Saint Matthew - Chap 3
 |
| A voice in the wilderness. J-J Tissot |
And in those days cometh John the Baptist preaching in the desert of Judea.
In those days, &c. This was in the fifteenth year of Tiberius, as S. Luke says, when John and Christ were about thirty years of age. Matthew passes at once from the childhood of Christ to His age of manhood, when He commenced His actual work of preaching and redemption, for which He had been sent by the Father into the world.
He sent John before Him to announce to the Jews that He was the Messiah, lest, if Christ should appear in Judæa abruptly, without one to point out who He was, or a witness worthy of credit, He should be despised of all.
Christ lived in obscurity, and exercised a workman’s craft with his father Joseph for nineteen years, to give to the world a memorable example of humility. He began to preach in his thirtieth year, that He might conform Himself to the customs and laws of the Jews. Amongst them it was not lawful for any one to execute the office of a doctor or a priest before his thirtieth year. Such is the Hebrew tradition, and the same thing may be gathered from 1 Chron. 23:3. Hence John began to preach in this same thirtieth year, but a little before Christ.
That Christ should be hid so long in the obscure depths of His humility S. Bernard admires when he exclaims (Serm. 1 de Epiph.), “O humility, virtue of Christ, how dost thou confound the pride of our vanity! Little enough do I know, or rather seem to myself to know, and yet I cannot know—impertinently and imprudently carrying and manifesting myself—ready to speak, swift to teach, slow to hear. And did Christ, when He kept silence for so long a time and hid Himself, did He fear vain glory? What could He fear from vain glory who is the True Glory of the Father? He did fear, indeed, but not for Himself. He feared for us that which He knew was to be feared by us. He took cautious heed for us, and so instructed us. He kept silence with His mouth, but taught by His deeds. And what He afterwards taught in words He at this time cried aloud by His example, ‘Learn of me, for I am meek and lowly in heart.’ ”
In the desert. Not in a cultivated and inhabited place. For Isaiah (40:3), prophesying concerning this desert of John, speaks of it as a wilderness. And this is plain from the circumstances. We behold John’s rough clothing of sackcloth of camel’s hair, his woodland food, the locusts and wild honey. The motive cause of this life was that, as a follower of Moses and Elias, and the precursor of Christ, in the desert, removed from the pollutions of men, he might converse with God and the angels, and might from them derive the power of strength and of the Spirit, and might acquire for himself the name and fame of sanctity, that all might give credit to him when he pointed out Christ, and, being pricked at his preaching, might repent. Whence the Fathers constantly call John the prince of monks and anchorites, as S. Jerome (Epist. 22 ad Eustoch.), S. Chrysostom, Theophylact, Cassian (Collat. 18. 6). Hence John, living in the desert an angelic life with the angels, was regarded as an angel by Malachi (chap. 3.) and by Christ Himself (Matt. 11:10): “This is he of whom it is written, Behold, I send mine angel before thy face, who shall prepare thy way before thee.” (Vulg.)
Symbolically, S. John preaching in the desert signified that the Gospel would be preached chiefly, not in Jerusalem and Judæa, but in the wilderness—i.e., the deserted multitudes of the Gentiles. So S. Jerome.
Tropologically, S. John, by his example, taught that the apostolic men and preachers who were about to be, would first retire from the tumult of men to have leisure in secret for prayer and meditation, that they might thereby drink, as it were, from heaven a mighty power of the Spirit, which they should afterwards pour forth upon their hearers. (See what I have said on Hosea 2:14: “I will lead her into the wilderness, and will speak to her heart.”—Vulg.) To this may be referred what S. Augustine says (Epist. 76): “He will not be a good clergyman who has not been a good monk.” Wherefore SS. Augustine, Martin, Chrysostom, Nazianzen, Basil, and many more were taken out of their monasteries into the ranks of the clergy, and, even against their will, promoted to the episcopate.
 |
| Charles Foster Kent [Public domain] |
Lastly, Nicephorus (lib. 1, c. 14) asserts that when John was a year and a half old he was taken by his mother into the desert. Cedrinus adds, that he was concealed in a certain cave, and that his mother died there, and that an angel then took care of the child. This cave was afterwards frequented by the hermits, as appears from John Moschus (Spiritual Meadow, c. 1), who says that the cave was situated near the Jordan, and that by chance an abbot, John, who was sick, turned into it, where he was healed by John the Baptist, to whom he promised that he would dwell in the cave.
