St Mark Chapter VIII : Verses 22-30
 |
| Peter answering said to him: Thou art the Christ. J-J Tissot. |
[23] And taking the blind man by the hand, he led him out of the town; and spitting upon his eyes, laying his hands on him, he asked him if he saw any thing.
[24] And looking up, he said: I see men as it were trees, walking.
[25] After that again he laid his hands upon his eyes, and he began to see, and was restored, so that he saw all things clearly.
[26] And he sent him into his house, saying: Go into thy house, and if thou enter into the town, tell nobody.
[27] And Jesus went out, and his disciples, into the towns of Caesarea Philippi. And in the way, he asked his disciples, saying to them: Whom do men say that I am?
[28] Who answered him, saying: John the Baptist; but some Elias, and others as one of the prophets.
[29] Then he saith to them: But whom do you say that I am? Peter answering said to him: Thou art the Christ.
[30] And he strictly charged them that they should not tell any man of him.
[22] Et veniunt Bethsaidam, et adducunt ei caecum, et rogabant eum ut illum tangeret. [23] Et apprehensa manu caeci, eduxit eum extra vicum : et exspuens in oculos ejus impositis manibus suis, interrogavit eum si quid videret. [24] Et aspiciens, ait : Video homines velut arbores ambulantes. [25] Deinde iterum imposuit manus super oculos ejus : et coepit videre : et restitutus est ita ut clare videret omnia.[26] Et misit illum in domum suam, dicens : Vade in domum tuam : et si in vicum introieris, nemini dixeris. [27] Et egressus est Jesus, et discipuli ejus in castella Caesareae Philippi : et in via interrogabat discipulos suos, dicens eis : Quem me dicunt esse homines? [28] Qui responderunt illi, dicentes : Joannem Baptistam, alii Eliam, alii vero quasi unum de prophetis. [29] Tunc dicit illis : Vos vero quem me esse dicitis? Respondens Petrus, ait ei : Tu es Christus. [30] Et comminatus est eis, ne cui dicerent de illo.
s
Notes
The blind man at Bethsaida
bring to him : one of the cases in which friends solicit a miracle for the sufferer. Blindness was extremely common in the Holy Land, on account of the Jews having little ophthalmic skill, and also because of the extreme brightness of the light. The atmosphere laden with particles of dust was also very injurious to the sight.
would touch him : the usual mode our Lord employed in healing.
23. taking the blind man, etc. As in the case of the deaf and dumb man recently healed, Jesus took the blind man “apart” out of the town. He employed spittle and touched the blind man twice, hence the cure was progressive.
he led him out. Notice our Lord’s kindness in leading the man Himself.
24. as it were trees walking : a proof that the man had not been born blind, since he could distinguish the difference between a tree and a man.
25. began to see ; — was restored ; — saw all things clearly. Three steps in the restoration of sight. Thus of old, Naaman the Syrian had been gradually cured of his leprosy (4 Kings v.).
26. into his house. The man did not dwell in Betlisaida.
if thou enter into the town, etc. Again Jesus commands silence respecting a miracle.
the town : Bethsaida.
The cure of the blind man was perfect though not instantaneously wrought. Like all blind people the man would have lost the sense of distance or depth, for this is a matter of experience, not of vision. A blind person when restored to sight has been known to close his eyes in order to cross a room, and thus the better gauge its width ; but the blind man of Bethsaida saw all things clearly and in correct perspective, since he was able to go about now without a guide.
St Peter's confession of faith at Cæsarea Philippi
into the towns : the towns and villages in the neighbourhood of the remote city of Cæsarea Philippi, near which it is possible that He might have passed in His circuit from Sidon a few weeks before.
in the way. St Luke adds, as he was alone praying, his disciples also were with him (ix. 18). Probably they found Him engaged in prayer, which He interrupted to question them. Jesus might have retired to pray while the Apostles were resting awhile, and when they came to Him, He interrupted His prayer and continued the journey.
