stand up to his attack for one day. This has happened to you because of the young monk. He came to you because he was being attacked by the common enemy of us all. You ought to have given him words of consolation to help him against the devil’s attack but instead you drove him to despair. You did not remember the wise man’s saying, which orders us to deliver the men who are drawn towards death, and not to cease to redeem men ready to be killed. You did not remember our Saviour’s parable, “You should not break the bruised reed, nor quench the smoking flax” (Matt. 12:20). No one can endure the enemy’s clever attacks, nor quench, nor control the leaping fire natural to the body, unless God’s grace preserves us in our weakness. In all our prayers we should ask for his mercy to save us, so that he may turn aside this scourge which is aimed even at you. For he makes a man to grieve, and then lifts him up to salvation; he strikes, and his hand heals; he humbles and exalts; he gives death and then life; he leads to hell and brings back from hell (1 Sam. 2:6). So Apollo prayed again, and at once the hermit was set free from his inner war. Apollo urged him to ask God to give him a wise heart, in order to know how best to speak. — The Desert Fathers, Sayings of the Early Christian Monks

Hilary of Poitiers: But even amid this desire to keep silent about himself, the purpose of Jesus’ words was fulfilled through Isaiah. About his prophecy I now give you the following important reminder: Jesus was loved by God and was pleasing in his Father’s will. The Spirit of God was upon him. Judgment was made known to the Gentiles by him. The reed that was crushed was not broken, and the smoking wick was not extinguished. This means that the frail, shaken bodies of the Gentiles were not worn out but rather preserved to salvation. The meager flame only smoking now on the wick was not extinguished. The spirit of Israel was not removed from the rest of the ancient story of grace. The capability of restoring all the light exists in the time of repentance. But that was appointed within the statutes of a fixed time, “till he brings justice to victory.” When the power of death was removed, he would bring judgment at the return of his splendor to the Gentiles who would believe in his name through faith. — Commentary on Matthew 12.10

Jerome: The one who does not stretch out a hand to a sinner and does not carry a brother’s load breaks the crushed reed. And the one who despises the small spark of faith in children extinguishes the smoking wick. Christ did neither of these. He came for this purpose: to save those who were perishing. — COMMENTARY ON Matthew 2.12.20

Jerome: (Verse 20, 21.) He will not break a bruised reed, and he will not extinguish smoking flax, until he brings forth judgment to victory. And in his name the Gentiles will hope. He who does not reach out his hand to the sinner, nor carries the burden of his brother, he breaks the bruised reed. And he who despises the small spark of faith in the little ones, he extinguishes smoking flax. Christ has done neither of these; for this is why he came, to save what was lost. — Commentary on Matthew

Theodore Stratelates: He did not eagerly contend with the folly of the rulers, nor did he scream and provoke them to anger against himself. Rather, with gentleness Jesus withdrew slowly so that he might not, in confuting them, cause them to be destroyed while they were still weak in soul like “a bruised reed” or like “smoking flax,” that is, very close to being snuffed out. He bore with them patiently, so as not to reduce them to utter oblivion on account of their weakness, until he had fulfilled the purpose of his dispensation,that is, to bring judgment to a full end. By this dispensation all the nations would come to believe. — FRAGMENT 85

Theophylact of Ohrid: He could have crushed the Jews, he says, like a broken reed, and could have quenched their anger like a smoldering wick, but Jesus did not wish to do so until He had fulfilled His dispensation and defeated them in every way. For this is the meaning of what follows.

Matthew 12:21

Augustine of Hippo ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (De Civ. Dei, xx. 30.) This last we now see fulfilled; and thus this which cannot be denied establishes the truth of that which some have denied through ignorance, the last judgment namely, which He will hold upon earth, when he Himself shall come from heaven. For who could have expected that the Gentiles would have hope in Christ’s name, when He was in the hands of His enemies, when He was bound, scourged, set at nought, and crucified; when even His disciples had lost that hope which they had begun to have in Him? That which one thief hardly hoped on the cross, the nations scattered far and wide now hope. And that they may not die for ever, they are marked with that very cross on which he died. Let none then doubt that the last judgment will be by Christ Himself. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Tertullian: But when the same prophet represents to us even nations sometimes estimated as “the small dust of the balance,” and as “less than nothing, and vanity,” and sometimes as about to hope and “trust in the name” and arm of the Lord, are we at all misled respecting the Gentile nations by the diversity of statement? Are some of them to turn believers, and are others accounted dust, from any difference of nature? Nay, rather Christ has shone as the true light on the nations within the ocean’s limits, and from the heaven which is over us all. — On the Resurrection of the Flesh

Theophylact of Ohrid: So that the Jews would have no excuse, Christ endured all things, so that later He might condemn and overcome those who could say nothing in their own defense. What did He not do to win them over? But the Jews were not willing; therefore the Gentiles shall hope in Him.

Matthew 12:22

Augustine of Hippo ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (Quaest. Ev. i. 4.) For he that believes not, is truly daemoniac, blind, and dumb; and he that has not understanding of the faith, nor confesses, nor gives praise to God, is subject to the devil.

(De Cons. Ev. ii. 37) This narrative is given by Luke, not in this place, but after many other things intervening, and speaks of him as dumb only, and not blind. But he is not to be thought to be speaking of another man, because he is silent respecting this one particular; for in what follows he agrees exactly with Matthew. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Epiphanius Scholasticus: The entire population of the Gentiles was blind, sitting in darkness and in the shadow of death. They could not see Christ with the eyes of their hearts blinded. This was because they did not know the law and could not praise God. They were possessed by a demon, because after such great idolatry and hunger for the demonic, they were led captive as it were by an unclean spirit. “Then a blind and dumb demoniac was brought to him.” By whom was he offered if not by the apostles, who quickly brought all the Gentiles who were attacked by the devil to bring offering to God? Jesus cured him in their presence, “in such a way that he might speak and might see.” He spoke because he praised God through his faith. He saw Christ because light shined on the eyes of his heart. He was healed because, now by leaving behind his mad idolatry and his various mistakes, he was faithfully serving the Lord. — INTERPRETATION OF THE GOSPELS 24

Glossa Ordinaria ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (non occ.) The Lord had refuted the Pharisees above, when they brought false charges against the miracles of Christ, as if He had broken the sabbath in doing them. But inasmuch as with a yet greater wickedness they perversely attributed the miracles of Christ done by divine power to an unclean spirit, therefore the Evangelist places first the miracle from which they had taken occasion to blaspheme, saying, Then was brought to him one that had a dæmon, blind and dumb.

(ap. Raban.) Because of His mercy and His goodness to them they proclaim Him the Son of David. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Hilary of Poitiers ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): Not without reason, after having mentioned that all the multitude was healed together, does he bring in the cure of this man separately who was dæmoniac, blind and dumb. For after the man of the withered hand had been brought before Him, and been healed in the Synagogue, it behoved that the salvation of the Gentiles should be represented in the person of some other afflicted man; he who had been the habitation of a dæmon, and blind and dumb, should be made meet to receive God, should contain God in Christ, and by confession of God should give praise to the works of Christ.

All the multitude were astonished at this which was done, but the jealousy of the Pharisees grew thereupon, And all the multitude were astonished and said, Is not this the Son of David? — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Hilary of Poitiers: The healing of the blind, mute, demon-possessed man follows. It was not without reason that, although he had said that all the multitudes were healed together, now a blind, mute man possessed by a demon was offered to him so that the same order of understanding might follow without any ambiguity. The Pharisees accused the apostles of plucking ears of corn, that is, of prematurely gathering the people of their age. But in his presence mercy was praised over sacrifice. A man with a withered hand was offered up in a synagogue and was cured. Yet not only were these deeds not useful in converting Israel, but the Pharisees even entered into a plan of murder. So it was necessary that the salvation of the Gentiles happen after these events in the dramatic definitive form of a single person. A blind, mute man who was the dwelling place of a demon was being prepared as one fit for God, that he might behold God in Christ and might praise the works of Christ by his acknowledgment of God. The crowd was stunned at the accomplishment of this deed. But the Pharisees’ envy grew worse. These great deeds of his surpassed their human weakness. Shamefully they escaped any acknowledgment of this deed of God, covering it over with the greater crime of their own treachery. They did this so that they could say that all this power of his against demons came from Beelzebub, prince of demons. They could not suppose that these were the achievements of a man. — Commentary on Matthew 12.11

Jerome ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): Three miracles were wrought in one and the same person at the same time; the blind sees, the dumb speaks, the possessed is delivered from the dæmon. This was at that time done in the flesh, but is now daily being fulfilled in the conversion of them that believe; the dæmon is cast out when they first behold the light of the faith, and then their mouths which had before been stopped are opened to utter the praises of God. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Jerome: (Verse 22.) Then a demon-possessed man who was blind and mute was brought to him, and he healed him, so that he could speak and see. All the crowds were amazed and said, ‘Could this be the Son of David?’ But when the Pharisees heard this, they said, ‘This man does not cast out demons except by Beelzebul, the prince of demons.’ Three signs were performed simultaneously in one man: the blind see, the mute speak, and the one possessed by a demon is set free. This was indeed done in a physical sense at that time, but it is also fulfilled daily in the conversion of believers, so that after the demon is expelled, they first see the light of faith, and then their mouths are opened in praise of God. — Commentary on Matthew

John Chrysostom ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): We may wonder at the wickedness of the dæmon; he had obstructed both inlets by which he could believe, namely, hearing and sight. But Christ opened both, whence it follows, And he healed him., insomuch that the blind and dumb both spake and saw. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

John Chrysostom: “Then they brought unto Him one possessed with a devil, blind and dumb, and He healed him, insomuch that the blind and dumb both spake and saw.”

O wickedness of the evil spirit! he had barred up both entrances, whereby that person should have believed, as well sight as hearing; nevertheless, both did Christ open. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 40

Rabanus Maurus ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (e Beda in Luc.) The multitude who seemed less learned, always wondered at the works of the Lord; they, on the other hand, either denied these things, or what they could not deny laboured to pervert by an ill interpretation, as though they were wrought not by a Deity, but by an unclean spirit, namely, Beelzebub, who was the God of Acharon: The Pharisees when they heard it said, This man does not cast out dæmons but by Beelzebub, the prince of the dæmons. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Remigius of Rheims ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): And it should be known, that the meaning not only of this passage, but of many others also, is supported by this testimony from the Prophet. The words, Behold my servant, may be referred to the place in which the Father had said above, This is my Son. (Mat. 3:17.) The words, I will put my Spirit upon him, is referred to the descent of the Holy Spirit upon the Lord at His baptism; He shall declare judgment to the Gentiles, to that which He says below, When the Son of Man shall sit in the seat of his Majesty. (Mat. 25:31) What he adds, He shall not strive nor cry, refers to the Lord how He answered but little to the Chief Priests, and to Pilate, but to Herod nothing at all. He shall not break the bruised reed, refers to His shunning His persecutors that they might not be made worse; and that In his name shall the Gentiles hope, refers to what Himself says below, Go ye, and teach all nations. (Mat. 28:19)

The word Then refers to that above, where having healed the man who had the withered hand, He went out of the synagogue. Or it may be taken of a more extended time; Then, namely, when these things were being done or said.

