Matthew 19

Matthew 19:1

Hilary of Poitiers ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): Also He cures the Galileans on the borders of Judæa, that He might admit the sins of the Gentiles to that pardon which was prepared for the Jews. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

John Chrysostom: Having constantly left Jud’a on account of the envy of those men, now He frequents it from this time forth, because the passion was to be nigh at hand; He goeth not up, however, unto Jerusalem for a while, but “into the coasts of Jud’a.” — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 62

Pseudo-Chrysostom ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): PSEUDO-CHRYSOSTOM.e. As the righteous Lord of all, who loves these servants so as not to despise those.

They were conducting Him forth, as the young children of a father going on a far journey. And He setting forth as a father, left them as pledges of His love the healing of their diseases, as it is said, And he healed them. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Rabanus Maurus ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): Here then He begins to relate what He did, taught, or suffered in Judæa. At first beyond Jordan eastward, afterwards on this side Jordan when He came to Jericho, Bethphage, and Jerusalem; whence it follows, And He came into the coasts of Judæa beyond Jordan.

It should be known, that the whole territory of the Israelites was called Judæa, to distinguish it from other nations. But its southern portion, inhabited by the tribes of Judah and Benjamin, was called Judæa proper, to distinguish it from other districts in the same province as Samaria, Galilee, Decapolis, and the rest. It follows, And great multitudes followed him. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Matthew 19:2

John Chrysostom: For neither in the teaching by words doth He continue always, nor in the wonderful working of signs, but He doeth now one now the other, variously working the salvation of them that were waiting upon Him and following Him, so as by the miracles to appear, in what He said, a Teacher worthy of belief, and by the teaching of His word to increase the profit from the miracles; and this was to lead them by the hand to the knowledge of God.

But do thou mark, I pray thee, this too, how the disciples pass over whole multitudes with one word, not declaring by name each of them that are healed. For they said not, that such a one, and such another, but that many, teaching us to be unostentatious. But Christ healed, benefiting both them, and by them many others. For the healing of these men’s infirmity was to others a foundation for the knowledge of God. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 62

Origen of Alexandria: Only, when Jesus had finished these words, having spoken them in Galilee about Capernaum, then “He departed thence, and came into the borders of Judaea,” which were different from Galilee. But He came to the borders of Judaea, and not to the middle of it, but, as it were, to the outermost parts, where great multitudes followed Him, whom He healed at “the borders of Judaea beyond Jordan,"-where baptism had been given. But you will observe the difference between the crowds who simply followed, and Peter and the others who gave up everything and followed, and Matthew, who arose and followed him; he did not simply follow, but “having arisen; “for “having arisen” is an important addition. There are always those, then, who follow like the great multitudes, who have not arisen that they may follow, nor have given up all that was theirs formerly, but few are they who have arisen and followed, who also, in the regeneration, shall sit on twelve thrones. Only, if one wishes to be healed, let him follow Jesus. — Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (Book XIV), 15

Origen of Alexandria ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): The Lord healed the multitudes beyond Jordan, where baptism was given. For all are truly healed from spiritual sickness in baptism; and many follow Christ as did these multitudes, but not rising up as Matthew, who arose and followed the Lord, — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Matthew 19:3

Jerome: (Chapter XIX. — Verse 1 and following) And it came to pass when Jesus had finished these sayings, he departed from Galilee and came into the borders of Judea, beyond the Jordan; and great multitudes followed him, and he healed them there. And the Pharisees came to him, tempting him and saying: Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for any cause? He had come from Galilee to Judea; therefore, the faction of the Pharisees and Scribes questioned him, whether it is lawful for a man to put away his wife for any cause, so that they may hold him in a trap as if he were caught in a syllogism, and whatever he answers, may be used against him. If he says that wives should be dismissed for any reason whatsoever, and other wives should be taken, he will appear to preach against chastity. But if he responds that not every reason warrants dismissal, he will be held guilty of sacrilege as if he were a transgressor of the law given through Moses and by Moses from God. Therefore, the Lord tempers his response so that their disciple may understand, citing sacred Scripture as evidence and opposing the natural law and the first intention of God with the second intention, which was granted not by the will of God but by the necessity of sinners. — Commentary on Matthew

Jerome ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): That they might have Him as it were between the horns of a syllogism, so that, whatever answer He should make, it would lie open to cavil. Should He allow a wife to be put away for any cause, and the marriage of another, he would seem to contradict Himself as a preacher of chastity. Should He answer that she may not be put away for any cause whatsoever, He will be judged to have spoken impiously, and to make against the teaching of Moses and of God. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

John Chrysostom: But not so to the Pharisees, but even for this self-same thing they become more fierce, and come unto Him tempting Him. For because they could not lay hold of the works that were doing, they propose to Him questions.

O folly! They thought to silence Him by their questions, although they had already received certain proof of this power in Him. When at least they argued much about the Sabbath, when they said, “He blasphemeth,” when they said, “He hath a devil,” when they found fault with His disciples as they were walking in the corn fields, when they argued about unwashen hands, on every occasion having sewed fast their mouths, and shut up their shameless tongue, He thus sent them away. Nevertheless, not even so do they keep off from Him. For such is wickedness, such is envy, shameless and bold; though it be put to silence ten thousand times, ten thousand times doth it assault again.

But mark thou, I pray thee, their craft also from the form of their question. For neither did they say unto Him, Thou didst command not to put away a wife, for indeed He had already discoursed about this law; but nevertheless they made no mention of those words; but took occasion from hence, and thinking to make their snare the greater, and being minded to drive Him to a necessity of contradicting the law, they say not, why didst Thou enact this or that? but as though nothing had been said, they ask, “Is it lawful?” expecting that He had forgotten having said it; and being ready if on the one hand He said, “It is lawful to put away,” to bring against Him the things He Himself had spoken, and to say, How then didst Thou affirm the contrary? but if the same things now again as before, to bring against Him the words of Moses.

What then said He? He said not, “tempt ye me, ye hypocrites?” although afterwards He saith this, but here He speaks not thus. Why can this be? In order that together with His power He might show forth His gentleness also. For He doth neither always keep silence, lest they should suppose they are hidden; nor doth He always reprove, in order that He may instruct us to bear all things with gentleness. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 62

Origen of Alexandria ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): Seeing the Lord thus tempted, let none of His disciples who is set to teach think it hard if he also be by some tempted. Howbeit, He replies to His tempters with the doctrines of piety. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Pseudo-Chrysostom ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): But, as when you see one much pursuing the acquaintance of physicians, you know that he is sick, so, when you see either man or woman enquiring concerning divorce, know that that man is lustful and that woman unchaste. For chastity has pleasure in wedlock, but desire is tormented as though under a slavish bondage therein. And knowing that they had no sufficient cause to allege for their putting away their wives, save their own lewdness, they feigned many divers causes. They feared to ask Him for what cause, lest they should be tied down within the limits of fixed and certain causes; and therefore they asked if it were lawful for every cause; for they knew that appetite knows no limits, and cannot hold itself within the bounds of one marriage, but the more it is indulged the more it is kindled. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Tertullian: But grant that these argumentations may be thought to be forced and founded on conjectures, if no dogmatic teachings have stood parallel with them which the Lord uttered in treating of divorce, which, permitted formerly, He now prohibits, first because “from the beginning it was not so,” like plurality of marriage; secondly, because “What God hath conjoined, man shall not separate,” -for fear, namely, that he contravene the Lord: for He alone shall “separate” who has “conjoined” (separate, moreover, not through the harshness of divorce, which (harshness) He censures and restrains, but through the debt of death) if, indeed, “one of two sparrows falleth not on the ground without the Father’s will. — On Monogamy

Theophilus of Antioch: And concerning chastity, the holy word teaches us not only not to sin in act, but not even in thought, not even in the heart to think of any evil, nor look on another man’s wife with our eyes to lust after her. Solomon, accordingly, who was a king and a prophet, said: “Let thine eyes look right on, and let thine eyelids look straight before thee: make straight paths for your feet.” [Proverbs 4:25-26] And the voice of the Gospel teaches still more urgently concerning chastity, saying: “Whosoever looketh on a woman who is not his own wife, to lust after her, hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.” [Matthew 5:28] “And he that marrieth,” says [the Gospel], “her that is divorced from her husband, committeth adultery; and whosoever putteth away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery.” [Matthew 5:32] Because Solomon says: “Can a man take fire in his bosom, and his clothes not be burned? Or can one walk upon hot coals, and his feet not be burned? So he that goeth in to a married woman shall not be innocent.” [Proverbs 6:27-29] — To Autolycus, Book III, Chapter 13

Matthew 19:4

Augustine of Hippo ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (Cont. Faust. xix. 29.) Behold now out of the books of Moses it is proved to the Jews that a wife may not be put away. For they thought that they were doing according to the purport of Moses’ law when they did put them away. This also we learn hence by the testimony of Christ Himself, that it was God who made it thus, and joined them male and female; which when the Manichæans deny, they are condemned, resisting the Gospel of Christ. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Jerome: (V. 4.) And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female? This is written in the beginning of Genesis. But in saying male and female, he pointed towards monogamous marriages. For he did not say males and females, which was sought after due to the repudiation of the former, but male and female, so that the bond of one spouse might be established. — Commentary on Matthew

Jerome ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): But He so frames His answer as to evade their snare. He brings in the testimony of Holy Writ, and the law of nature, and opposing God’s first sentence to this second, He answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female? This is written in the beginning of Genesis. This teaches that second marriages are to be avoided, for He said not male and females, which was what was sought by the putting away of the first, but, male and female, implying only one tie of wedlock. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

John Chrysostom: See a teacher’s wisdom. I mean, that being asked, Is it lawful? He did not at once say, It is not lawful, lest they should be disturbed and put in disorder, but before the decision by His argument He rendered this manifest, showing that it is itself too the commandment of His Father, and that not in opposition to Moses did He enjoin these things, but in full agreement with him.

But mark Him arguing strongly not from the creation only, but also from His command. For He said not, that He made one man and one woman only, but that He also gave this command that the one man should be joined to the one woman. But if it had been His will that he should put this one away, and bring in another, when He had made one man, He would have formed many Women.

But now both by the manner of the creation, and by the manner of lawgiving, He showed that one man must dwell with one woman continually, and never break off from her.

And see how He saith, “He which made them at the beginning, made them male and female,” that is, from one root they sprung, and into one body came they together, “for the twain shall be one flesh.”

After this, to make it a fearful thing to find fault with this lawgiving, and to confirm the law, He said not, “Sever not therefore, nor put asunder,” but, “What God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.”

But if thou put forward Moses, I tell thee of Moses’ Lord, and together with this, I rely upon the time also. For God at the beginning made them male and female; and this law is older (though it seem to have been now introduced by me), and with much earnestness established. For not merely did He bring the woman to the man, but also commanded to leave father and mother. And neither did He make it a law for him merely to come to the woman, but also “to cleave to her,” by the form of the language intimating that they might not be severed. And not even with this was He satisfied, but sought also for another greater union, “for the twain,” He saith, “shall be one flesh.”

Then after He had recited the ancient law, which was brought in both by deeds and by words, and shown it to be worthy of respect because of the giver, with authority after that He Himself too interprets and gives the law, saying, “So that they are no more twain, but one flesh.” Like then as to sever flesh is a horrible thing, so also to divorce a wife is unlawful. And He stayed not at this, but brought in God also by saying, “What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder,” showing that the act was both against nature, and against law; against nature, because one flesh is dissevered; against law, because that when God hath joined and commanded it not to be divided, ye conspire to do this. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 62

Pseudo-Chrysostom ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): If then God created the male and female out of one, to this end that they should be one, why then henceforth were not they born man and wife at one birth, as it is with certain insects? Because God created male and female for the continuance of the species, yet is He ever a lover of chastity, and promoter of continence. Therefore did He not follow this pattern in all kinds, to the end that, if any man choose to marry, he may know what is, according to the first disposition of the creation, the condition of man and wife; but if he choose not to marry, he shall not be under necessity to marry by the circumstances of his birth, lest he should by his continence be the destruction of the other who was not willing to be continent; for which same cause God forbids that after being joined in wedlock one should separate if the other be unwilling. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Tertullian: There, while prohibiting divorce, He has given us a solution of this special question respecting it: “Moses,” says He, “because of the hardness of your hearts, suffered you to give a bill of divorcement; but from the beginning it was not so” -for this reason, indeed, because He who had “made them male and female” had likewise said, “They twain shall become one flesh; what therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.” Now, by this answer of His (to the Pharisees), He both sanctioned the provision of Moses, who was His own (servant), and restored to its primitive purpose the institution of the Creator, whose Christ He was. — Against Marcion Book IV

Matthew 19:5

Augustine of Hippo ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (Civ. Dei, xiv. 22.) For they are called one, either from their union, or from the derivation of the woman, who was taken out of the side of the man. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Augustine of Hippo ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (Gen. ad lit. ix. 19.) Whereas Scripture witnesses that these words were said by the first man, and the Lord here declares that God spake them, hence we should understand that by reason of the ecstasy which had passed upon Adam, he was enabled to speak this as a prophecy. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Jerome: (Vers. 5, 6.) And he said: Because of this, a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh. So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Likewise, he said, a man must be united to his wife, not wives. And the two will become one flesh. The reward of marriage is for two to become one flesh. Chastity joined to the spirit makes one spirit.

Therefore, what God has joined together, let no man separate. God has joined, by making one flesh of man and woman: this the man cannot separate, unless perhaps by the power of God alone. Man separates, when, due to desire for a second spouse, he dismisses the first. God separates, who had also joined, when by consent due to the service of God (because time is limited) we have wives as though we have none (I Cor. VII). — Commentary on Matthew

Jerome ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): In like manner He says his wife, and not wives, and adds expressly, and they twain shall be one flesh. For it is the reward of marriage that one flesh, namely in the offspring, is made of two. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Origen of Alexandria: But since the Apostle understands the words, “And they twain shall be one flesh,” of Christ and the church, we must say that Christ keeping the saying, “What God hath joined together let not man put asunder,” did not put away His former wife, so to speak—that is, the former synagogue—for any other cause than that that wife committed fornication, being made an adulteress by the evil one, and along with him plotted against her husband and slew Him, saying, “Away with such a fellow from the earth, crucify Him, crucify Him.” It was she therefore who herself revolted, rather than her husband who put her away and dismissed her; wherefore, reproaching her for falling away from him, it says in Isaiah, “Of what kind is the bill of your mother’s divorcement, with which I sent her away?” And He who at the beginning created Him “who is in the form of God” after the image, made Him male, and the church female, granting to both oneness after the image. And, for the sake of the church, the Lord—the husband—left the Father whom He saw when He was “in the form of God,” left also His mother, as He was the very son of the Jerusalem which is above, and was joined to His wife who had fallen down here, and these two here became one flesh. For because of her, He Himself also became flesh, when “the Word became flesh and dwelt among us,” and they are no more two, but now they are one flesh, since it is said to the wife, “Now ye are the body of Christ, and members each in his part;” for the body of Christ is not something apart different from the church, which is His body, and from the members each in his part. And God has joined together these who are not two, but have become one flesh, commanding that men should not separate the church from the Lord. And he who takes heed for himself so as not to be separated, is confident as one who will not possibly be separated and says, “Who shall separate us from the love of Christ?” — Commentary on Matthew, Book 14

Philoxenus of Mabbug: For when the soul hath intercourse with the body, this intercourse is adultery and fornication; but if the body be united unto the soul in one agreement, and be raised above from below in a right union, it is the intercourse which is according unto the law, which is implanted naturally in the person of each one of us by the Creator. For behold the connection which men have with women according to nature was ordained by the command of the Creator at the beginning, and when it taketh place according to the will of the Creator, it is called lawful connection; but if it be performed in any other way it is called adultery and fornication, and as in a mystery this parable is depicted in reference unto the soul and body. For if the soul hath intercourse with the body it is fornication, but if the body hath intercourse with the soul, it is an union according to the law, and towards this meaning also inclineth the words of the Book which saith, “A man shall leave his father and his mother, and cleave unto his wife.” Now it doth not say concerning the woman that she shall leave her parents, and cleave unto the man, although according to the custom of the world women do actually leave their natural parents, and cleave unto their husbands, and it appeareth that, according to custom, the opposite of the words of the Book are done in nature; so therefore that which is said of the man is a parable which is based on the body, which shall leave everything in which it hath gratification, and shall be united unto the soul. For if the Book had said, “A woman shall leave her parents, and cleave unto a man,” it would have taught that the soul should have intercourse with the body, but now that it hath spoken concerning the man, “He shall leave his parents and be united unto his wife,” the words indicate to us a mystery of doctrine, and exhort the body to deny itself its pleasures, and to hate its lusts, and to have connection with the soul in all good things. — 13 Ascetic Discourses, Discourse 12 – First Discourse on Fornication

