St Mark Chapter XI : Verses 12-19
The barren fig-tree
 |
| The accursed fig-tree. J-J Tissot. |
[13] And when he had seen afar off a fig tree having leaves, he came if perhaps he might find any thing on it. And when he was come to it, he found nothing but leaves. For it was not the time for figs.
[14] And answering he said to it: May no man hereafter eat fruit of thee any more for ever. And his disciples heard it.
[12] Et alia die cum exirent a Bethania, esuriit. [13] Cumque vidisset a longe ficum habentem folia, venit si quid forte inveniret in ea : et cum venisset ad eam, nihil invenit praeter folia : non enim erat tempus ficorum. [14] Et respondens dixit ei : Jam non amplius in aeternum ex te fructum quisquam manducet. Et audiebant discipuli ejus.
Notes
12. the next day. The eleventh of Nisan, Monday in Holy Week.
when they came out from Bethania: where Christ had retired the previous night.
he was hungry : the words are to be taken literally ; possibly Jesus had spent the night in prayer, as He often did, for had He come direct from the house of Lazarus, He would not have lacked food ; or it was very early, before the usual hour for taking food. These words shew our Lord’s perfect humanity ; He hungered and thirsted like an ordinary human being. Our Lord did not feign hunger, nor excite it preternaturally ; His hunger was a real craving for food, due to His fasting or great temperance in the use of food.
13. he had seen afar off. He saw the tree in the distance perhaps as He descended the slope of Olivet. It was conspicuous, as having leaves.
a fig-tree. Figs were largely cultivated in Palestine. They also grew wild, and formed a staple article of the Jews’ fare. St Matt, adds the tree was by the wayside. They were planted thus, since the dust of the road was supposed, by checking the growth of foliage, to favour the production of fruit.
he came. Jesus went up close to the tree, which stood alone by the wayside.
if perhaps he might find anything on it. He knew well there were no figs. In spite of His omniscience, Jesus commonly acted as prudent men would act, so that this seeming disappointment cannot astonish us ( Maas, S.J. ). Jesus was teaching His disciples by a parable in action, for the fruitless fig-tree with its abundant foliage was a figure of the Jewish nation, which, with all its profession of godliness, lacked the essential virtues of mercy, truth, charity, humility, etc.
nothing but leaves : therefore as the leaves had all attained their full size, there should have been figs on the tree, since blossoms and fruit precede the leaves in the case of the fig-tree.
it was not the time for figs. Figs were ripe in Palestine at two different seasons, the early ones about June, the later about October, but Josephus tells us that near the Lake of Galilee, figs were to be found ten months out of the twelve. The winter figs only ripened after the fall of the leaves. This passage has greatly puzzled some commentators, who ask, “ How could our Lord expect to find fruit, if it was not the season?” To this others reply, that although early in April the figs were not ordinarily ripe, yet if a tree stood in a particularly favourable soil or had a good exposition, fruit would be found earlier, and the extraordinary luxuriance of the growth of the leaves in this particular case justified our Lord in expecting to find fruit.
14. answering , he said to it ( i.e . “ arbori fructum neganti”). Jesus, by a Hebrew idiom, is represented as addressing the tree, which “ may be supposed to say to Him, ‘ I have no fruit for Thee . . . .’ Our Lord is often said to answer when no one has spoken to Him. He is either answering some secret thought in the mind of His hearers, or, as in this instance, what the circumstances seem to say ” (P. T. Gallwey, S.J.).
May no man hereafter, etc. Our Lord having pronounced this curse, immediately the fig-tree withered away (St Matt. xxi. 19), which typified the rejection and destruction of Israel.
his disciples heard it. Hence when they saw the fig-tree withered away the following morning they knew what had produced this phenomenon.