When the Baptist appeared to the abbot, he said to him, “I am John the Baptist, and I bid thee that thou depart not from hence, for this narrow cave is greater than Mount Sinai, for into it our Lord Jesus Christ often entered when He visited me. Promise me therefore to dwell here, and I will restore thee to health.” “When the old man heard this, he willingly promised to dwell in the cave; and forthwith he was healed; and he abode there unto his life’s end. Moreover, he made that cave a church, and gathered brethren together there. And the name of the place was called Sapsas.”
[2] et dicens : Poenitentiam agite[1] : appropinquavit enim regnum caelorum.[2]
And saying: Do penance:[1] for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.[2]
[1] Saying, Repent ye, &c. John went into the desert, and there did penance, and led an austere life that he might be a fitting preacher of repentance. S. Gregory Nazianzen strove to imitate John when he says, “The office, or rather the service of John, I strive to undertake, and though I am not the Forerunner, yet I come from the desert.” For Gregory went apart with S. Basil into the wilderness of Pontus, and there led a hard life, and then, being filled with the Spirit, he came forth like another Baptist to preach repentance. This was the theme, this the sum of the Baptist’s preaching, Repent; because well-nigh all were grievous sinners, living in vices and lusts, therefore repentance was necessary, that they might receive the grace and righteousness of Christ.
Moreover, repentance is not only amendment of manners, and the beginning of a new life, as the heretics say, but it is a detestation, chastisement, and destruction of the old sinful life, for the new life cannot effectually be begun, unless the old life be cast away. Whence the Interlinear Gloss thus expounds: “Let every man punish the evils of his former life, because salvation shall come nigh, and the opportunity of returning thither from whence we have fallen.” S. Augustine (lib. de Pœniten.) says, “He cannot begin the new life who does not repent of the old.” “To repent is to weep over sins past, and not to commit what has been wept over. He who truly repents, chastises in himself his past errors, and lifts up his mind to heavenly things. And this virtue is born of holy fear, and is called pœnitentia, penance, from the Latin puniendo, punishing.”—Gloss.
Whence Ausonius sings of penitence:
“A goddess I, who punishment exact of things amiss,
Metanœa I, from penitence I wiss.”
S. Gregory (Hom. 34, in Evangel.) says, “Penitence is the bewailing past sins, and the abstaining from doing that which you have bewailed.” The Hebrew הנחם hinnachem has the same meaning; viz., to repent and grieve over the past. Whence God, when He saw the men whom He had created rushing into wickedness, repented Him that He had made man upon the earth, and it grieved Him at His heart; and He said, “I will destroy man, whom I have created, from the face of the earth.” Wherefore the Hebrew Gospel, attributed to S. Matthew by Munster, has, less fully, instead of hinnachem and nechumim, i.e., “to repent,” and “repentance,” teschuba, i.e., “conversion,” or schuba, that is, “be converted to the Lord;” for repentance is not merely turning to God, but turning away from sin; also grief, compunction, and satisfaction, as the Apostle teaches (2 Cor. 7:10), and Joel (2:12), “Turn unto me with all your heart, and with weeping and fasting and mourning.” Whence it is plain that repentance must include three duties—sorrow, a new life, and chastisement of sins—in order to please God.
[2] For the kingdom of heaven, &c. In which God reigns in the faithful, by grace in this life, and in the life to come by glory; and makes them kings and partakers of His eternal kingdom. “John first preached the kingdom of heaven,” says the Gloss, “which the Jews had never heard of,” says S. Chrysostom. And S. Jerome says, “John the Baptist first preaches the kingdom of heaven, that the precursor of the Lord might be honoured with this privilege.” Observe, the Jews expected that their kingdom, under King Messiah, would be rich and splendid in their land, such as it was under Solomon. S. John, therefore, and after him Christ and the Apostles, begin their preaching from the kingdom of Messiah, but a kingdom heavenly, not earthly; as though to say, “Now is the time of heaven being opened, which Christ shall shortly open unto you by His death. Repent ye, therefore, for your sins past, correct your lives, be changed for the better, that ye may be meet to be taken by Him into His kingdom. Behold, now is the accepted time foretold by Isaiah, now is the day of salvation, the day when heaven, which has been shut for 4,000 years, is opened, and they who will may enter into it, if indeed they will walk in the path which Christ has pointed out, the path of faith, hope, and charity, and a heavenly life, and enter into the spiritual kingdom of the Church militant, which shall have its joyful consummation in the Church triumphant.” Thus Theophylact and Jansen. Franc. Lucas says, “The kingdom of heaven is the dominion of Christ, both over the holy angels and the company of those men whose rightly ordered life on earth is obedient to God ruling from heaven.”