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

Matthew 12:23

John Chrysostom: “And all the people were amazed, saying, Is not this the Son of David? But the Pharisees said, This fellow doth not cast out devils, but by Beelzebub, the prince of the devils.”

And yet what great thing had been said? Nevertheless, not even this did they endure: to such a degree, as I have already remarked, are they ever stung by the good works done to their neighbors, and nothing grieves them so much as the salvation of men. And yet He had actually retired, and had given room for their passion to subside; but the evil was again rekindled, because a benefit was again conferred; and the evil spirit was not so indignant as they. For he indeed departed from the body, and gave place and fled away, uttering no sound; but these were endeavoring now to slay, now to defame Him. That is, their first aim not succeeding, they would fain hurt His good name.

Such a thing is envy, than which no worse evil can exist. For the adulterer indeed enjoys some pleasure, such as it is, and in a short time accomplishes his proper sin; but the envious man punishes himself, and takes vengeance upon himself more than on the person whom he envies, and never ceases from his sin, but is continually engaged in the commission thereof. For as a sow in mire, and evil spirits in our hurt, so also doth he delight in his neighbor’s ills; and if anything painful take place, then is he refreshed, and takes breath; accounting the calamities of others his own joys, and the blessings of others his own ills; and he considers not what pleasure may accrue to himself, but what pain to his neighbor. These men therefore were it not meet to stone and beat to death, like mad dogs, like destroying demons, like the very furies?

For as beetles feed on dung, so do these men on the calamities of others, being a sort of common foes and enemies of our nature. And whereas the rest of mankind pity even a brute when it is killed, dost thou, on seeing a man receive benefits, become like a wild beast, tremble, and turn pale? Why, what can be worse than this madness? Therefore, you see, whoremongers and publicans were able to enter into the kingdom, but the envious, being within it, went out: For “the children of the kingdom,” it is said, “shall be cast out.” And the former, once freed from their present wickedness, attained to things which they never looked for, while these latter lost even the good things which they had; and very reasonably. For this turns a man into a devil, this renders one a savage demon. Thus did the first murder arise; thus was nature forgotten; thus the earth defiled; thus afterwards did it open its mouth, to receive yet living, and utterly destroy, Dathan, and Korah, and Abiram, and all that multitude. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 40

Theophylact of Ohrid: The demon had stopped up the avenues towards faith, that is, the eyes, the hearing, and the tongue. But Jesus healed, and was called the Son of David by the multitude. For the Christ was expected to come from the seed of David. And so now, if you see a man who neither understands the good, nor accepts the words of another, consider him blind and dumb, and may God touch his heart and heal him.

Matthew 12:24

Theophylact of Ohrid: Although the Lord had departed for their sake, nevertheless they heard of it even from afar and slandered Him as He was doing good to men, and thus they were enemies of nature, as is the devil.

Matthew 12:25

Chromatius of Aquileia: The Lord declared that a kingdom or city or house divided against itself could not stand. This was said in reference to the kingdom that the Jews themselves occupied under the rule of Jeroboam, the servant of Solomon, which was judged as abandoned before being divided. The Jews would lose entirely the city of Jerusalem, to which Samaria had been hostile. They would lose the dwelling place of God’s temple against which golden calves and the house of idols had been erected. He showed them that they ought rather to follow that kingdom that cannot be divided—that is, the heavenly and eternal one. The spiritual city of Jerusalem always remains fixed and immovable. No hostile power ever has been or will be able to overcome the true house of God. That house which is protected by the Son of God is quite safe. — TRACTATE ON Matthew 49.5

Glossa Ordinaria ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (ord.) He holds them therefore in this dilemma. For Christ casts out dæmons either by the power of God, or by the Prince of the dæmons. If by the power of God, their accusations are malicious; if by the Prince of the dæmons, his kingdom is divided, and will not stand, and therefore let them depart out of his kingdom. And this alternative He intimates that they had chosen for themselves, when they refused to believe in Him. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Hilary of Poitiers ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): For a city or family is analogous to a kingdom, as it follows, And every city or house divided against itself shall not stand.

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

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

Hilary of Poitiers: The law comes from God. The promise of the kingdom of Israel comes from the law, and the announcement of Christ’s birth and arrival come from the law. If the kingdom of the law is divided against itself, it will of necessity be abandoned. Every power is pulled down by division, and the strength of a kingdom separated from itself is destroyed. Thus the kingdom of Israel has fallen from the law when the people of the law oppose the fulfillment of the law in Christ. “But both a city and a house divided against themselves will not stand.” The dwelling of a city is the same principle as that of a kingdom. But this city of Jerusalem is always viewed in contrast to the boastful tyranny of the nations. Now after Jerusalem had been inflamed against the Lord by the madness of its people and after the crowd of the faithful had put his apostles to flight, then it will not stand because of the division of those who are leaving. And so, what directly follows this division is the order for that city’s destruction. — Commentary on Matthew 12.13-14

Jerome ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): The Pharisees ascribed the works of God to the Prince of the dæmons; and the Lord makes answer not to what they said, but to what they thought, that even thus they might be compelled to believe His power, Who saw the secrets of the heart; Jesus, knowing their thoughts, said unto them.

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

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

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

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

John Chrysostom ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (Hom. xli.) Above they had accused Christ of having cast out dæmons by Beelzebub; but then He did not reprove them, suffering them, if they would, to acknowledge Him from further miracles, and to learn His greatness from His doctrine. But because they continued to maintain the same things, He now rebukes them, although their accusation had been very unreasonable. But jealousy recks not what it says, so that only it say somewhat. Yet does not Christ contemn them, but answers with a gracious mildness, teaching us to be gentle to our enemies, and not to be troubled, even though they should speak such things against us, as we neither acknowledge in us, nor have any reasonableness in themselves. Therein also He proves that the things which they had said against Him were false, for it is not of one having a dæmon to show such mercy, and to know the thoughts. Moreover, because this their accusation was very unreasonable, and they feared the multitude, they did not dare to proclaim it openly, but kept it in their thoughts; wherefore he says, Knowing their thoughts. He does not repeat their thoughts in His answer, not to divulge their wickedness; but He brings forward an answer; it was His object to do good to the sinners, not to proclaim their sin. He does not answer them out of the Scriptures, because they would not hearken to Him as they explained them differently, but He refutes them from common opinions. For assaults from without are not so destructive as quarrels within; and this is so in bodies and in all other things. But in the mean while He draws instances from matters more known, saying, Every kingdom divided against itself shall be brought to desolation; for there is nothing on earth more powerful than a kingdom, and yet that is destroyed by contention. What then must we say concerning a city or a family, that whether it be great or small, it is destroyed when it is at discord within itself.

Or thus; If he is divided, he is made weak, and perishes; but if he perishes, how can he cast out another? — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Seest thou how great the absurdity of the accusation, how great the folly, the inconsistency? Since it is not for the same persons to say first, that He stands, and casts out devils, and then to say, that He stands by that, which it was likely would be the cause of His undoing. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 41

Remigius of Rheims ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): Beelzebub is the same as Beel or Baal, or Beelphegor. Beel was father of Ninus king of Assyria; Baal was so called because he was worshipped on high; he was called Beelphegor from the mountain Phegor; Zebub was the servant of Abimelech the son of Gedeon, who, having slain his seventy brothers, built a temple to Baal, and set him up as Priest therein, to drive away the flies which were collected there by the abundant blood of the victims; for Zebub means, a fly. Beelzebub therefore is interpreted, The man of flies, wherefore from this most unclean worship they called him the Prince of the dæmons. Having therefore nothing more mean to cast upon the Lord, they said that He cast out dæmons by Beelzebub. And it should be known that this word is not to be read with d or t at the end, as some corrupt copies have, but with b. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Matthew 12:26

Augustine of Hippo: In saying this, he wanted it to be understood from their confession that they had chosen to live in him by not believing in the kingdom of the devil and that the devil could not stand divided against himself. So let the Pharisees choose what they want. If Satan could not cast out Satan, they could find nothing to say against the Lord. But if Satan can cast out Satan, let them look out for themselves all the more and let them abandon his kingdom because it cannot stand divided against itself. — SERMON 71.1

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

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

Matthew 12:27

Augustine of Hippo ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (Quæst. Ev. i. 5.) Whence the sense might be this, If I by Beelzebub vast out dæmons, then, according to your own opinion, the kingdom of God is come upon you, for the kingdom of the Devil, being thus divided against itself, cannot stand. Thus calling that the kingdom of God, in which the wicked are condemned, and are separated from the faithful, who are now doing penitence for their sins. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Glossa Ordinaria ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (ap Anselm.) For the weakening of the kingdom of the Devil is the increase of the kingdom of God. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Hilary of Poitiers ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): And they are worthily appointed judges over them, to whom Christ is found to have given that power over the dæmons, which it was denied that He had.

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

Jerome ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): But if ye think, ye Scribes and Pharisees, that the dæmons depart out of the possessed in obedience to their Prince, that men may be imposed upon by a concerted fraud, what can ye say to the healing of diseases which the Lord also wrought? It is something more if ye assign to the dæmons even bodily infirmities, and the signs of spiritual virtues.

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

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

Jerome: If they were exorcists casting out devils by invoking God’s name, he intimates by clever questioning that they should declare the work to be of the Holy Spirit. He goes on to say, “If the casting out of devils by your [the Pharisees’] children is attributed to God and not to devils, how come the same work does not have the same cause?” Therefore “they shall be your judges,” not by authority but by comparison. While they attribute to God the casting out of devils, you attribute it to Beelzebub the prince of devils. But it was said about the apostles (and this we should bear in mind), they will be the judges of those children, for they will sit on twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel. — COMMENTARY ON Matthew 2.12.27

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

John Chrysostom ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): After the first answer, He comes to a second more plain than the first, saying, And if I by Beelzebub cast out dæmons, by whom do your sons cast them out? Therefore shall they be your judges.