The sudden withering was miraculous, for a tree, even when cut down, does not at once dry up, and the topmost branches will even continue to bud for a time. This cursing of the fig-tree was a miracle , a parable in action , and a prophecy. “ As Jesus went to the fig-tree seeking fruit and found none, so now He comes to our soul in the hope of being comforted and refreshed by finding some good fruit. His people are the fig-tree ; each one created to His image and redeemed by His Sacred Blood is the fig-tree. Our poor souls are each His fig-tree ” ( Gallwey , S.J .).
The second cleansing of the Temple
 |
| He began to cast out them that sold and bought in the temple... J-J Tissot |
[16] And he suffered not that any man should carry a vessel through the temple;
[17] And he taught, saying to them: Is it not written, My house shall be called the house of prayer to all nations? But you have made it a den of thieves.
[18] Which when the chief priests and the scribes had heard, they sought how they might destroy him. For they feared him, because the whole multitude was in admiration at his doctrine.
[19] And when evening was come, he went forth out of the city.
[15] Et veniunt in Jerosolymam. Et cum introisset in templum, coepit ejicere vendentes et ementes in templo : et mensas numulariorum, et cathedras vendentium columbas evertit : [16] et non sinebat ut quisquam transferret vas per templum : [17] et docebat, dicens eis : Nonne scriptum est : Quia domus mea, domus orationis vocabitur omnibus gentibus? vos autem fecistis eam speluncam latronum. [18] Quo audito principes sacerdotum et scribae, quaerebant quomodo eum perderent : timebant enim eum, quoniam universa turba admirabatur super doctrina ejus. [19] Et cum vespera facta esset, egrediebatur de civitate. [20] Et cum mane transirent, viderunt ficum aridam factam a radicibus.
Notes
15. into the Temple. Into the court of the Gentiles. For the convenience of the worshippers, especially for those who came from a distance, a kind of market was set up in this court. Booths were erected, where sacrificial victims, oil, incense, flour, wine, etc., for the sacrifices and religious rites, could be purchased.
cast out. With His irresistible authority, as He had done on a previous occasion in the first year of His ministry.
them that sold and bought. Both buyers and sellers were desecrating the Temple. This is an example of being a partaker in the sin of another, which is one of the nine ways of giving scandal.
overthrew. The word denotes our Lord’s extreme indignation. the tables of the money-changers. The pilgrims required money —
(a) To purchase what was required for the sacrifices.
(b) To make voluntary offerings to the Temple, as we learn from St Mark : And Jesus sitting over against the treasury, beheld how the people cast money into the treasury , and many that were rich cast in much (xii. 41).
(c) For the half-shekel which every Jew was bound to pay for the Temple expenses, (as we are commanded by the Church to contribute to the support of our religion).
As the Roman, Greek and other foreign coins were frequently stamped with idolatrous images and emblems, and thus rendered “unclean” and unfit for use in God’s service, payments had to be made in a Hebrew coin called the “Temple shekel,” which was not in general currency. Pilgrims therefore had to exchange their foreign money for native “ shekels.” The money-changers charged “ a kolbon,” a small coin, as their fee for exchanging foreign money. This fee was unlawful, and gave ample opportunities for defrauding the buyers. This market was much frequented, even by the inhabitants of the city, since the priests guaranteed that the animals sold there were of the right age and without blemish, as the law exacted ; moreover, the priests profited by these transactions, since they received rents from the booth-owners, and they themselves furnished the lambs and doves, which were a profitable source of revenue. Our Lord did not overthrow the chests which contained the offerings for the Temple, but the “kolbons” which were so unlawfully obtained.
the chairs of them, etc. The doves were generally sold by women, who sat beside the dove cages.
doves. These were required by the poor women who came for the ceremony of purification. The rich offered a lamb. At one time as much as a gold coin was asked as the price of a dove, but a zealous Rabbi insisted on the prices being lowered, and “doves were sold that very day for two farthings ” ( Lightfoot ).
