Commentary on Matthew, Book 16

Origen · a new plain-English translation from the Greek and Latin

"Now as Jesus was about to go up to Jerusalem, he took the twelve aside on the way and said to them" and so on down to "and on the third day he will rise" (20:17-19). The equivalent passage is recorded in Mark in this way: "Now they were on the road, going up to Jerusalem, and Jesus was going ahead of

them," and so on down to "and on the third day he will rise." And Luke too would seem to agree with these, writing: "And taking the twelve aside, he said to them," and so on down to "and they did not understand what was said." Paul, who exhorts us to imitate him, as he himself imitated Christ, and who said, "Be imitators of me, just as

I also am of Christ," having seen Christ going to meet dangers already foreseen and going up to Jerusalem eagerly, even while knowing beforehand that he would be handed over to the chief priests and scribes and condemned to death, and so on, did something similar. For Agabus, taking his "belt," bound his own hands and feet and said: "Thus says the Holy Spirit: the man to whom

this belt belongs will be bound in this way" when he has gone to "Jerusalem." When Paul learned this, imitating his teacher, he went up to Jerusalem eagerly. But being affected by something human on account of those who, out of love for him, were weeping and trying to keep him from going up to Jerusalem, he said: "What are you doing, weeping and breaking my heart? For I am ready not only to be bound

when I come to Jerusalem, but even to die for the name of my Lord Jesus." Considering these things, then, sometimes even when we know that burdensome trials are pressing upon us, let us ourselves go to meet them, in accordance with the saying "let us go forward," taking as our example for such conduct first the Savior himself, and after him also his apostle. But do not suppose that these words contradict what

we have said elsewhere, namely, "Should they persecute you in one town, flee to the next," and so on, and that Jesus, on hearing "that John had been handed over" to prison, withdrew. For we say that it is not always fitting to avoid dangers, nor always to go to meet them directly; rather one who is wise in Christ is needed to judge

which occasion calls for withdrawal and which for eager engagement in the contest without withdrawal, and much more without flight. Let this much be said in accordance with the intent of the passage before us, as an exhortation to disregard the dangers of death at the proper time. Next it must be observed that when Jesus was about to go up to Jerusalem, if indeed he took the twelve aside, and one

of the twelve was still Judas, then he took Judas aside as well; for it was likely still fitting that he be taken aside along with the other eleven. And when on the road he said to them, "Behold, we are going up to Jerusalem," and so on, clearly he judged this man too to be one of those who would hear what the teacher would suffer, not

denying that Judas yet knew what he would do, just as each of us — for it has been said to all of us: "Do not boast about tomorrow, for you do not know what the coming day will bring" — for the devil had not yet, I think, thrown "into the heart of Judas son of Simon Iscariot, that he should betray" Jesus. And since it now lies before us to examine the Gospel according to Matthew, let whoever is able attend more carefully

from the beginning of the gospel up to the passage now before us, and inquire whether Judas has nowhere yet been accused by Matthew, but only in the list of the twelve he has said, "Judas son of Simon Iscariot, who also betrayed him." But we have said more, for the establishing of the point that Judas too was at first like the rest of the apostles, when we were examining the passage "these twelve Jesus sent out"

"Jesus, having charged them, saying" — the things that are recorded there. Now we must compare what is said here with the similar things recorded above, since there, upon such words being prophesied by the Savior, Peter took him aside and started rebuking him with the words, "Be merciful to yourself, Lord; this shall never happen to you." But here nothing is recorded of the disciples having said or done anything

in response to the gloomier things reported about what was going to happen. And I think that the disciples were silent now for this reason: because earlier, when Peter "took" Jesus aside "and, rebuking him, began to say: God be merciful to you, Lord; this shall never happen to you," Jesus "turned and said to Peter: Get behind me, Satan; you are a stumbling block to me, because you are not thinking the things

of God but the things of men." It is likely, then, that they, remembering what had been said to Peter, took care to avoid hearing the same or even worse things from the Teacher. There is no harm in setting out the earlier passage, similar to the one before us, which reads thus: "Then he charged his disciples that they should tell no one that he was the Christ," and so on, down to "and

be raised on the third day." For it was in response to these words that it was said, "And Peter took him aside," and so on. Moreover, above it was said that the Savior was going to "be killed," but here the manner of his execution is also written, that he would be crucified. Now as long as Jesus was not being handed over in Jerusalem to the chief priests and scribes, nor condemned to death, nor mocked or scourged

or crucified, Jerusalem stood firm and the place called the sanctuary was not thrown down. But when they had dared to do these things to Jesus, then those who had handed him over were themselves abandoned, and the chief priests ceased to be chief priests, so that after them there were no more chief priests; and then too the scribes who had condemned Jesus to death, hardened in mind and blinded in reasoning, could not see

the intent of the holy scriptures. And all those who handed Jesus over to death were themselves handed over to death by the enemy of Christ, and having mocked Jesus they became an object of mockery when Jerusalem was "surrounded by armies," when also "her desolation drew near"; but moreover, having scourged Jesus, they themselves were scourged and are being scourged until "the fullness of the nations comes in"; for "he who throws a stone on high, upon

"...throws his head." And all this happened so that oversight might depart from them and pass over to those from the nations, who are saved together with the remnant "according to election." For "unless the Lord Sabaoth had left" them "a seed, they would have become like Sodom" and "been made like Gomorrah." But I think that, just as the worship performed of old "by way of example and shadow"

"of the heavenly things" was abolished on account of the heavenly things themselves, and when the true high priest came, the symbolic high priest ceased, and once the true sacrifices for sins were being performed, the symbolic <sacrifices> were done away with — so too, when the true Jerusalem received Jesus, having mounted his own beast of burden, the body (over which the daughter of Zion also greatly rejoiced, and the daughter of the Jerusalem above proclaimed),

then the shadow-Jerusalem was torn down, and the temple made of dead stones fell, on account of the temple <that was to be raised> from living stones; and the altar below was also razed, since the heavenly altar had come into function, Jesus having performed its dedication in the true worship. But if, according to one of its meanings, the people are the city, then even now in Jerusalem (this is

how I mean those who have set their hopes on the place on earth) Jesus is handed over to the Jews who profess the service of God, and > just as though they were high priests, the scribes too, who boast of expounding the divine writings, condemn Jesus to death by the evil things they say about him, and there is no time when they do not hand Jesus over to the nations, mocking him and

his teaching among themselves, and they forever scourge with their tongues the reverence for God that comes through Jesus Christ. And they themselves crucify him through the very acts by which they anathematize him and wish to destroy his teaching. But he, being greater than <all> of them, after a brief interval is raised, and living, appears to <the nations> who have received the power to see. For now, "who is blind as Isaiah, speaking from the person of the

God, says) except my servants, and who are deaf except those who lord it over them?" For he says, with a great and prophetic bearing and spirit: "You who are deaf, hear; and you who are blind, look up so as to see. And who is blind but my servants, and who are deaf but those who lord it over them? And the servants of God have been blinded" — for

Jesus came "into this world for judgment, so that those who do not see — these are the nations — might see, and those who see — that is, Israel — might become blind." Now that so great a true light has risen, and the Word shows itself and declares, "Behold, a man, Dayspring is his name," they did not see the light, because their wickedness had blinded them, and

"they did not know the mysteries of God," and this proved a paradox both for that people and for the nations. For the people saw each of the prophets as a lamp, but when the sun of righteousness rose they did not recognize it; hence even if they seemed to have some lamp, it was taken away from them. But "the people" of the nations, "sitting in darkness, saw a light," not the kind that the

...Israel a little (for each of the prophets was a small light), but ‘the people seated in darkness beheld a great light’ — our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, whose greatness is seen extending ‘from one end of the earth to the other mightily, and governing’ the churches ‘graciously,’ since his spirit has filled the inhabited world, the prophecy being fulfilled that says, ‘in

the last days the mountain of God’ will be made manifest’; and now ‘all the nations are going up to it,’ and this is Christ Jesus. ‘Then the mother of the sons of Zebedee came to him with her sons,’ and so on down to ‘and when the ten heard this, they were indignant at the two brothers’ (20:20–24). The

passage parallel to it Mark also recorded in this way: ‘And James and John, the sons of Zebedee, come up to him and say to him,’ and so on down to ‘they began to be indignant at James and John.’ It is worthwhile, in the passage before us, to inquire into a sense that is not to be despised and that truly befits the gospel of Jesus Christ. We have set this out beforehand, since the saying, to

simpler people, wholly unmixed and not knowing how to search out the depths of God and of his scriptures, exhibits the simplicity of a certain request and of Jesus’ reply to it. But to those who are able to some degree to examine problems, the sense that appears on the surface is slight and cheap and contains nothing great, especially since Jesus answers in a manner befitting his own greatness of mind. For just as

in the case of an earthly kingdom those who sit alongside the king when he is seated in royal vesture and administers some royal business are regarded as being in a position of advancement, so — to follow the letter of the text — it will seem that the mother of the sons of Zebedee (or, as Mark wrote, James and John), imagining such a thing, is asking of the Savior that one of the two sit at his right hand in

his kingdom, when he attains it, and the other at his left. And it would be nothing strange for a woman, out of feminine and untrained thinking, to suppose she ought to ask for such things. But let it be granted also that the two apostles, as men still imperfect and understanding nothing deeper about the kingdom of Christ, supposed such things about those who would sit alongside Jesus. But when Jesus too, as though agreeing

that it is a great thing for someone to sit at his right hand or at his left, raises the request higher and says, ‘You do not know what you are asking; that is not mine to grant, but belongs to those for whom it has been prepared by my Father’ — one who considers himself a discerning hearer of scripture might well ask what it means to sit at the right hand or at the left hand of Jesus in his kingdom.

And against those who suppose that we are inquiring into these matters too officiously, we must gather together the passages written concerning the sittings of God or of Christ, so that, by testing what has been collected on this subject and comparing them with one another, some greatness of doctrine may be able to arise even from a simpler example taken up. For instance, in the Third Book of Kingdoms it is written that ‘Micaiah said: I saw the God of Israel sitting

upon his throne, and the whole host of heaven was standing around him, on his right and on his left," and so forth. And in the second book of Chronicles the same Micaiah says things similar to these, in: "Hear the word of the Lord. I saw the Lord sitting upon the throne of his glory, and all the power of heaven stood on his right

and on his left," and so forth. And in Isaiah it is likewise written: "In the year king Uzziah died, so it came to pass that I saw the Lord seated upon a throne, lofty and exalted," and so forth. And further, in Daniel such things are written: "I watched until thrones were set, and the Ancient of Days sat," and so forth. Similar

to these one can find also in Ezekiel, at the beginning of his prophecy, when he says: "above the firmament that was over their heads" (it is clear that this refers to the cherubim) "was, as it were, the appearance of a sapphire stone, the likeness of a throne upon it, and upon the likeness of the throne was a likeness as the appearance of a man, from above." And in the hundred and ninth psalm, the word "the Lord said

to my lord: sit at my right hand," shows one sitting of the Father and another sitting of the Savior, seated at his right hand. And again, in another psalm, the prophet, praying, says: "You who sit upon the cherubim, appear," and again: "God sits upon his holy throne." But if you also wish to take an example

from the gospels, hear Matthew recording how Jesus spoke to the disciples: "Truly I say to you, that you who have followed me, in the regeneration, when the Son of Man sits upon the throne of his glory," and so forth; and: "from now on you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of power." And Matthew also says this: "when the

Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit upon the throne of his glory," and so forth, and: "from now on you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of power." And Mark recorded the equivalent of this, in: "and you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of power

and coming with the clouds of heaven." And Luke likewise says the same thing, in: "for from now on the Son of Man will be sitting at the right hand of the power of God." And why should I gather still more examples of this kind, wishing, after the plain and simpler and lower reading concerning the sitting

of Christ in the kingdom, and of those who sit at his right or his left, to set forth also a more mystical reading, so that it may reasonably be examined by those capable of rising to divine thoughts, and something worthy be found by the one who judges "all things" as a spiritual person and "is judged by no one," corresponding to Paul's statements about spiritual and evangelical matters. For as Paul, according to

Taking the law spiritually, he speaks of the manna and the rock and the water from it: "and all ate the same spiritual food, and all drank the same spiritual drink; for they drank from a spiritual rock that followed them, and the Rock was Christ" -- so might say the one who stands upon this rock spiritually, and

giving thanks to God for this and saying also concerning himself: "He set my feet upon a rock, and directed my steps," since the sitting of God upon a spiritual throne is spiritual, and likewise that of Christ, and the sitting of Christ "at the right hand of power" is spiritual. For nothing in these passages indicates a bodily sitting, which they have defined as a settling

upon the hips of one seated upon some seat -- for it is ridiculous, just because these things are named in bodily terms, to suppose that there are certain thrones <bodily> fashioned, I know not from what material, capable of receiving the sitting of God or of Christ or of those seated at the right or left of Christ, for whom the Father has prepared such a thing. Nor do I know whether

it is reverent to suppose that it is bodily -- that "the host of heaven" stands "at the right hand and at the left" of God bodily -- or again to suppose that those who are being saved and praised are situated at the bodily right of our king Jesus Christ, while those who are blamed and about to perish are at the corresponding bodily left. But perhaps

that Christ, having recovered his own rule, be restored to the kingdom, once the sin that reigns in the mortal bodies of men has been abolished, along with the whole rule and authority and power of the wicked that holds sway -- this is his "being seated upon the throne of his glory"; and the making of both right <and left> into all things for God, so that nothing may any longer be "contrary" toward him -- this

is what will come to pass among those who are to be "at the right hand of power," who are destined to look, as to an example, at his "being seated at the right hand of power," as they themselves are seated at his right and at his left in the kingdom of Christ the Word; whom God restores, working together with them and preparing their drawing near to the preeminence of Christ, so that the one who is foremost among the others <who are with Christ> may be at

the right, and as it were touching him and clinging to the right hand of the Word, while the one who is lesser is near his left. And as for "right," see whether you can understand it as Christ's invisible creatures, so called, and "left" as the visible and bodily ones. But Christ reigns over all; yet already, of those drawing near to him, some have been allotted the right and the intelligible things, and others the

left and the sensible things. And perhaps the true mother of the sons of Zebedee, whom the Savior called Boanerges, that is, "sons of thunder" -- the thunder <herself> -- having made great judgments concerning her sons James and John (for indeed they were great), and supposing that they could hold the first places beyond every begotten nature, as being able to contain her loud voice, came forward and asked

the Lord, so that he might set one of them at his right hand and the other at his left hand. But the Savior, refuting even so loud-voiced a mother of James and John as one who did not know who the truly superior ones are, and that so great a gift is a grace belonging <solely> to the God who is over all, who breathes with, works with, and establishes in such a preeminence

those whom he saw to be fit, said: "You do not know what you are asking," and: "To sit at my right hand or at my left hand is not something I may grant; rather it belongs to those for whom it has been made ready by my Father." Now whoever is capable will consider carefully which things are given by the Savior and which by the Father, seeing that there are certain things which the Son would not give

but the Father himself. And if the gospels present something of this sort too, in one place introducing the Savior praying concerning certain powers, that his requests be granted to him by the Father, and in another place acting without prayer, as one who already possesses those things he had been deemed worthy of — it is a bold thing to inquire into this, yet nevertheless let whoever is capable examine even these matters with reverence. But wishing, I think, to make plain

to the mother of Zebedee's sons and to them themselves that they still lacked what was needed to bring to perfection things attainable among men that are no ordinary things, he answered, after "you do not know what you are asking," "Are you able to drink the cup which I am about to drink?" — or, as Mark recorded it: "Are you able to drink the cup which I drink, or

to be baptized with the baptism with which I am baptized?" And in these words too one will ask what the cup is and what the baptism, as being <two things different from each other, both so named> and requiring no ordinary power on the part of the one who is to drink or the one who is to be baptized — and the one who was to drink would drink no other cup than the one Jesus was about to drink, and likewise the one who was to be baptized would be baptized with a baptism similar to that

with which the Lord himself was about to be baptized. Now most people refer both of these to the dispensation concerning martyrdom, without making clear either whether the two names, existing in one and the same reality, signify two distinct notions, or whether two distinct things can also be signified by them. We for our part do not reject this interpretation either, but we do raise the question

whether they can also signify something else besides these two things. And since it would take a great deal to treat this matter with precision at present, we will lay out a handful of observations, in order to fix what appears to us, and move on to the passage. Now, as regards the view that martyrdom is signified in these words, one will make use not only of the saying "Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from

me," as though drunk with toil by the one who takes up the struggles involved in martyrdom, until one drains it, having endured all the things brought upon him in the trial that comes with martyrdom — but also of what is said in Psalm 115 (116): "What shall I render to the Lord for all that he has rendered to me? I will take the cup of salvation, and call upon the Lord's name."

“I will pay my vows to the Lord before all his people.” “Precious in the sight of the Lord is the death of his holy ones.” For we can render nothing greater to the Lord for the benefits we have received than to take up readily the cup of salvation and call upon the name of the Lord in order to drink it — in the drinking of which a person renders his vows

all of them to the Lord before all his people.” He taught clearly in these words that the cup is martyrdom, by adding, in connection with the cup, “Precious in the sight of the Lord is the death of his holy ones.” In conception, martyrdom is twofold: the one is called “the cup of salvation,” the other, baptism. And insofar as

someone endures the sufferings, it is a cup drained by the one who takes upon himself everything brought against him, taking it up and, as it were, stifling the pains, neither pushing them away nor casting them off or vomiting them out. And insofar as the one who endures receives forgiveness of sins, it is baptism; for if baptism promises forgiveness of sins, as we have received concerning the baptism in water and spirit,

and the one who endures the baptism of martyrdom likewise receives forgiveness of sins, then martyrdom might reasonably be called baptism. That forgiveness of sins comes to everyone who endures martyrdom is clear from: “Everyone who confesses me before men, I too will confess him before my Father who is in the heavens.” Indeed

the Savior confesses before the Father who is in the heavens everyone who has confessed him, even if that person happened to have sinned in some way before the confession; for if he will not confess those who have sinned in some way but have confessed, then it will not be true that “everyone, then, who confesses me,” and so on. But I do not think that the Savior will confess before the Father in the heavens

a person guilty of any sin whatsoever; for the confession is the son’s speaking freely before the Father concerning the one confessed, as one worthy of Christ’s confession before the Father. Let it not disturb us that in Mark the Savior himself also drinks the cup and is himself baptized with the baptism; for indeed, when John came into all the region around the Jordan proclaiming a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness

of sins, Jesus too “comes to John to be baptized by him,” as it were washing away our sins, so that we might be cleansed by his washing. But it is shown more fully that we are cleansed through his own martyrdom, insofar as he was baptized taking up our sins upon himself, in order to release them both from us and from himself; wherefore “what he died, he died to” our “sin,” since

“he himself died to sin,” not his own but ours — if indeed such a statement will seem to some to make sense. And accordingly, as it seems to me, the sons of Zebedee have both drunk the cup and been baptized with the baptism, since Herod killed “James the brother of John with the sword,” while the king of the Romans, as tradition teaches, condemned the

John, bearing witness on account of the word of truth, on the island of Patmos. And John himself teaches us about his own testimony, without saying who condemned him, declaring these things in the Revelation: ‘I, John, your brother and partner in the affliction and kingdom and endurance in Jesus, was on the island called Patmos on account of the

word of God,’ and so on. And it seems that he beheld the revelation on the island. And the one who, after the account already given, adds the following concerning the cup and the baptism: just as there is a certain food of the Savior, about which he says, ‘My nourishment lies in doing the will of the one who sent me and bringing his work to completion,’ so

there is a cup analogous to that food. It is a bold thing to distinguish it from the food and set it forth in a practical way, but nevertheless let the one who is able consider whether the food is the practical element and the drink the contemplative one. For corresponding to Christ’s ‘eating,’ which consists in doing the will of him who sent him and completing his work, so also his ‘drinking’

consists in understanding the will of him who sent him and bringing knowledge of him to completion. But whether or not ‘my flesh is truly food, and my blood is truly drink’ can be referred to this same distinction, you yourself shall judge. For one might say that action is truly food, and contemplation is truly

drink, and the one who says this will say that this is why he first gives the ‘bread, having blessed’ it, and having broken it, ‘to the disciples’ — since action comes first — and after this, ‘having taken the cup, having given thanks, he gave it to them, saying: drink from it, all of you’ — since it is necessary that the one who has set his actions in order and has set the practical life aright should thus proceed, through those who have gained foreknowledge, and

on to their contemplation. For indeed, according to the prophet it is said, ‘Sow for yourselves unto righteousness, reap unto the fruit of life,’ so that we may first do what is required; and after this he says, ‘Light for yourselves the light of knowledge’ — as one who, after clearing the way, would then travel on toward knowledge and be illumined in it. These things have been said digressively for the sake of a

deeper examination concerning the cup. And in the twenty-second Psalm it is said, first, ‘You have prepared a table before me in the presence of those who afflict me,’ and next, ‘Your cup that inebriates me is like the strongest wine.’ But let the one who reads this writing not suppose that we are congratulating ourselves for having somehow explained the matters concerning the recorded sittings of God

or of Christ. For we offer this defense: our purpose was only, from the words themselves, to induce reverence concerning the ‘sitting,’ and to turn the reader away from the more lowly interpretation. For it would require another occasion to make some preliminary examination concerning the sitting and standing and walking of God or of Christ, which the present discussion does not demand; for the digression would become excessively great and untimely.

However, when these things had been said by the Savior in response to the request of the mother of John and James—or of the sons of Zebedee themselves—the ten, hearing this (he says), became indignant about the two brothers, on the grounds that they had asked to be preferred over the rest. Note that Judas too was among those who were indignant (Mark also recorded this). But if he was among those who were indignant along with

the other nine, then perhaps the devil had not yet "cast into his heart" the intention that he should "betray" our Lord; yet already, in his choice, Judas was one of the apostles. But having said much about him in what preceded, we do not now resume the task of showing that Judas fell by the same sort of choice by which the

rest also fell, and he fell into the snare of the evil one, having loved money and having betrayed the Savior. But Jesus, calling them to himself, said: "You know that the rulers of the nations lord it over them," and so on down to "and to give his life as a ransom for many" (20:25–28). Mark too recorded the equivalent of these things. And we have observed, as

in many other instances, that Matthew and Mark keep the order of the things recorded, whether of healings or of sayings, so also here. For in sequence, from "Now as Jesus was about to go up to Jerusalem, he took the twelve aside" down to "and immediately he sends them," Mark too has kept everything in order, from "they were

on the road going up to Jerusalem" down to "immediately he sends him out again here." But go and set the Gospels beside one another at these places and compare them, and you will find what is being said. Luke, moreover, recorded in part something similar, prefacing it with "And a dispute arose among them" as to "which of them might be greatest." In

this passage he adds: "But he said to them, 'The kings of the nations lord it over them, and those who exercise authority over them are called benefactors. But you are not to be so,'" and so on. Let this, then, be said, so that the correspondence observed at this point between Matthew and Mark, and in part Luke, may not escape our notice. And now let us also examine

the sense of what is being said. It has been said before that James and John were laying claim to the first place with Jesus, and were asking to receive a seat at his right hand and at his left in his kingdom (or their mother was asking this on their behalf), and it has been said that at this the rest, since they themselves too were laying claim to the first place with Jesus,

"became indignant, the ten," at the thought that James and John wished to snatch away, as though they were above the other ten, the nearness to Jesus in glory. Now that these things have been said beforehand, as is fitting, Jesus calls to himself either the ten who had become indignant, or these together with the other two, and teaches the way by which someone will be great and first with God.