Pseudo-Chrysostom ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): If then because the wife is made of the man, and both one of one flesh, a man shall leave his father and his mother, then there should be yet greater affection between brothers and sisters, for these come of the same parents, but man and wife of different. But this is saying too much, because the ordinance of God is of more force than the law of nature. For God’s precepts are not subject to the law of nature, but nature bends to the precepts of God. Also brethren are born of one, that they should seek out different roads; but the man and the wife are born of different persons, that they should coalesce in one. The order of nature also follows the appointment of God. For as is the sap in trees, so is affection in man. The sap ascends from the roots into the leaves, and passes forth into the seed. Therefore parents love their children, but are not so loved of them, for the desire of a man is not towards his parents, but towards the sons whom he has begot; and this is what is said, Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Rabanus Maurus ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): For by the wholesome design of God it was ordained that a man should have in the woman a part of his own body, and should not look upon as separate from himself that which he knew was formed out of himself. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Remigius of Rheims ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): The Apostle says that this is a mystery in Christ and the Church (Eph. 5:32.); for the Lord Jesus Christ left His Father when He came down from heaven to earth; and He left His mother, that is, the synagogue, because of its unbelief, and clave unto His wife, that is, the Holy Church, and they two are one flesh, that is, Christ and the Church are one body. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Tertullian: Let them see to that, who, among the rest of their perversities, teach the disjoining of the “one flesh in twain; " denying Him who, after borrowing the female from the male, recombined between themselves, in the matrimonial computation, the two bodies taken out of the consortship of the self-same material substance. — To His Wife Book I

Tertullian: What kind of yoke is that of two believers, (partakers) of one hope, one desire, one discipline, one and the same service? Both (are) brethren, both fellow servants, no difference of spirit or of flesh; nay, (they are) truly “two in one flesh.” Where the flesh is one, one is the spirit ton. — To His Wife Book II

Matthew 19:6

Jerome ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): God has joined by making man and woman one flesh; this then man may not put asunder, but God only. Man puts asunder, when from desire of a second wife the first is put away; God puts asunder, who also had joined, when by consent for the service of God we so have our wives as though we had them not. (1 Cor. 7:29.) — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Tertullian: And accordingly, those whom God “from the beginning” conjoined, “two into one flesh,” man shall not at the present day separate. The apostle, too, writing to the Ephesians, says that God “had proposed in Himself, at the dispensation of the fulfilment of the times, to recall to the head” (that is, to the beginning) “things universal in Christ, which are above the heavens and above the earth in Him. — On Monogamy

Matthew 19:7

Augustine of Hippo ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (ubi sup.) For how great was that hardness! When not even the intervention of a bill of divorce, which gave room for just and prudent men to endeavour to dissuade, could move them to renew the conjugal affection. And with what wit do the Manichæans blame Moses, as severing wedlock by a bill of divorce, and commend Christ as, on the contrary, confirming its force? Whereas according to their impious science they should have praised Moses for putting asunder what the devil had joined, and found fault with Christ who riveted the bonds of the devil. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Jerome: (Verse 7) They said to him, ‘So why did Moses command us to give a bill of divorce and dismiss?’ They open the trap they had prepared. And certainly the Lord had not given his own opinion, but had remembered the old history and commandments of God. — Commentary on Matthew

Jerome ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): Here they reveal the cavil which they had prepared; albeit the Lord had not given sentence of Himself, but had recalled to their minds ancient history, and the commands of God. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

John Chrysostom: What then ought they to have done after this? Ought they not to have held their peace, and to have commended the saying? ought they not to have marvelled at His wisdom? ought they not to have stood amazed at His accordance with the Father? But none of these things do they, but as though they were contending for the law, they say, “How then did Moses command to give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away?” And yet they ought not now to have brought this forward, but rather He to them; but nevertheless He doth not take advantage of them, nor doth He say to them, “I am not now bound by this,” but He solves this too.

And indeed if He had been an alien from the old covenant, He would not have striven for Moses, neither would He have argued positively from the things done once for all at the beginning; He would not have studied to show that His own precepts agreed with those of old.

And indeed Moses had given many other commandments besides, both those about meats, and those about the Sabbath; wherefore then do they nowhere bring him forward, as here? From a wish to enlist the multitude of the husbands against him. For this was considered a thing indifferent with the Jews, and all used to do so much as this. Accordingly it was for this reason that when so many things had been said on the mount, they remembered this commandment only now. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 62

Origen of Alexandria: Now, keeping in mind what we said above in regard to the passage from Isaiah about the bill of divorce, we will say that the mother of the people separated herself from Christ, her husband, without having received the bill of divorce.Afterward, however, when an unseemly thing was found in her, she did not find favor in his sight, and the bill of divorce was written out for her. When the new covenant called those of the Gentiles to the house of him who had cast away his former wife, it virtually gave the bill of divorce to her who formerly separated from her husband—the law and the Word. Therefore, he also having separated from her, married, so to speak, another, having given into the hands of the former wife the bill of divorce. So they can no longer do what was ordered to them under the law because of the certificate of divorce. And a sign that she has received the bill of divorce is that Jerusalem was destroyed along with what they called the sanctuary of the things in it which were believed to be holy, the altar of burnt offerings and all the rites contained in it. And a further sign of the bill of divorce is this, that they cannot keep their feasts, even though the letter of the law specifically commanded them [to be celebrated] in the place that the Lord God appointed for keeping feasts. At present the whole synagogue cannot stone those who have committed such and such sins; and thousands of other instructions are proof of the certificate of divorce. Add to this the fact that “there is no longer any prophet” and that they say, “We do not see any signs.” — COMMENTARY ON Matthew 14.19

Pseudo-Chrysostom ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): This sentence of chastity seemed hard to these adulterers; but they could not make answer to the argument. Howbeit, they will not submit to the truth, but betake themselves for shelter to Moses, as men having a bad cause fly to some powerful personage, that where justice is not, his countenance may prevail; They say unto him, Why did Moses then command to give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away? — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Matthew 19:8

Jerome: (Verse 8.) He said to them: because Moses allowed you to divorce your wives due to the hardness of your hearts, but it was not like that from the beginning. This is what he meant: Can God be opposed to himself, so that he would command one thing before and then nullify his own command with a new one? It should not be understood this way. Rather, Moses, seeing that because of the desire for second wives, who were either richer, younger, or more beautiful, the first wives were being killed or leading a bad life, preferred to tolerate discord rather than continue with hatred and murders (Deut. XXIV). At the same time, consider that God did not allow it because of the hardness of your hearts, but Moses did, so that, according to the Apostle’s counsel (1 Corinthians 7), it may be a human choice, not a commandment from God. — Commentary on Matthew

Jerome ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): What He says is to this purpose. Is it possible that God should so contradict Himself, as to command one thing at first, and after defeat His own ordinance by a new statute? Think not so; but, whereas Moses saw that through desire of second wives who should be richer, younger, or fairer, that the first were put to death, or treated ill, he chose rather to suffer separation, than the continuance of hatred and assassination. Observe moreover that He said not God suffered you, but, Moses; showing that it was, as the Apostle speaks, a counsel of man, not a command of God. (1 Cor. 7:12.) — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

John Chrysostom: Nevertheless, unspeakable wisdom maketh a defense even for these things, and saith, “Moses for the hardness of your hearts” thus made the law. And not even him doth He suffer to remain under accusation, forasmuch as He had Himself given him the law; but delivers him from the charge, and turns the whole upon their head, as everywhere He doth.

For again when they were blaming His disciples for plucking the ears of corn, He shows themselves to be guilty; and when they were laying a transgression to their charge as to their not washing their hands, He shows themselves to be the transgressors, and touching the Sabbath also: both everywhere, and here in like manner.

Then because the saying was hard to bear, and brought on them much blame, He quickly directs back His discourse to that ancient law, saying as He had said before also, “But in the beginning it was not so,” that is, God by His acts at the beginning ordained the contrary. For in order that they may not say, Whence is it manifest, that “for our hardness Moses said this?” hereby again He stoppeth their mouths. For if this were the primary law, and for our good, that other would not have been given at the beginning; God in creating would not have so created, He would not have said such things. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 62

Pseudo-Chrysostom ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): Therefore said He well, Moses suffered, not commanded. For what we command, that we ever wish; but when we suffer, we yield against our will, because we have not the power to put full restraint upon the evil wills of men. He therefore suffered you to do evil that you might not do worse; thus in suffering this he was not enforcing the righteousness of God, but taking away its sinfulness from a sin; that while you did it according to His law, your sin should not appear sin. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Tertullian: There, while prohibiting divorce, He has given us a solution of this special question respecting it: “Moses,” says He, “because of the hardness of your hearts, suffered you to give a bill of divorcement; but from the beginning it was not so” -for this reason, indeed, because He who had “made them male and female” had likewise said, “They twain shall become one flesh; what therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder. — Against Marcion Book IV

Tertullian: So true, moreover, is it that divorce “was not from the beginning,” that among the Romans it is not till after the six hundredth year from the building of the city that this kind of “hard-heartedness” is set down as having been committed. — On Monogamy

Matthew 19:9

Apollinaris of Laodicea: To commit adultery is to have relations with a woman who is not one’s proper spouse. A man commits adultery if he brings another woman in, instead of the one to whom he was lawfully bound. The law forbade obvious adultery, which is when another man seduces the woman in the house. But the Savior includes also that adultery that has not become known to everyone or that has not been proven as having occurred physically, because it is still adultery. Moreover, Christ agrees that the unfaithful wife has rebelled because she herself has destroyed the natural yoking and is no longer treated as a wife by her husband. — FRAGMENT 94

Apostolic Constitutions: If a layman divorces his own wife, and takes another, or one divorced by another, let him be suspended. — Apostolic Constitutions (Book VIII), The Ecclesiastical Canons of the Same Holy Apostles, Section 48

Athenagoras of Athens: A person should either remain as he was born, or be content with one marriage; for a second marriage is only a specious adultery. “For whosoever puts away his wife,” says He, “and marries another, commits adultery;” [Matthew 19:9] not permitting a man to send her away whose virginity he has brought to an end, nor to marry again. For he who deprives himself of his first wife, even though she be dead, is a cloaked adulterer, resisting the hand of God, because in the beginning God made one man and one woman, and dissolving the strictest union of flesh with flesh, formed for the intercourse of the race. — A Plea for the Christians

Augustine of Hippo ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (De Conjug. Adult. ii. 9.) For a reunion of the wedlock, even after actual commission of adultery, is neither shameful nor difficult, where there is an undoubted remission of sin through the keys of the kingdom of heaven; not that after being divorced from her husband an adulteress should be called back again, but that after her union with Christ she should no longer be called an adulteress. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Clement of Alexandria: Now that the Scripture counsels marriage, and allows no release from the union, is expressly contained in the law, “Thou shalt not put away thy wife, except for the cause of fornication;” and it regards as fornication, the marriage of those separated while the other is alive. Not to deck and adorn herself beyond what is becoming, renders a wife free of calumnious suspicion, while she devotes herself assiduously to prayers and supplications; avoiding frequent departures from the house, and shutting herself up as far as possible from the view of all not related to her, and deeming housekeeping of more consequence than impertinent trifling. “He that taketh a woman that has been put away,” it is said, “committeth adultery; and if one puts away his wife, he makes her an adulteress,” that is, compels her to commit adultery. And not only is he who puts her away guilty of this, but he who takes her, by giving to the woman the opportunity of sinning; for did he not take her, she would return to her husband. What, then, is the law? In order to check the impetuosity of the passions, it commands the adulteress to be put to death, on being convicted of this; and if of priestly family, to be committed to the flames. And the adulterer also is stoned to death, but not in the same place, that not even their death may be in common. And the law is not at variance with the Gospel, but agrees with it. How should it be otherwise, one Lord being the author of both? She who has committed fornication liveth in sin, and is dead to the commandments; but she who has repented, being as it were born again by the change in her life, has a regeneration of life; the old harlot being dead, and she who has been regenerated by repentance having come back again to life. The Spirit testifies to what has been said by Ezekiel, declaring, “I desire not the death of the sinner, but that he should turn.” Now they are stoned to death; as through hardness of heart dead to the law which they believed not. But in the case of a priestess the punishment is increased, because “to whom much is given, from him shall more be required.” — The Stromata Book 2

Jerome ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): It is fornication alone which destroys the relationship of the wife; for when she has divided one flesh into two, and has separated herself by fornication from her husband, she is not to be retained, lest she should bring her husband also under the curse, which Scripture has spoken, He that keepeth an adulteress is a fool and wicked. (Prov. 18:23.)

For it might be that a man might falsely charge an innocent wife, and for the sake of another woman might fasten an accusation upon her. Therefore it is commanded so to put away the first, that a second be not married while the first is yet alive. Also because it might happen that by the same law a wife would divorce her husband, it is also provided that she take not another husband; and because one who had become an adulteress would have no further fear of disgrace, it is commanded that she many not another husband. But if she do marry another, she is in the guilt of adultery; wherefore it follows, And whoso marrieth her that is put away, committeth adultery. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Jerome: (Verse 9.) But I say to you, that whoever divorces his wife, except for fornication, and marries another, commits adultery. And he who marries a divorced woman, commits adultery. Only fornication is what overcomes a wife’s affection: indeed, when she divides one flesh into another, and separates herself from her husband through fornication, she should not be held: lest she also make her husband subject to a curse, as Scripture says: Whoever holds onto an adulteress, is foolish and wicked. Therefore, whenever there is fornication, or even suspicion of fornication, the wife is freely dismissed. And because it could happen that someone falsely accuses the innocent person and implicates them in an old crime due to a second marriage, the husband is commanded to divorce the first wife so that he does not have a second wife while the first one is still alive. For what he says is as follows: If you divorce your wife not for lust but for injury, why do you expose yourself to the danger of unhappy previous marriages by entering into new ones? Moreover, because it could happen that, according to the same law, a wife could also give a divorce to her husband, the same caution is prescribed so that she does not marry a second man. And because a prostitute, and one who has once been an adulteress, does not fear disgrace, the same caution is prescribed for the husband, that if he marries such a woman, he is subject to the crime of adultery. — Commentary on Matthew

John Chrysostom: “But I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife except it be for fornication, and marry another, committeth adultery.” For since he had stopped their mouths, He then gives the law with His own authority, like as touching the meats, like as touching the Sabbath.

For with regard to the meats likewise, when He had overcome them, then, and not till then, He declared unto the multitude, that, “Not that which goeth in defileth the man;” and with regard to the Sabbath, when He had stopped their mouths, He saith, “Wherefore it is lawful to do well on the Sabbath day;” and here this self-same thing. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 62

Justin Martyr: Concerning chastity, He uttered such sentiments as these: “Whosoever looketh upon a woman to lust after her, hath committed adultery with her already in his heart before God.” And, “If thy right eye offend thee, cut it out; for it is better for thee to enter into the kingdom of heaven with one eye, than, having two eyes, to be cast into everlasting fire.” And, “Whosoever shall marry her that is divorced from another husband, committeth adultery.” And, “There are some who have been made eunuchs of men, and some who were born eunuchs, and some who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake; but all cannot receive this saying.” So that all who, by human law, are twice married, are in the eye of our Master sinners, and those who look upon a woman to lust after her. For not only he who in act commits adultery is rejected by Him, but also he who desires to commit adultery: since not only our works, but also our thoughts, are open before God. — The First Apology, Chapter XV

Origen of Alexandria ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): Perhaps some one will say, that Jesus in thus speaking, suffered wives to be put away for the same cause that Moses suffered them, which He says was for the hardness of the hearts of the Jews. But to this it is to be answered, that if by the Law an adulteress is stoned, that sin is not to be understood as the shameful thing for which Moses suffers a writing of divorcement; (Deut. 24:1.) for in a cause of adultery it was not lawful to give a writing of divorcement. But Moses perhaps calls every sin in a woman a shameful thing, which if it be found in her, a bill of divorcement is written against her. But we should enquire, If it is lawful to put away a wife for the cause of fornication only, what is it if a woman be not an adulteress, but have done any other heinous crime; have been found a poisoner, or to have murdered her children? The Lord has explained this matter in another place, saying, Whoso putteth her away, except for the cause of fornication, maketh her to commit adultery, (Mat. 5:32.) giving her an opportunity of a second marriage. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Pseudo-Chrysostom ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): Therefore said He well, Moses suffered, not commanded. For what we command, that we ever wish; but when we suffer, we yield against our will, because we have not the power to put full restraint upon the evil wills of men. He therefore suffered you to do evil that you might not do worse; thus in suffering this he was not enforcing the righteousness of God, but taking away its sinfulness from a sin; that while you did it according to His law, your sin should not appear sin.

For as he is cruel and unjust that puts away a chaste wife, so is he a fool and unjust that retains an unchaste; for in that he hides the guilt of his wife, he is an encourager of foulness.