16. he suffered not that any man, etc. Christ would not suffer porters to carry burdens through the courts of the Temple, which they were in the habit of doing in order to avoid a long circuit. Josephus writes, “ it is not .... lawful to carry any vessel into the holy house,” i.e. the Temple (Against Apion. ii. 8). This law had evidently become a dead letter. Necessarily, if the Gentiles’ court had become a place of traffic, the private devotions of the worshippers would be greatly disturbed. The Jews only tolerated this abuse in the court of the Gentiles ; the other courts were not thus desecrated. St Mark alone relates this detail about Christ forbidding vessels to be carried through the Temple precincts.
a vessel : a pail or basket.
17. he taught. He explained to them how they were infringing the law of God by referring them to a text in Isaias, My house shall be called the house of prayer for all nations (Ivi. 7).
Hence it was unlawful to traffic therein, and since the Temple was the house of prayer , all commerce was illegal, and as it was for the use of “ all nations,” the court of the Gentiles was to be as much respected as the courts where the Israelites worshipped.
a den of thieves : rather “ bandits ” or “ robbers.” The caves of Palestine were infested with these brigands ; there they made their evil plans and carried their booty ; there, too, they quarrelled and fought over their respective shares. In much the same spirit the avaricious vendors were chaffering and quarelling over the price of their wares.
18. when the chief priests and the scribes, etc. St Luke adds, and the rulers of the people (xix. 47) ; hence the whole Sanhedrin was now formally arrayed against Jesus.
they sought how they might destroy him. Three reasons may be assigned for their perplexity —
(а) They could not accuse Him of any evil deed.
(b) They feared Him ; His mighty deeds and majestic demeanour awed them.
(c) They feared the people, who were in admiration of His doctrine.
(d) They apprehended that if they laid hands on Jesus, it would cause a rebellion, and so endanger their, own position as rulers in the eyes of the Romans.
doctrine : better “ teaching ” ; not so much what He taught, but how He taught.
19. when evening was come: at sunset, when the gates of the city would be closed, and all who did not dwell in Jerusalem had to leave the city to seek shelter elsewhere.
he went forth out of the city. Various reasons have been assigned as to why Jesus left Jerusalem, since He had many disciples there who would gladly have received Him. It has been suggested that —
(а) He wished to pass the night in the house of Lazarus.
(b) He desired to pray in Gethsemani as He was wont.
(c) He wished to avoid dwelling in the city, lest He should be suspected of plotting with His disciples in order to secure a rising of the people on His behalf.
(d) He willed to get away from the multitude that thronged Him in Jerusalem.
Note. — St Matthew alone relates that after Christ had driven the vendors out of the Temple, there came to him the blind and the lame in the temple, and he healed them (xxi. 14). Doubtless many of these afflicted people were beggars who usually thronged the approaches to the Temple and exploited their infirmities, in order to obtain alms from the worshippers. By working these miracles Jesus proved Himself to be the Messiah.
Lesson. — From the cleansing of the Temple we may learn with what reverence Christ would have us treat His house, where in the Sacrament of the Holy Eucharist He abides with us. Our souls, too, are His temples, and they must be pure and free from stain, that He may dwell within us by His grace, and that we may be well prepared to receive Him in Holy Communion.
Additional Notes
The Barren Fig-tree.
The cursing of the barren fig-tree is an example of a miracle of punishment. “ Jesus, after miracles of love, performs just one miracle which should demonstrate His power to punish and ruin, as it belongs to the Judge of all flesh. He did not, however, perform this on man, whom He has not come to destroy, but on an inanimate object ” (Heubner).
14. May no man hereafter eat fruit of thee , etc. These words on the lips of an ordinary human being might seem like an expression of disappointment and vexation, but coming from Him “ who knew no sin,” they take the character of a solemn judgment, passed, not so much on the tree, as on that of which it became the representative. The Jews, in their show of the “leaves ” of devotion, in the absence of the “fruits” of righteousness, were as that barren tree. Only a few weeks previously our Lord had spoken a parable of a certain man who had “a fig-tree planted in his vineyard, and he came seeking fruit on it and found none ” (St Luke xiii. 6). Then, when the dresser of the vineyard had begged that the execution of the sentence “ cut it down” should be deferred, the owner of the fig-tree had granted his petition. Since Jesus had thus spoken, the Jews had had still clearer proofs that He was the Messias, but, in their pride and obstinacy, they still hardened their hearts and refused to accept Him. Now by this parable in action, Jesus warns them that their final rejection is near at hand — the Synagogue and Jerusalem are doomed for their unbelief.