What was being said was something like this: that the rulers of the nations, or those who seem to rule them, not content with lording it over their subjects, wanting to hold power over them more forcibly, also dominate them. Likewise, those who are great among the nations according to the rank valued in this life do not stop at exercising authority over their subjects, but, rising up against them, exercise power over

them. But among you, my acquaintances, let this not be so. Nor let those among those who believe in me who have been entrusted with some office, or who are reckoned to hold authority in the church of my Father and God, lord it over their own brothers, or exercise power over those who have taken refuge in the reverence for God that comes through me. But if anyone wishes to be judged great before my Father, and by comparison

surpasses his own brothers, let him serve all those whom he wishes to be greater than. And if anyone also aspires to the first places among those who are with me, let him know that he will be first of none to whom he has not rendered a slave's service — a service marked by moderation and praiseworthy humility, one able to benefit the one who serves, and to help or give rest also to those who are served. But Luke brings kings and those who exercise authority over

the nations into the account beforehand, turning away the one who wishes to be greater among the brothers from imitating royal power, or the desire for flattery of those who exercise authority, teaching us so that the one who truly becomes greater among us may become like the younger — that is, like a child — for the sake of simplicity and equality, while the one who leads (for so, I think, he calls the one

called a bishop in the churches) may be like one who serves those he is served by. This is what the word of God teaches us. But we, either not understanding the intent of Jesus' teaching in these matters, or despising such great counsels of the Savior, are such that at times we even exceed the arrogance of those who rule badly among the nations, and all but seek

to have bodyguards as kings do, making ourselves fearsome and hard to approach, especially to the poor; we behave toward them — toward those who come to us and ask something of us — as not even tyrants and the cruelest of rulers behave toward their suppliants. And indeed one can see, in many so-called churches, and especially in those of the smaller towns, that the leaders of the people of God permit no one

equal speech, or to speak with them on equal terms; there are even times when even the finest of Jesus' disciples find it so toward them. And the apostle gives a command to masters concerning their household servants, saying: "Masters, grant your slaves what is just and fair, knowing that you too have a Master in heaven." And he also teaches

masters to relax their threats against their household servants. But one can see some bishops threatening cruelly, sometimes on the pretext of sin, sometimes out of contempt for the poor, contrary to the apostolic word in which it is said: "They gave to me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcision — only that we should remember the poor," and again

the equality toward the humble, neither considering nor imagining that it is fitting to have no pretension, and that above all Christians should practice equality among themselves, and especially those who bear some preeminence in the title of the church; for it is written: “The greater you are, the more you should humble yourself, and before the Lord you will find favor.” And we ought to know also what is said thus in Proverbs: “Before destruction a man's heart is exalted, and”

“before glory it is humbled,” and to avoid falling into thinking great things of oneself, or saying the word that the one “wishing to justify himself” said to Jesus, who had taught “you shall love your neighbor as yourself”—the man who was not ashamed to say to the Savior, “And who is my neighbor?” We ought also to have read from Paul the phrase, “though we could have been a burden, as apostles of Christ,”

“we became gentle in your midst, as a nurse cherishes her own children.” We ought also to imitate the words, “Or did I commit a sin in humbling myself so that you might be exalted?” Let the rulers of the nations, then, lord it over them, but let them be slaves to the church. And let the great ones among the nations exercise authority over them, but let the faithful listen to “Learn from me,”

“for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls.” Let us also be trained not to accept flattery, nor to be gladly called by people, for whatever good we may seem to have done someone, “benefactors.” We do not say this out of ignorance, wishing to humble ourselves “under the mighty hand of God,” and, according to his word, under

the ministry of the church. But there are times when it is necessary, according to the apostolic voice, to rebuke “those who sin, before all,” so that “the rest also may have fear.” And there are times when one must, making use of authority, “hand over” someone “to the adversary for the ruin of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved on the day of the Lord.” But this must be done rarely; for one must admonish

“the unruly,” and comfort “the fainthearted,” and support “the weak,” and be patient “toward all,” and render “evil for evil to no one.” And one must not consider the one who sins to be an enemy, but must listen to the apostle saying: “Do not consider him an enemy, but admonish him as a brother.” And I have said all this because I wished to establish, according to my argument, that

the ruler of the church ought not to imitate the ruler of the nations, nor ought one to emulate those who lord it over others and exercise authority, and kings; but, so far as one is able, in these matters too one must imitate Christ, who is most approachable, conversing with women and laying his hands on children. And even if it carries less weight that Jesus “poured water into a basin” and washed “the feet of the disciples,” nonetheless

one must listen to him, according to the letter, as he speaks about these things: “You call me Teacher and Lord, and you say well, for I am,” and so on. For through these words he teaches the disciples to become imitators of his praiseworthy humility. And perhaps also, since, being Lord, he became a slave for the salvation of mankind, for the sake of our race, it is on this account that he is said to have taken “the form of a slave.”

and to have humbled himself, having become obedient unto death. And if indeed “God exalted him” for this reason, let the one who wishes to be exalted do the like of what someone is exalted for. For indeed the Son of Man did not come so as to be served but rather to render service; since even though he was served, when “angels came and served him,” and again he was served by Martha, yet

he did not come for this reason, to be served; for he came to dwell among the human race in order to serve, and to travel so far in serving our salvation as to give his own soul a ransom for many who would believe in him. And if, hypothetically, all had believed in him, he would have given his soul a ransom for all. But to whom did he give his soul

as a ransom for many? Certainly not to God; was it then to the evil one? For this one held us fast, until there should be given to him, on our behalf, as ransom, the soul of Jesus — he having been deceived, <clearly, and made to imagine> that he was able to have mastery over it, and not seeing that it does not endure the torment of holding it fast. Therefore also “his death,” having seemed to gain mastery, “no longer

has mastery,” since he became <alone> among the dead free, and stronger than the power of death, and stronger to such a degree that he is able to set free even all who wish to follow him from among those held fast by death, death no longer having any power over them. For everyone who is with Jesus is beyond the reach of death. Now in the passages of the gospel under examination

it is written that our savior gave his own soul a ransom for many. But in Peter it is said that we were ransomed not with perishable things, silver and gold, from our futile way of life handed down from our fathers, but with precious blood; and the apostle too says: “you were bought at a price; do not become slaves of men.” We were bought, then, with the precious blood of Jesus, and there was given as ransom

on our behalf the soul of the Son of God, and neither his spirit (for he had already entrusted it beforehand to the Father, saying, “Father, into your hands I commit my spirit”) nor his body (for we have as yet found nothing of this sort written concerning it). And since his soul has been given as a ransom for many, but did not remain with him to whom

it was given as ransom for many, therefore he says in the fifteenth Psalm, “You will not abandon my soul to Hades.” Having arrived once at this point, I would remind those who, through a fanciful notion of glorification concerning Christ, confuse what pertains to the firstborn of all creation with what pertains to the soul and body of Jesus, and perhaps also his spirit, and

suppose that what was seen and dwelt among us in this life is altogether without composition, that they do not speak soundly. For let us ask them whether the divinity belonging to “the likeness of the God who cannot be seen” and the preeminence of “the firstborn of all creation” — whether that one in whom “all things were created, the things in the heavens and the things on earth, whether visible or invisible, whether thrones

whether dominions or principalities or powers, a ransom was given in exchange for many. And to whom was that ransom given? To the enemy holding us captive, until he should receive the ransom — if indeed that enemy could have taken so great and so large a ransom in exchange for the captives. And I do not say these things as though I were despising the soul of Jesus and belittling it, but because I wish this soul, so far as

possible, to be understood as the ransom given by the Savior of the whole, while that surpassing dignity and that divinity could not, even in principle, have been given as a ransom. Yet today I am not separating Jesus from Christ; rather, I know all the more that Jesus the Christ and his soul are one thing in relation to the firstborn “of all creation,” and that his body too — if it must be named still further — belongs wholly to this same one thing, even as “whoever cleaves to the Lord is made one spirit with him.”

“And as they went out from Jericho, a great crowd followed him. And behold, two blind men sitting by the road,” and so on (20:29–30 [34]). Let the facts of the history concerning the place also be true: that as Jesus went out from Jericho with his disciples,

a great crowd followed him; and that two blind men sitting by the road at the point where one leaves Jericho, having heard that Jesus was passing by that place, themselves cried out and said, “Have mercy on us, Lord, Son of David”; and that, agreeing together in their crying out, they spoke the words recorded; and that, because the blind men had asked to be shown mercy, Jesus stood still and called out to them, so that

he might call to them not while passing by and going past them, but while standing still; and that, inquiring, he said to them, “What do you want me to do for you?” And that the blind men, now stating their request more specifically, said to him that they wanted their eyes to be opened by Jesus. And that our Savior, who loves mankind and is compassionate, was moved with compassion for the blind men — moved with compassion, I think, because he had already grasped

that which called forth, so to name it, the mercy of Jesus, which was this: that they had cried out saying, “Have mercy on us, Lord, Son of David,” and, having believed, had asked that their eyes be opened; and that, touching their eyes and infusing into them a healing power, he made the blind men see again, and that they, in gratitude, followed Jesus. And let one who believes these things and knows

also the saying, “if you do not believe, you will not understand,” receive understanding, out of having believed, “according to the proportion of faith”; and having received it, let him speak of these matters, interpreting them in accordance with the foundation of faith concerning them, according to “I believed, therefore I spoke.” And let such a person be not only one who believes Jesus and the things recorded concerning this passage,

but also one who knows the meaning of them. For the one who remains in the truth of the faith, and through works abides in “the word,” according to the promise of Jesus, “knows the truth,” and is set free by it. And we too, since when we do not believe we do not understand the intent of what is said, but when we understand, we understand from believing,

Let us bring forward what occurs to us on this passage. Having prayed to the one who delivers us from having the gospel "veiled to us," let us set it out to the extent that we are able. And first let us consider what it means that, as the disciples of Jesus were going out from Jericho with the Savior, a great crowd had followed him. See, then, if you can, recalling what we said in expounding the parable in the Gospel according to Luke,

the one that begins, "A certain man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and he fell among robbers," noting whether here too Jericho is a symbol of the earthly region customarily called, according to scripture, "the world." The one, then, going down "from Jerusalem to Jericho" is Adam (that is, man), and he has fallen among "robbers." But because of the many in Jericho (for there is a great crowd in Jericho), our Jesus,

having come to be there together with the disciples, is going out from it, transacting business (namely, through having entered into Jericho) so as to guide those who wish to follow. For those in Jericho do not know how to go out from the worldly mindset unless it is given by God — not only Jesus going out from Jericho but also his disciples. And having observed these things, a great crowd follows him.