Yet He said not, My disciples, or Apostles, but your children; that if they chose to return again to their own privileges, they might take occasion hence; but if they should be ungrateful, they might not have even an impudent excuse. And the Apostles cast out dæmons by virtue of power which they had from Him, and yet the Pharisees made no such charge against them; for it was not the actions themselves, but the person of Christ to which they were opposed. Desiring then to show that the things which were said against Him were only jealous suspicions, He brings forward the Apostles. And also He leads them to a knowledge of Himself, showing how they stood in the way of their own good, and resisted their own salvation; whereas they ought to be joyful because He had come to bestow great goods upon them; If I by the Spirit of God cast out dæmons, then is the kingdom of God come upon you. This also shows that it is a matter of great power to cast out dæmons, and not an ordinary grace. And thus it is He reasons, Therefore is the kingdom of God come upon you, as much as to say, If this indeed be so, then is the Son of God come upon you. But this He hints darkly, that it may not seem hard to them. Also to draw their attention, He said not merely, The kingdom hath come, but, upon you; that is to say, These good things are coming for you; why do you oppose your own salvation; for this is the very sign given by the Prophets of the presence of the Son of God, that such works as these should be wrought by Divine power. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Now thus speaking He signified the power of charity, and the weakness of separation and contentiousness. Wherefore He was Himself also continually charging His disciples, on every occasion, concerning charity, and teaching them that the devil, to subvert it, leaves nothing undone. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 41

Rabanus Maurus ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): Or, because the Apostles well knew within their own conscience that they had learnt no evil art from Him. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

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

Matthew 12:28

Apollinaris of Laodicea: Again, his ability “to cast out demons” in the Spirit was something which, as man, he had been made able to do, according to the divine economy. And if the work of the Spirit is the kingdom of God, we should in no way regard the Spirit as something added to the Godhead, as if brought in from the servile creation in order to prepare for the divine kingdom. — FRAGMENT 72

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

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

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

Matthew 12:29

Augustine of Hippo ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (ubi sup.) For he held us, that we should not by our own strength be able to free ourselves from him, but by the grace of God. By his goods, he means all the unbelievers. He has bound the strong man, in that He has taken away from him all power of hindering the faithful from following Christ, and gaining the kingdom of heaven. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Cyril of Alexandria: He calls the devil strong, not as though he were so by his created nature but as signifying his tyranny over us, which he has obtained through our own indolence. The Son says, in effect, “I will despoil him, not by allowing him to have human beings as worshipers but by changing their belief so that they might come to acknowledge God. In that case, how then could he become my ally? For is he fighting against himself.” — FRAGMENT 155

Jerome ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): His house is this world, which is set in evil, not by the majesty of the Creator, but by the greatness of the sinner. The strong man is bound and chained in tartarus, bruised by the Lord’s foot. Yet ought we not therefore to be careless; for here the conqueror Himself pronounces our adversary to be strong. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

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

Rabanus Maurus ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): Therefore He has spoiled his house, in that them whom He foresaw should be His own, He set free from the snares of the Devil, and has joined to the Church. Or in that He has divided the whole world among His Apostles and their successors to be converted. By this plain parable therefore He shows that He does not join in a deceitful working with the dæmons as they falsely accused Him, but by the might of His divinity He frees men from the dæmons. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Theodore of Mopsuestia: Jesus here compares the earth with a house and human beings with vessels or possessions. Human beings have become possessions of demons and of the devil, having by evil means been brought under his authority. Thus it was impossible for the demons’ own possessions to be taken away unless the demons were first weakened and bound with chains. — FRAGMENT 68

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

Matthew 12:30

Chromatius of Aquileia: And rightly Jesus adds, “He who is not with me is against me. And he who does not gather with me scatters.” By this he meant that his work is one thing and the devil’s work another. For the devil is the enemy of human well being. It is proper for the devil to scatter to utter destruction and for Christ to gather to salvation. Hence it is clear that one who is against the Lord cannot be with the Lord. Therefore, although the Lord seems to be repudiating those Pharisees who, unwilling to gather with Christ, have remained the Lord’s enemies and adversaries, he speaks also of all heretics and schismatics. Drawing impious conclusions against the church or the Lord by way of unorthodox teachings or schismatic beliefs, they aim to tear asunder and ravage the incorrupt body of the church and the unity of peace and faith. They are oblivious to Solomon’s words: “He who splits a log is endangered by it.” Clearly those who cause separation in the church shall run the risk of eternal death. — TRACTATE ON Matthew 50.2.25

Hilary of Poitiers ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): Wherein He shows how far He is from having borrowed any power from the Devil; teaching us how great the danger to think amiss of Him, not to be with Whom, is the same as to be against Him. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

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

Jerome ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): But let none think that this is said of heretics and schismatics; though we may apply it besides to such; but it is shown by the context to refer to the Devil; in that the works of the Saviour cannot be compared with the works of Beelzebub. He seeks to hold men’s souls in captivity, the Lord to set them free; he preaches idols, the Lord the knowledge of the true God; he draws men to sin, the Lord calls them back to virtues. How then can these have agreement together, whose works are so opposite? — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

John Chrysostom ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): After that third reply, here follows a fourth, He that is not with me is against me.

Therefore whoso gathereth not with me, nor is with me, may not be compared together with me, that with me he should cast out dæmons, but rather seeks to scatter what is mine. But tell me; If you were to have fought together with some one, and he should not be willing to come to your aid, is he not therefore against you? The Lord also Himself said in another place, He that is not against you is for you. (Luke 9:50) To which that which is here said is not contrary. For here He is speaking of the Devil who is our adversary—there of some man who was on their side, of whom it is said, We saw one casting out dæmons in thy name. Here He seems to allude to the Jews, classing them with the Devil; for they were against Him, and scattered what He would gather. But it is fair to allow that He spoke this of Himself; for He was against the Devil, and scattered abroad the things of the Devil. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

John Chrysostom: “He that is not with me is against me, and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad.”

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

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

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

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

“Therefore I say unto you, that all manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men.” — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 41

Rabanus Maurus ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): Therefore He has spoiled his house, in that them whom He foresaw should be His own, He set free from the snares of the Devil, and has joined to the Church. Or in that He has divided the whole world among His Apostles and their successors to be converted. By this plain parable therefore He shows that He does not join in a deceitful working with the dæmons as they falsely accused Him, but by the might of His divinity He frees men from the dæmons. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

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

Matthew 12:31

Augustine of Hippo ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (Serm. 71. 13.) For what difference does it make to the purpose, whether it be said, The spirit of blasphemy shall not be forgiven, or, Whose shall blaspheme against the Holy Spirit it shall not be forgiven him. (Luke 12:10) as Luke speaks; except that the same sense is expressed more clearly in the one place than in the other, the one Evangelist not overthrowing but explaining the other? The spirit of blasphemy it is said shortly, not expressing what spirit; to make which clear it is added, And whoso shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him. After having said the same of all manner of blasphemy, He would in a more particular way speak of that blasphemy which is against the Son of Man, and which in the Gospel according to John He shows to be very heavy, where He says concerning the Holy Ghost, He shall convince the world of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment; of sin, because they believe not on me. That then which here follows, He who shall speak a word against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, nor in that which is to come, is not said because the Holy Spirit is in the Trinity greater than the Son, which no heretic ever affirmed.

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

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

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

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

Glossa Ordinaria ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (ap. Anselm. vid. infra in cap. 25. 46.) This passage destroys that heresy of Origen, who asserted that after many ages all sinners should obtain pardon; for it is here said, this shall not be forgiven either in this world, or in the world to come. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Gregory the Dialogist ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (Dial. iv. 39.) Hence we may gather that there are some sins that are remitted in this world, and some in the world to come; for what is denied of one sin, must be supposed to be admitted of others. And this may be believed in the case of trifling faults; such as much idle discourse, immoderate laughter, or the sin of carefulness in our worldly affairs, which indeed can hardly be managed without sin even by one who knows how he ought to avoid sin; or sins through ignorance (if they be lesser sins) which burden us even after death, if they have not been remitted to us while yet in this life. But it should be known that none will there obtain any purgation even of the least sin, but he who by good actions has merited the same in this life. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Hilary of Poitiers ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): He condemns by a most rigorous sentence this opinion of the Pharisees, and of such as thought with them, promising pardon for all sins, but refusing it to blasphemy against the Spirit; Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men.

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

Hilary of Poitiers: He condemns in no uncertain terms the thinking of the Pharisees and their intellectual bedfellows. He promises forgiveness of all sins and denies pardon for blasphemy against the Spirit. For although other words and deeds may be treated with liberal forgiveness, there is no mercy if God is denied in Christ. For whatever sins one may commit, he extends the benevolence of his repeated admonition. All kinds of sins are to be forgiven, but blasphemy against the Holy Spirit shall not be forgiven. For what is so beyond the pale of forgiveness as to deny Christ since he is of God? To forsake Christ is to forsake the nature of the Spirit of the Father residing in him. For Jesus fulfills every work in the Spirit of God, is himself the kingdom of heaven, and in him God is reconciling the world to himself. Therefore any blasphemy aimed at Christ is aimed at God, because God is in Christ and Christ is in God. — Commentary on Matthew 12.17

Jerome ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): Or the passage may be thus understood; Whoso speaks a word against the Son of Man, as stumbling at My flesh, and thinking of Me as no more than man, such opinion and blasphemy though it is not free from the sin of heresy, yet finds pardon because of the little worth of the body. But whoso plainly perceiving the works of God, and being unable to deny the power of God, speaks falsely against them prompted by jealousy, and calls Christ who is the Word of God, and the works of the Holy Ghost, Beelzebub, to him it shall not be forgiven, neither in this world, nor in the world to come. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

John Chrysostom ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): Therefore whoso gathereth not with me, nor is with me, may not be compared together with me, that with me he should cast out dæmons, but rather seeks to scatter what is mine. But tell me; If you were to have fought together with some one, and he should not be willing to come to your aid, is he not therefore against you? The Lord also Himself said in another place, He that is not against you is for you. (Luke 9:50) To which that which is here said is not contrary. For here He is speaking of the Devil who is our adversary—there of some man who was on their side, of whom it is said, We saw one casting out dæmons in thy name. Here He seems to allude to the Jews, classing them with the Devil; for they were against Him, and scattered what He would gather. But it is fair to allow that He spoke this of Himself; for He was against the Devil, and scattered abroad the things of the Devil.

The Lord had refuted the Pharisees by explaining His own actions, and He now proceeds to terrify them. For this is no small part of correction, to threaten punishment, as well as to set right false accusation.