For every thing by whatsoever causes it is created, by the same is it destroyed. It is not matrimony but the will that makes the union; and therefore it is not a separation of bodies but a separation of wills that dissolves it. He then who puts away his wife and does not take another is still her husband; for though their bodies be not united, their wills are united. But when he takes another, then he manifestly puts his wife away; wherefore the Lord says not, Whoso putteth away his wife, but, Whoso marrieth another, committeth adultery. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Rabanus Maurus ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): There is then but one carnal cause why a wife should be put away, that is, fornication, and but one spiritual, that is, the fear of God. But there is no cause why while she who has been put away is alive, another should be married. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Shepherd of Hermas: “Sir, if any one has a wife who trusts in the Lord, and if he detect her in adultery, does the man sin if he continue to live with her?” And he said to me, “As long as he remains ignorant of her sin, the husband commits no transgression in living with her. But if the husband know that his wife has gone astray, and if the woman does not repent, but persists in her fornication, and yet the husband continues to live with her, he also is guilty of her crime, and a sharer in her adultery.” And I said to him, “What then, sir, is the husband to do, if his wife continue in her vicious practices?” And he said, “The husband should put her away, and remain by himself. But if he put his wife away and marry another, he also commits adultery.” And I said to him, “What if the woman put away should repent, and wish to return to her husband: shall she not be taken back by her husband?” And he said to me, “Assuredly. If the husband do not take her back, he sins, and brings a great sin upon himself; for he ought to take back the sinner who has repented. But not frequently. For there is but one repentance to the servants of God. In case, therefore, that the divorced wife may repent, the husband ought not to marry another, when his wife has been put away. In this matter man and woman are to be treated exactly in the same way.” — Shepherd of Hermas, Commandment 4

Tertullian: But, however, since Patience takes the lead in every species of salutary discipline, what wonder that she likewise ministers to Repentance, (accustomed as Repentance is to come to the rescue of such as have fallen, ) when, on a disjunction of wedlock (for that cause, I mean, which makes it lawful, whether for husband or wife, to persist in the perpetual observance of widowhood), she waits for, she yearns for, she persuades by her entreaties, repentance in all who are one day to enter salvation? How great a blessing she confers on each!The one she prevents from becoming an adulterer; the other she amends. — Of Patience

Matthew 19:10

Clement of Alexandria: Concerning the words, “Not all can receive this saying. There are some eunuchs who were born so, and some who were made eunuchs by men, and some who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven; let him receive it who can receive it,” they do not realize the context. After his word about divorce some asked him whether, if that is the position in relation to woman, it is better not to marry; and it was then that the Lord said: “Not all can receive this saying, but those to whom it is granted.” What the questioners wanted to know was whether, when a man’s wife has been condemned for fornication, it is allowable for him to marry another. — The Stromata Book 3

Jerome: (Verse 10.) His disciples said to him: If such is the case between a man and his wife, it is not expedient to marry. The burden of wives is heavy, for apart from the cause of fornication, they cannot be divorced. For what if she is drunken, if she is angry, if she is of bad morals, if she is lascivious, if she is gluttonous, if she is wandering, if she is quarrelsome, if she is abusive? She must be endured. For when we were free, we willingly subjected ourselves to servitude. Therefore, seeing the heavy burden of wives, the apostles express their thoughts and say, if it is so, it is not expedient for a man to marry. — Commentary on Matthew

Jerome ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): A wife is a grievous burden, if it is not permitted to put her away except for the cause of fornication. For what if she be a drunkard, an evil temper, or of evil habits, is she to be kept? The Apostles, perceiving this burden someness, express what they feel; His disciples say unto him, If the case of the man be so with his wife, it is not good to marry. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

John Chrysostom: But what took place there, this happened here also. For as there, when the Jews had been put to silence the disciples were troubled, and came unto Him with Peter and said, “Declare unto us this parable;” even so now also they were troubled and said, “If the case of the man be so, it is good not to marry.”

For now they understood the saying more than before. Therefore then indeed they held their peace, but now when there hath been gainsaying, and answering, and question, and learning by reply, and the law appeared more clear, they ask Him. And openly to contradict they do not dare, but they bring forward what seemed to be a grievous and galling result of it, saying, “If the case of the man be so with his wife, it is not good to marry.” For indeed it seemed to be a very hard thing to have a wife full of every bad quality, and to endure a wild beast perpetually shut up with one in the house. And that thou mayest learn that this greatly troubled them, Mark said, to show it, that they spake to Him privately.

But what is, “If such be the case of a man with his wife?” That is, if to this end he is joined with her, that they should be one, or, on the other hand, if the man shall get to himself blame for these things, and always transgresses by putting away, it were easier to fight against natural desire and against one’s self, than against a wicked woman. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 62

Pseudo-Chrysostom ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): And the Lord said not, It is good, but rather assented that it is not good. However, He considered the weakness of the flesh; But he said unto them, All cannot receive this saying; that is, All are not able to do this.

But all cannot obtain it, because all do not desire to obtain it. The prize is before them; he who desires the honour will not consider the toil. None would ever vanquish, if all shunned the struggle. Because then some have fallen from their purpose of continence, we ought not therefore to faint from that virtue; for they that fall in the battle do not slay the rest. That He says therefore, Save they to whom it is given, shows that unless we receive the aid of grace, we have not strength. But this aid of grace is not denied to such as seek it, for the Lord says above, Ask, and ye shall receive. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Matthew 19:11

Jerome: (Verse 11.) He said to them: Not everyone can understand this word, but only those to whom it is given. No one should think that under this word, either fate or fortune is introduced: these are the virgins to whom it has been given by God, or whom certain circumstances have brought to this, but it has been given to those who have asked, who have desired, who have worked to receive it. For everyone who asks will receive, and the one who seeks will find, and to the one who knocks, it will be opened (Matthew 7:8 and Luke 11:10). — Commentary on Matthew

Jerome ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): But let none think, that wherein He adds, save they to whom it is given, that either fate or fortune is implied, as though they were virgins only whom chance has led to such a fortune. For that is given to those who have sought it of God, who have longed for it, who have striven that they might obtain it. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

John Chrysostom: What then saith Christ? He said not, “yea, it is easier, and so do,” lest they should suppose that the thing is a law; but He subjoined, “Not all men receive it, but they to whom it is given,” raising the thing, and showing that it is great, and in this way drawing them on, and urging them.

But see herein a contradiction. For He indeed saith this is a great thing; but they, that it is easier. For it was meet that both these things should be done, and that it should be at once acknowledged a great thing by Him, that it might render them more forward, and by the things said by themselves it should be shown to be easier, that on this ground too they might the rather choose virginity and continence.

And if it is of free choice, one may say, how doth He say, at the beginning, “All men do not receive it, but they to whom it is given?” That thou mightest learn that the conflict is great, not that thou shouldest suspect any compulsory allotments. For it is given to those, even to the willing.

But He spake thus to show that much influence from above is needed by him who entereth these lists, whereof He that is willing shall surely partake. For it is customary for Him to use this form of speech when the good work done is great, as when He saith, “To you it is given to know the mysteries.”

And that this is true, is manifest even from the present instance. For if it be of the gift from above only, and they that live as virgins contribute nothing themselves, for nought did He promise them the kingdom of Heaven, and distinguish them from the other eunuchs. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 62

Matthew 19:12

Hilary of Poitiers ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): The cause in one item he assigns nature; in the next violence, and in the last his own choice, in him, namely, that determined to be so from hope of the kingdom of heaven. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Jerome: (Verse 12.) For there are eunuchs who have been so from birth, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Let the one who is able to receive this receive it. There are three types of eunuchs: those who are eunuchs from birth, those who are made eunuchs by men, and those who make themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Some are born eunuchs, others are made eunuchs by men, and others choose to be eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. And those who can accept it should accept it. A reward is promised to these people, but to the previous ones, for whom the necessity of chastity is not voluntary, nothing is owed at all. We can say differently. There are eunuchs who are born from their mother’s womb, who are of a colder nature and do not desire lust. And there are others who are made by humans: whom either philosophers make, or they are softened into women because of the worship of idols: or they pretend chastity due to heretical persuasion, in order to lie about the truth of religion. But none of them will inherit the kingdom of heaven unless he has castrated himself for the sake of Christ. Therefore, it is concluded: He who is able to receive this, let him receive it; so that each person may consider his own abilities, whether he can fulfill the commands of virginity and chastity. For chastity is enticing in itself, attracting anyone to itself. But one’s abilities must be considered, so that he who is able to receive it, may receive it. It is like the voice of the Lord urging and inciting his soldiers to the reward of chastity. Let whoever is able to understand, understand; let whoever is able to fight, fight, overcome and triumph. — Commentary on Matthew

Jerome ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): He speaks of three kinds of eunuchs, of whom two are carnal, and one spiritual. One, those who are so born of their mother’s womb; another, those whom enemies or courtly luxury has made so; a third, those who have made themselves so for the kingdom of heaven, and who might have been men, but become eunuchs for Christ. To them the reward is promised, for to the others whose continence was involuntary, nothing is due.

(cf. Orig. in loc.) Or we may say otherwise. The eunuchs from their mothers’ wombs are they whose nature is colder, and not prone to lust. And they that are made so of men are they whom physicians made so, or they whom worship of idols has made effeminate, or who from the influence of heretical teaching pretend to chastity, that they may thereupon claim truth for their tenets. But none of them obtain the kingdom of heaven, save he only who has become a eunuch for Christ’s sake. Whence it follows, He that is able to receive it, let him receive it; let each calculate his own strength, whether he is able to fulfil the rules of virginity and abstinence. For in itself continence is sweet and alluring, but each man must consider his strength, that he only that is able may receive it. This is the voice of the Lord exhorting and encouraging on His soldiers to the reward of chastity, that he who can fight might fight and conquer and triumph. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

John Chrysostom: For since to speak of virginity seemed to be grievous, by the constraint of this law He drove them to this desire. Then to show the possibility of it, He saith, “There are some eunuchs, who were so born from their mother’s womb, there are some eunuchs which were made eunuchs of men, and there be eunuchs which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of Heaven’s sake,” by these words secretly leading them to choose the thing, and establishing the possibility of this virtue, and all but saying, Consider if thou wert in such case by nature, or hadst endured this selfsame thing at the hands of those who inflict such wanton injuries, what wouldest thou have done, being deprived indeed of the enjoyment, yet not having a reward? Thank God therefore now, for that with rewards and crowns thou undergoest this, which those men endure without crowns; or rather not ever this, but what is much lighter, being supported both by hope, and by the consciousness of the good work, and not having the desire so raging like waves within thee.

For the excision of a member is not able to quell such waves, and to make a calm, like the curb of reason; or rather, reason only can do this.

For this intent therefore He brought in those others, even that He might encourage these, since if this was not what He was establishing, what means His saying concerning the other eunuchs? But when He saith, that they made themselves eunuchs, He means not the excision of the members, far from it, but the putting away of wicked thoughts. Since the man who hath mutilated himself, in fact, is subject even to a curse, as Paul saith, “I would they were even cut off which trouble you.” And very reasonably. For such a one is venturing on the deeds of murderers, and giving occasion to them that slander God’s creation, and opens the mouths of the Manichaeans, and is guilty of the same unlawful acts as they that mutilate themselves amongst the Greeks. For to cut off our members hath been from the beginning a work of demoniacal agency, and satanic device, that they may bring up a bad report upon the work of God, that they may mar this living creature, that imputing all not to the choice, but to the nature of our members, the more part of them may sin in security, as being irresponsible; and doubly harm this living creature, both by mutilating the members, and by impeding the forwardness of the free choice in behalf of good deeds.

These are the ordinances of the devil, bringing in, besides the things which we have mentioned, another wicked doctrine also, and making way beforehand for the arguments concerning destiny and necessity even from hence, and everywhere marring the freedom given to us of God, and persuading us that evil deeds are of nature, and hence secretly implanting many other wicked doctrines, although not openly. For such are the devil’s poisons.

Therefore I beseech you to flee from such lawlessness. For together with the things I have mentioned, neither doth the force of lust become milder hereby, but even more fierce. For from another origin hath the seed that is in us its sources, and from another cause do its waves swell. And some say from the brain, some from the loins, this violent impulse hath its birth; but I should say from nothing else than from an ungoverned will and a neglected mind: if this be temperate, there is no evil result from the motions of nature.

Having spoken then of the eunuchs that are eunuchs for nought and fruitlessly, unless with the mind they too practise temperance, and of those that are virgins for Heaven’s sake, He proceeds again to say, “He that is able to receive it, let him receive it,” at once making them more earnest by showing that the good work is exceeding in greatness, and not suffering the thing to be shut up in the compulsion of a law, because of His unspeakable gentleness. And this He said, when He showed it to be most possible, in order that the emulation of the free choice might be greater. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 62

Pseudo-Chrysostom ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): For as the deed without the will does not constitute a sin; so a righteous act is not in the deed unless the will go with it. That therefore is honourable continence, not which mutilation of body of necessity enforces, but which the will of holy purpose embraces.

For they are born such, just as others are born having six or four fingers. For if God according as He formed our bodies in the beginning, had continued the same order unchangeably, the working of God would have been brought into oblivion among men. The order of nature is therefore changed at times from its nature, that God the framer of nature may be had in remembrance. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Tertullian: Thus in the Revelation of John it is said: “These are they which have not defiled their clothes with women,” -indicating, of course, virgins, and such as have become “eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake.” Therefore they shall be “clothed in white raiment,” that is, in the bright beauty of the unwedded flesh. — On the Resurrection of the Flesh

Tertullian: Further, if we set down in order the higher and happier grades of bodily patience, (we find that)it is she who is entrusted by holiness with the care of continence of the flesh: she keeps the widow, and sets on the virgin the seal and raises the self-made eunuch to the realms of heaven. That which springs from a virtue of the mind is perfected in the flesh; and, finally, by the patience of the flesh, does battle under persecution. — Of Patience

Tertullian: If, then he shows plainly that even wives themselves are so to be had as if they be not had, on account of the straits of the times, what would be his sentiments about these vain appliances of theirs? Why, are there not many, withal, who so do, and seal themselves up to eunuchhood for the sake of the kingdom of God, spontaneously relinquishing a pleasure so honourable, and (as we know) permitted? Are there not some who prohibit to themselves (the use of) the very “creature of God,” abstaining from wine and animal food, the enjoyments of which border upon no peril or solicitude; but they sacrifice to God the humility of their soul even in the chastened use of food? Sufficiently, therefore, have you, too, used your riches and your delicacies; sufficiently have you cut down the fruits of your dowries, before (receiving) the knowledge of saving disciplines. — On the Apparel of Women Book II

Tertullian: How many are there who from the moment of their baptism set the seal (of virginity) upon their flesh? How many, again, who by equal mutual consent cancel the debt of matrimony-voluntary eunuchs for the sake of their desire! after the celestial kingdom! But if, while the marriage-tie is still intact, abstinence is endured, how much more when it has been undone! For I believe it to be harder for what is intact to be quite forsaken, than for what has been lost not to be yearned after. — To His Wife Book I

Tertullian: This (even) broader assertion we make: that even if the Paraclete had in this our day definitely prescribed a virginity or continence total and absolute, so as not to permit the heat of the flesh to foam itself down even in single marriage, even thus He would seem to be introducing nothing of “novelty; “seeing that the Lord Himself opens “the kingdoms of the heavens” to “eunuchs,” as being Himself, withal, a virgin; to whom looking, the apostle also-himself too for this reason abstinent-gives the preference to continence. — On Monogamy

Tertullian: But (now), when the “extremity of the times” has cancelled (the command) “Grow and multiply,” since the apostles (another command), “It remaineth, that both they who have wives so be as if they have not,” because “the time is compressed; and “the sour grape” chewed by “the fathers” has ceased “to set the sons’ teeth on edge,” for, “each one shall die in his own sin; “and “eunuchs” not only have lost ignominy, but have even deserved grace, being invited into “the kingdoms of the heavens: " the law of succeeding to the wife of a brother being buried, its contrary has obtained-that of not succeeding to the wife of a brother. — On Monogamy

Tertullian: is it that He Himself withal should set upon His own official chair men who were mindful rather to enjoin-(but) not likewise to practise-sanctity of the flesh, which (sanctity) He had in all ways recommended to their teaching and practising?-first by His own example, then by all other arguments; while He tells (them) that “the kingdom of heavens” is “children’s; " while He associates with these (children) others who, after marriage, remained (or became)virgins; " while He calls (them) to (copy) the simplicity of the dove, a bird not merely innocuous, but modest too, and whereof one male knows one female; while He denies the Samaritan woman’s (partner to be) a husband, that He may show that manifold husbandry is adultery; while, in the revelation of His own glory, He prefers, from among so many saints and prophets, to have with him Moses and Elias -the one a monogamist, the other a voluntary celibate (for Elias was nothing else than John, who came “in the power and spirit of Elias” ); while that “man gluttonous and toping,” the “frequenter of luncheons and suppers, in the company of publicans and sinners,” sups once for all at a single marriage, though, of course, many were marrying (around Him); for He willed to attend (marriages) only so often as (He willed) them to be. — On Monogamy

Tertullian: How long shall we allege “the flesh,” because the Lord said, “the flesh is weak? " But He has withal premised that “the Spirit is prompt,” in order that the Spirit may vanquish the flesh-that the weak may yield to the stronger. For again He says, “Let him who is able to receive, receive (it); " that is, let him who is not able go his way. — On Monogamy

Tertullian: These things, my brother, seem to you perhaps harsh and not to be endured; but recall that God has said, “He who receives it, let him receive it,” that is, let him who does not receive it go his way. — On Flight in Persecution

Matthew 19:13

Hilary of Poitiers ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): The infants are a type of the Gentiles, to whom salvation is rendered by faith and hearing. But the disciples, in their first zeal for the salvation of Israel, forbid them to approach, but the Lord declares that they are not to be forbidden. For the gift of the Holy Ghost was to be conferred upon the Gentiles by laying on of hands, as soon as the Law had ceased. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Hilary of Poitiers: The children prefigure the Gentiles, to whom salvation is given through faith and the simple word. But since the goal was first to save Israel, they were at first prevented by the disciples from approaching. The action of the apostles is not about their personal desires but rather their serving as a type or prefiguring of the future proclamation of the gospel to the Gentiles. The Lord says that the children should not be prevented because “theirs is the kingdom of heaven”; for the grace and gift of the Holy Spirit was going to be bestowed on the Gentiles by the laying on of hands, when the work of the law ceased. — Commentary on Matthew 19.3

Jerome: (Verses 13, 14.) Then little children were brought to him, so that he could lay his hands on them and pray. But the disciples rebuked them. Jesus said to them, ‘Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these.’ — Commentary on Matthew

Jerome ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): Not because they liked not that they should have benediction of the Saviour’s hand and mouth; but forasmuch as their faith was not yet perfect, they thought that He like other men would be wearied by the applications of those that brought them. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

John Chrysostom: But mark thou, I pray, how from some men’s wicked doings, other men gain. I mean, that the Jews went away having learnt nothing, for neither did they ask with the intent of learning, but the disciples gained even from hence.