And one can observe that people desiring to live in accordance with the word — despising the world and all things earthly — follow Jesus and his disciples, and, treading in their footsteps as they set out from Jericho, watch what happens along the way. The great crowd, then, follows Jesus, so that, walking behind him and using him as their guide, they may go up to Jerusalem

* * * . (A little further on it is added that when they drew near to Jerusalem and came to Bethphage, at the Mount of Olives, Jesus then sent forth two disciples, and so on.) Then next it is written, as though the word were showing those who were about to be healed very soon — the blind men — thus: "And behold, two blind men sitting beside the road, hearing that Jesus was passing by,"

cried out, saying, "Have mercy on us, Lord, Son of David." And pay attention, in these words, to whether "and behold, two blind men" contains something being pointed out by the word "behold." If, then, we are able to follow the word as it points out the two blind men and to see them, we shall say that Israel and Judah, before the coming of Jesus, were blind, yet were sitting beside the road, spending their time occupied with the law

and the prophets — blind, on the one hand, because the true word in the law and the prophets was not seen by them in their souls before the coming of Jesus, but crying out "Have mercy on us, Lord, Son of David" because they perceived themselves to be blind, not seeing the intent of the scriptures, yet wishing to regain their sight and to see the glory that is in them.

But since they were still blind and imagined nothing great concerning Jesus, but understood only what pertains to him according to the flesh, they call the one born from David's offspring in the flesh — since they understood nothing more than this — Son of David; and all their seemingly loud proclamation, made out of piety, knew nothing more to say about the Savior than that he was a son

of David. But if I say 'two blind men,' meaning the one who, before Jesus' arrival, dwelt in their soul, Israel and Judah, take yourself up to the two kingdoms, and observe that in the time of Rehoboam the people were divided into Israel and Judah; and next look at the prophets, at one time prophesying to Israel, at another to Judah,

and sometimes to both together. Privately, then, how they prophesy to each you would find by attending to the succession of the prophets, but together to Israel and Judah, when through Jesus God promises to establish upon the house of Israel and upon the house of Judah a common covenant, not according to the covenant which God made with the fathers when they came out from the land of Egypt. And

being blind — Israel, concerning whom we have often explained, distinguishing him from the Israel according to the flesh — and Judah likewise, having heard, it says, that Jesus was passing by, cried out; having heard, it says, that — for, I think, from those proclaiming the things concerning Jesus' arrival and that he was passing through, on his way to Jericho, which was about to pass away, sojourning in it but about to go out from it — they are blessed if he does not pass them by

without their being shown mercy. Therefore they cried out to him, saying: Have mercy on us, Lord, Son of David. But the Savior, in doing good, does not pass by, but hastens, so that once he has stood still the benefit may not flow past and pass away, but may come to those benefited as from a standing spring. So then Jesus, having stood still and struck by their outcry and their request, calls them

to himself, already making the beginning of the benefit at the moment he called them; for he would not have called in vain, with nothing accomplished in those called. Would that we too, crying out to him and saying: Have mercy on us, Lord, he might call us, beginning from 'Son of David,' and, having stood still, might call us as one attending to our request. He said,

then, to them: What do you want me to do for you? Which I take to mean something like this: state, declare, what you want, so that all who are going out from Jericho and following me may hear and see what happens. They answered: Lord, that our eyes may be opened — an answer which they, being noble by birth (in being Israel and Judah) but blinded by ignorance and

having become aware of it, and having heard those speaking about the Savior, cried out to him and say that they want their eyes to be opened. And this especially do those say who, in reading the sacred scripture, are not insensible of their own blindness toward the mind within it. For these say 'have mercy on us' and 'we want our eyes to be opened,' that is,

our eyes. Would that we too, perceiving in what respects we are blind and do not see, sitting beside the very road of the scriptures, and hearing that Jesus is passing by, might through our own request make him stand still and say that we want our eyes to be opened. And if we should say this out of a disposition longing to see what he grants to be seen, leaping up with the eyes of the soul

Jesus, our Savior, will be moved with compassion, and being power and word and wisdom and everything that is written about him, he will touch our eyes, which did not see before him. And when he has touched them, the darkness and the ignorance will flee, and immediately we will not only see again but will also follow him, since he himself cooperates in our seeing again in order that

we do nothing else but follow the one who will make us see again, so that, always following him, we may be led by him to God and may see God with our eyes that have seen again through him, together with those who are blessed for having a pure heart. We have, then, those going out from Jericho and following Jesus, being a great crowd, not Israel nor

Judah; but the two blind men, having heard that Jesus was passing by, and having learned that he is the son of David, and becoming aware of their own blindness, and requesting that their eyes be opened, are Israel and Judah restored, whose eyes, though shut and closed together, see again through the touch of Jesus. These things, then, according to Matthew. But since Mark and Luke, according to some, set out

the same story, but according to others a different but similar one, it is worth also examining what they say. And first one must consider the account according to Mark, who writes of the place in this way: "And he comes to Jericho. And as he was going out from there, with his disciples and a considerable crowd, behold, the son of Timaeus, Bartimaeus, a blind man" and so on, up to "and

he followed him on the road." Now the one who takes his stand on the bare history and does not wish the evangelists to disagree will say that what is according to Matthew and what is according to Mark did not happen at the same time, but that on one visit to Jericho the events concerning the two blind men who received their sight occurred, and on another visit the events concerning this one, the son of Timaeus, Bartimaeus, and on yet another

the events according to Luke. For if indeed we believe accurately that the Gospels were written with the cooperation of the Holy Spirit, and that those who wrote them were not mistaken in what they recorded, it is clear that, since it is not possible for it to be true that two blind men and one blind man were healed on one and the same visit, one visit is indicated by Matthew, another by Mark,

and yet another by Luke, as one who pays attention can, from the difference with respect to the others, confidently declare this point as well. And it is nothing to marvel at if someone, having noticed the first healing at Jericho, should have wished to be healed in the same place through the same wording and a similar request. But someone might say that in this way the blind man healed according to Luke is also

a different person. But whoever seeks a deeper account of all these things will say that one and the same matter is presented in different wordings; for there are two blind men, as it has been recorded, standing for Israel and Judah, but there is one people made up of both of these, when one blind man is shown being healed. "A considerable crowd," then, is the crowd from the nations going out together with them from

of worldly things to Jesus and his disciples, a certain remnant of Israel sitting “beside the road” <that is, beside the prophetic scriptures> and poor in understanding and begging for what the soul needs, having heard that it is Jesus the Nazarene, begins to cry out loudly, asking the savior, as son of David, to show him mercy. And whenever you see those of

the Jews who believe in Jesus, believing concerning the savior—at one time supposing him to be from Mary and Joseph, at another from Mary alone and the divine Spirit, yet not along with the theology concerning him—you will see how this blind man says, “son of David, have mercy on me,” whom the “many” rebuke; for many

of those going out from Jericho, from the nations, rebuke the poverty of those among the Jews who falsely claim to believe. And if you apply such things, though seemingly unreasonable, to the noble soul that has become poor in this way and come even to begging, you will not miss the sense of the passage by much. Since Mark also thought it good to record the name of the blind man’s father, that he was Timaeus,

and that of the blind man, that he was called Bartimaeus, we inquire whether Mark had in mind something deeper at this point. And perhaps he simply added the name, taking it from the historical account without variation; though one might also say he did so because it served a purpose. And if we shall not be thought to grow tediously cold by pressing on to the examination of such matters, let us inquire about the one named for honor, Timaeus,

and his son Bartimaeus, which means “son of Timaeus.” Could it be, then, that because of the honor of the patriarch Jacob, that is, Israel, he is figuratively “Timaeus,” while those who have obtained their nobility from him are “Bartimaeus,” blind for the reasons already stated, and likewise “sitting beside the road” and “begging” as well? Then, when he said, “Son of David, have mercy on

me,” the many rebuked him that he should be silent, I ask whether you can say that the many rebuke “that he should be silent” the Ebionite — who is poor with regard to faith in Jesus — being themselves those from the nations, who have almost all without exception believed him to have been born of a virgin, while they rebuke “that he should be silent” the one who supposes him to be from the seed of a man and a woman, tracing his lineage from David.

But although the many were rebuking him, he cried out “all the more,” believing in Jesus, yet believing in a more human way, and crying out he says, “Son of David, have mercy on me.” But the savior, who loves mankind, stood still, and no longer—according to Matthew—does he himself call him, but he ordered that he be called; and those who were commanded said to him, “Take courage, rise” (for to him, sitting and having fallen back, they say, “Rise”), and they say,

“He is calling you.” After this Mark says that, having thrown off his cloak, [he came to] Jesus. Did he then record nothing meaningful about the man who threw off his cloak and leapt up and came to him, or are we to think these details have been tossed into the gospel at random? I, for my part, do not believe that a single iota or a single stroke is empty of divine teachings, but I consider that succeeding in interpreting them requires a great deal of reasoning, because of

matters difficult to interpret. Perhaps, then, the things belonging to him as a blind man and a beggar *** indicate the marriage-garments and wraps with which Bartimaeus was clothed; which the blind man cast off when he heard, "Take courage, rise, he is calling you," and, having cast off the coverings and wraps of his begging, "he leapt up and stood," so that he might come to Jesus and, upon obtaining the answer given by him in response to

the request, "What do you want me to do?" — he himself might utter a greater cry than "Son of David, have mercy on me"; for a greater thing than "Son of David" has been conceived by the one who says "Rabbouni" and who sets forth the kind of mercy through "that I may see again." And the Savior, indeed, through "Son of David, have mercy on me" does not grant the benefit, nor even when the garment of

<blindness and of> begging... nor when he was sitting beside the road, dwelling there. But because of "Rabbouni, that I may see again" he said to him, "Go, your faith has saved you." And the Savior indeed said to him, "Go"; but he did something better than this command, for he did not go away, but "was following" Jesus on the road, since "immediately he saw again." Let us also consider

the account in Luke, which runs thus: "Now it happened, as he was drawing near to Jericho, that a certain blind man was sitting by the road begging," and so on down to "and all the people, seeing it, gave praise to God." Of this account, the elements common to the others, already treated in the discourse we have set forth according to what has become apparent to us, we will not repeat, but

the timely and distinctive points we will set forth as far as we are able. And first observe that Matthew and Mark recorded that the matters concerning the blind men, or the blind man, occurred as Jesus was going out from Jericho with his disciples; but Luke says, "Now it happened, as he was drawing near to Jericho." Therefore, according to Luke, it is on entering

Jericho and coming near to it that he accomplishes the dispensation concerning the blind man. And one might say, according to the mystical sense, that Luke's account is first, Mark's second, and Matthew's third. For first one must draw near to Jericho, then enter it, and after that go out from it. Accordingly

Luke wrote, "Now it happened, as he was drawing near to Jericho"; Mark, "And he comes to Jericho, and as he was going out from there"; but Matthew recorded neither the drawing near to Jericho nor that he comes to Jericho, but only that, as they were going out from Jericho, a great crowd followed him. It is possible, then, that what is according to

Luke he did upon drawing near to Jericho, what is according to Mark upon coming to Jericho, and what is according to Matthew upon going out from it. And you see that the blind man according to Luke, "having heard a crowd passing by" (and not, presumably, Jesus), asked what this might be, while the one according to Mark, "having heard that it was Jesus the Nazarene, began to cry out,"

...according to Matthew, two blind men sitting beside the road, having heard that Jesus was passing by, cried out. And in Matthew's account the blind men do not say "Jesus of Nazareth," but the one found in the other Gospels, of which, according to Mark, the blind man hears that "it is Jesus the Nazorean," while the one according to Luke, when he was inquiring of the crowd

"what this might be," learned it when they reported to him that Jesus the Nazarene was passing by. Next, after these things, observe that those going ahead rebuked the blind man who was crying out and saying, "Son of David, have mercy on me," so that he would be silent — as if they were saying: those who had believed first rebuked the one saying "Son of David," so that he would be silent and not proclaim him by the lesser name. But it is as if he were saying instead

"Son of God, have mercy on me." But that man "cried out all the more, 'Son of David, have mercy on me.'" Then it says, "Jesus stood still and ordered him to be brought to him." And observe whether, as we have noted, this blind man is not somehow inferior: for Jesus neither called him himself nor said that he should be called, but, as one who could not manage this on his own, "he ordered him"

unable by himself to be "brought to him." Then (it says) "when he had come near, he asked him, saying, 'What do you want me to do for you?'" And he did not ask him before the one being asked had drawn near, but since he had drawn near, therefore, when asked, he said, "that I may see again, Lord." Then, laying this aside, it says "Jesus said to him: 'See again; your faith has saved you.'"