Otherwise according to the first exposition. The Jews were indeed ignorant of Christ, but of the Holy Ghost they had had a sufficient communication, for the Prophets spake by Him. What He here saith then is this; Be it that ye have stumbled at Me because of the flesh which is around Me; but can ye in the same manner say of the Holy Spirit, We know Him not? Wherefore this blasphemy cannot be forgiven you, and ye shall be punished both here and hereafter, for since to cast out dæmons and to heal diseases are of the Holy Spirit, you do not speak evil against Me only, but also against Him; and so your condemnation is inevitable both here and hereafter. For there are who are punished in this life only; as they who among the Corinthians were unworthy partakers of the mysteries; others who are punished only in the life to come, as the rich man in hell; but those here spoken of are to be punished both in this world, and in the world to come, as were the Jews, who suffered horrible things in the taking of Jerusalem, and shall there undergo most heavy punishment. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Let us labor, therefore, to be of the same part with these: or if not with these, at least with them that wash away their sins here. For fearful indeed is that other judgment, and inexorable the vengeance, and incurable the punishment. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 41

Remigius of Rheims ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): But it should be known that they are not forgiven to all men universally, but to such only as have performed due penitence for their guiltinesses. So by these words is overthrown the error of Novatian, who said that the faithful could not rise by penitence after a fall, nor merit pardon of their sins, especially they who in persecution deniedb. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Severus of Antioch: Therefore, no matter what they say in blasphemy—even against the Son of Man when they were scandalized under the economy of law according to the flesh, as I pointed out—our Lord makes it clear they will be forgiven on the excuse of their ignorance of the mystery, his self-abasement and humility shown as a man. That is why Jesus said, “It will be forgiven humans” and did not say “you.” What he was saying in effect was “It is to those who do not know the depth of my dispensation that I offer forgiveness.” But in their blasphemy they heaped insults against the divine signs he manifested and the many miracles he worked through the Spirit who was in him and who is of the same essence (ousia). They exclaimed, “He casts out demons by the prince of demons.” Those insults—since they smack of blasphemy against the Holy Spirit and (because of the facts themselves) what is proper of God, with no room for excuse—Christ says they shall not be forgiven. They could not use ignorance as a pretext for their defense. — CATHEDRAL SERMONS, HOMILY 98.32

Matthew 12:32

Augustine of Hippo: Against this unmerited gift, against this free grace of God, the impenitent heart may continue to murmur. So it is unrepentance that is a blasphemy against the Spirit. It is not forgiven either in this world or in the next. Think of a person whose sins are entirely forgiven in faithful baptism and whom the church has welcomed. This is the very church commissioned to remit sin, in which whatever sins it remits are promised to be truly remitted. You are speaking a very evil, utterly graceless word against the Holy Spirit, you are speaking it in thought or out loud, if when the patience of God is beckoning you to repentance, you harden your impenitent heart. By doing so you store up wrath for yourself on the day of wrath and of the revelation of the just judgment of God, who will render to us all according to our works. This is the impenitence that is called both by the name of blasphemy and speaking against the Holy Spirit, which will never be forgiven. This is the flagrant impenitence against which both the herald and the Judge cried out when they proclaimed: “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is near.” It is the same impenitence against which the Lord opened his mouth to preach the gospel. He preached against it when he foretold that the gospel itself was to be preached in the whole world; when he said to the disciples after rising from the dead that it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise again from the dead on the third day; and for repentance and the forgiveness of sins to be preached in his name throughout all nations, beginning from Jerusalem. Yes, this refusal to repent has absolutely no forgiveness, neither in this age nor in the age to come, because repentance obtains forgiveness in this world in preparation for the next. — SERMON 71.12.20

Glossa Ordinaria: Ap. Anselm, vid. infra in cap. 25: This passage destroys that heresy of Origen, who asserted that after many ages all sinners should obtain pardon; for it is here said, this shall notbe forgiven either in this world, or in the world to come.

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

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

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

Matthew 12:33

Augustine of Hippo: When he says, “Make the tree good and its fruit good,” this is not a friendly admonition but a clear command to be obeyed. And when Jesus says, “Make the tree bad and its fruit bad,” he does not command you to do so, but he warns you to guard against it. He is referring to those who think they are able, though they are bad, to speak good things or to do good works. This the Lord Jesus says they cannot do. For a person must first be changed in order for his works to be changed. But if a person remains in an evil state, that one cannot do good works. If he abides in what is good, he will not be found producing evil works. — SERMONS ON NEW TESTAMENT LESSONS 72.1.1

Augustine of Hippo ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (Serm. 72. 1.) Or this is an admonition to ourselves that we should be good trees that we may be able to bring forth good fruit; Make the tree good, and its fruit good, is a precept of health to which obedience is necessary. But what He says, Make the tree corrupt, and its fruit corrupt, is not a command to do, but a warning to take heed, spoken against those who being evil thought that they could speak good things, or have good works; this the Lord declares is impossible. The man must be changed first, that his works may be changed; for if the man remains in that wherein he is evil, he cannot have good works; if he remains in that wherein he is good, he cannot have evil works. Christ found us all corrupt trees, but gave power to become sons of God to them that believe on His name. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Gregory the Dialogist ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (Dial. iv. 39.) Hence we may gather that there are some sins that are remitted in this world, and some in the world to come; for what is denied of one sin, must be supposed to be admitted of others. And this may be believed in the case of trifling faults; such as much idle discourse, immoderate laughter, or the sin of carefulness in our worldly affairs, which indeed can hardly be managed without sin even by one who knows how he ought to avoid sin; or sins through ignorance (if they be lesser sins) which burden us even after death, if they have not been remitted to us while yet in this life. But it should be known that none will there obtain any purgation even of the least sin, but he who by good actions has merited the same in this life. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Hilary of Poitiers ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): Thus did He at that present refute the Jews, who seeing Christ’s works to be of power more than human, would notwithstanding not allow the hand of God. And at the same time He convicts all future errors of the faith, such as that of those who taking away from the Lord His divinity, and communion of the Father’s substance, have fallen into divers heresies; having their habitation neither under the plea of ignorance as the Gentiles, nor yet within the knowledge of the truth. He figures Himself as a tree set in the body, seeing that through the inward fruitfulness of His power sprung forth abundant richness of fruit. Therefore either must be made a good tree with good fruits, or an evil tree with evil fruits; not that a good tree is to be made a bad tree, or the reverse; but that in this metaphor we may understand that Christ is either to be left in fruitlessness, or to be retained in the fruitfulness of good works. But to hold one’s self neuter, to attribute some things to Christ, but to deny Him those things that are highest, to worship Him as God, and yet to deny Him a common substance with the Father, is blasphemy against the Spirit. In admiration of His so great works you dare not take away the name of God, yet through malevolence of soul you debase His high nature by denying His participation of the Father’s substance. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Hilary of Poitiers: Though spoken in the present, Jesus’ words would be borne out in the future. For in the present he refutes the Jews. They could see that the works of Christ were beyond human power, but they were unwilling to declare them as works of God. In saying this Jesus anticipates the future of numerous perversions of faith, especially of those who would divest the Lord of the dignity and union with the Father’s nature and so plunge into heresy. They then wander aimlessly in the arena between those who act with the excuse of ignorance and those who live in the knowledge of truth.…Through a tree’s inherent vitality, fruitfulness abounds. Therefore either the tree must be made good with good fruit or made bad with bad fruit, because by its fruit the tree is known. The meaning is not that a bad tree, according to the nature of trees, can constitute what is good or be good in its branches if it is bad. Rather, it is that Christ must either be left behind as useless or held onto as good because of the usefulness of good fruit. — Commentary on Matthew 12.18

Jerome ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): Thus He holds them in a syllogism which the Greeks call ‘Aphycton,’ the unavoidable; which shuts in the person questioned on both sides, and presses him with either horn. If, He saith, the Devil be evil, he cannot do good works; so that if the works you see be good, it follows that the Devil was not the agent thereof. For it cannot be that good should come of evil, or evil of good.

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

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

John Chrysostom ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (Hom. xlii.) After his former answers He here again refutes them in another manner. This He does not in order to do away their charges against Himself, but desiring to amend them, saying, Either make the tree good and his fruit good, or make the tree corrupt, and his fruit corrupt. As much as to say, None of you has said that it is an evil thing for a man to be delivered from dæmons. But because they did not speak evil of the works, but said that it was the Devil that wrought them, He shows that this charge is contrary to the common sense of things, and human conceptions. And to invent such charges can only proceed from unbounded impudence.

For the discerning of a tree is done by its fruits, not the fruits by the tree. A tree is known by its fruits. For though the tree is the cause of the fruit, yet the fruit is the evidence of the tree. But ye do the very contrary, having no fault to allege against the works, ye pass a sentence of evil against the tree, saying that I have a dæmon.

But as speaking not for Himself but for the Holy Spirit, He accordingly rebukes them, saying, Generation of vipers, how can ye being evil speak good things? This is both a rebuke of them, and a proof in their own characters of those things which had been said. As though He had said, So ye being corrupt trees cannot bring forth good fruit. I do not wonder then that you thus speak, for you are ill nourished of ill parentage, and have an evil mind. And observe He said not, How can ye speak good things, seeing ye are a generation of vipers? for these two are not connected together; but He said, How can ye being evil speak good things? He calls them generation of vipers, because they made boast of their forefathers; in order therefore to cut off this their pride, He shuts them out of the race of Abraham, assigning them a parentage corresponding to their characters.

Herein also He shows His Godhead as knowing the hidden things of the heart; for not for words only, yea but for evil thoughts also they shall receive punishment. For it is the order of nature that the store of the wickedness which abounds within should be poured forth in words through the mouth. Thus when you shall hear any speaking evil, you must infer that his wickedness is more than what his words express; for what is uttered without is but the overflowing of that within; which was a sharp rebuke to them. For if that which was spoken by them were so evil, consider how evil must be the root from whence it sprung. And this happens naturally; for oftentimes the hesitating tongue does not suddenly pour forth all its evil, while the heart, to which none other is privy, begets whatsoever evil it will, without fear; for it has little fear of God. But when the multitude of the evils which are within is increased, the things which had been hidden then burst forth through the mouth. This is that He says, Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

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

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

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

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

Yea, and what He had said before, this He establishes now also; that a good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, nor again can the converse be. So that their charges were against all consistency and nature. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 42

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

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

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

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

Yea, and what He had said before, this He establishes now also; that a good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, nor again can the converse be. So that their charges were against all consistency and nature. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 42

Rabanus Maurus ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): Or the words, Generation of vipers, may be taken as signifying children, or imitators of the Devil, because they had wilfully spoken against good works, which is of the Devil, and thence follows, Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh. That man speaks out of the abundance of the heart who is not ignorant with what intention his words are uttered; and to declare his meaning more openly He adds, A good man out of the good treasure of his heart bringeth forth good things. The treasure of the heart is the intention of the thoughts, by which the Judge judges that work which is produced, so that sometimes though the outward work that is shown seem great, yet because of the carelessness of a cold heart, they receive a little reward from the Lord. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

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

Matthew 12:34

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

Hilary of Poitiers: He taught that a corrupt outlook on life arises out of a corrupted nature. He taught that from an evil storehouse nothing can come but what is evil. An account must be rendered to God for every idle, careless and useless word. We are to be condemned or justified by the words we speak. The mercy or the judgment we receive shall depend on the inward conviction we have about the Lord of heavenly glory. — Commentary on Matthew 12.19

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

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

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

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

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

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

See how vehemently He reprehends them. For if what they had said is so evil, and is of the very mind of the devil, consider the root and well-spring of their words, how far that must reach. And this is naturally the case; for while the tongue through shame often pours not forth all its wickedness at once, the heart having no human witness, fearlessly gives birth to whatever evils it will; for of God it hath not much regard. Since then men’s sayings come to examination: and are set before all, but the heart is concealed; therefore the evils of the former grow less, while those of the latter increase. But when that within is multiplied, all that hath been awhile hidden comes forth with a violent gushing. And as persons vomiting strive at first to keep down the humors that force their way out, but, when they are overcome, cast forth much abomination; so do they that devise evil things, and speak ill of their neighbors. And what can be more barbarous than this, to overlook our soul that is more precious than all, abused by so many adulterers, and so long companying with them, even until they are sated; which will never be. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 42

Theodore of Mopsuestia: “O worst of men,” he says, “you have not shrunk from any wickedness of vipers. So it is not surprising that you utter nothing good. For words follow the disposition of the soul. How can you speak good, when you are evil?” — FRAGMENT 70

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

Matthew 12:35

Cyril of Alexandria: When he says “treasure,” Christ refers to the multitude of motives that lie in the soul. It is not by nature that people are good or bad but by their own choice. He makes this plain in his remark to the Pharisees: It is possible for one and the same person at one time to become good, at another time evil, for “a good man speaks out of the abundance of his heart,” and likewise for the bad. — FRAGMENT 158.10

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

John Chrysostom: “A good man out of his good treasure,” saith He, “bringeth forth good things, and an evil man out of his evil treasure bringeth forth evil things.”