“Then were there brought unto Him little children, that He should put His hands on them, and pray: and the disciples rebuked them. But He said unto them, Suffer the little children to come unto me, for of such is the kingdom of Heaven. And He laid His hands on them, and departed thence.”

And wherefore did the disciples repel the little children? For dignity. What then doth He? Teaching them to be lowly, and to trample under foot worldly pride, He doth receive them, and takes them in His arms, and to such as them promises the kingdom; which kind of thing He said before also.

Let us also then, if we would be inheritors of the Heavens, possess ourselves of this virtue with much diligence. For this is the limit of true wisdom; to be simple with understanding; this is angelic life; yes, for the soul of a little child is pure from all the passions. Towards them who have vexed him he bears no resentment, but goes to them as to friends, as if nothing had been done; and how much soever he be beaten by his mother, after her he seeks, and her doth he prefer to all. Though thou show him the queen with a diadem, he prefers her not to his mother clad in rags, but would choose rather to see her in these, than the queen in splendor. For he useth to distinguish what pertains to him and what is strange to him, not by its poverty and wealth, but by friendship. And nothing more than necessary things doth he seek, but just to be satisfied from the breast, and then he leaves sucking. The young child is not grieved at what we are grieved, as at loss of money and such things as that, and he doth not rejoice again at what we rejoice, namely, at these temporal things, he is not eager about the beauty of persons.

Therefore He said, “of such is the kingdom of Heaven,” that by choice we should practise these things, which young children have by nature. For since the Pharisees from nothing rise so much as out of craft and pride did what they did, therefore on every hand He charges the disciples to be single hearted, both darkly hinting at those men, and instructing these. For nothing so much lifts up unto haughtiness, as power and precedence. Forasmuch then as the disciples were to enjoy great honors throughout the whole world, He preoccupies their mind, not suffering them to feel anything after the manner of men, neither to demand honors from the multitude, nor to have men clear the way before them.

For though these seem to be little things, yet are they a cause of great evils. The Pharisees at least being thus trained were carried on into the very summit of evil, seeking after the salutations, the first seats, the middle places, for from these they were cast upon the shoal of their mad desire of glory, then from thence upon impiety. So therefore those men went away having drawn upon themselves a curse by their tempting, but the little children a blessing, as being freed from all these.

Let us then also be like the little children, and “in malice be we babes.” For it cannot be, it cannot be for one otherwise to see Heaven, but the crafty and wicked must needs surely be cast into hell. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 62

Origen of Alexandria ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): For they now understood from His previous mighty works, that by laying on of His hands and by prayer evils were obviated. They bring therefore children to Him, judging that it were impossible that after the Lord had by His touch conveyed divine virtue into them, harm or any demon should come nigh them. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Origen of Alexandria ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): Mystically; We call them children who are yet carnal in Christ, having need of milk. They who bring the babes to the Saviour, are they who profess to have knowledge of the word, but are still simple, and have for their food children’s lessons, being yet novices. They who seem more perfect, and are therefore the disciples of Jesus, before they have learnt the way of righteousness which is for children, rebuke those who by simple doctrine bring to Christ children and babes, that is, such as are less learned. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Pseudo-Chrysostom ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): The Lord had been holding discourse of chastity; and some of His hearers now brought unto Him infants, who in respect of chastity are the purest; for they supposed that it was the pure in body only whom He had approved; and this is that which is said, Then were brought unto him little children, that he should put his hands on them, and pray.

The flesh as it delights not in good, if it hear any good readily forgets it; but the evil that it has it retains ever. But a little while before Christ took a little child and said, Except ye become as this child, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven, (Matt. 18:3.) yet His disciples, presently forgetting this innocence of children, now forbid children, as unworthy to come to Christ.

The present passage instructs all parents to bring their children to the priests, for it is not the priest who lays his hands on them, but Christ, in whose name hands are laid. For if he that offers his food in prayer to God eats it sanctified, for it is sanctified by the word of God, and by prayer, as the Apostle speaks, how much rather ought children to be offered to God, and sanctified? (1 Tim. 4:5.) And this is the reason of blessing of food, Because the whole world lieth in wickedness; (1 John 5:19.) so that all things that have body, which are a great part of the world, lie in wickedness. Consequently infants when born, are as respects their flesh lying in wickedness. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Remigius of Rheims ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): For it was a custom among the ancients that little children should be brought to aged persons, to receive benediction by their hand or tongue, and according to this custom little children are now brought to the Lord. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Tertullian: But further, if Christ reproves the scribes and Pharisees, sitting in the official chair of Moses, but not doing what they taught, what kind of (supposition). is it that He Himself withal should set upon His own official chair men who were mindful rather to enjoin-(but) not likewise to practise-sanctity of the flesh, which (sanctity) He had in all ways recommended to their teaching and practising?-first by His own example, then by all other arguments; while He tells (them) that “the kingdom of heavens” is “children’s; " while He associates with these (children) others who, after marriage, remained (or became)virgins; " while He calls (them) to (copy) the simplicity of the dove, a bird not merely innocuous, but modest too, and whereof one male knows one female; while He denies the Samaritan woman’s (partner to be) a husband, that He may show that manifold husbandry is adultery; while, in the revelation of His own glory, He prefers, from among so many saints and prophets, to have with him Moses and Elias -the one a monogamist, the other a voluntary celibate (for Elias was nothing else than John, who came “in the power and spirit of Elias” ); while that “man gluttonous and toping,” the “frequenter of luncheons and suppers, in the company of publicans and sinners,” sups once for all at a single marriage, though, of course, many were marrying (around Him); for He willed to attend (marriages) only so often as (He willed) them to be. — On Monogamy

Matthew 19:14

Epiphanius Scholasticus: Why did the disciples keep the children back? Not because of the children’s wickedness but because it was not the right time. They did not want the Lord to be tired by the great crowd. To them he said, “Let the children come to me and do not hinder them, for to such belongs the kingdom of heaven.” For children are ignorant of wickedness. They do not know how to return evil for evil or how to do someone an injury. They do not know how to be lustful or to fornicate or to rob. What they hear, they believe. They love their parents with complete affection. Therefore, beloved, the Lord instructs us that what they are by the gift of nature, we should become by the fear of God, a holy way of life and love of the heavenly kingdom; for unless we are alien to all sin just like children, we cannot come to the Savior. — INTERPRETATION OF THE GOSPELS 25

Jerome ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): And He said distinctly, Of such is the kingdom of heaven, not Of these, to show that it was not years, but disposition that determined His judgment, and that the reward was promised to such as had like innocence and simplicity. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Origen of Alexandria ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): But the Lord exhorting His disciples now become men to condescend to the needs of babes, to be babes to babes, that they may gain babes, says, For of such is the kingdom of heaven. For He Himself also, when He was in the form of God, was made a babe. These things we should attend to, lest in esteeming that more excellent wisdom, and spiritual advancement, as though we were become great we should despise the little ones of the Church, forbidding children to be brought to Jesus. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Philoxenus of Mabbug: It is meet for every man that would draw nigh to God that he should possess the mind of a child; and as a child is towards his father and mother, so should he be towards God and towards His dispensation. And as the child receiveth instruction from his master without searching into his words or examining his doctrine, and without judging in his thoughts that which he teacheth him—for he hath not sufficient ability in his own thoughts to be a judge of what he heareth—so also is it meet for the man to be towards God, neither enquiring into Him with his words, nor judging His deeds and actions in secret thoughts; for he is a child, and like a child he should incline his ear unto His instruction, and receive it with faith. And it was also for this reason that God gave birth to us a second time, that He might teach us that we were children and infants of the world born unto faith, for the womb which gave us birth—that is, baptism in which the Spirit is mingled—has been made the means. Now we have been born in faith, and as the natural child who is born from the womb existeth wholly in natural simplicity and knoweth nothing of the world, and seeketh not to know, and enquireth not, and thinketh not, and speaketh not, except that he moveth only with the living motions of nature, being remote from all power of the mind, so also this child, of the Spirit, who hath been brought forth by the womb of baptism instead of by the natural womb, is not bound to enquire concerning Him that begot him while he listeneth to His words with sincerity, and he should become like a child to His doctrine, accepting [His] commands and drawing not nigh to enquire into them. And as that natural child learneth the names of the things of the world without understanding their power, so also let [the child of the Spirit] accept the names and words, and God shall give him the secret of understanding them. For in respect of that knowledge we are children and infants compared to the unspeakable wisdom of God, and thus also are we called by the word of our Redeemer, [Who said], “Suffer little children to come unto Me, and restrain them not, for of those who are like these is the kingdom of God.” And again in another place He said, “Whosoever will not receive the kingdom of God like a little child shall not enter into it.” — 13 Ascetic Discourses, Discourse 2 – On Faith

Pseudo-Chrysostom ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): For who were worthy to come to Christ, if simple infancy were thrust away? Therefore he said, Forbid them not. For if they shall turn out saints, why hinder ye the sons from coming to their Father? And if sinners, why do ye pronounce a sentence of condemnation, before you see any fault in them? — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Tertullian: For why is it necessary-if (baptism itself) is not so necessary -that the sponsors likewise should be thrust into danger? Who both themselves, by reason of mortality, may fail to fulfil their promises, and may be disappointed by the development of an evil disposition, in those for whom they stood? The Lord does indeed say, “Forbid them not to come unto me.” Let them “come,” then, while they are growing up; let them “come” while they are learning, while they are learning whither to come; let them become Christians when they have become able to know Christ. — On Baptism

Matthew 19:15

Apollinaris of Laodicea: Only the wickedness and corruption of the creature stands in the way of our approaching the Creator. Lack of wisdom should not prevent it. He seeks completeness, and your approach is welcome to him for this completeness. Therefore the words “For to such belongs the kingdom of heaven” are accurate. He did not say “of these” but “to such,” since lack of wisdom is a property of children. For the same reason the apostle said, “Do not be children in your thinking; be babes in evil.” And Mark also examines the cause, speaking and interpreting as follows: “To such belongs the kingdom of heaven” and “Truly I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child shall not enter it.” Luke also said the same as Matthew above: “Whoever humbles himself like this child, he is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven.” For those qualities which the child has by nature, God wishes us to have by choice: simplicity, forgetfulness of wrongs done to us, love of our parents, even if struck by them. He laid his hands on the children because the laying on of hands signifies the arming of God’s power. — FRAGMENT 96

Jerome: (Verse 15.) Allow the children, and do not prohibit them from coming to me: for such is the kingdom of heaven. And when he had laid his hands on them, he departed from there. He specifically said ‘such’, not ’these’, to show that it is not age that reigns but character; and that those who have similar innocence and simplicity will be rewarded. The apostle also agrees with this sentiment: Brothers, do not be children in your thinking, but be infants in evil, and mature in your thinking (1 Corinthians 14:20). — Commentary on Matthew

Origen of Alexandria ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): But since children cannot follow all things that are commanded them, Jesus laid His hands upon them, and leaving virtue in them by His touch, went away from them, seeing they were not able to follow Him, like the other more perfect disciples. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Remigius of Rheims ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): Also laying His hands upon them, He blessed them, to signify that the lowly in spirit are worthy His grace and blessing. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Matthew 19:16

Jerome: (V. 16.) And behold, one approached him and said to him: Good Teacher, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life? And he said to him: This one who asks how to obtain eternal life is both young and wealthy, and proud; and according to another evangelist, he asks not out of a desire to learn, but to test (Mark X). — Commentary on Matthew

Jerome ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): He that asks this question is both young, rich, and proud, and he asks not as one that desires to learn, but as tempting Him. This we can prove by this, that when the Lord had said unto him, If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments, he further insidiously asks, which are the commandments? as if he could not read them for himself, or as if the Lord could command any thing contrary to them. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

John Chrysostom: Some indeed accuse this young man, as one dissembling and ill-minded, and coming with a temptation to Jesus, but I, though I would not say he was not fond of money, and under subjection to his wealth, since Christ in fact convicted him of being such a character, yet a dissembler I would by no means call him, both because it is not safe to venture on things uncertain, and especially in blame, and because Mark hath taken away this suspicion; for he saith, that “having come running unto Him, and kneeling to Him, he besought Him,” and that “Jesus beheld him, and loved him.”

But great is the tyranny of wealth, and it is manifest hence; I mean, that though we be virtuous as to the rest, this ruins all besides. With reason hath Paul also affirmed it to be the root of all evils in general. “For the love of money is the root of all evils,” he saith.

If he had come unto Him tempting, he would not have departed sorrowing for what he heard. This was not at any rate ever the feeling of any of the Pharisees, but they grew fierce when their mouths were stopped. But not so this man; but he goeth away cast down, which is no little sign that not with an evil will he had come unto Him, but with one too feeble, and that he did indeed desire life, but was held in subjection by another and most grievous feeling. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 63

Philoxenus of Mabbug: Let us now consider the answer of our Lord unto that young man who drew nigh unto Him, and who asked Him to teach him the doctrine of perfection, from which he might also receive perfect knowledge, and be born from one rule of life into another. Now when in order to learn he asked, “What shall I do that I may inherit eternal life,” Jesus said unto him, “Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness,” which things constitute remoteness from wickedness; and He taught after these the working of good by the word which He spake, saying, “Honour thy father and thy mother, and that which is hateful unto thee, thou shalt not do unto thy neighbour,” and He said, “If a man keep these things, he shall inherit life everlasting.” — 13 Ascetic Discourses, Discourse 9 – Second Discourse on Poverty

Rabanus Maurus ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (e Bed. in Luc. Mat. 18:3.) This man had, it may be, heard of the Lord, that only they who were like to little children were worthy to enter into the heavenly kingdom; but desiring to know more certainly, he asks to have it declared to him not in parables, but expressly, by what merits he might attain eternal life. Therefore it is said And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do that I may have eternal life? — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Tertullian: That rich man did go his way who had not “received” the precept of dividing his substance to the needy, and was abandoned by the Lord to his own opinion. Nor will “harshness” be on this account imputed to Christ, the Found of the vicious action of each individual free-will. — On Monogamy

Matthew 19:17

Apollinaris of Laodicea: The teaching of the law is good, and Christ does not criticize it, but he says, “If you would enter life, keep the commandments,” indicating the beginning of this route but not its completion. Through this he shows that the law is not alien to himself, but perfection comes from himself. — FRAGMENT 97

Augustine of Hippo: The Lord said to a certain young man, “If you would enter life, keep the commandments.” He did not say “If you would have life” but “If you would enter life,” defining that life as eternal life. Let us first consider then the love of this life. For this life is loved, whatever its quality; and however troubled it is, however wretched, people are afraid to end it. Hence we should see, we should consider, how much eternal life is to be loved, when this miserable life that must at some time be ended is so loved. Consider, brothers, how much that life is to be loved when it is a life you never end. You love this life, where you work so much, run, are busy, pant. In this busy life the obligations can scarcely be counted: sowing, plowing, working new land, sailing, grinding, cooking, weaving. And after all this hard work your life comes to an end. Look at what you suffer in this wretched life that you so love. And do you think that you will always live and never die? Temples, rocks, marbles, all reinforced by iron and lead, still fall. And a person thinks that he will never die? Learn therefore, brothers, to seek eternal life, when you will not endure these things but will reign with God forever. — SERMON 84.1

Augustine of Hippo ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (de Cons. Ev. ii. 63.) This may seem a discrepancy, that Matthew here gives it, Why askest thou me concerning good? whereas Mark and Luke have, Why callest thou me good? For this, Why askest thou me concerning good? may seem rather to be referred to his question, What good thing shall I do? for in that he both mentioned good, and asked a question. But this, Good Master, is not yet a question. Either sentence may be understood thus very appropriately to the passage.