But the blind men in Matthew have something more, concerning whom it is written that Jesus, moved with compassion, touched their eyes; but neither the one in Mark nor the one in Luke touched them. Again, the one in Luke has some further advantage, since, when "immediately he saw again," he not only followed him, but had something more beyond

the rest: for it says, "he followed him, glorifying God." And the outcome of this was that, in his following and glorifying God, all the crowd, upon seeing it, gave "praise to God." These things, then, for the present we have set down concerning these passages, whether by knowing them or by receiving them from others; and may God grant to whomever he wishes a richer word of wisdom and

a clearer word in the light of knowledge, so that these things, when compared with such gifts, may be found like a lamp beside the sun. And "when they drew near to Jerusalem and came to Bethphage, by the Mount of Olives," and so on, down to "having mounted on a donkey and a colt, the foal of a beast of burden" — and Mark too recorded it in this way at this point: and when

"they draw near to Jerusalem and to Bethany, by the Mount of Olives," and so on, down to "and immediately he will send it"; but Luke, in this manner: "and having said these things, he went on ahead, going up to Jerusalem," and so on, down to "thus you shall say: that the Lord has need of it." It is especially worthwhile, in cases like these, to consider the

of the words of the gospel, to attend to the intention of those who recorded them and their purpose, at what they were aiming when they recorded, alongside the marvelous and paradoxical things done by the Savior, also things that show nothing of that sort. For let it be granted that the evangelists dealt with the giving of sight to the blind, the healing of the paralyzed, the raising of the dead, and the cleansing of lepers, for the edifying, concerning Jesus, of those who would encounter

their writing, what does the passage before us intend, namely that when Jesus drew near to Jerusalem with his disciples and had come to Bethphage near the Mount of Olives, he sent two disciples, instructing them concerning a donkey and a colt, that having untied them they should bring them to him — to him who at times did not shrink from traveling a longer road on foot, and completing the journey with his own feet,

as when he passed from Jerusalem through Samaria <to the place, and> having arrived, being weary from the journey, he sat down beside it? But what does it mean that Jesus himself has need of a donkey tied up together with a colt, ordering them to be untied, and instructing that it be said to whoever speaks about this, that their lord has need of them, and that he will send them back at once? For so great a lord,

having need of a donkey and a colt long since tied up, let him show ... something worthy of his own magnificence. The inquiry concerning this passage is intensified by the prophet Zechariah son of Barachiah, who prophesied concerning these things a prophecy worthy of attention, in which it is written in these very words: "Rejoice greatly, daughter of Zion; proclaim, daughter of Jerusalem; behold, your king comes to you,

righteous and saving, he himself gentle and mounted on a beast of burden and a young colt." And if you wish to learn from the prophet how the things prophesied are matters worthy of great joy for the daughter of Zion, hear also: "and he will destroy the chariots out of Ephraim and the horse out of Jerusalem, and the battle bow will be destroyed, and abundance and peace out of the nations; and he will rule over waters as far as

the sea, and the outlets of the rivers of the earth. And you, by the blood of the covenant, have sent forth your prisoners from the pit that has no water. You prisoners of the congregation shall sit in a stronghold, and instead of one day of your exile I will repay you double." And so that we may not draw out the discussion further, let us leave it to whoever wishes to compare the prophecy with the account according to the gospel, to examine all the details

concerning the places, with the text set alongside. We have noted, as in other cases, that Matthew and John did not set forth the prophetic word in the very same words; for "rejoice greatly, daughter of Zion; proclaim, daughter of Jerusalem" is not the same as "say to the daughter of Zion," <or "do not fear, daughter of Zion,"> but also the words that come after "behold, your king comes to

you" and before "gentle" Matthew did not set forth, having it thus: "righteous and saving, he himself." Further, instead of "and mounted on a donkey and a colt, son of a beast of burden," he has <"and mounted on a donkey> and a young colt," or, as in some copies, "colt of a beast of burden." John, instead of "mounted on a beast of burden <and a young colt>," has made it: "sitting, he comes"

upon a colt of a donkey.» Showing that knowledge of the place is needed, he adds, »but his disciples did not know these things at first.« One might inquire how it is reasonable that, according to the prophet, the daughter of Zion is commanded to rejoice greatly and the daughter of Jerusalem to proclaim, because of the one mounted on a beast of burden and a young colt,« when shortly afterward, having seen

Jerusalem, Jesus wept over it, saying, »Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets,« and so on. Observe, then, if you can, that Zion, now called the daughter of the one commanding her to rejoice, and Jerusalem the city, the daughter of the one bidding her to proclaim, must be said to be not the one who crucified the Lord, but the one who longs for the crucified one — the heavenly Zion, concerning which

it is written in the letter to the Hebrews: »but you have drawn near to Mount Zion, the city of the God who lives, heavenly Jerusalem, and myriads of angels gathered in festival,« while in the letter to the Galatians: »but the Jerusalem above is free, which is our mother.« For perhaps these are symbols of the Savior loosing, through his disciples, their own mounts from their bonds — both those from

the people who believed at that time, and those from the nations. For the synagogue of that time was bound by sins, and the colt too was bound along with her — the new people believing from the nations, who came to be later. And bringing both of these near to the ascent to the Jerusalem above, the Savior commanded them to be loosed by the disciples as they taught, having given to them

the Holy Spirit, and saying: »Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive anyone's sins, they are forgiven them; if you retain anyone's, they are retained.« And indeed always the disciples — whom he made sufficient to serve as ministers of a covenant that is new, belonging not to the letter but to the Spirit « — loosing the bound donkey and the colt, lead them to Jesus, who wishes to make use of the mounts

that had been loosed from the ancient bond of sins. And it is indeed fitting for the Son of God to have need in this way — for he is a lover of humanity — of the bound donkey and of the colt bound along with her; and he has need of them so that, seated upon them, he may give rest rather than be given rest by those upon whom he sits. But someone will ask how the sense of what follows will be consistent with what has been given,

given that they run thus: »and immediately he will send them« — or »and immediately he will send it back here again.« You will resolve the difficulty raised by inquiring into the sending, whether it concerns the two animals according to Matthew or the one colt according to Mark. For the Lord was none other than the one of whom the apostle says: »but for us there is one Lord, Jesus

Christ, through whom are all things,« to whom, that no one of those who said, »why are you loosing the colt?« or whatever else the herders might say, was going to object at all, is clear; for it is as though they would not object to him that the Savior said, »and if anyone says anything to you, you shall say that the Lord has need of them,« or, »if anyone says to you, 'why are you loosing

the colt: "if ever anyone says that its master has need of it." And according to Luke as well: "if someone," he says, "asks you, Why are you untying it? you shall say this: that its master has need of it." And you should inquire whether, after the Savior's entry into Jerusalem and his having mounted upon these animals, or upon it, some mission to some

necessary work was about to take place with respect to that place, so that the donkey and the colt might do some work in keeping with what is passed over in silence — not plainly manifested, yet obscurely indicated. I derive an idea of this sort by attending to the order of the beatitudes in the Gospel according to Matthew. Among these, after "blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of the

heavens," it is written next, "fortunate are the gentle in spirit, since it is the earth they will receive as inheritance." Observe in these words that, first, of those pronounced blessed, "the kingdom" belongs to "the heavens"; and second, "the earth shall be given them as an inheritance" — not so as to remain upon it for the whole age. For having been comforted, and, on account of having hungered and thirsted for righteousness, having been satisfied with it, and having received mercy, and having seen

God, and having been called his sons, they are restored again to the kingdom of the heavens. But if the donkey and the colt, upon which the Savior mounts, happen to be those who are given back, do not stumble at the saying that compares to irrational, burden-bearing animals those who carry Jesus mounted upon them. For perhaps the prophet too, understanding something of this sort, said that he had become like a beast — not simply so, but

before God, or before Christ, in accordance with "I too became like a beast before you." For in relation to the self-subsistent Word and to God's majesty, we are like beasts — not we alone, but also those far more rational and wiser than we. And in the same way, in relation to the rational power of the Shepherd, we are his sheep, in that the reason present in human beings, even in the most perfect of them, when set beside the self-subsistent Word, is at

a greater distance from him than the distance a donkey's or a colt's soul — or a sheep's — has from a human being. And perhaps, while Jesus is being carried up, mounted, into Jerusalem, the beast of burden, or the colt, is of this sort; but once they have arrived there, they no longer remain a beast of burden or a colt, but are sent away, having been transformed, and having been benefited, and having partaken

of the divinity of the Word and the surpassing greatness of knowledge, so that, being deemed worthy of the glory of God, they are dispatched back toward the region out of which they had first been loosed — the Lord having transformed them and having given them a reward for having borne him, such a transformation, that they are even sent back to their former place, but no longer for the works they did before. For our

Lord, who loves mankind, having once received them, and having honored them both by loosing them from their bonds and by his own being carried upon them, was not going to send them back again to bonds, or to lesser works than the work they had done in receiving upon their backs the Son of God. And it was fitting that at such a mystery, and at what is said along with it, there should be great rejoicing, and that the fruit of joy should be intensified

to proclaim to the daughter of God, Zion, and her daughter Jerusalem; for there was coming to her “the righteous and saving king,” <and not simply “saving”> but <“righteous and saving,” that is,> along with keeping to being righteous and saving with righteousness, and preparing for salvation those who are being saved. And he himself was coming to Zion and Jerusalem “meek and mounted

upon a beast of burden and a young colt,” as we have rendered it) watching over Israel by destroying “chariots out of Ephraim,” which happen to be like the chariots of Pharaoh, when “he cast the chariots of Pharaoh and his host into the sea.” And he was coming also destroying “the horse,” the animal of war, from Jerusalem, so that he might make peace for Israel by turning back his lost sheep, and peace also for

Jerusalem, by bringing back her children who had fallen away. And how was it not bound to be a matter of great joy that the righteous and saving and gentle king should come in this way into Jerusalem, when every “bow of war” was about to be destroyed, so that “sinners” might no longer stretch their bows nor prepare arrows for the quiver, to shoot down in the moonless dark those who are upright in heart? And there was then to be

both multitude and peace,” from the believing and saved “nations,” with the Savior as ruler, as it says, “from sea unto sea, and from the river,” ruling too over the “outlets of the rivers of the earth” as they make their courses and water most of it. But whoever wishes to understand more simply, concerning <the sojourn among the Jews> in which the Savior dwelt, the phrase “daughter of Zion” and “daughter of Jerusalem,” will say that the word indeed commands rejoicing

to the daughter of Zion and proclaiming to the daughter of Jerusalem; but if some disbelieved, neither doing what was worthy of rejoicing nor heeding the command about proclaiming, they themselves became responsible for suffering what they have suffered, so that it is said to them: “The word of God had to be announced to you first; but since you judge yourselves unworthy, behold, we are turning to the—” it is necessary

also to know this, that upon coming across five editions of Zechariah we found in the Seventy and in Aquila the reading “he himself meek and mounted upon a beast of burden and a young colt,” or “upon a donkey and a colt, the son of she-donkeys,” but in Theodotion: “he himself giving heed and mounted upon a donkey and a colt, the son of a donkey,” but in Symmachus: “he himself poor and mounted upon

a donkey and a colt, the son of a she-donkey,” and in the fifth edition: “he himself poor and mounted upon a beast of burden and a colt, the son of donkeys,” and one can indeed apply these readings to the history of the Gospel passage under examination, since it was meek and heedful and poor that the Savior came into Jerusalem; for “he became poor, though he was rich, so that” those who hear him,

who heeds us, might become rich by his “poverty.” Let us look at Bethphage according to Matthew, Bethany according to Mark, and Bethphage and Bethany according to Luke. These places were by the mountain called “of Olives.” We say that Bethphage is interpreted “OF JAWS” (which was a district belonging to the priests), and Bethany “HOUSE OF OBEDIENCE.” Concerning the house