For think not by any means, saith He, that it is so in respect of wickedness only, for in goodness also the same occurs: for there too the virtue within is more than the words without. By which He signified, that both they were to be accounted more wicked than their words indicated, and Himself more perfectly good than His sayings declared. And He calls it “a treasure,” indicating its abundance. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 42

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

Matthew 12:36

Gregory the Dialogist ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (Hom. in Ev. vi.) Or such as lacks either rightness in itself, or reasons of just necessity; — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Jerome ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): What He says, The good man out of the good treasure of his heart, & c. is either pointed against the Jews, that seeing they blasphemed God, what treasure in their heart must that be out of which such blasphemy proceeded; or it is connected with what had gone before, that like as a good man cannot bring forth evil things, nor an evil man good things, so Christ cannot do evil works, nor the Devil good works.

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

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

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

Jerome: This, too, goes with what was said before, and the meaning is that on the day of judgment each person must render an account of his or her words. If an idle word which by no means edifies the listeners is not without harm to the speaker, how much more will you Pharisees, who criticize the works of the Holy Spirit and say that I cast out devils by Beelzebub the prince of devils, have to render an account of your criticism? An idle word is what is spoken without benefit to the speaker and the listener. We overlook serious things and utter frivolous things and tell old wives’ tales. One who acts like a buffoon and makes mouths drop with boisterous laughter and who utters disgraceful things—that person shall be held to account, not for an idle word but a slanderous word. — COMMENTARY ON Matthew 2.12.36

John Chrysostom ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): The Lord follows up what He had said before by moving their fears, showing that they that have thus sinned shall receive the most extreme punishment, I say unto you, that every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give an account thereof in the day of judgment.

He said not ‘which ye have spoken,’ but makes His teaching of universal application to the whole race of mankind, and at the same time His words less grievous to them that heard them. By an idle word is meant one that is false, that accuses any falsely. Some indeed say that it includes all light talk, all such as stirs immoderate laughter, or shameful and immodest words.

See that this sentence is not a burdensome one. The Judge will pass sentence not according to what any other has said concerning you, but according to what you have yourself spoken. They that are accused then have no need to fear, but they that accuse; for those are not charged of those evil things that have been spoken of them, but these of those evil things that they have spoken. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

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

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

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

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

Wherefore not those that are slandered, but the slanderers, have need to be anxious and to tremble. For the former are not constrained to answer for themselves touching the evil things which are said of them, but the latter will, for the evil they have spoken; and over these impends the whole danger. So that the persons censured should be without anxiety, not being to give account of the evil that others have said; but the censurers have cause to be in anxiety, and to tremble, as being themselves to be dragged before the judgment-seat in that behalf. For this is indeed a diabolical snare, and a sin having in it no pleasure, but harm only. Yea, and such an one is laying up an evil treasure in his soul. And if he that hath an evil humor in him doth himself first reap the fruits of the malady, much more he that is treasuring up in himself what is more bitter than any bile, I mean, wickedness, will suffer the utmost evils, gathering unto himself a grievous disease. And it is evident from the things that He vomits out. For if they pain others so much, far more the soul that gives them birth. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 42

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

And that is idle, which is not according to the fact, which is false, which hath in it unjust accusation; and some say, that which is vain also, for instance, provoking inordinate laughter, or what is filthy, and immodest, and coarse. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 42

Remigius of Rheims ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): The words which here follow depend on those that went before; By thy words thou shat be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned. There is no doubt but that every man shall be condemned for his evil words which he speaks; but none shall be justified for his good words, unless they proceed from his inmost heart, and from a entire purpose. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Tertullian: Again, it is said that “impeachment awaits us for every vain and needless word.” It follows that, from whatever the Lord keeps us, the same He admonishes us to bear patiently from another. — Of Patience

Matthew 12:37

John Chrysostom: “For by thy words thou shall be justified, and by thy words thou shall be condemned.”

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

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

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

But if we ought not to accuse men of things which are acknowledged, much less of those which are disputed; nay, for the offender hath a judge. Do not now, I warn thee, seize upon the privilege of the Only Begotten. For Him is the throne of judgment reserved. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 42

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

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

Theodore Stratelates: If we are called to account “for every careless word,” how much more will those who have blasphemed against the Spirit of the only begotten Son receive a more bitter punishment on the day of judgment. And if, Christ says, someone merely utters a slander against someone else, that one will by no means escape judgment. If they will give an account concerning an idle word, how much more so concerning a work. — FRAGMENTS 88-89

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

Matthew 12:38

Cyril of Alexandria: They say the miracles he has performed are from devils. He only conjures up imaginary images on the earth. So come then, by your power: perform a miracle from heaven. For another Evangelist says clearly that they wanted Jesus to perform a sign from heaven as an action befitting his divine power. They said this, blinded in their minds, as though Jesus were unable to do anything befitting God. For to open the eyes of the blind and to raise the dead and to rebuke the winds and the sea—all these miracles could be accomplished only by a divine power. — FRAGMENT 160.4

Jerome ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): They require a sign of Him, as though what they had seen were not signs; and in another Evangelist what they required is more fully expressed, We would see of thee a sign from heaven. Either they would have fire from heaven as Elias did; or after the example of Samuel they would that in summer-time, contrary to the nature of the climate, thunder should be heard, lightnings gleam, and rain descend; as though they could not have spoken falsely even against such miracles, and said that they befel by reason of divers hidden motions in the air. For if thou cavillest against what thou not only beholdest with thine eyes, but feelest with thine hand, and reapest the benefit of, what wilt thou do in those things which come down from heaven. You might make answer, that in Egypt the magi also had given many signs from heaven.

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

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

Jerome: (Verse 38) Then some of the scribes and Pharisees answered him, saying, “Teacher, we want to see a sign from you.” They demand a sign as if the signs they had seen were not enough. But in another Gospel it is explained more fully what they are asking for: “We want to see a sign from heaven” (Mark 8:11). They either wanted fire to come down from above like Elijah, or they wanted thunder to roar, lightning to flash, and rain to pour down in the summertime against the natural order of the place, so that they could not accuse Jesus of working these wonders in secret or attribute them to various natural phenomena. For those who calumny the things which they see with their eyes, hold with their hand, and experience through usefulness: what will you do with those things which have come from heaven? Surely you will respond that the magicians in Egypt performed many signs from heaven (Exod. VII). — Commentary on Matthew

John Chrysostom ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (Hom. xliii.) Because the Lord had so oft repressed the shameless tongue of the Pharisees by His sayings, they now turn to His works, whereat the Evangelist wondering, says, Then certain of the Scribes and Pharisees answered, saying, Master, we would see a sign of thee; and that at a time when they should have been moved, when they should have wondered, and been dumb with astonishment; yet even at such time they desist not from their malice. For they say, We would see a sign of thee, that they may take Him as in a snare.

But their words are full of hypocrisy and irony. But now they were railing against Him, saying that He had a dæmon; now they fawn upon Him, calling Him, Master. Wherefore the Lord rebukes them severely; He answered and said unto them, An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign. When they railed on Him, He had answered them mildly; now they approached Him with smooth and deceitful words, He rebukes them sharply; showing that He was above either affection, and was neither moved to anger by evil speaking, nor was to be gained by flattery. What He says is this; What wonder that ye do thus to Me who am unknown to you, when you have done the same to the Father, of whom ye have had such large knowledge, in that, despising Him ye went after dæmons? He calls them an evil generation, because they have ever been ungrateful to their benefactors, and were made worse when they received benefits, which is the extreme of wickedness.

Which also proves Him to be equal to the Father, if not to believe in Him makes them adulterous.

For the signs He wrought were not in order to move them, for He knew that they were hard as stone, but for the profit of others. Or because they had not received it when He had given them a sign such as they now desired. And a sign was given them, when by their own punishment they learned His power. This He alludes to when He says, No sign shall he given it. As much as to say; I have shown you many mercies; yet none of these has brought you to honour My power, which you will then know when you shall behold your city thrown down upon the ground in punishment. In the mean time He brings in a saying concerning the Resurrection which they should after understand by those things that they should suffer; saying, Except the sign of the Prophet Jonas. For verily His Cross would not have been believed, unless it had had signs to testify to it. But if that were not believed, truly the Resurrection would not have been believed. For this reason also He calls this a sign, and brings forward a figure thereof, that the verity itself may be believed. It follows, As Jonas was three days and three nights in the belly of the whale,

He said not openly that He should rise again, because they would have derided him, but hints it distantly that even they might believe that He foreknew it. He said not in the earth, but in the heart of the earth, therein declaring His tomb, and that none might suspect that there was only the semblance of death. Therefore also He spake of three days, that it should be believed that He was dead. But the sign itself proves the truth of it; for Jonas was in the whale’s belly not in figure but in deed; and surely the sign did not happen in very deed, if the thing signified happened only in figure. Wherefore it is manifest that they are children of the Devil who follow Marcion asserting that the passion of Christ was only a phantasy. And that He should suffer for them also, though they would not profit by it, is shown by that which He speaks, that to this generation should be given the sign of Jonas the Prophet. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

John Chrysostom: Could then anything be more foolish than these men (not more impious only), who after so many miracles, as though none had been wrought, say, “We would see a sign from Thee?” With what intent then did they so speak? That they might lay hold of Him again. For since by His words He had stopped their mouths, once and twice and often, and had checked their shameless tongue, they come to His works again. At which also the evangelist marvelling again, said, “Then certain of the scribes answered Him, asking a sign.”

“Then,” when? When they ought to be stooping before Him, to admire, to be amazed and give way, “then” they desist not from their wickedness.

And see their words too, teeming with flattery and dissimulation. For they thought to draw Him towards them in that way. And now they insult, now they flatter Him; now calling Him a demoniac, now again “Master,” both out of an evil mind, how contrary soever the words they speak.

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

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

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

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

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

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

All this however He saith not, but leaves it to after time to make it clear to them, but for the present He is making trial of the doctrine of His resurrection, which they were to come to know by the things which they should afterwards suffer. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 43

John Chrysostom: Could then anything be more foolish than these men (not more impious only), who after so many miracles, as though none had been wrought, say, “We would see a sign from Thee?” With what intent then did they so speak? That they might lay hold of Him again. For since by His words He had stopped their mouths, once and twice and often, and had checked their shameless tongue, they come to His works again. At which also the evangelist marvelling again, said, “Then certain of the scribes answered Him, asking a sign.”

“Then,” when? When they ought to be stooping before Him, to admire, to be amazed and give way, “then” they desist not from their wickedness.