Whom do men say that I am ? This question served as an introduction to the direct question, Whom do you say that I am ? All three Synoptists give this last question in the same words, but the first question of our Lord is given differently by St Matt. (xvi. 13), Whom do men say that the Son of man is ?
28. Who answered, etc. The Apostles give three different opinions held by the people, namely —
(1) He was John the Baptist risen from the dead.
(2) He was Elias who had been taken up in a fiery chariot.
(3) He was Jeremias or “one of the prophets” risen again. None of them confessed Him to be the Messiah, but all agreed in accepting Him as a forerunner of the Messiah. In answering this question, no reference is made to the Pharisees, who had decided that Jesus was an impostor. Our Lord inquired what opinion the people in general had of Him.
29. Peter answering. His faith was more ardent than that of the other apostles, as seen by his demand to walk upon the waters. Moreover, he was naturally impetuous, and his deep love prompted him to anticipate the reply of the others. Possibly he feared lest his companions should not give our Lord His true title ; in any case, his answer was a repetition of that which he made, when Jesus asked the Twelve, Will you also go away ? And Simon Peter answered him : Lord , to whom shall we go ? Thou hast the words of eternal life. And we have believed and have known that thou art the Christ, the Son of God (St John vi. 68-70).
Thou art the Christ, i.e. the Anointed One, the Messiah. St Matthew adds, the Son of the living God, where the words “ the Son of the living God ” do not merely mean a holy man, but the Son of God, i.e. God the Son, the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity. It is possible that St Peter did not fully realise all that his confession implied, since at this time the Apostles had not a clear conception of the doctrine of the Trinity. We see from our Lord’s question to St Philip about a year later that their knowledge was imperfect. Philip saith to him : Lord , shew us the Father , and it is enough for us. Jesus saith to him : So long a time have I been with you , and have you not known me ? Philip , he that seeth me seeth the Father also. How say est thou , shew us the Father ? (St John xiv. 8, 9).
St Peter’s faith was, however, strong enough to recognise Jesus in all His lowliness and humiliation as the Son of God. The old error of a Messiah who should have a glorious reign on earth, did indeed reveal itself again later, on more than one occasion, but the germ of the truth was at least now taking root in his soul.
Note. — St Mark, who wrote his gospel under the guidance of St Peter, has omitted the promise made by Christ to the Prince of the Apostles : And Jesus answering, said to him: Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona : because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven (St Matt. xvi. 17).
Doubtless St Peter’s humility prevented him from revealing what was to his own praise. His faults he took care to allow St Mark to mention, but his virtues and dignities are passed over in silence, thus giving us an example of humility. St Peter had proclaimed the dignity of Jesus, he had confessed Him to be the Son of God , and Christ dignifies His faithful Apostle by making him the “ rock ” on which the Church of Christ was to be established. “ Where Peter is, there is the Church” (St Ambrose). In the fourfold promise made by Christ to St Peter, we have a certain proof that the Church is the one Infallible Guide for all time.
(1) St Peter and his successors, the Popes of the Catholic Church, form the “rock” on which the Church is built.(2) “The gates of hell ” ( i.e . “the devil ”) shall not prevail against it.(3) To St Peter and his successors are given the keys of the kingdom of heaven, that is, the power to open or to close heaven; which is effected by the sacraments, indulgences, excommunications, and interdicts.(4) Finally, to the Church is confided the power of binding and loosing, i.e. of absolving from sin, properly called “ the power of the keys.” This gives the Church her authority.
30. he strictly charged them, etc. There were reasons for this prohibition.
(1) It was not yet time for the Divinity of our Lord to be revealed ; this truth was to be unfolded gradually, and St Peter proclaimed it with all boldness after the Ascension. (See Acts ii. 31-36, iv. 8-12).
(2) Jesus wished to remove the idea of the temporal greatness of the Messiah.
(3) He willed to suffer for our salvation, and had the Jews known Him to be the Son of God, they would never have crucified the Lord of Glory (1 Cor. ii. 8).