...of obedience, then, is the thing being loosed, or the things being loosed, led so that Jesus might mount upon them from there, or to the house of the jawbone, concerning which one can speak, taking occasion also from Judges, in which there is a spring called "of the jawbone," from which Samson, being thirsty, drank — or perhaps because to the one who strikes on the jawbone one must offer the other also,

Bethphage was a symbol of the patience of those being saved, whence Jesus mounted upon the animals loosed by the disciples according to Jesus' command. And the Mount of Olives is the church, whose members are said to bear fruit, being fine olive trees: "But I am like a fruitful olive tree in the house of God"; and those who are beginning and being introduced

among them are like newly planted olive shoots around the table of Christ, being his little children and "sons." But if we must also give attention to the two disciples whom Jesus sent for the tethered donkey and the colt with her, so that, having loosed them, they might bring them to him, it must be said — perhaps not unreasonably — that the two disciples are, in a sense, Peter and Paul, giving each other the right hand of "fellowship,"

so that Peter might be assigned to the circumcision in relation to the beast of burden, the people who had come to be under the yoke of the law, while Paul was assigned to the nations in relation to the young and untamed colt. And both — I mean the beast of burden and the colt — were before Jesus in a village, not a city, where they had been tethered. But the disciples of Jesus loose and

lead both animals to Jesus. Bringing the discussion back further to the two disciples, one might say that there is one order of those who minister to those of the circumcision, and another for those from the nations; yet there is fellowship in their works, since they loose what has been commanded by Jesus to be loosed. And as they loose them, if anyone says to them, "Why are you loosing the colt?",

whatever the case, he speaks concerning both: we proclaim that their Lord has need of them, of those previously bound. He has need of them in order to mount them once they have been loosed from their sins and have received forgiveness of them; for upon those still bound and constricted by the chains of their own sins, Jesus does not sit. According to Mark and Luke, however, the colt is bound, "on which no man

has ever sat" — for nothing rational, in a human manner, had ever before been done to the colt from the nations either. And this colt, on which no rational being had previously been seated, had the good fortune that God, the Word, the Son of God, should sit upon it, so that, being led by him as he held the reins, it might arrive at the Jerusalem of God. So much, then, have we seen concerning this passage for the present; but

whoever is able and has room for a greater grace concerning this passage, let him say something greater and better, and let him rather be heard by those who thirst for the clarity of the gospel. "So the disciples set out and did just as Jesus had directed them, bringing the donkey and the colt," and so on, down to "the one from Nazareth of Galilee." Mark, however, renders the passage thus:

he set forth: “and going away they found a colt bound outside by the door, at the corner of the street, and they loosed it” and so on down to “Blessed is the coming kingdom of our father David; peace in the highest.” And Luke also says something similar: “And those who were sent went away and found, just as he had told them, the colt standing” and so on down to

“if these keep silent, the stones will cry out.” Following what has been given concerning the two disciples sent to loose the tethered donkey and the colt with her, and everything said on this subject, we will also relate what is set down, in which it is said that the two disciples, having gone and done what had been commanded them by the Savior,

brought to him the donkey and the colt; and they did not leave them bare, but placed an adornment on them in the form of garments, procuring for them a becoming appearance, having decked the donkey that had been loosed by her and the colt with her in the very garments by which they themselves also were adorned and covered—and] so that, the donkey and the colt having been adorned with the garments of the teaching disciples, the Word of God might mount, and settle, and

be enthroned upon it, becoming alone the one seated above and the charioteer of those who had been loosed and were bearing him. But it is upon the garments laid by the teaching disciples upon the donkey and the colt that Jesus sits down, since each one had to contribute something to Christ, the meek king mounted upon a beast of burden and a young colt *** <And the very great crowd spread their own garments in the

way, and others struck off branches from the trees and spread them in the way.> Indeed it was a very great crowd that was entering Jerusalem together with Jesus, and these showed the fruit of their acceptance of the Savior by spreading their own garments beneath him, and whatever adornment and covering they had, for him who was seated upon the donkey and the colt. In the way, then, along

which he led the donkey and the colt toward Jerusalem, the very great crowd spread their own garments, so that with feet pure of earth and earthly things, and having no dust whatever, the donkey and the colt might tread upon Jerusalem. And a third order, distinct from the two disciples and the very great crowd that spread their garments in

the way, is now enumerated; for others procured a certain beauty for the way by which Jesus traveled toward Jerusalem, borne by those already mentioned; and the beauty consisted of branches cut from trees and strewn on either side of the spread garments—unless perhaps this was a fourth order. For the disciples who loosed the animals were one group, and the donkey and the colt with her another,

and third the very great crowd, and fourth those who were cutting the branches from the trees and strewing them in the way. But consider from these that also a fifth and sixth order are being enumerated, namely those going before Jesus and those following him. And you will say that those going before were, from among those before his coming, of the people, perhaps the righteous

...and of the prophets; and those following are the ones from among those who, after his coming, follow the word and accompany him, whether they are righteous ones or even apostles of Christ. Yet those going before were not saying different things from those following; for all of them cried out together, as it were a chorus singing in unison and in harmony, and they spoke, hymning also the human nature of the Savior in the "Hosanna" to the

Son of David, and his second coming in "Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord," and the restoration into the holy places in "Hosanna in the highest." Now when these three acclamations were being spoken by the harmonious voice of those going before and those following Jesus, he himself was entering into the true Jerusalem; and the heavenly powers, astonished,

who are said to be the whole city, kept saying, "Who is this?" — corresponding to what was prophesied in Psalm twenty-three concerning the ascension of the Savior and the astonishment of the heavenly powers, astonished at the common spectacle of his bodily vehicle. It runs thus in the Psalm: "Lift up your gates, O rulers, and be lifted up, everlasting gates, and the

King of glory shall come in," and so on. And in Isaiah too something similar is prophesied concerning the ascent of the Savior after the dispensation; for it is written: "Who is this who comes from Edom, the redness of his garments from Bosor — this one beautiful in his robe?" And you yourself will be able, by reading through the whole passage, to observe what the astonished powers say at

the ascent of the body of salvation, and what is answered to them. Now I have set these things down because I wished to preserve the sequence of the tropological reading of the scripture, namely that once he had gone into Jerusalem the entire city was shaken, saying, "Who is this?" And after this it is written next that many were saying, "This is Jesus the prophet, the one from Nazareth of Galilee," acknowledging the one

prophesied, that "he shall be called a Nazorean" — the one properly always devoted to God. But let what belongs to this passage, according to this narrative, be marked off as a boundary, and let the things that follow be made the beginning of a different section, so that no one is compelled (by joining the narrative about those things to what precedes) to inquire about certain people being cast out of the temple of God, who are rebuked as having made the "house of prayer"

a "den of robbers." I do not know, however, whether, even if one should force it, one can save the whole sequence of what follows in agreement with "Rejoice greatly, daughter Zion." After this let us examine also what sense "Hosanna to David's Son; blessed is the one who comes in the Lord's name; hosanna in the highest heights" carries. Now clearly "Blessed is he who

comes in the name of the Lord" stands, in these very words, in the psalm before the greatest psalm, called in some copies the hundred and seventeenth; and it seems to me that what stands in place of "O Lord, save now," placed before "Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord," is set out in Hebrew fashion in "Hosanna to the Son of David"; and indeed so the Hebrew word had it.

ANNA ADONAI OEIANNA. ANNA ALONAI ASLIANNA, BAROUCH ABBA BSAIM ALO— it seems to me that these words, being continually copied out by Greeks who did not know the language, have become garbled in the manuscripts that contain them at this point, deriving from the psalm mentioned above. But if you wish to learn the precise sense of the wording, hear how Aquila rendered it: "O Lord, save now"; "O Lord,

prosper now"; "blessed is the one who comes in the Lord's name." But let us return to summarizing the matter at this point and say that it was either Paul and Peter, or two other kinds of teachers, who, having loosed from their bonds, in accordance with Jesus' command, both the circumcised and the uncircumcised alike, adorned them and made them fit to carry

the word as it went up into Jerusalem. And as for the rest, according to one account it will run thus, but according to another it always stands that ... of those who received Jesus, spreading the road before him with their own garments and adorning it with branches, both going ahead and following after. And in yet another way, each person, through what has already been done, goes before

Jesus, while through what is yet to be done he follows after him — and this is what is recorded. On these points we ourselves have seen this much; let him who surpasses us see and teach more. Still, in one of our comments on the Gospel according to John we examined these matters to some extent as well, when it was proposed to give an account of "on the next day, then, the great crowd that had come to

the feast" and what follows. "And Jesus entered the temple of God and cast out all who were selling and buying in the temple," and what follows at this point — this the other three evangelists likewise set forth, and it is not the business of the present occasion to explain their difference from one another; it will suffice for us to clarify, so far as we are able, what stands in the gospel now under examination

As for the four evangelists, since they have recorded the matter at this point, we have examined more fully, so far as we were able, when dictating our comments on the Gospel according to John, and have clarified as best we could the words "and he found in the temple those selling oxen and sheep and doves" and what follows. There we were establishing that this was no lesser a display

of Jesus' extraordinary powers than his other deeds, and we were setting forth the point that, though he was reputed to be a carpenter's son, he exercised such boldness and authority — casting out at a festal gathering, from the temple, those we have mentioned — of a kind that not even the leader of the nation could easily have accomplished with the same facility as Jesus did what he did. And we gave a tropological interpretation, serving the wording as far as we were able to follow John's intent. But since now too

the sequence of our task demands that we speak, according to Matthew's wording, about the matters set out here, let us call upon the Father of wisdom and see whether we are able to say anything worthy about Jesus' bold action, with respect to this passage. And first it must be said what the temple of God is, which God himself, acknowledging it, said through the prophet: "My house is a house of prayer