[3] Hic est enim, qui dictus est per Isaiam prophetam dicentem : Vox clamantis in deserto : Parate viam Domini : rectas facite semitas ejus.
For this is he that was spoken of by Isaias the prophet, saying: A voice of one crying in the desert, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make straight his paths.
For this is he, &c. I have commented at length upon this in Isaiah 40:6, and will not here repeat.
S. John was the voice of God, 1. Announcing that Christ was about to come. 2. Pointing out that He was now born, and inviting men to repent and prepare for the grace of Christ. “By the expression, crying, the strength of his preaching is denoted,” says Raban. Aptly says Bede, “God, indeed, cried by means of others, but He Himself is the only Voice, because He shows the present Word.” “Prepare therefore the way of the Lord,” is the same as, “Repent ye;” as though “Arouse ye, O Jews, and ye, O inhabitants of the world, as many as ye be; Christ is about to come, and to be installed as Messiah, your King. Make smooth your ways, as is wont to be done for monarchs; take away all things which can offend or dishonour Him, that Christ may be freely and with longing received by all; that, indeed, each may prepare their hearts and minds, by thorough repentance, for the faith and grace of Christ and every kind of holiness.”
[4] Ipse autem Joannes habebat vestimentum de pilis camelorum,[1] et zonam pelliceam circa lumbos suos[2] : esca autem ejus erat locustae, et mel silvestre.[3]
And the same John had his garment of camels' hair,[1] and a leathern girdle about his loins:[2] and his meat was locusts and wild honey.[3]
[1] The same John, &c. Not the flowing robe, commonly called camelots, as Chrytræus, and those luxurious innovators, who magnificently adorn themselves in the pulpits like the suitors of Penelope. For Christ commends John for the roughness of his clothing. Matt. 11:8.) John fled from the halls of Herod, and retired into the desert, and preferred a hovel to a palace. His garment was cheap, rugged, hairy, and made of sackcloth. “Yea,” say S. Chrysostom and others, “the clothing of his body spoke of the virtue of his soul.” Eusebius of Emissa (Hom. 1 de Joan. Bapt.) says that John’s raiment was made of camel-hair sackcloth, since Syria abounds in camels. By this means he tamed his flesh in his youth, like as S. Paul says, “I chastise my body, and bring it under servitude, lest after I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway.” (1 Cor. 9, Vulg.) For sackcloth, by its hairs and pointed bristles, pricking the flesh all over as with little needles, mortifies it greatly, and restrains its lusts, as they know who have made trial of it. Hence S. Ægidius, one of the first companions of S. Francis, being asked why S. John, who had not sinned, led so austere a life, and did penance, replied, “As flesh is seasoned with salt, that it may not corrupt, so was the body of the Baptist seasoned with penance.” “Penance,” as S. Cyprian says (Serm. de ratione Circumcisionis), “is that penetrating salt which dries up the rankling putrescences of the flesh.” Hence, SS. Hilarion, Anthony, Paul, Pachomius, and the rest of the Anchorites, according to the testimony of S. Jerome and others, were clothed in hair shirts, or sackcloth, such as the Capuchins wear now, and such as was worn by Elijah, Elisha, and the other prophets, as I have shown in my Preface to the Minor Prophets. In truth, God made for Adam not fine linen or woollen tunics, but coats of skin, and rough ones, that by them, as by a hair shirt, he might tame his flesh and do penance for his sin, as I have shown in Genesis. That is a wise saying of Augustus Cæsar in Suetonius, “Soft and splendid clothing is the banner of pride and a seed plot of luxury.” S. Ephrem concludes his life of S. Abraham the hermit thus, “In all the fifty years of his abstinence he never changed the hair shirt which was his clothing.” S. Clare wore for twenty-eight years, even in sickness, a hair shirt made of hogs’ bristles. When S. Josaphat exchanged a kingdom for the desert, he wore a hair shirt next his skin, under his clothes. (See Damas., in Histor. c. 37.) Theodoret says that the emperor, wishing to see S. Abraham the hermit, called him to him, and when he came received him with a salutation, and regarded his rough sackcloth as of more excellence than his own purple. When S. William, Duke of Aquitaine, was converted by S. Bernard, he tamed his flesh with an iron coat of mail, and armed it against temptation. S. Dominic did the same, and was, for that reason, surnamed Loricatus (coated with mail). S. Martin, as Sulpitius testifies, was of opinion that it becomes a Christian to die on ashes; wherefore, he himself, making his bed on ashes, and clothed in sackcloth, so died. SS. Anselm, Charles Borromœo, and many others did the same.