And see their words too, teeming with flattery and dissimulation. For they thought to draw Him towards them in that way. And now they insult, now they flatter Him; now calling Him a demoniac, now again “Master,” both out of an evil mind, how contrary soever the words they speak. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 43

Rabanus Maurus ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): Then He begins to answer them, giving them a sign not from heaven, which they were unworthy to see, but giving it them from the deep beneath. But to His own disciples He gave a sign from heaven, to whom He showed the glory of His blessed eternity both in a figure on the mount, and after in verity when He was taken up into heaven. Wherefore it follows, And there shall no sign he given it, but the sign of the Prophet Jonas.

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

Theophylact of Ohrid: The evangelist is amazed and so writes the word “then.” For when they should have submitted to Him because of His preceding miracles, it was then that they asked for a sign. They wanted to see a sign from heaven, as the other evangelist says (Lk. 11:16). For they thought that He performed the miracles which He did on earth by the power of the devil, as the devil is the ruler of this world. How, then, does the Saviour answer?

Matthew 12:39

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

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

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

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

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

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

What then? one may say; was no sign given it? None was given to it on asking. For not to bring in them did He work His signs (for He knew them to be hardened), but in order to amend others. Either then this may be said, or that they were not to receive such a sign as that was. For a sign did befall them, when by their own punishment they learnt His power. Here then He speaks as threatening, and with this very meaning obscurely conveyed: as if He said, innumerable benefits have I showed forth, none of these hath drawn you to me, neither were ye willing to adore my power. Ye shall know therefore my might by the contrary tokens, when ye shall see your city cast down to the ground, the walls also dismantled, the temple become a ruin; when ye shall be cast out both from your former citizenship and freedom, and shall again go about everywhere, houseless and in exile. (For all these things came to pass after the cross.) These things therefore shall be to you for great signs. And indeed it is an exceeding great sign, that their ills remain unchanged; that although ten thousand have attempted it, no one hath been able to reverse the judgment once gone forth against them. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 43

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

For after the crucifixion, the city was destroyed, and the Jewish state came to an end, they fell away from their polity and their freedom, the gospel flourished, the word was spread abroad to the ends of the world; both sea and land, both the inhabited earth and the desert perpetually proclaim its power. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 88

Origen of Alexandria: That generation was evil, on account of the influence that had come to be in it from the evil one. It was adulterous because it had left her natural husband—the word or law of truth—and had come to be wedded to a lie. The law which is “in the members” of our flesh wars against “the law of the mind.” It is an adulterer of the soul. Every opposing power, when it has intercourse with the soul unfaithfully—the soul that has as its bridegroom the Word of God—causes the soul to commit adultery. — FRAGMENT 274

Matthew 12:40

Athanasius of Alexandria: We know that He, the Only-begotten Son of God, at the Father’s bidding came from the heavens for the abolishment of sin, and was born of the Virgin Mary, and conversed with the disciples, and fulfilled the Economy according to the Father’s will, and was crucified, and died and descended into the parts beneath the earth, and regulated the things there, Whom the gate-keepers of hell saw [Job 38:17] and shuddered; and He rose from the dead the third day… — De Synodis, Part 1, Section 8

Augustine of Hippo: The Savior pointed out that Jonah the prophet, who having been tossed into the sea was caught in the belly of the whale and emerged on the third day, prefigured the Son of Man who would suffer and rise on the third day. The Jewish people were censured in comparison with the Ninevites, for the Ninevites, to whom Jonah the prophet had been sent by way of reproof, placated God’s wrath by repenting and gained his mercy. “And behold,” he said, “something greater than Jonah is here,” the Lord Jesus implying himself. The Ninevites heard the servant and amended their ways; the Jews heard the Lord and not only did they not amend their ways but moreover they killed him. — SERMON 72A.1

Augustine of Hippo ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (De Cons. Ev. iii. 24.) Some, not knowing the Scripture manner of speaking, would interpret as one night those three hours of darkness when the sun was darkened from the sixth to the ninth hour; and as a day in like manner those other three hours in which it was again restored to the world, from the ninth hour till sunset. Then follows the night preceding the sabbath, which if we reckon with its own day we shall have thus two days and two nights. Then after the sabbath follows the night of the sabbath prime, that is of the dawning of the Lord’s day on which the Lord arose. Thus we shall only get two nights and two days, with this one night to be added if we might understand the whole of it, and it could not be shown that that dawn was indeed the latter part of the night. So that not even by taking in those six hours, three of darkness, and three of restored light, can we establish the computation of three days and three nights. It remains therefore that we find the explanation in that usual manner of Scripture of putting a part for the whole.

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

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

But He who descended into the regions beneath the earth came up again; and Jesus, who was buried, truly rose again the third day. And if the Jews ever worry you, meet them at once by asking thus: Did Jonah come forth from the whale on the third day, and has not Christ then risen from the earth on the third day? — Catechetical Lecture 4, Sections 11-12

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

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

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

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

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

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

When the Lord rose from the dead, He led captivity captive (Eph. 4:8)—all the saints in the Old Testament who had died and gone to Abraham’s bosom were transferred when Paradise was moved (Matt. 27:52). And by the time of Paul, Paradise was up (2 Cor. 12:4). So if you had lived in the Old Testament, you would have died and gone down to Sheol/Hades. But the part of Hades that contained the saints of God has been emptied out, and now when God’s people die, what happens? To be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord (2 Cor. 5:6, 8). We still go to Paradise, but Paradise itself has been moved into the heavens. — The Apostles Creed 11: He Descended Into Hades

Gregory of Nyssa: What shall we learn of the three days’ time? […] This one hath loosed the oath of death, this one hath comforted the firstborn of the dead, in this one the iron gates of death are broken down, in this one the brass of the rod of hell are broken. Now the prison of death is opened, now the prisoners are declared to be released… As the ruler of darkness could not approach the presence of the Light unimpeded, had he not seen in Him something of flesh, then, as soon as he saw the God-bearing flesh and saw the miracle performed through it by the Deity, he hoped that if he came to take hold of the flesh through death, then he would take hold of all the power contained in it. Therefore, having swallowed the bait of the flesh, he was pierced by the hook of the Deity and thus the dragon was transfixed by the hook. — Of the three days between the death and resurrection of our Lord Jesus (De tridui inter mortem et resurrectionem domini nostri Jesu), Section 3

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

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

Tertullian: By ourselves the lower regions (of Hades) are not supposed to be a bare cavity, nor some subterranean sewer of the world, but a vast deep space in the interior of the earth, and a concealed recess in its very bowels; inasmuch as we read that Christ in His death spent three days in the heart of the earth, [Matthew 12:40] that is, in the secret inner recess which is hidden in the earth, and enclosed by the earth, and superimposed on the abysmal depths which lie still lower down. Now although Christ is God, yet, being also man, “He died according to the Scriptures,” [1 Corinthians 15:3] and “according to the same Scriptures was buried.” With the same law of His being He fully complied, by remaining in Hades in the form and condition of a dead man; nor did He ascend into the heights of heaven before descending into the lower parts of the earth, that He might there make the patriarchs and prophets partakers of Himself. [1 Peter 3:19] — A Treatise on the Soul, Chapter 55

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

Theodore Stratelates: Christ says he will spend “three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.” He is referring to the end of Friday, all of Saturday and the beginning of Sunday [of the passion week], in keeping with the way people understood the beginning and ending of days. For we too commemorate the third day of those who have died, not when three days and three nights, completed in equal measure, have gone by. But we reckon as a single, complete day that day on which the person died, regardless of what hour the death occurred. We count as another day that on which we take our leave of the departed in hymns before the tombs. Following this same kind of sequence, then, the Lord announced that he would spend a full three days and nights under the earth. A clear indication of this is the fact that the women arrived at that very time, in order to fulfill those things that the law prescribed to be done for the dead upon the third day. — FRAGMENT 90

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

Matthew 12:41

Cyril of Alexandria: If Jonah then is taken as a type of Christ, he is not so taken in every respect—he was sent to preach to the Ninevites, but he sought to flee from the presence of God. And he is seen to shrink from going to the east. The Son also was sent from God the Father to preach to the nations, but he was not unwilling to assume this ministry.The prophet appeals to those sailing with him to throw him into the sea, then he was swallowed by a great fish, then after three days he was given back up and afterwards went to Nineveh and fulfilled his ministry. But he was embittered beyond measure when God took pity upon the Ninevites. Christ willingly submitted to death, he remained in the heart of the earth, he came back to life and afterward went up to Galilee and commanded that the preaching to the Gentiles should begin. But he was not grieved to see that those who were called to acknowledge the truth were being saved. Thus just as bees in the field, when flitting about the flowers, always gather up what is useful for the provision of the hives, so we also, when searching in the divinely inspired Scriptures, need always to be collecting and collating what is perfect for explicating Christ’s mysteries and to interpret the Word fully without cause for rebuke. — FRAGMENT 162

Jerome ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): Not by a sentence of judgment, but by the comparison of their example; as He adds, For they repented at the preaching of Jonas; and, behold, a greater than Jonas is here. This word ‘hic’ is to be taken as an adverb of place, not as a pronoun. Jonas (according to the LXX) preached for three days, (Jonah 3:4 ἔτι τρδῖς ἡμέδαι) I for this so long time; he to the Assyrians an unbelieving nation, I to God’s own people the Jews; he preached with his voice only, doing no miracles, I, doing so many wonders, am falsely accused as Beelzebub.

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

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

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

John Chrysostom ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): He said not openly that He should rise again, because they would have derided him, but hints it distantly that even they might believe that He foreknew it. He said not in the earth, but in the heart of the earth, therein declaring His tomb, and that none might suspect that there was only the semblance of death. Therefore also He spake of three days, that it should be believed that He was dead. But the sign itself proves the truth of it; for Jonas was in the whale’s belly not in figure but in deed; and surely the sign did not happen in very deed, if the thing signified happened only in figure. Wherefore it is manifest that they are children of the Devil who follow Marcion asserting that the passion of Christ was only a phantasy. And that He should suffer for them also, though they would not profit by it, is shown by that which He speaks, that to this generation should be given the sign of Jonas the Prophet.

That none should think that the same things would come to pass now among the Jews, as had of old been among the Ninevites; that as Jonas converted them and their city was delivered out of danger, so the Jews should be converted after the resurrection, the Lord now shows the contrary, that they should have no fruit of the benefit of the passion, but should suffer moreover grievous things, as He signifies below in the example of the dæmon. But now He first shows what just punishment they shall suffer, saying, The men of Nineveh shall rise in judgment with this generation.