...shall be called. Now, corresponding to the circumcision according to the flesh and to the bodily feasts and sacrifices of the law, the structure built of insensate stones was considered to be a temple of God — built first by Solomon and rebuilt again by Ezra, though after the dispensation of the Savior it was torn down by the Romans. And that house was supposed to be a house of prayer, and now that it has been torn down, it is necessary that the Jews,

as no longer having a house of prayer, say that they no longer have the special visitation of God, which they thought they possessed by praying in the house of prayer, nor the carrying-out of the worship prescribed by the law. And let our Savior — who also made symbols of his own spiritual acts — be understood to have physically driven out from that place those who sold and those who bought, and to have overturned the tables

of the currency-dealers, and the benches belonging to those who sold doves, and to have proclaimed the words laid out for the turning of the people then living, since instead of the solemn gathering-feast kept in God's name, they gave themselves over to buying and selling — not in the fitting place where buying and selling ought to occur, but within the temple, where those assembling should rather have prayed as though in a house of prayer,

but instead did the opposite of prayer in it, as in a house of commerce, selling and buying and exchanging money and sitting on seats in order to sell doves. And let our Jesus be understood to have done away with the unseemliness of what was then happening among the Jews, rebuking those who, instead of keeping festival according to the law, were engaged in trade and bodily indulgence. And now too I think that a temple built of

living stones is the church, and that there are in it some who serve not as in the church of the Living One but "according to the flesh," who indeed make the house of prayer, built of living stones, into a den of robbers through their own wickedness. For whoever considers what is sinned in certain churches by such Christians as suppose "godliness"

to be "the gain" of others, and though it is necessary to live "from the gospel" alone, not doing this, but instead gathering wealth and much property — will he not say that so great a mystery of the church has become a den of robbers? So that Jesus might say, concerning those sinning in the living temple that he built, the saying from the Psalms which runs thus: "What profit is there in my blood,

in my going down into corruption?" And the saying from (as I think) Hosea, where the soul of Jesus, displeased with the life of those who sin and yet seem to be in the temple, says: "Woe is me, for I have become like one who gathers stubble at the harvest and like a gleaning at the vintage, there being no ear of grain to eat the first-fruits. Woe is me, O soul, for

the godly man has perished from the earth, and there is none upright among men." And if you stumble at the idea that Jesus says this, and, mourning over our failings, utters the words "Woe is me, O soul," examine alongside these the passage from the Gospel where it is written that when he saw Jerusalem "he wept over it, and said" — and all the more so, if indeed he reasonably wept over Jerusalem,

he would with more justification weep over the church, built indeed that it might be a house of prayer, but made through the shameful greed and self-indulgence of certain people (but would that this were not true also of the leaders of the people!) a den of robbers. But then Jesus entered the temple of God and cleansed it, casting out all who were selling and buying in the temple, and the tables

of the money-changers he overturned, along with the seats on which sat those who were selling doves. But now, insofar as they are not examined, those who gather together in Jesus Christ have in their synagogues people who sell and buy in the temple and do all the rest, and nowhere does Jesus appear to them, so as to cast them out and save the rest, or make even those

who were cast out come to a recognition of their sin and enter the temple, no longer selling and buying or doing the other things; but whenever he visits our sins, coming among us as one who loves us, so as to discipline and scourge us as sons in order that he may receive us, then the power of Jesus will enter as we are gathered together, together with the Holy Spirit, and having entered

it will cast out all who are selling and buying in the temple — selling, as it were disposing of whatever good thing they had, and buying in its place worthless things, and doing these things in the temple of God, that is, the church. But would that Jesus, entering the temple of the Father, the church, the house of prayer, would overturn the tables of the money-changers

and of those greedy for shameful gain and lovers of money, and of those who break the approved coins into many cheap pieces of no value, so that they harm those with whom they exchange money while not themselves using the money as they should. There are also others in the temple who sell and buy the doves of Christ and hand over the innocent as though they were doves — those who prayed and said, "Who

will give me wings like a dove, that I may fly away and be at rest?" — and, having been heard, are handed over to rulers to whom they ought not be. And I think the account concerning those who sell the doves fits those who hand over the churches to bishops or presbyters or deacons who are greedy for shameful gain, tyrannical, unlearned, and irreverent. This is why Matthew and Mark named "seats" only of those selling the doves

which they say were overturned by Jesus. Would that those who boast of sitting on the seat of Moses heard these things with the understanding befitting the divine scripture, and would stop selling whole churches of doves and handing them over to such leaders, concerning whom what is said by the Lord in Jeremiah might be spoken: "The leaders of my people have not

known me; they are foolish children and without understanding; they are wise to do evil, but to do good they have not known" — and what is said, I think, in Micah in this way: "The leaders of my people shall be cast out of their house of luxury." For if they had listened, they would not have sold the doves of Christ, but would have appointed as their rulers people who spared the doves and took thought for the

...of their salvation, and not looking around to see which dove appears plump enough to slaughter and feast upon. Jesus addresses those being driven out as buyers and sellers, and the currency-dealers and those selling doves, shaming them by the prophecies uttered as if from the Father's own person, in that this stands recorded: 'A house of prayer is what my house shall be named.' For nothing else ought to be...

...in God's assembly except the prayer belonging to every holy deed, prayer that summons God's oversight, being reckoned as prayer before God — in this sense it is possible to 'pray without ceasing.' But you, you men, through your own wickedness have turned the prayer-house into a robbers' cave. And it is possible to find, in many places, little by little, the matters of what passes for a church having wandered into such distortion...

...that the assembly gathered together in the name of Christ differs in nothing from a den of robbers, so that it might be said of them: ‘Because of us my name is continually blasphemed among the nations.’ But if it is necessary, having contended somewhat for the clarity of Scripture, to explain more carefully the three kinds of persons enumerated here, perhaps those among the people who occupy themselves with nothing in the world...

...but have their pursuits solely in selling and buying, and rarely persevere in prayers and in the works the divine word demands — these are the ones selling and buying in the temple of God. And those deacons who administer the church’s funds not rightly, but are forever handling them, not managing them well but heaping up...

...the supposed wealth and money, so that they may grow rich from what is given for the sake of the poor — these are the money-changers who have tables of money, which Jesus overturned. And the bishops and presbyters entrusted with the first seats among the people, who, as it were, sell off entire churches to those to whom they ought not, and set up as rulers those who ought not to be set up — these are the ones selling the doves, whose seats...

...Jesus overturned. Let each, then, of those who sit on ecclesiastical seats and love ‘the first seats in the synagogues’ take heed, lest he so sit on his own seat that Jesus, when he comes, overturns it as deserving to be overturned. But let each of those who, through their ministry, gather wealth for themselves and defraud the poor of money, upon grasping the passage set before us, no longer heap up upon the tables...

...silver, lest Jesus overturn them. But let those too who are constantly driven by worldly cares and anxieties into buying and selling take heed, lest Jesus, when he comes, cast them out of the temple, since the one who is cast out has no hope of entering again from the place out of which he was cast. And it occurs to me, as I search out the passage set before us, that Jesus may do these things also...

...at his second coming, or at the divine judgment that is expected. For entering into the whole temple of God — the entire church, the church that has stood in the name of Christ from the time it was established until the consummation of the age — whomever he finds occupied with selling and buying among those supposed to belong in the temple, as unworthy of the temple of God...

he will cast out. And whoever he finds setting up tables and becoming money-changers, he will expose, overturning their tables and showing by his word what sins they have committed regarding money. Then he will also overturn the seats (as we have explained) of those selling doves. But if someone has none of these three kinds and is found in the temple of God, let him take courage. For neither

will he be cast out by Jesus, nor will anything belonging to him be overturned, nor will he be branded a thief for turning the prayer-house into a robbers' cave - even as those will be chastised who through their own thievery and wrongdoing turned the prayer-house into a robbers' cave. Since, then, the narrative bearing on the literal meaning has been set out for us, and handed down twofold to the church, come let us next see whether it is also possible

also to understand the matters concerning the place in this way. Every rational nature is by nature no less a temple of God than the church, having been constructed so that it might hold the glory of God, concerning which it is written (in the second book of Chronicles and the third of Kingdoms) that it appeared in the temple after its building. This then, the temple of God by nature, the soul, we who sin have filled

with reckonings that buy and sell, and with other computations that weigh everything by reference to silver; and we too, sinning, have filled it with others buying and selling off whatever holy remainder had come to exist within our soul, which was the dove. Jesus therefore tells those sinning, filled with the reckonings of thieves, what stands recorded: "A house of prayer is what my house shall be named," yet you have turned it

a den of robbers. Jesus, then, drove out of the temple as robbers those who turned the house of prayer into a robbers' den. But those who share the outlook of the robbers said concerning Jesus: "Crucify, crucify him," and concerning the robber Barabbas: "Release to us Barabbas." For this reason, to this day the Jews do not have Jesus - for they have not believed in the

son of God - but they have with themselves, from the spiritual things "of wickedness," Barabbas the robber, already seized and shut up in prison, whom they thought worthy to have released in preference to themselves. For this reason Barabbas the robber rules over the unbelieving Jews. "And blind and lame came to him in the temple, and he healed them," and so on, down to "out of the mouth of infants and nursing babes you have prepared praise."

The matters of the text are clear. Following the anagogical readings already given, it must be said that in the temple of God, the house of prayer, the church, not all are seeing, nor (so to call them) - for there are some also blind, and others lame, among those gathered, who, from perceiving their own blindness

and lameness, and from knowing that it is the work of none other than God, and of the word of God, to heal them, come forward to him and are healed. After this it is written that the chief priests and the scribes, although indeed they saw the wonders that Jesus did, and heard the children glorifying the son of God in the temple, the church, were indignant, disdaining

of the children who were praising Jesus, and being indignant they say to the Savior, "Do you hear what these are saying?" And he, rebuking them, answered that, for so long a time have you been occupied with the divine scriptures, reading up to this very point, in order that you not despise the little ones and children in the church who praise me and my Father in the heavens, since out of the mouth of infants and

nursing babes you have prepared praise? Perhaps, then, just as according to the historical sense these chief priests and scribes are blameworthy, so too according to the higher sense there are certain blameworthy chief priests, who do not adorn the name of their office with their own life, nor are clothed in knowledge and truth; these, then, although they see the wonders of God, nonetheless despise those in the church who are

little ones and infants but who praise God and his Christ, and are indignant at their progress and accuse them before Jesus himself as though he were one who does not disapprove of sinners, and as though he were not listening nor keeping order, they say to him, "Do you hear what these are saying?" And we shall understand this yet more if we give attention to the way in which, often, toward those who are fervent in

spirit and are brought even before prisons on account of the unbelieving, and who despise every danger, with how much vigor they practice chastity and virginity — to put it in the language of ordinary people — the blameworthy chief priests rebuke them as being disorderly and bring accusations against them before Jesus, as though they themselves were acting more justly than such simple, earnest, and good children. But Jesus bears witness in favor of the children, while against the chief priests

he charges ignorance of the scriptures, by saying: "Have you never read that out of the mouth of infants and nursing babes you have prepared praise?" And whenever you see, in the church, those who, like Peter, "as newborn infants" long for "the reasonable milk without guile" and suck at it, being given drink by it, and moreover who praise God by their faith and by their life, observe that there is fulfilled in them the

"Out of the mouth of infants and nursing babes you have prepared praise." For God prepares praise for himself in such as these, on account of whom the Son, giving thanks to the Father, says: "I confess to you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that you have hidden these matters from the wise and the intelligent, and disclosed them instead to infants; yes, Father, for so it was well-pleasing to you," and so on. And,

leaving them, he went out of the city [as far as] to Bethany, and so on up to "and all things whatsoever you ask in prayer, believing, you shall receive." Leaving certain people behind, Jesus went out from the city of Jerusalem, from which, having gone out, he was in Bethany — leaving behind those who saw, namely the people's chief priests and scribes, "the wonders that he did, and the"

children crying out in the temple and saying, "Hosanna to the Son of David," who were nonetheless indignant at those who were praising Christ, and were for this reason shown to be convicted of not having understood, "Out of the mouth of infants and nursing babes you have prepared praise"? And since he left that Jerusalem behind and came to be outside the city, for this reason it fell, and "stone upon stone" began not

...to remain, but even to be torn down, until everything is dissolved. And he came to Bethany, THE HOUSE OF OBEDIENCE, the church, where he also lodged and rested, since he had nowhere in Jerusalem "to lay his head," seeing that such chief priests and scribes were among them. And when he had rested in Bethany, THE HOUSE OF OBEDIENCE, after the beginning of the church's being constituted...