[2] And a leathern girdle, &c. The prophets—indeed, all the Jews and Syrians—wore long robes; to prevent these flowing down to the ground and impeding their walking, they made use of girdles. Thus they were more ready for a journey, and more strong for work. But John had a girdle of skin about his loins, that it might press his sackcloth more closely to his body, and so the more mortify his flesh and subdue it to the Spirit. For in the loins is the origin of lust. S. John was in this a follower of Elias, whose eulogium is that “he was a hairy man, and girt about the loins with a girdle of skin.” It is a common saying, “A girded garment, a girded mind; an ungirded garment, an ungirded mind.” As it is said in Ecclus. 19:27, “A man’s clothing, and excessive laughter and gait, shew what he is.” (See S. Chrysostom in loc.) And Cassian (lib. i. de Habitu Monach.) thus begins, “So must a monk needs walk as a soldier of Christ, always ready for battle, with his loins alway girded.”
[3] His meat, &c. For locusts the Greek has ἀκρίδες, which Beza erroneously understands to mean wild pears, for they are not called ἀκρίδες, but ἀχράδες. Ἀχρας is a wild pear-tree, a species of thorn. (See Columella, lib. 10.)
A second opinion of certain heretics mentioned by S. Epiphanius, Hæres. 30, is also wrong. By ἀκρίδες they understood ἐγκρίδες, or sweetmeats made of oil and honey.
Thirdly, certain innovators take ἀκρίδες to mean sea-crabs; but these are not called ἀκρίδες, but ἀχαρίδες, or καρίδες in Athenæus. But where, I ask, could John procure crabs in the desert? Besides, crabs, as crawling on the ground, were forbidden to the Jews.
Fourthly, some by ἀκρίδες translate herbs, or the tops of trees and leaves. The Ethiopian has, His food was arant anvota, the tops of herbs with wild honey, or dipped in honey.
But I say ἀκρίδες are locusts; so the Vulgate, Syriac, and Arabic. The Egyptian translates grasshoppers, but it means locusts, which chirp like grasshoppers. And both are so called because they feed upon τὰ ἀκρὰ, i.e. the tops of ears of corn and plants. So Theocritus, and the Lexicons, passim. Whence Origen, Hilary, Ambrose, Chrysostom, Augustine, understand by the word a kind of leaping insect, which is frequently eaten by the Ethiopians, Libyans, Parthians and other Orientals. (See Pliny, lib. 11, c. 29, and lib. 6, c. 30.) Hence S. Jerome (lib. 2 contra Jovin.) says, “Because clouds of locusts are found throughout the vast solitudes of the burning deserts, they are used as food; and this was what John the Baptist ate.” So, too, the locust, because it leaps, was counted a clean animal, and was allowed by God to be eaten by the Israelites. (Levit. 11)
Moreover, the ancients were wont to eat locusts, either sodden or roasted; and when dried in the sun, or salted and smoked, they would keep for a year.
Nothing is here said of John’s drink, for it is certain that he drank water only. Indeed there was nothing else to be had in the desert. So the angel said of him, “He shall drink neither wine nor strong drink.”
[3] Wild honey. What sort of honey was this? First, Rabanus is of opinion that it was the white and tender leaves of trees, which, when rubbed in the hands, give out a kind of honeyed flavour.
2. Others think that this honey was a moisture collected from the leaves of trees.
3. Suidas thinks it was the gum collected from trees and shrubs, which is called manna.
4. And rightly, S. Chrysostom, Theophylact, Isidore of Pelusium, believe that it was wild honey, made by wild bees, which they store in hollow trees, and which has a somewhat bitter and disagreeable flavour. The Ethiopic version has here, sedenæ, which means a particular kind of honey, sweeter and more wholesome than the common honey. It is made by a kind of bee, less than the common bee, about the size of a fly.