(de Trin. i. 13.) Or, because he sought eternal life, (and eternal life consists in such contemplation in which God is beheld not for punishment, but for everlasting joy,) and knew not with whom he spake, but thought Him only a Son of Man, therefore He says, Why askest thou me concerning good, calling me in respect of what you see in me, Good Master? This form of the Son of Man shall appear in the judgment, not to the righteous only, but to the wicked, and the very sight shall be to them an evil, and their punishment. But there is a sight of My form, in which I am equal to God. That one God therefore, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, is alone good, because none see Him to mourning and sorrow, but only to salvation and true joy.

(Serm. 84, 1.) And He said not, If thou desirest life eternal; but, If thou wilt enter into life, calling that simply life, which shall be everlasting. Here we should consider how eternal life should be loved, when this miserable and finite life is so loved. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Jerome: (Verse 17) Why do you ask me about what is good? There is only one good God. Because he had called a good teacher, and not God, or the Son of God, he learns that even a holy man is not good in comparison to God, of whom it is said: Give thanks to the Lord, for he is good (Psalms 117:1). But lest anyone think that the goodness of God excludes the Son of God, we read in another place: The good shepherd lays down his life for his sheep (John 10). And in the Prophet, the good Spirit and the good earth. Therefore, the Savior did not reject the testimony of goodness. But the teacher eliminated error without God. — Commentary on Matthew

Jerome ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): But because he had styled Him Good Master, and had not confessed Him as God, or as the Son of God, He tells him, that in comparison of God there is no saint to be called good, of whom it is said, Confess unto the Lord, for he is good; (Ps. 118:1.) and therefore He says, There is one good, that is, God. But that none should suppose that by this the Son of God is excluded from being good, we read in another place, The good Shepherd layeth down his life for his sheep. (John 10:11.)

For Our Saviour does not reject this witness to His goodness, but corrected the error of calling Him Good Master apart from God. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

John Chrysostom: Wherefore then doth Christ thus reply to him, saying, “There is none good?” Because He came unto Him as a mere man, and one of the common sort, and a Jewish teacher; for this cause then as a man He discourses with him. And indeed in many instances He replies to the secret thoughts of them that come unto Him; as when He saith, “We worship we know what;” and, “If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true.” When therefore He saith, “There is none good;” not as putting Himself out from being good doth He say this, far from it; for he said not, “Why dost thou call me good? I am not good;” but, “there is none good,” that is, none amongst men.

And when He saith this self-same thing, He saith it not as depriving even men of goodness, but in contradistinction to the goodness of God. Wherefore also He added, “But one, that is, God;” and He said not, “but my Father” that thou mightest learn that He had not revealed Himself to the young man. So also further back He called men evil, saying, “If ye, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children.” For indeed there too He called them evil, not as condemning the whole race as evil (for by “ye,” He means not “ye men”), but comparing the goodness that is in men with the goodness of God, He thus named it; therefore also He added, “How much more shall your Father give good things to them that ask Him?” And what was there to urge Him, or what the profit that He should answer in this way? He leads him on by little and little, and teaches him to be far from all flattery, drawing him off from the things upon each, and fastening him upon God, and persuading him to seek after the things to come, and to know that which is really good, and the root and fountain of all things, and to refer the honors to Him. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 63

Origen of Alexandria ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): Christ also answers thus, because of that He said, What good thing shall I do? For when we depart from evil and do good, that which we do is called good by comparison with what other men do. But when compared with absolute good, in the sense in which it is here said, There is one good, our good is not good. But some one may say, that because the Lord knew that the purpose of him who thus asked Him was not even to do such good as man can do, that therefore He said, Why askest thou me concerning good? as much as to say, Why do you ask me concerning good, seeing you are not prepared to do what is good. But after this He says, If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments. Where note, that He speaks to him as yet standing without life; for that man is in one sense without life, who is without Him who said, I am the life. Otherwise, every man upon earth may be, not in life itself, but only in its shadow, while he is clad in a body of death. But any man shall enter into life, if he keep himself from dead works, and seek living works. But there are dead words and living words, also dead thoughts and living thoughts, and therefore He says, If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.

Or perhaps these precepts are enough to introduce one, if I may say so, to the entrance of life; but neither these, nor any like them, are enough to conduct one to the more inward parts of life. But whoso transgresses one of these commandments, shall not even come to the entrance in unto life. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Remigius of Rheims ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): These words prove that the Law gave to such as kept it not only temporal promises, but also life eternal. And because the hearing these things made him thoughtful, He saith unto him, Which? — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

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 19:18

Cyril of Alexandria: When Christ says to him, “If you would enter life, keep the commandments,” the man expects him to add immediately, “my commandments.” “Which ones?” he asks. He was quite deceived in his expectation. For Christ did not answer him as he expected but simply pointed him to the law. This is not because the law is perfection, for “no one is justified by the law,” as it is written, but because the life lived according to law is a kind of introduction to the eternal life, briefly acquainting trainees to the things above. “For the law was put in charge to lead us to Christ.” The law is the starting point for social justice. Christ is the perfection. For the beginning of good is to act justly, he says. Just action then is shown by the law, but goodness is shown by Christ. The law taught us to repay those who wish to harm us, as in “eye for eye, tooth for tooth.” But Christ taught us to let go such balanced vengeance with a view to the greater good, teaching that “if anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also; and if anyone would sue you and take your coat, let him have your cloak as well.” — FRAGMENT 218

Hilary of Poitiers: This young man has grown impudent from studying the law. He is worried about his salvation. Jesus sends him back to the law so that he might understand that, in the very thing in which he takes pride, he has as yet done no righteous work. For the Lord answered him with the words of the law. But the young man, like the boastful and impudent people of whom he is a type, put his trust in the law, but he did not really comply with it at all. For they had been ordered not to kill, yet they had killed the prophets. They knew they were not to commit adultery, yet they had brought corruption on the faith and adultery on the law and had worshiped other gods. They knew not to steal, yet by stealth they had dissolved the commandments of the law, before Christ restored the freedom of believing in the faith. They knew not to bear false witness, yet they denied that Christ rose from the dead. They were ordered to honor father and mother, yet they had separated themselves from the family of God the Father and their mother the church. They were ordered to love their neighbor as themselves, yet they persecuted Christ, who had assumed the body of us all and had become neighbor to each one of us by the condition of the assumed body; they persecuted him to the punishment of the cross. So the young man was ordered to cast off and cut out all these vices and to return to the law. — Commentary on Matthew 19.5

Jerome: (Verse 18, 19.) But if you want to enter life, keep the commandments. He said to him, ‘Which ones?’ Jesus replied, ‘You shall not murder. You shall not commit adultery. You shall not steal. You shall not give false testimony. Honor your father and mother, and love your neighbor as yourself.’ This young man is tempting, and from this we can prove that when the Lord tells him, ‘If you want to enter life, keep the commandments,’ he deceitfully asks what those commandments are: as if he himself had not read them, or as if the Lord could command something contrary to God. — Commentary on Matthew

John Chrysostom: Therefore when Christ said, “If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments,” he saith, “Which?” Not tempting, far from it, but supposing there were some others besides those of the law that should procure him life, which was like one who was very desirous. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 63

Origen of Alexandria: These commandments are sufficient for someone entering on the ground level of the path of eternal life. But they are not sufficient to lead one to the higher life, and certainly not to perfection. One who fails in just one of these commandments cannot even enter the beginnings of life. Anyone who wishes to enter the early stages of the path of life must be free from adultery and murder and any kind of theft. For just as the adulterer and murderer will not enter into life, so neither will the thief. Many of those who are said to believe in Christ are guilty of this sin. Just look at their daily business and the way money is entrusted to them and the crafts they practice. — COMMENTARY ON Matthew 15.13

Remigius of Rheims ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): And Jesus, condescending as to a weak one, most graciously set out to him the precepts of the Law; Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder; and of all these precepts follows the exposition, And thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. For the Apostle says, Whoso loveth his neighbour has fulfilled the Law? (Prov. 13:10.) But it should be enquired, why the Lord has enumerated only the precepts of the Second Table? Perhaps because this young man was zealous in the love of God, or because love of our neighbour is the step by which we ascend to the love of God. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Matthew 19:19

Tertullian: Are we to paint ourselves out that our neighbours may perish? Where, then, is (the command), “Thou shall love thy neighbour as thyself? " “Care not merely about your own (things), but (about your) neighbour’s? " No enunciation of the Holy Spirit ought to be (confined) to the subject immediately in hand merely, and not applied and carried out with a view to every occasion to which its application is useful. — On the Apparel of Women Book II

Matthew 19:20

Jerome: (Verse 20.) The young man said to Him: All these things I have kept from my youth, what do I still lack? Jesus said to him: The young man lies. For if he had fulfilled the commandments: You shall love your neighbor as yourself, how then, upon hearing: Go, sell what you have and give to the poor, did he go away sad, for he had many possessions? — Commentary on Matthew

John Chrysostom: Then since Jesus mentioned those out of the law, he saith, “All these things have I kept from my youth up.” And neither at this did he stop, but again asks, “What lack I yet?” which itself again was a sign of his very earnest desire. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 63

Matthew 19:21

Augustine of Hippo ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (de. Op. Monach. 25.) Nor need it be made a scruple in what monasteries, or to the indigent brethren of what place, any one gives those things that he has, for there is but one commonwealth of all Christians. Therefore wheresoever any Christian has laid out his goods, in all places alike he shall receive what is necessary for himself, shall receive it of that which is Christ’s.

(cont. Faust. v. 9.) Nor are such only partakers in the kingdom of heaven, who, to the end they may be perfect, sell or part with all that they have; but in these Christian ranks are numbered by reason of a certain communication of their charity a multitude of hired troops; those to whom it shall be said in the end, I was hungry, and ye gave me to eat; (Mat. 25:35.) whom be it far from us to consider excluded from life eternal, as they who obey not the commands of the Gospel. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Augustine of Hippo: The rich young man claimed to have kept the commandments. Then he heard the greater commandment: “If you wish to be perfect, you still lack one thing: sell all that you have and give it to the poor”; you will not lose it, but “you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me.” What good does it do you if you follow the law and do not follow me? He went away sad and sorrowful, as you have heard, for he had great wealth.What he heard, we too have heard. The Word of Christ is the gospel. He sits in heaven, but he does not cease to speak on earth. Let us not be deaf, for he shouts. Let us not be dead, for he thunders. If you are not willing to do the greater commandments, do the lesser ones. If the burden of the greater is too much for you, take up the lesser. Why are you slow to do either? Why do you oppose both? The greater commandments are “Sell everything that you have and give to the poor and follow me.” The lesser are “You shall not commit murder; you shall not commit adultery; you shall not bear false witness; you shall not steal; honor your father and mother; love your neighbor as yourself.” So do these things. Why do I shout to you that you must sell your possessions when I cannot get you to admit that you should not take someone else’s? You have heard, “You shall not steal.” You rob. Before the eyes of so great a judge, I now hold you not a thief but a robber. Spare yourself; pity yourself. This life still gives you time. Don’t reject reproof. Yesterday you were a thief; do not also be one today. Perhaps you have also been one today? Do not be one tomorrow. Sometime end your sin and expect good reward. You want to have your goods, but you are unwilling to be good. Your life is contrary to your hopes. If it is a great good to have a good house, how great an evil is it to have an evil soul? — SERMON 85.1

Gennadius of Massilia ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (Gennadius, de Eccles. Dogm. 36.) It is good to distribute with discrimination to the poor; it is better, with resolve of following the Lord, to strip one’s self of all at once, and freed from anxiety to suffer want with Christ. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Jerome: (Verse 21.) If you wish to be perfect, go, sell what you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me. It is in our power to choose to be perfect. However, whoever wishes to be perfect must sell what they have: and not sell only a portion, as Ananias and Sapphira did (Act. V); but sell everything: and when they have sold, give everything to the poor, and thus prepare for themselves treasure in the kingdom of heaven. And this is not enough for perfection unless one follows the Savior after despising riches, that is, by leaving behind evils and doing good. For it is easier to despise a purse than pleasure. Many who leave behind riches do not follow the Lord. But he who is an imitator of the Lord follows him and walks in his footsteps. For whoever says that they believe in Christ should walk as he walked (1 John 2:6). — Commentary on Matthew

Jerome ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (cont. Vigilant. 15.) That Vigilantius asserts that they who retain the use of their property, and from time to time divide their incomes among the poor, do better than they who sell their possessions and lavish them in one act of charity, to him, not I, but God shall make answer, If thou wilt be perfect, Go and sell. That which you so extol, is but the second or third grade; which we indeed admit, only remembering that what is first is to be set before what is third or second.

For many who leave their riches do not therefore follow the Lord; and it is not sufficient for perfection that they despise money, unless they also follow the Saviour, that unless having forsaken evil, they also do what is good. For it is easier to contemn the hoard than quit the propensityb; therefore it follows, And come and follow me; for he follows the Lord who is his imitator, and who walks in his steps. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

John Chrysostom: What then saith Christ? Since He was going to enjoin something great, He setteth forth the recompenses, and saith, “If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in Heaven: and come, and follow me.”

Seest thou how many prizes, how many crowns, He appoints for this race? If he had been tempting, He would not have told him these things. But now He both saith it, and in order to draw him on, He also shows him the reward to be great, and leaves it all to his own will, by all means throwing into the shade that which seemed to be grievous in His advice. Wherefore even before mentioning the conflicts and the toil, He shows him the prize, saying “If thou wilt be perfect,” and then saith, “Sell that thou hast, and give to the poor,” and straightway again the rewards, “Thou shalt have treasure in Heaven; and come, and follow me.” For indeed to follow Him is a great recompense. “And thou shalt have treasure in Heaven.”

For since his discourse was of money, even of all did He advise him to strip himself, showing that he loses not what he hath, but adds to his possessions, He gave him more than He required him to give up; and not only more, but also as much greater as Heaven is greater than earth, and yet more so.

But He called it a treasure, showing the plenteousness of the recompense, its permanency, its security, so far as it was possible by human similitudes to intimate it to the hearer. It is not then enough to despise wealth, but we must also maintain poor men, and above all things follow Christ; that is, do all the things that are ordered by Him, be ready for slaughter and daily death. “For if any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.” So that to cast away one’s money is a much less thing than this last commandment, to shed even one’s very blood; yet not a little doth our being freed from wealth contribute towards this. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 63

John Chrysostom: Seest thou how far the praises of poverty have proceeded, and where it places thee, to what men it leads thee on, and how it makes thee a follower of the Lord? If it were good to have gold, Christ, who have the unutterable blessings, would have given this to His disciples. But now so far from giving it them, He forbad them to have it. Wherefore Peter also, so far from being ashamed of poverty, even glories in it, saying, “Silver and gold have I none; but what I have give I thee.” And who of you would not have desired to utter this saying? Nay, we all would extremely, perhaps some one may say. Then throw away thy silver, throw away thy gold. “And if I throw it away, thou wilt say, shall I receive the power of Peter?” Why, what made Peter blessed, tell me? Was it indeed to have lifted up the lame man? By no means, but the not having these riches, this procured him Heaven. For of those that wrought these miracles, many fell into hell, but they, who did those good things, attained a kingdom. And this you may learn even of Peter himself. For there were two things that he said, “Silver and gold have I none;” and, “In the name of Jesus Christ rise up and walk.”