Yet does not the Lord stay here, but adds another denunciation, saying, The queen of the south shall rise in the judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it, for she came from the ends of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon. This was yet more than that first. Jonas went to them; the queen of the south waited not for Solomon to come to her, but herself sought him. Both a woman and a barbarian, and dwelling so far away, she was not afraid of death in her desire to hear his wise words. This woman went to Solomon, I came hither; she rose up from the ends of the earth, I go round about your towns and villages; he spake of trees and wood, I of unspeakable mysteries. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

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

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

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

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

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

This was more than the former. For Jonah went unto them, but the queen of the south waited not for Solomon to come to her, but went herself unto him, although she was both a woman, and a barbarian, and at so great a distance, no threat laid upon her, nor being in fear of death, but simply through the love of wise words. “But behold even a greater than Solomon is here.” For in that case the woman came, but here I have come. And she indeed rose up from the uttermost parts of the earth, but I go about cities and villages. And his discourse was of trees and various kinds of wood, which could do no great good to his visitor: but mine, of secret things, and most awful mysteries. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 43

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

For he was a servant, but I am the Master; and he came forth from the whale, but I rose from death; and he proclaimed destruction, but I am come preaching the good tidings of the kingdom. And they indeed believed without a sign, but I have exhibited many signs. And they indeed heard nothing more than those words, but I have given a spring to every kind of self-denial. And he came being ministered unto, but I the very Master and Lord of all am come not threatening, not demanding an account, but bringing pardon. And they were barbarians, but these have conversed with unnumbered prophets. And of him no man had foretold, but of me all, and the facts agreed with their words. And he indeed, when he was to go forth, ran away that he might not be ridiculed; but I, knowing that I am both to be crucified and mocked, am come. And while he did not endure so much as to be reproached for them that were saved, I underwent even death, and that the most shameful death, and after this I sent others again. And he was a strange sort of person, and an alien, and unknown; but I a kinsman after the flesh, and of the same forefathers. And many more topics too might any one collect, were he to seek diligently for more. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 43

Rabanus Maurus ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): The Ninevites typify those who cease from sin—the queen those that know not to sin; for penitence puts away sin, wisdom shuns it. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Remigius of Rheims ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): The Lord shows in these words that there shall be one resurrection of the good and the bad against certain heretics, who said that there should be two, one of the good, another of the bad. These words likewise overthrow that fable of the Jews, who use to say that the Resurrection shall be held a thousand years before the Judgment; these words clearly proving that the Judgment shall ensue straight upon the Resurrection. And shall condemn it.

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

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

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

Matthew 12:42

Augustine of Hippo: It was nothing strange for Christ to be more than Jonah and to be more than Solomon, for he is the Lord and they are the servants. But who are those who looked askance at the presence of the Lord, whereas foreigners listened to his servants? — SERMON 72A.1

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

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

This was more than the former. For Jonah went unto them, but the queen of the south waited not for Solomon to come to her, but went herself unto him, although she was both a woman, and a barbarian, and at so great a distance, no threat laid upon her, nor being in fear of death, but simply through the love of wise words. “But behold even a greater than Solomon is here.” For in that case the woman came, but here I have come. And she indeed rose up from the uttermost parts of the earth, but I go about cities and villages. And his discourse was of trees and various kinds of wood, which could do no great good to his visitor: but mine, of secret things, and most awful mysteries. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 43

Origen of Alexandria: The church of the Gentiles, which in truth is gathered “from the ends of the earth,” fulfills the place of the queen of the south, not providing gifts in “perishable things, silver” and spices, but faith, the incense of knowledge, the outpouring of an offering, the sweat of the virtues and the blood of martyrdom. For with such gifts the true Solomon is pleased, who is Christ, “our peace.” For “Solomon” is interpreted as “peaceful.” — FRAGMENT 277.23

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

Matthew 12:43

Augustine of Hippo ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (Quæst. Ev. i. 8.) So that in these words the Lord signifies that some shall so believe, as not to have strength for the work of continence, and shall return to the world. He taketh unto him other seven, is to be understood that when any has fallen from righteousness, he shall also have hypocrisy. For the lust of the flesh being cast out of its wonted works by penitence, when it finds not any delights in which it may rest, returns the more greedily, and again takes possession of the soul, if carelessness has ensued, and there has not been introduced as the dweller in the cleansed abode the word of God in sound doctrine. And as he will not only have the seven vices which are the contraries of the spiritual virtues, but will hypocritically feign that he has the virtues, therefore his old lust, taking to itself seven other worse, that is, this seven-fold hypocrisy, returns to him so as to make the last state of that man worse than the former. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Gregory the Dialogist ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (Mor. xxxiii. 3.) The dry places where no water is are the hearts of the righteous, which by the power of discipline are dried from all humours of carnal lust. The wet places are the minds of worldly men, which the humour of carnal lust fills, and makes watery; in such the Devil imprints his footsteps the more deeply, inasmuch as in his wanderings he comes down upon such hearts as upon low and marshy ground.

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

Hilary of Poitiers: The law which was given later intervened, casting out the unclean spirit dwelling in the hearts of the elect people. It kept that spirit away as if it were surrounding the people with its protective power. Going out from there, the spirit wandered among the nations in the deserts and arid places, leaving behind its old home, so that it might rest in these places until the day of judgment and not in a troubled dwelling [as Israel provided].But when God’s grace was imparted afresh to the nations, flowing as a living fountain through the cleansing water [of baptism], there was no place for the spirit to continue living among them, and indeed he had no rest with them. After reconsidering its present situation, the spirit believed the best thing to do was to return to the house from which it had come. That house, having been cleaned out through the law, decorated with the proclamation of the prophets and finally prepared by the coming of Christ, was found to be vacant. The custodian of the law had left—because the whole law [was valid] until John—and those living there did not receive Christ. Also, there was no inhabitant in the dwelling, and it had been left unguarded. Because of the concern of those who were living there before, the place had been kept clean and adorned for the incoming dweller. Then seven spirits even more evil entered in—as many as there were the gifts of grace offered by Christ which God’s all-embracing wisdom had placed there with a sevenfold glory. In this way the possession of wicked spirits was as great as the possession of grace would have been. Thus “the last state of that man becomes worse than the first,” because the unclean spirit left the house for fear of the law but now returns with a vengeance because of the grace that was rejected. — Commentary on Matthew 12:22-23

Jerome ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): Some suppose that this place is spoken of heretics, because the unclean spirit who dwelt in them before when they were Gentiles, is cast out before the confession of the true faith; when after they went over to heresy, and garnished their house with feigned virtues, then it is that the Devil, having taken to him other seven evil spirits, returns and dwells in them; and their last state becomes worse than their first. And indeed heretics are in a much worse condition than the Gentiles; for in the heretics was a hope of faith, in the Gentiles a war of discord. Yet though this exposition has a plausibility and a show of learning, I am doubtful of its truth. For by the concluding words of this, whether it be parable or example, Titus shall it he to this evil generation, we are compelled to refer it, not to heretics, or to men in general, but to the Jewish people. So the context of the passage may not shift about loosely and vaguely, and be like unmeaning speeches, but may be consistent with itself from first to last. The unclean spirit then went out from the Jews when they received the Law; and being cast out of the Jews, he walked through the wilderness of the Gentiles; as it follows, He walketh through dry places seeking rest.

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

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

John Chrysostom ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): The Lord had said to the Jews, The men of Nineveh shall rise in the judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it; that they should not therefore be careless, He tells them that not only in the world to come but here also they should suffer grievous things; setting forth in a sort of riddle the punishment that should fall upon them; whence He says, When the unclean spirit has gone out of a man.

Or, herein He may be showing forth their punishment. As when dæmoniacs have been loosed from their infirmity, if they after become remiss, they draw upon themselves more grievous illusions, so shall it be among you—before ye were possessed by a dæmons, when you worshipped idols, and slew your sons to dæmon yet I forsook you not, but cast out that dæmon by the Prophets, and afterwards came Myself seeking to purify you altogether. Since then ye would not hearken to me, but have fallen into more heinous crime, (as it is greater wickedness to slay Christ than to slay the Prophets,) therefore ye shall suffer more heavy calamities. For what befel them under Vespasian and Titus, were much more grievous than they had suffered in Egypt, in Babylon, and under Antiochus. And this indeed is not all He shows concerning them, but also that since they were destitute of every virtue, they were more fit for the habitation of dæmons than before. It is reasonable to suppose that these things were said not to them only, but also to us. If after being enlightened and delivered from our former evils, we are again possessed by the same wickedness, the punishment of these latter sins will be greater than of the first; as Christ spake to the paralytic, Behold, thou art made whole, sin not, lest a worse thing come upon thee. (John 5:14) — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

All this might be seasonably said, not of them only, but of us also, when after having been enlightened, and delivered from our former ills, we again cleave unto the same wickedness, for more grievous also thenceforth will be the punishment of our subsequent sins. Therefore to the sick of the palsy also Christ said, “Behold, thou art made whole; sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee;” and this to a man who was thirty-eight years in his infirmity. And what, one might ask, was he to suffer worse than this? Something far worse, and more intolerable. For far be it from us, that we should endure as much as we are capable of enduring. For God is at no loss for inflictions. For according to the greatness of His mercy, so also is His wrath. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 43

Rabanus Maurus ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): Or, the dry places are the hearts of the faithful, which after they have been purged from the weakness of loose thoughts, the crafty lier-in-wait tries if by any means he may fix his footsteps there; but flying from the chaste spirit, the Devil finds no resting-place to his mind but in the heart of the wicked; as it follows, and findeth none.

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

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

Remigius of Rheims ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): Beautifully is the Church gathered out of the Gentiles spoken of as a queen who knows how to rule her ways. Of her the Psalmist speaks; The queen stood on thy right hand. (Ps. 45:9.) She is the queen of the south because she abounds in the fervour of the Holy Spirit. Solomon, interpreted ‘peaceful,’ signifies Him of whom it is said, He is our peace. (Eph. 2:14.)

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

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

Matthew 12:44

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

Matthew 12:45

Augustine of Hippo: When there is forgiveness of sins through the sacraments, the house is cleaned; but the Holy Spirit must be a necessary inhabitant. And the Holy Spirit inhabits only those who are humble of heart, for God says, “Upon whom will my Spirit rest?” And he answers the question: “Upon the one who is humble and quiet and who fears my word.” Therefore, when he is the inhabitant, he fills up, rules, acts, deters from evil, inspires one to do good and tempers justice with sweetness, so that one may do good with the love of an upright heart and not with the fear of punishment. But once that unclean spirit that made you evil has gone out of you, that is, from your mind, when your sins have been forgiven, it roams through dry places in search of a resting place. Finding none, the unclean spirit returns to his house, where he finds everything clean and in order. Then he takes with him seven other spirits more evil than himself; and the last state of that person becomes worse than the first. He takes with him seven other spirits. What is meant by “seven other spirits”? Is the unclean spirit itself sevenfold? What does this mean? By seven the whole group is signified. The whole spirit went away, the whole spirit came back; and would that only one spirit returned! What does it mean: “He takes with him seven other spirits”? Those spirits you did not have when you were evil, you will have unexpectedly when you are good. Listen carefully while I explain as best I can. By a sevenfold operation the Holy Spirit is committed to our care, so that we may have the “spirit of wisdom and understanding, counsel and fortitude, knowledge and true godliness, and fear of God.” Arrayed on the opposite side of this sevenfold good is the sevenfold evil: the spirit of stupidity and error, the spirit of foolhardiness and cowardice, the spirit of ignorance and impiety, and the spirit of pride against the fear of God. These are seven evil spirits. What are the seven other spirits even more evil? The seven other spirits even more evil are found in hypocrisy. One evil spirit is the spirit of stupidity, the other worse evil is the pretense of wisdom. The evil spirit of error, the other worse evil, is the pretense of truth. The evil spirit of foolhardiness, the other worse evil, is the pretense of counsel. The evil spirit of cowardice, the other worse evil, is the pretense of fortitude. The evil spirit of ignorance, the other worse evil, is the pretense of knowledge. The evil spirit of impiety, the other worse evil, is the pretense of piety. The evil spirit of pride, the other worse evil, is the pretense of fear. Seven were intolerable. Who will tolerate fourteen? Necessarily, therefore, when the pretense of truth is added to malice, the last state of that person becomes worse than the first. — SERMON 72A.2