Saint Mark - Chap 1
The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God.
[2] Sicut scriptum est in Isaia propheta : Ecce ego mitto angelum meum ante faciem tuam, qui praeparabit viam tuam ante te.
As it is written in Isaias the prophet: Behold I send my angel before thy face, who shall prepare the way before thee.
[3] Vox clamantis in deserto : Parate viam Domini, rectas facite semitas ejus.
A voice of one crying in the desert: Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make straight his paths.
Observe, Matthew and John commence their Gospels from Christ Himself—John from the divine, Matthew from the human generation of Christ. Mark and Luke begin with John the Baptist—Luke from his nativity, Mark from his preaching.
As it is written in Isaias the prophet, Behold, I send, my angel before Thy face, who shall prepare the way before Thee. A voice of one crying in the desert, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make straight His paths. The former citation in the 2nd verse is from Mal. 3:1. The latter is from Isa. 45:3. Wherefore the Greek has, it is written in the prophets. But the Vulgate and some Greek copies, also the Syriac and Arabic, have as above. And S. Jerome says that this was formerly the reading of the Greek (lib. de Opt. Gen. Interpret. Scrip.).
You will ask, “Why does Mark only cite Isaias and not Malachi?” I answer, because the prophecy of Isaias is of greatest importance in this place, for the voice of John crying in the desert, Do penance, &c., was the beginning of the Gospel. But inasmuch as Malachi shows that John was not sent by man, but by God, to utter these words, therefore Mark prefixes the words of Malachi to arouse the attention of the reader to receive and venerate the voice of John. Besides, Malachi in reality says the same as Isaias. For the angel sent by God to prepare the way of Christ was none other than John himself, crying, and preaching repentance, by which the hearts of men must be prepared for the preaching and grace of Christ. This is therefore, as it were, one and the same oracle of two prophets, uttered concerning one and the same John, but in different words, so that they mutually confirm and explain one another. This, then, is the reason why Mark in this place, and the other Evangelists and Apostles, when they cite two prophets, or two or more sentences of the same or different books of the Old Testament, quote them as one and the same testimony. This is plain from 1 Pet 2:7, compared with Ps. 118:22 and Isa. 8:14. Also 1 Cor. 15:54, compared with Isa. 25:8 and Hos. 13:14. The reason, I say, is, because one sentence confirms and explains the other, so that they are in truth not two, but one sentence.
Saint Luke - Chap 3
Under the high priests Annas and Caiphas; the word of the Lord was made unto John, the son of Zachary, in the desert.
[3] Et venit in omnem regionem Jordanis, praedicans baptismum poenitentiae in remissionem peccatorum,
And he came into all the country about the Jordan, preaching the baptism of penance for the remission of sins;
[4] sicut scriptum est in libro sermonum Isaiae prophetae : Vox clamantis in deserto : Parate viam Domini; rectas facite semitas ejus :
As it was written in the book of the sayings of Isaias the prophet: A voice of one crying in the wilderness: Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make straight his paths.
Annas and Caiaphas being the high priests, the word of God came unto John the son of Zacharias in the wilderness.
S. Luke passes from the twelfth year of Christ to His thirtieth, when, after the manner of the Hebrews, He began to discharge His Office of Teacher and Redeemer and to preach publicly.
Annas and Caiaphas being the high priests. There was but one high priest of the Jews, as appears from Josephus and others; why then are there two mentioned here? My answer is that Caiaphas was the high priest, but there were many chief, or leading priests, as is clear from Matt. 26:3, and the chief priests are repeatedly mentioned in the Passion of Christ, as accusing Him before Pilate, condemning Him, mocking Him, but the most prominent of them were Caiaphas and Annas, the former as being high priest, the latter as father-in-law of Caiaphas, and as having been high priest, and having great influence among the Jews; indeed, Annas had five sons who were high priests after him (Josephus, “Antiquities,” bk. xx. ch. 8).
The word (that is, the command) of God came unto John the son of Zacharias. In the fifteenth year of Tiberius, God ordered John the Baptist to preach and baptize; ordered him by an interior inspiration, perhaps too by the voice of an angel.