Which sort of thing then made Him glorious and blessed, the raising up the lame man, or the casting away his money? And this you may learn from the Master of the conflicts Himself. What then doth He Himself say to the rich man seeking eternal life? He said not, “raise up the lame,” but, “Sell thy goods, and give to the poor, and come and follow me, and thou shall have treasure in Heaven.” — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 90

Origen of Alexandria: One might inquire , since he is perfect who has all the virtues and no longer practices connected to vice, how it is that he might become perfect who sells his own substance and gives it to the poor. For should you present someone having done this, how might he become anger-free as a consequence, if he be easily susceptible to anger? How without grief, and better able to endure all such things which are able evoke grief? How will he be beyond all fear, of that which concerns trials, or of death, or of those things such as are able to bring fear to the as-yet unperfected soul? Will the person who gives away [his] substance in such a fashion, and gives to the poor, be free from all desire? For one might say that the ability to give away all one’s substance by itself could produce a certain kind of human suffering from poverty leading one to, on the one hand, repent of having done such a daring thing, and on the other to desire possessions equivalent [to that which was given away]. And if indeed that which is called pleasure, being an irrational impulse of the soul, is a passion, how might one give away all substance and give to the poor at one time, and at the same time be released from being impelled irrationally? Someone may also add a question, as to how one is able by having given away one’s substance and given to the poor to become wise the wisdom of God, so as to offer a reason to each one who asks concerning the faith that is in him (cf. 1 Peter 3.15), concerning each of those things which have been believed, and concerning those things spoken in a hidden fashion in the holy Scriptures? Take note that this line of questioning is truly genuine and not easily resolved. For were we to say that someone has become perfect through this [act] alone, even if he be not connected to the things we have outlined [above], we would be confronted by a paradox in saying that someone is at the same time perfect and a sinner (for the irascible man is a sinner, as is the one who grieves the grief of the world, and the one who fears tribulations or death, and desires things that are absent, and irrationally impels the soul to things that are not good as though they were good). At the same time, were we to say that someone, by selling a substance and giving it to the poor, assumes all the virtues even becoming inspired of God, as it were, and puts away all vice from himself, we would be speaking with credulity (if I may speak in a more common manner), but I do not know if truly. Perhaps indeed those who hear this explanation for the difficulty raised will mock us, as though we speak without prudence.

Someone, who keeps to the letter and in no way offers a figurative reading of the [contents] of the passage, might seem more prudently, offering a rejoinder in this way, as though credulous, but if the things said are worthy or not of the thoughts according to the passage, indeed you yourself will judge. One may say therefore that, since he who distributes to the poor is assisted by their prayer for his own salvation, receiving for his own lack an abundance of spiritual things from those who are lacking bodily things (as the Apostle indicated in the second [letter] to the Corinthians), might it be that someone else could experience the same thing and be assisted greatly by it, with God hearkening unto the prayers of those who have found rest in such poverty—[that] among such people there may perhaps be those who are similar to the Apostles though a little inferior to them, people who are poor in bodily things, as were [the Apostles], but who are wealthy in spiritual things? This person then who accepts poverty in exchange for wealth for the sake of becoming perfect (having been persuaded by the words of Jesus) might be assisted quickly, as indeed the Apostles of Christ [were], so as to become wise in Christ, and courageous, and righteous, and modest, and free of all passion. One who defends such an [interpretation] may say that one need not suppose that this [perfection] happened to him on the same day he sold [his] substance and gave [it] to the poor, but perhaps from that day God’s providential care would begin to direct him to such things, what I would call the praiseworthy impassibility and every virtue. Advancing as did Isaac on account of the assistance from God given him in Christ, he will become “greater, until such time as” he has increased “greatly,” he may become “exceedingly abundant” in every virtue (cf. Genesis 26.13), with every shred of vice having been destroyed from his soul. And the person who would offer this explanation is not constrained to say that the man becomes perfect by this [act] itself, namely that he gave his substance over to the poor, while sinning in other matters. — Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (Book XV), 16-17

Origen of Alexandria ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): If every commandment is fulfilled in this one word, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, and if he is perfect who has fulfilled every command, how is it that the Lord said to the young man, If thou wilt be perfect, when he had declared, All these have I kept from my youth up. Perhaps that he says, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, was not said by the Lord, but added by some one, for neither Mark nor Luke have given it in this place. Or otherwise; It is written in the Gospela according to the Hebrews, that, when the Lord said, Go, and sell all that thou hast, the rich man began to scratch his head, being displeased with the saying. Then the Lord said unto him, How sayest thou, I have kept the Law, and the Prophets, since it is written in the Law, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself? For how many of thy brethren sons of Abraham, clothed in filth, perish for hunger? Thy house is full of many good things, and nothing goes thereout to them. The Lord then, desiring to convict this rich man, says to him, If thou will be perfect, go and sell all that thou hast, and give to the poor; for so it will be seen if thou dost indeed love thy neighbour as thyself. But if he is perfect who has all the virtues, how does he become perfect who sells all that he has and gives to the poor? For suppose one to have done this, will he thereby become forthwith free from anger, desire, having every virtue, and abandoning all vice? Perhaps wisdom may suggest, that he that has given his goods to the poor, is aided by their prayers, receiving of their spiritual abundance to his want, and is made in this way perfect, though he may have some human passions. Or thus; He that thus exchanged his riches for poverty, in order that he might become perfect, shall have assistance to become wise in Christ, just, chaste also, and devoid of all passion; but not so as that in the moment when he gave up all his goods, he should forthwith become perfect; but only that from that day forward the contemplation of God will begin to bring him to all virtues. Or again, it will pass into a moral exposition, and say, that the possessions of a man are the acts of his mind. Christ then bids a man to sell all his evil possessions, and as it were to give them over to the virtues which should work the same, which were poor in all that is good. For as the peace of the Apostles returns to them again, (Mat. 10:13.) unless there be a son of peace, so all sins return upon their actors, when one will no longer indulge his evil propensities; and thus there can be no doubt that he will straightway become perfect who in this sense sells all his possessions. It is manifest that he that does these things, has treasure in heaven, and is himself become of heaven; and he will have in heaven treasure of God’s glory, and riches in all God’s wisdom. Such an one will be able to follow Christ, for he has no evil possession to draw him off from so following — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Philoxenus of Mabbug: And after He had laid down these limitations for us, and had explained unto us the various grades in the righteousness of the just, Jesus continued in His speech to teach us perfection, and said unto that learned man who asked Him, that is to say, in teaching him He taught all His disciples, “If thou wishest to be perfect, go, sell all thy possessions, and give them to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven.” And here even we have not as yet begun to walk in the path of righteousness, for that a man should take up his cross and go forth after Jesus is one rule of life, for as the dwelling in the womb is one thing, and the going forth of the child from the belly is another, and the existence of a man in the world, after being born from the womb, is another. Even so the righteousness which is in the world is like unto the substance of the child within the womb, and the commandment, “Go and sell all thy possessions, and give to the poor, and there shall be treasure for thee in heaven,” is the belly from which is born out of the old womb the new creation, and it is that door through which he goeth forth from one world to the other; but that commandment, “Take up thy cross and come after Me,” belongs to the perfect rule and conduct, and it is the path of spiritual life. — 13 Ascetic Discourses, Discourse 9 – Second Discourse on Poverty

Philoxenus of Mabbug: Now the reward hath Jesus set in the midst between the righteous and the perfect, “Go, sell thy possessions, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven”; behold the reward for righteousness! And He calleth this reward “treasure,” because the men who hasten after the righteousness of the world do good works on the condition that there is a reward, and well did Jesus in His words place the treasure at the end of the way of the righteousness which is in the world, that their wages being set before them they may run direct to where they are, even as do those who contend in a game, and before whom is set the crown which will make them to gain the victory. Into the land of the perfect our Lord did not make a reward to enter, because it would be a disgrace unto the perfect to labour in the rule of the spirit for wages; for behold the spiritual mindedness in which the perfect stand is the wages of the just and righteous, because they have wrought good things in the world on the condition that they should be changed and become spiritual beings, and be freed from all the carnal mindedness, and the passions, and the subjection of the world. — 13 Ascetic Discourses, Discourse 9 – Second Discourse on Poverty

Rabanus Maurus ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): See two kinds of life which we have heard set before men; the Active, to which pertains, Thou shalt not kill, and the rest of the Law; and the Contemplative, to which pertains this, If thou wilt be perfect. The active pertains to the Law, the contemplative to the Gospel; for as the Old Testament went before the New, so good action goes before contemplation. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Remigius of Rheims ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): But to those who would be perfect in grace, He shows how they may come to perfection, Jesus saith unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go, and sell all that thou hast, and give to the poor. Mark the words; He said not, Go, and consume all thou hast; but Go, and sell; and not some, as did Ananias and Sapphira, but All. And well He added, that thou hast, for what we have are our lawful possessions. Those therefore that he justly possessed were to be sold; what had been gained unjustly were to be restored to those from whom they had been taken. And He said not, Give to thy neighbours, nor to the rich, but to the poor. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Tertullian: “My work was my subsistence.” Nay, but “all things are to be sold, and divided to the needy.” “But provision must be made for children and posterity. — On Idolatry

Matthew 19:22

Augustine of Hippo ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (Ep. 31, 5.) I know not how, but in the love of worldly superfluities, it is what we have already got, rather than what we desire to get, that most strictly enthrals us. For whence went this young man away sorrowful, but that he had great possessions? It is one thing to lay aside thoughts of further acquisition, and another to strip ourselves of what we have already made our own; one is only rejecting what is not ours, the other is like parting with one of our own limbs. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Hilary of Poitiers: But the young man, when he heard this, “went away sorrowful.” For he put great trust in wealth. And in him we observe the rational working out of a metaphor. This was a young man. He himself said that since his youth he had obeyed the commandments that are contained in the law. Yet an arrested adolescence remains within his youth, whatever age he may be. — Commentary on Matthew 19.7

Jerome: (Verse 22.) He went away sad, for he had many possessions. This is the sadness that leads to death. And the cause of the sadness is that he had many possessions, that is, thorns and thistles, which choked the Lord’s seed. — Commentary on Matthew

Jerome ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): It follows, And when the young man had heard these words, he went away sorrowful. This is the sorrow that leads to death. And the cause of his sorrow is added, for he had great possessions, thorns, that is, and briars, which choked the holy leaven. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

John Chrysostom: “But when the young man heard it, he went away sorrowful.” After this the evangelist, as it were to show that he hath not felt anything it was unlikely he should feel, saith, “For he had great possessions.” For they that have little are not equally held in subjection, as they that are overflowed with great affluence, for then the love of it becomes more tyrannical. Which thing I cease not always saying, that the increase of acquisitions kindles the flame more, and renders the getters poorer, inasmuch as it puts them in greater desire, and makes them have more feeling of their want.

See, for example, even here what strength did this passion exhibit. Him that had come to Him with joy and forwardness, when Christ commanded him to cast away his riches, it so overwhelmed and weighed down, as not to suffer him so much as to answer touching these things, but silenced and become dejected and sullen to go away. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 63

Origen of Alexandria ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): But historically, the young man is to be praised for that he did not kill, did not commit adultery; but is to be blamed for that he sorrowed at Christ’s words calling him to perfection. He was young indeed in soul, and therefore leaving Christ, he went his way. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Matthew 19:23

Cyril of Alexandria: “How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God! And I say unto you, that it is easier for a camel to enter in through the eye of a needle, than a rich man into the kingdom of God.” Now by a camel He means not the animal of that name, but a thick cable rather: for it is the custom of those well versed in navigation to call the thicker cables “camels.”

Observe however, that He does not altogether cut away the hope of the rich, but reserves for them a place and way of salvation. For He did not say that it is impossible for a rich man to enter in, but that he does so with difficulty. — Commentary on the Gospel of Luke, Sermon 122

Hilary of Poitiers: The arrogant young man, when told to make good his failure to obey the law, is downcast and sad. To the people of which he is a prototype, the cross and Passion are a stumbling block. There is no salvation for this young man there. But he glories in the law, despises the Gentiles and refuses to cross into the freedom of the gospel; therefore it will be difficult for him to enter the kingdom of heaven. For few of them—and compared with the multitude of the Gentiles they are very rare—were those Jews who would believe. It was difficult for them to bend their will, long hardened under the law, to the gospel’s preaching of humility. But more easily will the camel pass through the eye of a needle. A camel cannot fit into the eye of a needle, nor can the bulk of the huge beast be received by the narrow mouth of the tiny hole. In the beginning of this book in discussing John’s clothing I pointed out that the camel signifies the Gentiles. For this beast obeys the word, is restrained by fear, is tolerant of fasting and kneels to take on its burden with a kind of ordered discipline. In this comparison the wildness of the Gentiles has been tamed by obedience to God’s commandments. These then enter the very narrow path of the heavenly kingdom, that is, the needle, which is the preaching of the gospel word. By it the wounds of the body are stitched together, the torn clothing is rewoven, and death itself is pricked. Therefore this is the route of this new preaching. Into it the weakness of the Gentiles will enter with less difficulty than the opulence of the rich man, that is, of the one taking pride in the law. — Commentary on Matthew 19.10-11

Hilary of Poitiers ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): To have riches is no sin; but moderation is to be observed in our havings. For how shall we communicate to the necessities of the saints, if we have not out of what we may communicate?

It is a dangerous toil to become rich; and guiltlessness occupied in increasing its wealth has taken upon itself a sore burden; the servant of God gains not the things of the world, clear of the sins of the world. Hence is the difficulty of entering the kingdom of heaven. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Jerome: (Verse 23) But Jesus said to his disciples: Amen I say to you, that it is difficult for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of heaven. And how did Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, being rich, enter into the kingdom of heaven (Genesis 13 and 36), and in the Gospel Matthew and Zacchaeus, leaving their riches behind, are proclaimed by the testimony of the Lord? But it must be considered that at the time they entered, they ceased to be rich. Therefore, they will not enter as long as they are rich. And yet, because riches are difficult to despise, he did not say, ‘It is impossible for the rich to enter the kingdom of heaven,’ but rather ‘It is difficult.’ Where difficulty is presented, not impossibility is claimed; but rarity is demonstrated. — Commentary on Matthew

Jerome ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): Because riches once gained are hard to be despised, He saith not it is impossible, but it is hard. Difficulty does not imply the impossibility, but points out the infrequency of the occurrence. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

John Chrysostom: What then saith Christ? “How hardly shall the rich enter into the kingdom of Heaven!” blaming not riches but them that are held in subjection by them. But if the rich man “hardly,” much more the covetous man. For if not to give one’s own be an hindrance to entering the kingdom, even to take of other men’s goods, think how much fire it heapeth up.

Why can it have been, however, that He said to His disciples, that “hardly shall a rich man enter in,” they being poor men, and having no possessions? Instructing them not to be ashamed of their poverty, and, as it were, excusing Himself to them for suffering them to have nothing. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 63

Rabanus Maurus ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): But though there be a difference between having and loving riches, yet it is safer neither to have nor to love them. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Remigius of Rheims ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): Whence in Mark the Lord expounding the meaning of this saying, speaks thus, It is hard for them that trust in riches to enter into the kingdom of heaven (Mark 10:24.) They trust in riches, who build all their hopes on them. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Tertullian: What am I to fasten on as the cause of this madness, except the weakness of faith, ever prone, to the concupiscences of worldly joys?-which, indeed, is chiefly found among the wealthier; for the more any is rich, and inflated with the name of “matron,” the more capacious house does she require for her burdens, as it were a field wherein ambition may run its course. To such the churches look paltry. A rich man is a difficult thing (to find) in the house of God; and if such an one is (found there), difficult (is it to find such) unmarried. — To His Wife Book II

Matthew 19:24

Gregory the Dialogist ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (Mor. xxxv. 16.) Or, by the rich man He intends any one who is proud, by the camel he denotes the right humility. The camel passed through the needle’s eye, when our Redeemer through the narrow way of suffering entered in to the taking upon Him death; for that passion was as a needle which pricked the body with pain. But the camel enters the needle’s eye easier than the rich man enters the kingdom of heaven; because if He had not first shown us by His passion the form of His humility, our proud stiffness would never have bent itself to His lowliness. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Jerome: (Verse 24 and following) And again I say to you: It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of heaven. When the disciples heard this, they were greatly astonished, saying, ‘Who then can be saved?’ But Jesus looked at them and said, ‘With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.’ This statement shows that it is not difficult, but impossible. For if a camel cannot enter through the eye of a needle, so a rich person cannot enter the kingdom of heaven, no rich person will be saved. But if we read Isaiah, how the camels of Midian and Ephah come to Jerusalem with gifts and offerings (Isa. 60): and how those who were previously bent and distorted by the corruption of vices enter the gates of Jerusalem, we will see how even these camels, to whom the rich are compared, when they have unloaded the heavy burden of sins and the corruption of the whole body, are able to enter through the narrow gate and the narrow way that leads to life (Above 7). But when the disciples asked and were amazed at the severity of his words, he tempered the severity of his statement with his mercy, saying: What is impossible for men is possible for God. — Commentary on Matthew

Jerome ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): According to this, no rich man can be saved. But if we read Isaiah, how the camels of Midian and Ephah came to Jerusalem with gifts and presents, and they who once were crooked and bowed down by the weight of their sins, enter the gates of Jerusalem, we shall see how these camels, to which the rich are likened when they have laid aside the heavy load of sins, and the distortion of their whole bodies, may then enter by that narrow and strait way that leads to life. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

John Chrysostom: But having said it was hard; as He proceeds, He shows that it is even impossible, and not merely impossible, but even in the highest degree impossible; and this He showed by the comparison concerning the camel and the needle.