Cyril of Alexandria: This is said with good reason. For when someone who has once been freed from evils loses self-control, he suffers a much worse fall than previously. For this reason “he passes through waterless places seeking rest.” This indicates how thoroughly the demons’ stratagem has taken hold of such a person—completely and absolutely. There are many reasons why such a person should have kept himself under control before it is too late. He has already suffered. He has been redeemed. The threat of a worse future punishment should be constraining. But none of these reasons has prevailed to make them better.Now remember how the evil spirit inhabited the people when they were in Egypt, how they lived according to Egyptian customs and laws and became filled with all kinds of uncleanness. When they had been delivered by Moses and had received the law as a guide calling them to the light of true divine knowledge, the wicked and unclean spirit left them. But what happens when someone who has believed now disbelieves? The demons again take up their abode there with a vengeance. For just as the Holy Spirit, when he sees a person’s heart desisting from all uncleanness, abides and dwells and rests in that one, so also the unclean spirit likes to take lodging in the souls of the lawless. — FRAGMENT 163

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

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

Matthew 12:46

Ambrose of Milan ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (in Luc. 8:21.) Nor does He overthrow the duty of filial submission, which is conveyed in the command, Honour thy father and thy mother, (Ex. 20:12.) but shows that He owes more to the mysteries and relationship of His Father, than of His mother; as it follows, And stretching out his hand to his disciples, he said, Behold my mother and my brethren. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Apollinaris of Laodicea: That “his brothers” did not yet believe in him we learn from John, while from Mark we have also heard something else: for his own family tried to lay hands on him, as though he were beside himself. On account of their frame of mind, the Lord does not often mention them as his own family. He points instead to those who are obedient. To believers he applies all the terms of family relationship, those, namely, who had been joined to him in the kindred fellowship of obedience. Even if temporarily he had a quarrel with Mary, as Simeon had foretold when he had said “a sword shall pierce through your own soul,” she overcame these things, as was fitting, and the Lord graciously made mention of her at his passion and entrusted her to the beloved disciple. — FRAGMENT 75

Augustine of Hippo ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (De Cons. Ev. ii. 40.) We are to understand without doubt that this happened close upon the foregoing; for he begins to tell it with the words, And while he yet spake. What can that yet mean but that it was at the very time He spake the foregoing things? Mark also follows up that which He had said concerning blasphemy against the Holy Ghost, by saying, And there came his mother and his brethren. (Mark 3:31) Luke has not observed the order of action here, but has placed this earlier as he happened to recollect it. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Gregory the Dialogist ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (Mor. vii. 17.) For it often happens that the soul in the commencement of its progress is lifted up, and prides itself on its virtues, that it opens an entrance to the adversary who is raging against it, and who shows himself the more violent in breaking into it, by how much he was grieved at being cast out, though but for a short space.

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

(ubi sup.) Thus also His mother is declared to stand without, as though she was not acknowledged, because the synagogue is therefore not acknowledged by its Author, because it held to the observance of the Law, and having lost the spiritual discernment thereof, kept itself without to guard the letter. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Gregory the Dialogist: Hence also His mother, when she is seemingly not acknowledged, is said to be standing outside, because clearly the Synagogue is not recognized by its Author, since, while holding to the observance of the Law, it lost spiritual understanding, and fixed itself outside in guarding the letter. — Forty Gospel Homilies, Homily 3

Hilary of Poitiers ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): Because He had spoken all the aforesaid things in the power of His Father’s majesty, therefore the Evangelist proceeds to tell what answer He made to one that told Him that His mother and His brethren waited for Him without; While he yet spake unto the people, his mother and his brethren stood without desiring to see him.

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

Although they had like the rest power to come in, yet they abstain from all approach to Him, for he came unto his own, and his own received him not. (John 1:11.) — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Jerome: (Verse 46 and following) While he was still speaking to the crowds, behold his mother and brothers stood outside seeking to speak to him. But someone said to him: Look, your mother and brothers stand outside seeking you. But he answered the one who told him, saying: Who is my mother, and who are my brothers? And stretching out his hand towards his disciples, he said. The Lord was occupied with the work of speaking, teaching the people, and fulfilling the duty of preaching, while his mother and brothers came and stood outside, desiring to speak to him. Then someone announces to the Savior that his mother and brothers are standing outside, seeking him. It seems to me that this person who announces it is not doing so by chance and simply: but is setting a trap for the Savior, whether he prefers spiritual work over flesh and blood. Therefore, the Lord, not because he denied his mother and brothers, ignored their request to go out; but because he responded to the one laying a trap, extending his hand towards his disciples, he said: — Commentary on Matthew

Jerome ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (cont. Helvid. 14, et seq.) From this is taken one of Helvidius’s propositions, on the ground that mention is made in the Gospel of the brethren of the Lord. How, says he, are they called brethren of the Lord, if they were not his brethren? But now it should be known that in divine Scripture men are said to be brethren in four different ways, by nature, by nation, by kindred, and by affection. By nature, as Esau and Jacob. By nation, as all Jews are called brethren, as in Deuteronomy, Thou shalt not set over thee a foreigner who is not thy brother. (Deut. 17:15) They are called brethren by kindred who are of one family, as in Genesis, Abraham said unto Lot, Let there not be strife between thee and me, for we are brethren. (Gen. 13:8) Also men are called brethren by affection, which is of two kinds, special and general. Special, as all Christians are called brethren, as the Saviour says, Go tell my brethren. General, inasmuch as all men are born of one father, we are bound together by a tie of consanguinity, as in that, Say unto them that hate you, Ye are our brethren. (Is. 66:5 sec. LXX.) I ask then, after which manner these are called the Lord’s brethren in the Gospel? According to nature? But Scripture saith not, neither calling them sons of Mary nor of Joseph. By nation? But it is absurd that some few out of all the Jews should be called brethren, seeing that all the Jews who were there might have thus been called brethren. By affection, either of a human sort, or of the Spirit? If that be true, yet how were they more His brethren than the Apostles, whom He instructed in the inmost mysteries. Or if because they were men, and all men are brethren, it was foolish to say of them in particular, Behold, thy brethren seek thee. It only remains then that they should be His brethren by kindred, not by affection, not by privilege of nation, not by nature.

(in loc.) But some suspect the brethren of the Lord to be sons of Joseph by another wife, following the idle fancies of apocryphal writers, who have coined a certain woman called E sea. But we understand by the brethren of the Lord, not the sons of Joseph, but cousins of the Saviour, sons of a sister of Mary, an aunt of Our Lord, who is said to be the mother of James the Less, and Joseph, and Jude, whom in another place of the Gospel we find called the brethren of the Lord. (Mark 6:3) And that cousins are called brethren, appears from every part of Scripture.

He that delivers this message, seems to me not to do it casually and without meaning, but as setting a snare for Him, whether He would prefer flesh and blood to the spiritual work; and thus the Lord refused to go out, not because He disowned His mother and His brethren, but that He might confound him that had laid this snare for Him.

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

Let us also expound in another way. The Saviour is speaking to the multitude—that is, He teaches the Gentiles the inward mysteries; His mother and His brethren, that is the synagogue and the Jewish people, stand without.

And when they shall have asked and enquired, and sent a messenger, they shall receive for answer, that their will is free, and that they can enter in, if they will believe. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Theophylact of Ohrid: Subject to a certain human foible, His mother wanted to show that she had authority over her child, for she did not yet comprehend His greatness. This is why, while He was still speaking, she wished to summon Him to herself, seeking to draw attention to her son’s obedience to her. What does Christ do? He knew her intentions; hear what He says:

Matthew 12:47

Augustine of Hippo ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (De Nat. et Grat. 36.) But whatever may be decided concerning these brethren, yet concerning the holy Virgin Mary, (for the honour of Christ,) when sin in her is in question, I would not have it brought into doubt. For from this only we might know that more abundant grace was conferred upon her that she should overcome sin on all sides, because she merited to conceive and bring forth Him Who it is clear had no sin. It follows; Then said one unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren stand without seeking thee. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Matthew 12:48

Gregory the Dialogist: For Jesus, our Creator and Redeemer, pretends not to know His mother, and indicates who is His mother and who are His relatives not through kinship of the flesh, but through union of the spirit, saying: “Who is my mother, and who are my brethren? For whoever does the will of my Father who is in heaven, he is my brother, and sister, and mother.” By these words, what else does He suggest to us, except that He gathers many who are obedient to His commands from among the Gentiles, and does not acknowledge Judea, from whose flesh He was born? — Forty Gospel Homilies, Homily 3

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

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

Matthew 12:49

Augustine of Hippo: Is it not true that the Virgin Mary did the Father’s will, she who believed in faith, conceived in faith and was chosen so that, through her, salvation could be born for us among humans and was begotten by Christ before Christ was begotten in her? Holy Mary carried out, plainly and clearly, the Father’s will. Therefore it is greater for Mary to have been a disciple of Christ than the mother of Christ. Indeed, it is greater and better to have been the disciple of Christ than the mother of Christ. Mary was therefore blessed because, even before she gave birth, she bore the Master in her womb. … Mary is holy and Mary is blessed, but the church is greater than the Virgin Mary. And why? Because Mary is a part of the church, a holy limb, an extraordinary limb, an outstanding limb, but she is only a limb of the whole body. If she is but a part of the whole body, greater indeed is the body than a limb. Christ is the head, and Christ is the entire head and body. What shall I say? We have a divine head. We have God as our head…

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

Matthew 12:50

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

To confirm this matter fittingly for us, blessed Felicity is present, whose birthday we celebrate today, who by believing became a handmaid of Christ, and by preaching was made a mother of Christ. For she feared to leave her seven sons, as is read in the more accurate accounts of her deeds, alive in the flesh after her, just as carnal parents usually fear to send their dead children before them. For when she was seized in the labor of persecution, she strengthened the hearts of her sons by preaching the love of the heavenly fatherland, and she brought forth in spirit those whom she had borne in the flesh, so that by preaching she might bear to God those whom she had borne in the flesh to the world. — Forty Gospel Homilies, Homily 3

Theodore of Mopsuestia: He said these things, not in contempt of his mother and his brothers, but in order to show that he values more highly closeness of soul than any blood relation of body. For it was necessary to say this, both for those who thought that it was more important for him to interact with his own family, as well as for the instruction of those who were present. For just as he himself says to the disciples, “he who loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me,” in the same way, I think, Jesus sets a higher value on his disciples than on his “mother and brothers.” — FRAGMENT 71.19

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