Saint John - Chap 1
And this is the testimony of John, when the Jews sent from Jerusalem priests and Levites to him, to ask him: Who art thou?[1]
And this is the witness of John, &c. John the Baptist often bare witness to Jesus, that He was the Messias, or the Christ, both before and after His baptism. John the Evangelist therefore, omitting in this place the testimony which the Baptist bore to Jesus before His baptism, which had been related by the three other Evangelists, gives his testimony concerning Him after he had baptized Him. For this testimony was public, judicial, and most celebrated. It had been judicially demanded by the chief priests and magistrates, and had been received by them through the ambassadors whom they sent to John. The reason of this embassy was because the chief priests saw John leading in the desert an angelic life, preaching with great power, baptizing, and moving men to repentance, as none of the other prophets had done. The chief priests thought therefore that it was their duty to ask him who he was, especially because they knew that the sceptre had passed from Judah to Herod, and the seventy weeks of Daniel being completed, the coming of Messias must be nigh at hand. Wherefore, suspecting that John was the Messias, they ask him, Who art thou?
S. Chrysostom gives another reason—that they asked out of envy and hatred of Jesus, in order that they might show that Jesus was not the Messiah. They would have preferred to bestow the title upon John. They disliked John’s preferring Jesus to himself, and calling Him the Messias or Christ. But although there might be some envy mingled with it, the true reason was, as I have said, that it was the counsel of God so to exalt John, that the chief priests might be driven to ask him whether he were the Christ or not, that being asked he might authoritatively answer that which was the truth, namely, that not he, but Jesus, was the Messias, and that, being convicted by this testimony of John, they might be compelled either to receive Jesus as the Messias or to be without excuse.
[1] Who art thou? The chief priests appear tacitly at least to have inquired of John, whether he were the Christ or not; for John replies, I am not the Christ.
Moreover, they were aware that John was the son of the priest Zacharias, and therefore a priest himself. When therefore they say, Who art thou? they ask virtually. What office hast thou received from God? With what object has God sent thee to preach and baptize? For God was wont to commit greater offices to priests.
Tropologically, let every one often ask himself, Who art thou?
Firstly, as regards our substance. Listen to thy conscience making answer to thyself—the name of God my Creator is, I AM THAT I AM (Exod. 3). My name therefore as a creature is “I am that am not,” because I am nothing of myself, but out of my nothingness have been brought forth by God, and made a man. Wherefore my body and soul are not my own, but God’s, who has given them, or rather lent them, to me. As S. Francis was wont to say, “Who art Thou, Lord? Who am I? Thou art an abyss of wisdom and long-suffering, and all goodness. I am an abyss of ignorance, weakness, of all evil and wretchedness. Thou art an abyss of being, I of nothingness.” So when Christ appeared to S. Catherine of Sienna, He said, “Blessed art thou if thou knowest who I am, and who thou art. I am He who is, thou art she who is not.”
Secondly, as to quality. Who? that is, of what sort art thou? Answer, As regards my body, I am weak, miserable, and wretched. As to my soul, as regards my reason, I am like unto the angels. As regards my sensual appetite, and concupiscence, I am like the brutes. Therefore I will follow my reason, and so become assimilated to the angels.
Thirdly, as regards relation. Who? that is, whose son art thou? Reply, I am the son of Adam, the first sinner, and therefore being born in sin, I am living in sin, and must die in sin, unless the grace of Christ rescue me from my sins, and sanctify and save me.
Fourthly, as regards employment. Who art thou? what trade or profession art thou? I am a carpenter, a baker, a governor, a shepherd, a lawyer. See then that thou exercise thyself in thy calling, whatsoever it be, as the law of God requires, namely, in such wise that thou live soberly, righteously, and godly in this present world, looking for the blessed hope, and the coming of the glory of the great God, that thou mayest so pass through things temporal, that thou lose not, but gain the things eternal. Work, study, live for eternity. As S. Bernard was wont often to say to himself, “Bernard, tell me, wherefore art thou here?” And with this goad, as it were, he stirred himself up to zeal for all virtues.
Fifthly, as regards suffering. Who art thou? that is to say, what dost thou suffer? Reply, In the body I suffer hunger, thirst, disease, continual afflictions, so that there is scarcely the smallest space of time in which I have not many things to bear. As regards my soul, I have far greater and more bitter afflictions, griefs, and anguish, anxieties, sorrows, angers, indignation, darkness, fear, &c., so that I seem to be, as it were, a mark at which all afflictions hurl their darts, and thrust me through with their arrows. Be thou therefore a very adamant of patience, that thou mayest patiently and generously endure all things, and win the everlasting crown of patience in heaven.