“It is easier” saith He, “for a camel to enter in by the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of Heaven.” Whence it is shown, that there is no ordinary reward for them that are rich, and are able to practise self command. Wherefore also He affirmed it to be a work of God, that He might show that great grace is needed for him who is to achieve this. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 63

Pseudo-Chrysostom ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): The Gentile souls are likened to the deformed body of the camel, in which is seen the humpback of idolatry; for the knowledge of God is the exaltation of the soul. The needle is the Son of God, the fine point of which is His divinity, and the thicker part what He is according to His incarnation. But it is altogether straight and without turning; and through the womb of His passion, the Gentiles have entered into life eternal. By this needle is sewn the robe of immortality; it is this needle that has sewn the flesh to the spirit, that has joined together the Jews and the Gentiles, and coupled man in friendship with angels. It is easier therefore for the Gentiles to pass through the needle’s eye, than for the rich Jews to enter into the kingdom of heaven. For if the Gentiles are with such difficulty withdrawn from the irrational worship of idols, how much more hardly shall the Jews be withdrawn from the reasonable service of God? — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Matthew 19:25

Augustine of Hippo ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (Quaest. Ev. 1, 26.) Whereas the rich are few in comparison of the multitude of the poor, we must suppose that the disciples understood all who wish for riches, as included in the number of the rich. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

John Chrysostom: And wherefore are the disciples troubled, being poor, yea, exceedingly poor? Wherefore then are they confounded? Being in pain about the salvation of the rest, and having a great affection for all, and having already taken upon themselves the tender bowels of teachers. They were at least in such trembling and fear for the whole world from this declaration, as to need much comfort. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 63

Matthew 19:26

John Chrysostom: At least, when the disciples were troubled, He said, “With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible.”

Therefore, having first “beheld them, He said unto them, The things which are impossible with men, are possible with God.” For with a mild and meek look, having soothed their shuddering mind, and having put an end to their distress (for this the evangelist signified by saying, “He beheld them”), then by His words also He relieves them, bringing before them God’s power, and so making them feel confidence.

But if thou wilt learn the manner of it likewise, and how what is impossible may become possible, hear. For neither for this end did He say, “The things which are impossible with men, are possible with God,” that thou shouldest give it up, and abstain, as from things impossible; but that having considered the greatness of the good work, thou shouldest hasten to it readily, and having besought God to assist thee in these noble contests, shouldest attain unto life. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 63

Remigius of Rheims ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): This must not be so understood as though it were possible for God to cause that the rich, the covetous, the avaricious, and the proud should enter into the kingdom of heaven; but to cause him to be converted, and so enter. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Tertullian: It has learnt not to respect life; how much more food? [You ask] “How many have fulfilled these conditions? “But what with men is difficult, with God is easy. Let us, however, comfort ourselves about the gentleness and clemency of God in such wise, as not to indulge our “necessities” up to the point of affinities with idolatry, but to avoid even from afar every breath of it, as of a pestilence. — On Idolatry

Tertullian: How is it, then, that we read, “With men these things are impossible, but with God all things are possible; " and again, “God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise? " Let me ask you, if you were to manumit your slave (seeing that the same flesh and soul will remain to him, which once were exposed to the whip, and the fetter, and the stripes), will it therefore be fit for him to undergo the same old sufferings? I trow not. — On the Resurrection of the Flesh

Tertullian: In this way they hold the Monarchy, but they hold neither the Father nor the Son. Well, but “with God nothing is impossible.” True enough; who can be ignorant of it? Who also can be unaware that “the things which are impossible with men are possible with God? " The foolish things also of the world hath God chosen to confound the things which are wise. — Against Praxeas

Matthew 19:27

Desert Fathers: A hermit was asked, ‘What is meant by the text “Narrow and strait is the way” (Matt. 7:14)?’ He answered, ‘Narrow and strait is the way by which a man does violence to his thoughts and for God’s sake breaks down his self-will. This is what was written about the apostles, “Lo, we have left all, and followed thee” (Matt. 19:27).’ — The Desert Fathers, Sayings of the Early Christian Monks

Jerome: (Verse 27) Then Peter answered and said to him: Behold, we have left everything and followed you: What therefore will be for us? Great confidence: Peter was a fisherman, he had not been wealthy, he sought food by hand and skill: and yet he speaks confidently, We have left everything. And because it is not enough to just leave, he adds what is perfect: and followed you. We have done what you commanded, so what reward will you give us? — Commentary on Matthew

Jerome ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): Because to forsake is not enough, he adds that which makes perfection, and have followed thee. We have done what thou commandedst us, what reward wilt thou then give us? What shall we have?

He said not only, Ye who have left all, for this did the philosopher Cratesh, and many other who have despised riches, but added, and have followed me, which is peculiar to the Apostles and believers. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

John Chrysostom: Bearing in mind then all this, let us imitate those things whereby the apostles became great. And whereby did they become great? Hear Peter, saying, “Behold we have forsaken all and followed Thee; what shall we have therefore?” Hear also Christ saying to them, “Ye shall sit upon twelve thrones,” and, “every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or father, or mother, shall receive an hundredfold in this world, and shall inherit everlasting life.” From all worldly things, therefore, let us withdraw ourselves, and dedicate ourselves to Christ, that we may both be made equal to the apostles according to His declaration, and may enjoy eternal life; unto which may we all attain, by the grace and love towards man of our Lord Jesus Christ to whom be glory and might forever and ever. Amen. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 46

John Chrysostom: How then should this become possible? If thou cast away what thou hast, if thou empty thyself of thy wealth, if thou refrain from the wicked desire. For in proof that He does not refer it to God alone, but that to this end He said it, that thou shouldest know the vastness of the good work, hear what follows. For when Peter had said, “Behold, we have forsaken all, and followed Thee,” and had asked, “What shall we have therefore?” having appointed the reward for them; He added, “And every one who hath forsaken houses, or lands, or brothers, or sisters, or father, or mother, shall receive an hundred fold, and shall inherit eternal life.” Thus that which is impossible becometh possible. But how may this very thing be done, one may say, to forsake these? how is it possible for him that is once sunk in such lust of wealth, to recover himself? If he begin to empty himself of his possessions, and cut off what are superfluous. For so shall he both advance further, and shall run on his course more easily afterwards.

Do not then seek all at once, but gently, and by little and little, ascend this ladder, that leads thee up to Heaven. For like as those in fevers having acrid bile abounding within them, when they cast in thereon meats and drinks, so far from quenching their thirst, do even kindle the flame; so also the covetous, when they cast in their wealth upon this wicked lust more acrid than that bile, do rather inflame it. For nothing so stays it as to refrain for a time from the lust of gain, like as acrid bile is stayed by abstinence and evacuations.

But this itself, by what means will it be done? one may say. If thou consider, that whilst rich, thou wilt never cease thirsting, and pining with the lust of more; but being freed from thy possessions, thou wilt be able also to stay this disease. Do not then encompass thyself with more, lest thou follow after things unattainable, and be incurable, and be more miserable than all, being thus frantic. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 63

John Chrysostom: “Then answered Peter and said unto Him, Behold, we have forsaken all, and followed Thee; what shall we have therefore?”

All which? O blessed Peter; the rod? the net? the boat? the craft? These things dost thou tell me of, as all? Yea, saith he, but not for display do I say these things, but in order that by this question I may bring in the multitude of the poor. For since the Lord had said, “If thou wilt be perfect, sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in Heaven;” lest any one of the poor should say, What then? if I learn, that thou art made in no respect inferior by this: Peter asks, that thou mayest not learn from Peter and doubt (for indeed he was imperfect as yet, and void of the Spirit), but that, having received the declaration from Peter’s Master, thou mayest be confident.

For like as we do (we make things our own often when speaking of the concerns of others), so did the apostle, when he put to Him this question in behalf of all the world. Since that at least he knew with certainty his own portion, is manifest from what had been said before; for he that had already received the keys of the Heavens, much more might feel confidence about the things hereafter.

But mark also how exactly his reply is according to Christ’s demand. For He had required of the rich man these two things, to give that he had to the poor, and to follow Him. Wherefore he also expresses these two things, to forsake, and to follow. “For behold we have forsaken all,” saith he, “and have followed Thee.” For the forsaking was done for the sake of following, and the following was rendered easier by the forsaking, and made them feel confidence and joy touching the forsaking. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 64

John Chrysostom: And Peter again said not, “Behold, in Thy name we cast out devils;” although he was casting them out, but, “Behold, we have forsaken all and followed Thee; what shall we have?” And Christ again, in answering this apostle, said not, “If any man raise up the lame,” but, “Whosoever hath forsaken houses or lands, shall receive an hundredfold in this world, and shall inherit everlasting life.”

Let us also then emulate this man, that we may not be confounded, but may with confidence stand at the judgment seat of Christ; that we may win Him to be with us, even as He was with His disciples. For He will be with us, like as He was with them, if we are willing to follow them, and to be imitators of their life and conversation. For in consequence of these things God crowns, and commends men, not requiring of thee to raise the dead, or to cure the lame. For not these things make one to be like Peter, but the casting away one’s goods, for this was the apostles’ achievement. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 90

Origen of Alexandria ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): Peter had heard the word of Christ when He said, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell all that thou hast. Then he observed that the young man had departed sorrowful, and considered the difficulty of riches entering into the kingdom of heaven; and thereupon he put this question confidently as one who had achieved no easy matter. For though what he with his brother had left behind them were but little things, yet were they not esteemed as little with God, who considered that out of the fulness of their love they had so forsaken those least things, as they would have forsaken the greatest things if they had had them. So Peter, thinking rather of his will than of the intrinsic value of the sacrifice, asked Him confidently, Behold, we have left all.

It may be said, In all things which the Father revealed to Peter that the Son was, righteousness, sanctification, and the like, in all we have followed Thee. Therefore as a victorious athlete, he now asks what are the prizes of his contest. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Philoxenus of Mabbug: And, moreover, let us also see from the speech of Simon to our Lord, and let us also learn from the first disciple how it is meet for us to become disciples. “Behold we have left everything, and have come after thee.” What then shall we have? Thou hast heard what this disciple said, and how he hath revealed unto thee the truth of his absolute poverty, and that they, that is, the disciples, possessed nothing besides Jesus. “We have left everything, and have come after thee.” Behold the definite law of discipleship. They did not have one thing and not the other, and they did not renounce one thing and hold fast to the other; but they left everything, and followed Jesus. Do thou then forsake everything and go forth after Him, and observe, immediately the might of the Apostles clotheth thee, that thou wilt feel and know in very deed that the Word is not a lie; for thou canst not ask Him to make thee worthy of the sight of His hidden and spiritual riches whilst thou hast not made thyself destitute of everything which is visible. So long as thou holdest fast that which is thine own, He will not shew thee the things which are His. Give everything that thou hast for the love of Him only, being in thy gift watchful against the thought that seeketh human praise, and go forth and travel along the road a little, bearing afflictions and labours with purity of the thoughts; and observe, immediately His glory riseth in thy soul, and He mingleth the spirit in thee, how thy whole being will be smitten with the love of Him, and thou wilt also forget the weight of thy afflictions, and He will suddenly change thee from one being into another, that is to say, from the old into the new. — 13 Ascetic Discourses, Discourse 9 – Second Discourse on Poverty

Tertullian: If you wish to be the Lord’s disciple, it is necessary you “take your cross, and follow the Lord: " your cross; that is, your own straits and tortures, or your body only, which is after the manner of a cross. Parents, wives, children, will have to be left behind, for God’s sake. Do you hesitate about arts, and trades, and about professions likewise, for the sake of children and parents? Even there was it demonstrated to us, that both “dear pledges,” and handicrafts, and trades, are to be quite left behind for the Lord’s sake; while James and John, called by the Lord, do leave quite behind both father and ship; while Matthew is roused up from the toll-booth; while even burying a father was too tardy a business for faith. — On Idolatry

Matthew 19:28

Augustine of Hippo ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (de Civ. Dei, xx. 5.) Thus our flesh will be regenerated by incorruption, as our soul also shall be regenerated by faith.

(ubi sup.) From this passage we learn that Jesus will judge with His disciples; whence He says in another place to the Jews, Therefore shall they be your judges. (Mat. 12:27.) And whereas He says they shall sit upon twelve thrones, we need not think that twelve persons only shall judge with Him. For by the number twelve is signified the whole number of those that shall judge; and that because the number seven which generally represents completeness contains the two numbers four and three, which multiplied together make twelve. For if it were not so, as Matthias was elected into the place of the traitor Judas, the Apostle Paul who laboured more than they all should not have place to sit to judge; but he shows that he with the rest of the saints pertains to the number of judges, when he says, Know ye not that we shall judge Angels? (1 Cor. 6:3.)

(Serm. 351. 8.) In the number of judges therefore are included all that have left their all and followed the Lord;

(de Civ. Dei, xx. 5.) The same holds good, by reason of this number twelve, of those that are to be judged. For when it is said, Judging the twelve tribes, yet is not the tribe of Levi, which is the thirteenth, to be exempt from being judged by them; nor shall they judge this nation alone, and not also other nations. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Gregory the Dialogist ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (Mor. x. 31.) For whosoever, urged by the spur of divine lore, shall forsake what he possesses here, shall without doubt gain there the eminence of judicial authority; and shall appear as judge with the Judge, for that he now in consideration of the judgment chastens himself by a voluntary poverty. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Hilary of Poitiers ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): The disciples had followed Christ in the regeneration, that is, in the laver of baptism, in the sanctification of faith, for this is that regeneration which the Apostles followed, and which the Law could not bestow.

Their following Christ in thus exalting the Apostles to twelve thrones to judge the twelve tribes of Israel, associated them in the glory of the twelve Patriarchs. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Jerome: [Daniel 7:9] “I beheld until thrones were set up, and the Ancient of days took His seat. His garment was as white as snow, and the hair of His head was like pure wool. His throne was composed of fiery flames and its wheels were set on fire. From before His presence there issued forth a rushing, fiery stream.” We read something similar in John’s Apocalypse: “After these things I was immediately in the Spirit, and lo, a throne was set up in heaven, and one was seated upon the throne; and He who sat upon it had the likeness of jasper and sardine stone, and there was a rainbow round about the throne like the appearance of emerald. Around the throne there were twenty-four other thrones, and upon the twenty-four thrones there sat twenty-four elders, clothed in shining garments; upon their heads was a golden crown, and lightning flashes issued from the throne, and voices and thunder. And in front of the throne there were seven torches of burning fire, which were the seven spirits of God. And in front of the throne lay a glassy sea like unto crystal.” (Revelation 4:2-6) And so the many thrones which Daniel saw seem to me to be what John called the twenty-four thrones. And the Ancient of days is the One who, according to John sits alone upon His throne. Likewise the Son of man, who came unto the Ancient of days, is the same as He who, according to John, is called the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, and the titles of that sort (Revelation 5:5). I imagine that these thrones are the ones of which the Apostle Paul says, “Whether thrones or dominions…” (Colossians 1:16). And in the Gospel we read, “Ye yourselves shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel” (Matthew 19:28). And God is called the One who sits and who is the Ancient of days, in order that His character as eternal Judge might be indicated. His garment is shining white like the snow, and the hair of His head is like pure wool. The Savior also, when He was transfigured on the mount and assumed the glory of His divine majesty, appeared in shining white garments (Matthew 17:2). And as for the fact that His hair is compared to perfectly pure wool, the even-handedness and uprightness of His judgment is shown forth, a judgment which shows no partiality in its exercise. Moreover He is described as an elderly man, in order that the ripeness of His judgment may be established. His throne consists of fiery flames, in order that sinners may tremble before the severity of the torments, and also that the just may be saved, but so as by fire. The wheels of the throne are set aflame, or else it is the wheels of His chariot which are aflame. In Ezekiel also God is ushered on the scene seated in a four-horse chariot (Ezekiel 1:4-28), and everything pertaining to God is of a fiery consistency. In another place also a statement is made on this subject: “God is a consuming fire” (Deuteronomy 4:24), that we might know that wood, hay and stubble are going to burn up in the day of judgment. And in the Psalms we read: “Fire goeth before Him, and He shall set aflame all His enemies round about Him” (Psalms 97:3). A rushing, fiery stream proceeded from before Him in order that it might carry sinners to hell (Gehenna). — St. Jerome, Commentary on Daniel, CHAPTER SEVEN

Jerome: (Verse 28.) But Jesus said to them: Amen I say to you, that you who have followed me in the regeneration, when the Son of man shall sit on the seat of his majesty, you also shall sit on twelve seats, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. He did not say: you who have left all things, for this Crates the philosopher also did, and many others despised riches; but you who have followed me: which properly belongs to the apostles and believers. In the regeneration, when the Son of Man shall sit on the throne of His glory, you will also sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel: because they refused to believe in Him, who believed in you. — Commentary on Matthew

Jerome ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): Or it may be constructed thus, Ye which have followed me, shall in the regeneration sit, &c.; that is, when the dead shall rise from corruption incorrupt, you also shall sit on thrones of judges, condemning the twelve tribes of Israel, for that they would not believe when you believed. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

John Chrysostom: “Verily, I say unto you, that ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of Man shall sit on the throne of His glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.”