Additional Notes
Reason of our Lord’s retirement.
We may conjecture that Jesus wished to be alone with His disciples in order to instruct them further and to prepare them for His approaching Passion and Death. Jesus had been rejected by the Jews, and after His discourse at Capharnaum “ many of his disciples went back ; and walked no more with him ” (St John vi. 67). There was a powerful coalition formed against Him, and He would now test His own disciples and see how far they had profited by the two years’ training which they had had, or whether they would leave Him and return to their old masters the Pharisees. It was an important crisis in their life, they were asked to state their opinion concerning Him. It is the first occasion recorded on which Jesus questioned His disciples about Himself. Since they had witnessed His miracles and heard His teaching, it was natural that they should have had their own convictions about His Divine Person. Only on condition of their firmly believing Him to be the Messias, could He reveal to them the mystery of His Passion, which was now near at hand. St Luke tells us that before asking His disciples this important question “ he was alone praying,” as He had prayed in solitude, before the call of the Apostles, and again before His Transfiguration.
Opinions concerning our Lord. As far as we can gather, these different opinions each rested on a certain foundation.
(1) Christ was believed to be St John the Baptist. This opinion would naturally have originated with Herod, who feared it might he so. The Galilean people would have heard of their tetrarch’s opinion and adopted it.
(2) The Jews in general took Him for Elias. We see this from the disciples’ question. “And his disciples asked him saying, Why then do the scribes say that Elias must come first?” (St Matt. xvii. 10). They believed Elias would return to earth before the coming of the Messias. This view was based on the prophecy of Malachias iv. 5. The multiplication of the loaves and fishes would have reminded them of the miracle which Elias wrought for the widow of Sarepta when “ the pot of meal wasted not, and the cruse of oil was not diminished ” (3 Kings xvii. 16).
(3) some say Jeremias. In 2 Machabees ii. 5-7 we read : “ And when Jeremias came thither he found a hollow cave : and he carried in thither the tabernacle, and the ark, and the altar of incense, and so stopped the door. Then some of the men that followed him, came up to mark the place ; but they could, not find it. And when Jeremias perceived it, he blamed them, saying : The place shall be unknown, till God gather together the congregation of the people, and receive them to mercy.” From these words the Jews concluded that Jeremias would return and reveal the hiding-place of the ark before the coming of the Messias. This universal opinion was strengthened by the apparition of Jeremias to Judas Machabeus : — “After this there appeared also another man, admirable for age, and glory, and environed with great beauty and majesty. Then Onias answering said : This is a lover of his brethren, and of the people of Israel : this is he that prayeth much for the people, and for all the holy city, Jeremias the prophet of God. Whereupon Jeremias stretched forth his right hand, and gave to Judas a sword of gold, saying : Take this holy sword, a gift from God, wherewith thou shalt overthrow the adversaries of my people Israel” (2 Machabees xv. 13-16). “Jeremias’ freedom and boldness in denouncing the crimes of the Jews, of his own day, was so like the line of conduct pursued by our Redeemer in this respect ” ( MacEvilly ).
(4) one of the prophets: risen again. This opinion was based on Deut. xviii. 15. That the two last opinions expressed were current among the Jews is proved by the questions put to St John the Baptist : “ And they asked him : What then ? Art thou Elias ? And he said : I am not. Art thou the prophet? And he answered: No” (St John i. 21).
All these opinions are in harmony with the teaching of the Pharisees, who taught “that a just man can easily return to life” (Josephus). They probably heard the Pythagorean doctrine of the transmigration of souls, for it was certainly believed by some of their writers, that the spirit of Jeremias had passed into Zacharias, and hence all agreed in taking Jesus to be an ancient prophet, now incarnate for the second time.
Totus tuus ego sum
Et omnia mea tua sunt;
Tecum semper tutus sum:
Ad Jesum per Mariam.
No comments:
Post a Comment