Sixthly, as regards place. Who? that is, where art thou? Answer, I am on earth, placed between heaven and hell, in such wise, that if I live holily, I may pass to heaven, if wickedly, to hell. Live therefore carefully, warily, and holily, that not hell, but heaven may receive thee, when this short mortal life is over.
Seventhly, as regards time. Who art thou? When wast thou born? How long hast thou lived? When shalt thou die? Answer, Born yesterday, to-day I live, to-morrow I die. “For we are of yesterday, and know nothing; all our days upon the earth are but a shadow” (Job 8:9). Therefore despise all things temporal, which fly past as a bird doth. Love and covet heavenly things, which endure for ever with God and the angels. So shalt thou, being eternal, be happy eternally, and abide in everlasting delights. For as S. Gregory says, “That we may be eternal, and happy eternally, let us imitate eternity. And this is to us a great eternity, even the imitation of eternity.”
Lastly, as regards posture and clothing. Who art thou? that is, what posture, or clothing hast thou? Reply, I stand, I sit, I lie, I wear the habit of a Christian, a priest, a bishop, a religious. Take heed then that thou live conformably to thy habit. For it is not the habit which makes the Christian, or the monk, but purity of life, humility, charity.
[20] Et confessus est, et non negavit, et confessus est : Quia non sum ego Christus.
And he confessed, and did not deny: and he confessed: I am not the Christ.
And he confessed, &c. That is, publicly, plainly, and fully that he was not the Christ. For when the Hebrews wished very strongly to assert anything, they doubled the affirmative, and trebled the negative. Observe the great humility of S. John: how firmly he refused the name of Christ when it was offered to him. For he loved the truth, and Jesus, to whom this name belonged. Men of the world love to boast, and say, I am a nobleman, a governor, a canon, a bishop. But John teaches us to say, “I am nothing,” because if I am anything, I have it from God.
[21] Et interrogaverunt eum : Quid ergo? Elias es tu? Et dixit : Non sum. Propheta es tu? Et respondit : Non.
And they asked him: What then? Art thou Elias? And he said: I am not. Art thou the prophet? And he answered: No.
And they asked him, &c. When John denied that he was the Christ, the messengers asked him if he were Elias. For him God took away, that he might be the forerunner of Christ. And of him they were then in expectation, according to the words of Malachi (4:5), “Behold, I send you Elijah the prophet before the great and terrible day of the Lord come,” meaning the day of judgment, when Christ shall return to be the Judge of all. But the Scribes did not understand this. They thought that there would be but one advent of Christ, and that a glorious one, the precursor of which would be Elias. Thus the Jews think even now that Christ has not yet come, but is about to come with Elias. And yet they ought to have known from the same Malachi (3:1) that there would be another precursor of Christ’s first coming in the flesh, even John the Baptist. “For I,” saith the Lord, “do send My messenger, and he shall prepare My way before My face.”
Art thou that prophet? Greek, ὁ προφήτης, the prophet par excellence. “Art thou a new and great prophet, such an one as we think will come with Messiah, to be His herald?” So SS. Chrysostom and Cyril. But they (the Jews) were in error. For Christ needed not a prophet, as Moses, who was not eloquent, needed Aaron. But Christ was His own prophet, herald, priest, and lawgiver. Moreover John was not a prophet in the sense that he foretold things to come. But he pointed out with his finger, as it were, Christ present. Therefore was he more than a prophet, as Christ says in the 11th of Matthew.
[22] Dixerunt ergo ei : Quis es ut responsum demus his qui miserunt nos? quid dicis de teipso?
They said therefore unto him: Who art thou, that we may give an answer to them that sent us? What sayest thou of thyself?
[23] Ait : Ego vox clamantis in deserto : Dirigite viam Domini, sicut dixit Isaias propheta.
He said: I am the voice of one crying out in the wilderness, make straight the way of the Lord, as said the prophet Isaias.
I am the Voice, &c. (Isa. 40:3), where I have expounded the meaning. Listen to what the Fathers say about it. “I am a servant, and prepare paths, your hearts, for the Lord,” says Theophylact. “I come, he says, to say that He is at the doors who is expected, that you may be prepared to go whithersoever He may bid you,” says Cyril.
Totus tuus ego sum
Et omnia mea tua sunt;
Tecum tutus semper sum:
Ad Jesum per Mariam
No comments:
Post a Comment