What then, one may say, shall Judas sit there? By no means. How, then, doth He say, “Ye shall sit on twelve thrones?” How shall the terms of the promise be fulfilled?

Hear how, and on what principle. There is a law ordained of God, recited by Jeremiah, the prophet to the Jews, and in these words: “At what instant I shall speak a sentence concerning a nation and kingdom, to pluck up and destroy; if that nation turn from their evil deeds, I also will repent of the evils, which I thought to do unto them. And at what instant I shall speak concerning a nation and kingdom to build and to plant it; and if they do evil in my sight, that they obey not my voice, I also will repent of the good, which I said I would do unto them.”

For the same custom do I observe with respect to the good things as well, saith He. For though I spake of building up, should they show themselves unworthy of the promise, I will no longer do it. Which sort of thing was done with respect to man upon his creation, “For the dread of you,” it is said, “and the fear of you shall be on the wild beasts,” and it came not to pass, for he proved himself unworthy of the sovereignty, even as did Judas also.

For in order that neither at the denunciations of punishment any men should despair and become more hardened, nor by the promises of good things be rendered causelessly more remiss, He remedies both these evils, by that which I have before mentioned, saying in this way: Though I should threaten, do not despair; for thou art able to repent, and to reverse the denunciation, like the Ninevites. Though I should promise any good thing, grow not remiss because of the promise. For shouldest thou appear unworthy, the fact of my having promised will not advantage thee, but will rather bring punishment. For I promise thee being worthy.

Therefore even then in His discourse with His disciples He did not promise to them simply, for neither did He say, “you,” only, but added, “which have followed me,” that He might both cast out Judas, and draw towards Him those that should come afterwards. For neither to them only was it said, nor to Judas any more, when he had become unworthy.

Now to the disciples He promised things to come, saying, “Ye shall sit on twelve thrones,” for they were now of a higher stamp, and sought after none of the things of the present world, but to the rest He promises also what are here. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 64

John Chrysostom: But what is, “Judging the twelve tribes of Israel?” This is, “condemning them.” For they are not surely to sit as judges, but like as He said the Queen of the South should condemn that generation, and the Ninevites shall condemn them; so now these also. Therefore He said not, the nations, and the world, but the tribes of Israel. For since both the Jews alike and the apostles had been brought up under the same laws, and customs, and polity; when the Jews said, that for this cause they could not believe in Christ, because the law forbade to receive His commandments, by bringing forward these men, who had received the same law, and yet had believed, He condemns all those; like as even already He had said, “therefore they shall be your judges.”

And what great thing doth He promise them, it may be said, if what the Ninevites have and the Queen of the South, this these are to have also? In the first place He had promised them many other things before this, and after this doth promise them, and this alone is not their reward.

And besides even in this He intimated by the way something more than these things. For of those He simply said, “The men of Nineveh shall rise up and condemn this generation,” and, “The Queen of the South shall condemn it;” but concerning these, not merely thus, but how? “When the Son of Man shall sit upon the throne of His glory, then shall ye also sit upon twelve thrones,” saith He, declaring, that they also shall reign with Him, and partake of that glory. “For if we suffer,” it is said, “we shall also reign with Him.” For neither do the thrones signify a sitting (in judgment), for He alone is the one that shall sit and judge, but honor and glory unspeakable did He intimate by the thrones.

To these then He spake of these things, but to all the rest of eternal life and an hundredfold here. But if to the rest, much more to these too, both these things, and the things in this life. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 64

Origen of Alexandria: In gift giving it is not the gift itself that God praises and approves but the will and sincerity of the giver. He excuses and holds more acceptable the one who gave less but gave it with more perfect sincerity than the one who gave more from a fuller store but with less pure affection. Thus, from what is written about the gifts of the wealthy and from the two mites which the widow in the treasury sent for the poor, it is clear that the same also happens to those who leave everything that they possess for the love of God so as to follow undistractedly the Christ of God. They will do everything according to his word. The one who leaves the greater wealth is not more acceptable than the one who leaves the lesser. This is especially so if he leaves the lesser with his whole heart. What Peter left, along with his brother Andrew, was small and of no value, but when they both heard, “Follow me, and I will make you fishers of men, immediately they left their nets and followed him.” Yet they were not valued lightly by God, who knew that they had done this with great love. God knew that even if they had been endowed with much wealth they would still not have been distracted by it, nor would their desire to follow Jesus have been thwarted by it.… Those who follow the Savior, therefore, will sit on the twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel and will receive this power in the resurrection of the dead. For this is the regeneration, a new birth, when the new heaven and the new earth are established for those who renew themselves, and a New Testament with its chalice is given. — COMMENTARY ON Matthew 15.21-22

Philoxenus of Mabbug: And behold both the manner of thy going forth, and the wages thereof are inscribed in one place; and as to how thou shouldst go forth, thou mayest learn from the words, “We have left everything, and come after Thee.” And what the wages of this going forth are the word of our Lord sheweth thee, saying, “Verily I say unto you, that in the new world, when the Son of Man sitteth upon the throne of His glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, and judge the twelve tribes of Israel.” Behold the wages of going forth is participation with Jesus in sublime honour! For He will set the thrones for the disciples opposite to His own throne; and that which with nature is impossible He shewed by His word that it cometh to pass. For He did not promise those disciples who loved His word to honour them like servants and like men who were in subjection, but to make them worthy of the majesty of thrones like unto friends and like unto those who were similar unto Him in His glory. — 13 Ascetic Discourses, Discourse 9 – Second Discourse on Poverty

Pseudo-Chrysostom ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): For it would come to pass, that in the day of judgment the Jews would allege, Lord, we knew Thee not to be the Son of God when Thou wast in the flesh. For who can discern a treasure buried in the ground, or the sun when obscured by a cloud? The disciples therefore will then answer, We also were men, and peasants, obscure among the multitude, but you priests and scribes; but in us a right will became as it were a lamp of our ignorance, but your evil will became to you a blinding of your science.

Or, by that, In the regeneration, Christ designs the period of Christianity that should be after His ascension, in which men were regenerated by baptism; and that is the time in which Christ sate on the throne of His glory. And hereby you may see that He spake not of the time of the judgment to come, but of the calling of the Gentiles, in that He said not, When the Son of Man shall come sitting upon the throne of his majesty; but only, In the regeneration when he shall sit, which was from the time that the Gentiles began to believe on Christ; according to that, God shall reign over the heathen; God sitteth upon his holy throne. (Ps. 47:8.) From that time also the Apostles have sat upon twelve thrones, that is, over all Christians; for every Christian who receives the word of Peter, becomes Peter’s throne, and so of the rest of the Apostles. On these thrones then the Apostles sit, parcelled into twelve divisions, after the variety of minds and hearts, known to God only. For as the Jewish nation was split into twelve tribes, so is the whole Christian people divided into twelve, so as that some souls are numbered with the tribe of Reuben, and so of the rest, according to their several qualities. For all have not all graces alike, one is excellent in this, another in that. And so the Apostles will judge the twelve tribes of Israel, that is, all the Jews, by this, that the Gentiles received the Apostles’ word. The whole body of Christians are indeed twelve thrones for the Apostles, but one throne for Christ. For all excellencies are but one throne for Christ, for He alone is equally perfect in all virtues. But of the Apostles each one is more perfect in some one particuar excellence, as Peter in faith; so Peter tests upon his faith, John on his innocence, and so of the rest. And that Christ spake of reward to be given to the Apostles in this world, is shown by what follows, And every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, &c. For if these shall receive an hundred fold in this life, without doubt to the Apostles also was promised a reward in this present life. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Tertullian: For avoiding it, remedies cannot be lacking; since, even if they be lacking, there remains that one by which you will be made a happier magistrate, not in the earth, but in the heavens. — On Idolatry

Matthew 19:29

Augustine of Hippo ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): (De Civ. Dei, xx. 7.) That He says, An hundred fold, is explained by the Apostle, when he says, As having nothing, and yet possessing all things. (2 Cor. 6:10.) For a hundred is sometimes put for the whole universe. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Cyril of Alexandria: So that no one should think that what was said applied only to the disciples, he extended the words to cover all those doing likewise. The rest might not receive the same as the disciples; yet instead of their relatives of the flesh they will have kinship with God and fraternity with the saints. In fact, he means the older men and women of the church, who were, as it were, relatives through love, beloved from disposition, who loved them much more than their relatives of the flesh. They also received money from them to spend as they wished, while the future treasures were laid up in store for them. Instead of their fields they will receive paradise. They will receive paradise instead of their fields. They will receive Jerusalem above, the mother of their firstborn, in place of their houses built of stone. — FRAGMENT 221

Hilary of Poitiers: They followed him in the washing of baptism, the sanctification of the faith, in the adoption of the inheritance and in the resurrection from the dead. For this is that regeneration that the apostles received and that the law could not grant. It joined them together above the twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel, to the glory of the twelve patriarchs. To others following him in scorn of the secular world, he promises the abundance of hundredfold harvests. This hundredfold harvest is the same as that which is filled with heavenly joy at the hundredth sheep. This hundredfold harvest is that which the fruitfulness of the perfected earth will provide. This honor was also destined to the church in Sarah’s name. This honor will be merited through the loss of the law and the faith of the gospel. And thus he says that the first are to be made from the last because the last are made from the first. — Commentary on Matthew 20.4

Jerome: (Verse 29, 30.) And everyone who has left houses, or brothers, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or fields for my name’s sake, shall receive a hundredfold, and shall possess eternal life. But many who are first shall be last, and the last first. This passage is in agreement with that saying in which the Savior speaks: ‘I came not to send peace, but a sword. For I have come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law.’ (Matthew 10:34) Therefore, those who for the sake of the faith of Christ and the preaching of the Gospel have despised all affections, as well as riches and worldly pleasures: they will receive a hundredfold and possess eternal life. In connection with this statement, some introduce the idea of a thousand years after the resurrection, saying that then a hundredfold of all the things we have given up will be restored to us, and eternal life will be given: not understanding that if in other matters there is a worthy promise, in the case of wives there appears a shameful thing; so that one who leaves one for the Lord will receive a hundred in the future. Therefore, this is the meaning: Whoever renounces earthly things for the sake of the Savior will receive heavenly things, which will be suitable and proportionate to the merit of the renunciation, as if a small number were compared to a hundred. Thus the Apostle says, he who has renounced only one house and the small fields of one province: As if having nothing, and possessing all things (2 Corinthians 6:10). — Commentary on Matthew

Jerome ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): There are that take occasion from this passage to bring forward the thousand years after the resurrection, and say that then we shall have a hundred fold of the things we have given up, and moreover life eternal. But though the promise be in other things worthy, in the matter of wives it seems to have somewhat shameful, if he who has forsaken one wife for the Lord’s sake, shall receive a hundred in the world to come. The meaning is therefore, that he that has forsaken earnal things for the Saviour’s sake, shall receive spiritual things, which in a comparison of value are as a hundred to a small number.

And that, And every one that hath forsaken brethren, agrees with that He had said before, I am come to set a man at variance with his father. (Mat. 10:35.) For they who for the faith of Christ and the preaching of the Gospel shall despise all the ties, the riches, and pleasures of this world, they shall receive an hundred fold, and shall possess eternal life. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

John Chrysostom: For “every one,” He saith, “that hath forsaken brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, or house, for my names sake, shall receive an hundredfold in this world, and shall inherit eternal life,”

For lest any after having heard the word “ye,” should suppose this a thing peculiar to the disciples (I mean now the enjoying the greatest and first honors in the things to come), He extended the word, and spread the promise over the whole earth, and from the things present establishes the things to come also. And to the disciples also at the beginning, when they were in a more imperfect state, He reasoned from the things present. For when He drew them from the sea, and took them from their trade, and commanded them to forsake the ships, He made mention not of Heaven, not of thrones, but of the things here, saying, “I will make you fishers of men;” but when He had wrought them to be of higher views, then after that He discourses of the things to come also.

And this surely came to pass; for when they had left a fishing rod and a net, they possessed with authority the substances of all, the prices of the houses and the lands, and the very bodies of the believers. For often did they choose even to be slain for their sake, as Paul also bears witness to many, when he saith, “If it had been possible ye would have plucked out your eyes, and given them to me.” But when He saith, “Every one who hath forsaken wife,” He saith not this, for marriages to be broken asunder for nought, but as He saith concerning one’s life, “He that loseth his life for my sake shall find it,” not that we should destroy ourselves, neither that while yet here we should part it from the body, but that we should prefer godliness to all things; this too He saith also with respect to wife and brethren.

But He seems to me here to intimate also the persecutions. For since there were many instances both of fathers urging their sons to ungodliness, and wives their husbands; when they command these things, saith He, let them be neither wives nor parents, even as Paul likewise said, “But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart.” — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 64

John Chrysostom: And Christ again, in answering this apostle, said not, “If any man raise up the lame,” but, “Whosoever hath forsaken houses or lands, shall receive an hundredfold in this world, and shall inherit everlasting life.”

Let us also then emulate this man, that we may not be confounded, but may with confidence stand at the judgment seat of Christ; that we may win Him to be with us, even as He was with His disciples. For He will be with us, like as He was with them, if we are willing to follow them, and to be imitators of their life and conversation. For in consequence of these things God crowns, and commends men, not requiring of thee to raise the dead, or to cure the lame. For not these things make one to be like Peter, but the casting away one’s goods, for this was the apostles’ achievement. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 90

Origen of Alexandria ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): Or otherwise; Whosoever shall leave all and follow Christ, he also shall receive those things that were promised to Peter. But if he has not left all, but only those things in special here enumerated, he shall receive manifold, and shall possess eternal life.

And in this world, because for his brethren after the flesh he shall find many brethren in the faith; for parents, all the Bishops and Presbyters; for sons, all that have the age of sons. The Angels also are brethren, and all they are sisters that have offered themselves chaste virgins to Christ, as well they that still continue on earth, as they that now live in heaven. The houses and lands manifold more suppose in the repose of Paradise, and the city of God. And besides all these things they shall possess eternal life. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Philoxenus of Mabbug: And our Lord Himself said unto the Apostles, “Not ye only, but every man who leaveth houses, or family, or brethren, or sisters, or children, for My sake, and for My Gospel’s sake, shall receive an hundred-fold in this world, and in the world to come life everlasting.” What sleeper would not wake up at the sound of these promises? What dead man would not come to life at this breath of spiritual life? And what sluggard would not be quickened at the pointing out of this path which goeth up to heaven? And who would not wish to despise himself and to make himself of no account at the hearing of His incomparable promise? Who would not deny the whole world, even if it happened that he possessed it, to become a consort of God upon the throne? And who would not be willing to exchange the things of time for those of eternity? — 13 Ascetic Discourses, Discourse 9 – Second Discourse on Poverty

Theodore of Heraclea: “A hundredfold” means that which is incomparably better as regards the future in heaven. When Mark says he will receive a hundredfold “in this age,” we should understand him as speaking about spiritual joys far exceeding earthly ones, inasmuch as they are pledges of future blessings. — FRAGMENT 107

Matthew 19:30

John Chrysostom: When He had then raised the spirit of all, and had persuaded them to feel confidence both with respect to themselves and to all the world, He added, that “Many that were first shall be last, and last first.” But this although it be spoken also without distinction concerning many others likewise, it is spoken also concerning these men and concerning the Pharisees, who did not believe, even as before also He had said, “Many shall come from east and west and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob; but the children of the kingdom shall be cast out.”

Then He adds also a parable, as training those who had fallen short to a great forwardness. — Homily on the Gospel of Matthew 64

Origen of Alexandria ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): By this He exhorts those that come late to the heavenly word, to haste to ascend to perfection before many whom they see to have grown old in the faith. This sense may also overthrow those that boast to have been educated in Christianity by Christian parents, especially if those parents have filled the Episcopal see, or the office of Priests or Deacons in the Church; and hinder them from desponding who have entertained the Christian doctrines more newly. It has also another meaning, the first, are the Israelites, who become last because of their unbelief; and the Gentiles who were last become first. He is careful to say, Many; for not all who are first shall be last, nor all last first. For before this have many of mankind, who by nature are the last, been made by an angelic life above the Angels; and some Angels who were first have been made last through their sin. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Rabanus Maurus ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): But because many with what zeal they take up the pursuit of virtue, do not with the same complete it; but either grow cool, or fall away rapidly; it follows, But many that are first shall be last, and the last first. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Remigius of Rheims ((as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274)): It may also be referred in particular to the rich man, who seemed to be first, by his fulfilment of the precepts of the Law, but was made last by his preferring his worldly substance to God. The holy Apostles seemed to be last, but by leaving all they were made first by the grace of humility. There are many who having entered upon good works, fall therefrom, and from having been first, become last. — Catena Aurea by Aquinas