...and after Christ had rested in it, then he goes back to the city which he had left and of which he had gone outside; and going back into it he is hungry, and seeing a single fig tree by the road, the tree of the people, he came to it, and found nothing edible on it but only an appearance of life; for there were leaves without fruit on the fig tree.

Then, since this fig tree was ensouled, on account of this he speaks to it as to something that hears, the curse fitting for it. And what was said was something like this: as long as the present age holds together, may there no longer be fruit in you. For this reason the synagogue of the Jews is fruitless, and this remains its condition until the completion of the age, until "the fullness of the nations comes in."

But the fig tree was withered while human life was still going on and while Jesus was still, as it were, living as a human being among them. And the disciples, seeing it, marveled, saying: How did the fig tree wither at once? For with the eyes of the soul they saw the mystery of the withered fig tree, and they marveled not so much at its having withered as at its having withered at once; for they saw

the fig tree dry, that people Israel. And when the disciples marveled at having seen the fig tree instantly withered, Jesus answered and said, confirming what was said with the "amen," that if you have faith and do not doubt, you will do not only what was done to the fig tree, but even if you say to this mountain: Be lifted up and thrown into the sea, it will happen.

Accordingly, the disciples who believe and do not doubt also do what was done to the fig tree, saying to it: "we were obliged to speak the word of God to you first; but since you judge yourselves not worthy, behold, we turn to the nations," and leaving it, they wither it, so that its vital power might pass over to those from the nations, and the spirit that formerly held that people together

might shift over to those from the nations. And besides making the disciples do what was done to the fig tree, the word of God promises them further that, if they have faith and do not doubt, then even to the mountain seen and pointed out by him, the opposing power that rises up against human beings, they will say: Be lifted up and thrown into the sea, and

it happens. For from each of those benefited by the disciples of Jesus the heavy mountain of evil, Satan, is lifted, he who has overcome it lifting it away, and it is thrown into the sea, the abyss, he who throws it casting it into the place of punishment worthy of it. And concerning this sea it is said in the psalms: "This is the sea, great and wide,..."

there ships pass through, small creatures along with great ones, this dragon which you formed to play with in it." And in another psalm: there "you crushed the heads of the dragons upon the water" — clearly meaning in the sea — and again: there "you crushed the head of the dragon, you gave him as food to the peoples, to the Ethiopians." So then, in the case of each of those

who are being fitted by the word for salvation, the mountain that is seen and pointed out by Jesus is lifted up and thrown into the sea, in accordance with the word of the disciple of Jesus who succeeds in his teaching, saying to the mountain within each of his hearers, "Be lifted up and be thrown into the sea," and saying this while having faith and not doubting, so that what is said may

actually happen. And everything whatsoever the one who has faith and does not doubt asks for in prayer, believing, he will receive. This is Bethany, where the friend of Jesus who was raised from the dead used to live. And everyone who obeys the word of God and holds within himself the word of obedience, established <and lodging there>, is a HOUSE of OBEDIENCE, that is, a Bethany,

in which Jesus lodges and finds rest. But since we must draw from what is said matters worthy of the wisdom of God from which the Gospels were written, observe whether, according to those who understand in a more simple way, the statement "having left them he went out of the city" is superfluous — for how could he have come to be outside the city without having left the earlier people with whom he was? But according to

those who listen to what is said with more understanding, he does not leave the earlier ones altogether when he comes to be among others; rather, he leaves behind the base and the sinful, while, remaining with the righteous, he also comes to be with others, after them and together with them. Indeed, even when lodged in Bethany, he does not leave Bethany when he leads back into the city; for he was both in Bethany and was leading back into the

city. And Jesus is always hungry, wishing to partake of the fruits of the <holy> spirit that are in the righteous, and his foods are — if I may call them so — the figs which, in its hunger, the love of the one who bears it eats, love being the first "fruit of the spirit," and also joy and peace and patience and the rest. And to the degree that we

bear fruit we shall not wither, but whenever he stands by and seeks such fruit to eat and we do not supply it, it will be said to us: "Let no fruit come from you ever again," for apart from the interpretation already given concerning the fig tree as representing the people, it is also possible to apply the word to each individual, who is a fig tree either withering or bearing fruit and living and being cultivated, so that it may bear more

fruit. Perhaps, then, just as in the case of the sowing "the sower went out to sow," and "some fell beside the road, and the birds of heaven came and devoured them," while others fell upon the rocks and others among "the thorns" and others upon "the good" and fertile earth, so too there are fig trees of different kinds. And if indeed

It is a fig tree on good and fertile earth, and bears “fruit,” and offers it to Jesus when he is hungry. But when it is “by the road,” like the one about which it is written, “and seeing one fig tree by the road,” it gives no fruit to Jesus when he comes; for he finds nothing on the fig tree “by the road” except leaves only.

For this reason he says to it, since it was “by the road” and had only leaves, giving the impression of being alive but without fruit, “let no fruit ever again come from you.” Now as long as he does not come upon some fig tree, and does not yet seek its fruit, but is patient, waiting to see whether the fig tree will somehow bear fruit, it is not withered. But when...

...when the hungry one stands over us <and seeks out> our fruits and we are found to have nothing but the mere profession of faith *** with no fruits accompanying it, we shall be withered at once, and shall have lost even the appearance of being faithful; and it is possible to find some such people who for a great many years have worn the name of faith and shown that they are alive, and yet are altogether dried up; whom

one can see, because they do not bear fruit, falling away entirely from the word and being withered. Here, then, the fig tree that has not given fruit to Jesus when he is hungry is withered; and another fig tree is ordered to be cut down, so that it not render the earth useless. Then the disciples, whenever they see someone withered after having shown a semblance of life, marvel, saying: how was the fig tree withered at once? But we shall understand this still more

if we apply the details of the passage point by point, considering in what way, in trials, Jesus seeks the fruits—for instance, in persecution, the confession and the martyrdom, and, when a woman is infatuated with someone, Joseph’s self-restraint and moderation, and thus, in each trial, the fruit that corresponds to it. But the one who has not prepared himself to give

fruit to Jesus when he is hungry and stands over him demanding the confession or the self-restraint is withered at once; for the one who has denied withers, and likewise also the one who has fornicated, even though, before the time of the trials, he displayed a living power and was, so to speak, clothed about with the leaves of the fig tree. And the disciples marvel at such people, how Jesus stood over them hungry and seeking the fruit,

and, not having found it, immediately “said” and “it happened,” and at once the fig tree not prepared to bear fruit was withered. And often someone who has been a fig tree for many years is not withered, but when Jesus stands over him in the time of trial and demands the fruit, and he has not given it to him, he is withered at once and has lost the fruit of so many years; and this happens because, according to the

word of the Savior: “to everyone who has, more will be given, and he will have abundance; but from the one who does not have, even what he seems to have will be taken away from him,” so that what he seems to have not be idle. And each of the disciples, if he has faith and does not doubt, does the same as the fig tree, and also what follows next upon it. And it is a task to show how Jesus

A disciple, seeking fruit on a fig tree and not finding it, says to it: ‘May fruit come from you no longer, forever,’ so that at once, upon that very word, the fig tree also withered. And consider also someone who professes the things of faith and imagines that he eats and drinks in the name of Jesus, and has taught Jesus in the broad streets

of his own soul. Then let a disciple come seeking in him the fruit of wisdom and reason, in keeping with his profession of teaching divine things, and seeking and searching him out by reason, let him find no fruit whatever; and therefore, exhibiting him to onlookers as empty of Christ, let him show by reason that it is no longer possible for any fruit ever to come from him,

since he has been damaged by his own conceit. Consider, then, whether the one who has faith and does not doubt does something rather like what Jesus did in the case of the fig tree. And it is indeed better that the deceptive fig tree, which is supposed to be alive yet bears no fruit, once convicted of being fruitless, should appear withered at the words of Jesus’ disciples, than that it should go on deceiving, by its supposed life and

by its pretense <of profession>, the ‘hearts’ of the innocent and easily deceived. So the deed done, concerning the withering fig tree, by both Jesus and his disciples proved good. And in every faithless and lawless person, I think, there lies a mountain, proportioned to his faithlessness and lawlessness, which is lifted up by the word of Jesus’ disciples and cast into the sea of

his punishment. And everything that Jesus’ disciples ask for in prayer, believing, they will receive, since as disciples they will ask for nothing improper, and since, obedient to their teacher, they will ask for nothing but what is great and heavenly; for Jesus said to his disciples: ‘Ask for the great things, and the small will be added to you; and ask for the heavenly things,

and the earthly will be added to you.’ Now Mark, recording the events at this place in a way that seems somewhat at variance with the saying, added — having made it so — that Jesus, ‘seeing from a distance a fig tree that had leaves, went to it’ as one expecting to find something on it; but ‘coming to it’ and finding nothing ‘but leaves’ (‘for it was not the season for figs’), ‘answering, he said’

to it: ‘let no one ever eat fruit from you again.’ For one might say: if it was not ‘the season for figs,’ how did Jesus go expecting to find something ‘on it,’ and how could he justly say to it, ‘let no one ever eat fruit from you again’? To this it will be said that the fruits of the

Spirit enumerated by the apostle — love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faith, gentleness, self-control — are at times rendered in their own proper season. But it is better that, when circumstances urge one toward the opposite of fruit-bearing, one should nonetheless be able, on account of the great benefit gained from reason, to give the fruits of the Spirit no less even then. What I mean is something like this: one of the fruits

...is love of the Spirit. Of this fruit there is a season in which it is not hard to render the fruit of being loved; and to love the one who loves you is fruit of the spirit, yet not in a season - if I may call it so - of 'figs.' But when someone provokes the believer toward hatred by deceiving him and plotting against him and being corrupted in character, so that he seems worthy

to be hated, the righteous man does not hate even such a person but, as a son 'of him who makes his sun rise on the evil and the good,' loves him even then, giving the fruit of love, as it were, in a season not of figs - he is blessed. You will understand the same concerning joy as well. For to bear the fruit of the Spirit that is joy

when nothing provokes one to grief and displeasure is not hard; but when circumstances provoke one to grief and despondency and displeasure, and yet one has advanced through the benefit that comes from the word to such a degree as to be well pleased even in what seems displeasing, and to rejoice in seasons of being dishonored and scourged, and simply to remember, in every circumstance of trial,

the command 'rejoice always' - such a person would be blessed, bearing the fruit of joy even in a season - if I may call it so - not of figs. It is not hard to do the same with the other fruits of the Spirit as well. For God wants the one who comes to his word to be better than human nature, and he demands of him things beyond the ordinary and, if I may call them so,

works of God rather than of man. Therefore he also says to all whom he calls to blessedness: 'I said, you are gods, and all of you sons of the Most High,' while reproaching those who do not wish to be deified and to become sons of the Most High he says: 'but you die like men'; for with every sin, when we are 'fleshly and walk according to man,' we accomplish nothing other than dying,

and it is plain that if we live 'according to the flesh,' we are going to 'die,' as the apostle taught. I have said these things also because of the phrase 'for it was not the season of figs.' Peter, according to Mark, seeing the fig tree 'withered from the roots,' said to the Savior: 'Look, the fig tree you cursed has withered'; for what does not bear

fruit for the word that seeks it is worthy of a curse from the word. At the end the passage contains an exhortation for the believer to receive; for we shall not receive otherwise unless we ask. Let, then, our disposition also be worthy of obtaining what we ask, and let our prayer, sent up with knowledge, be worthy of being granted, and let our requests be heavenly and great and worthy of being given by God.

← All of Origen: Commentaries & Homilies