This cursing of the barren fig-tree may be regarded as a prophetic parable ; as such we notice —
14. May no man hereafter eat fruit of thee. Some non- Catholic writers have cavilled at these words of our Lord, on the grounds that —
(а) It was an act of useless destruction.
(b) The owner thereby was deprived of his tree (as the Gadarens were of their swine).
To these futile objections the following answers can be given —
(a) The fig-tree thus withered was useful in conveying a solemn truth both to the Jews and to our Lord’s disciples, and this was a nobler use than the mere nourishing of the body. By its medium, they learnt that retribution follows impenitence, that hypocrisy will be punished, and that faith can work miracles.
(b) There is not a shadow of evidence that the tree was private property.
(c) “ When the hail beats down the tendrils of the vine, when the lightning scathes the olive .... do any but the utterly ignorant and brutal begin at once to blaspheme against God ?”
(d) “ Is it a crime under any circumstance to destroy a useless tree ? If not, is it more a crime to do so by miracle ? Jesus hastened the withering of the barren fig-tree, and founded, on the destruction of its uselessness, three eternal lessons : a symbol of the destruction of impenitence, a warning of the peril of hypocrisy, an illustration of the power of faith ” (Farrar).
The second cleansing of the Temple.
The two cleansings of the Temple. St John records that Jesus cast out the buyers from the Temple in the first year of His ministry, while the Synoptists make no mention of this, but agree in relating a cleansing of the Temple as having taken place in Holy Week, of which St John makes no mention. From this, some critical writers have concluded that all four Evangelists refer to the same occasion, that there was but one cleansing, which St John does not place in its correct order. In answer to this objection it should be noticed that —
(a) The greater number of commentators agree that our Lord cleansed the Temple twice.
(b) St John seems rather to have had in view, among other purposes, to supplement what the Synoptists had omitted ; therefore it is not astonishing that since they all refer to the second cleansing, he should pass it over.
(c) The silence of the Synoptists concerning the first, does not prove that it did not take place, since we have many proofs that the argument from silence has not great weight.
(d) It was perfectly natural that the practice of buying and selling in the Temple, would have the support of those who profited by this traffic ; hence it is probable, that although our Lord had once driven out the buyers, they had taken advantage of His absence from Jerusalem, to return thither and resume their traffic.
(e) The circumstances differ in the two cases, as will be seen by com¬ paring the two narratives.
St John’s Account of the Cleansing.
“ And the pasch of the Jews was at hand, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem. And he found in the temple them that sold oxen and sheep and doves, and the changers of money sitting. And when he had made as it were a scourge of little cords, he drove them all out of the temple, the sheep also and the oxen, and the money of the changers he poured out, and the tables he overthrew. And to them that sold doves he said : Take these things hence, and make not the house of my Father a house of traffic. And his disciples remem¬bered that it was written : “ The zeal of thy house hath eaten me up.” The Jews therefore answered and said to him : What sign dost thou shew us, seeing thou dost these things? Jesus answered and said to them : Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. The Jews then said : Six and forty years was this temple in building, and wilt thou raise it up in three days ? But he spoke of the temple of his body. When therefore he was risen from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this, and they believed the Scripture, and the word that Jesus had said” (St John ii. 13-22).
Harmonised Account of the Second Cleansing of the Temple.
Luke xix. 45-48 ; Mark xi. 15-19 ; Matt. xxi. 12-13.
(Monday in Holy Week, 33 a. d.) “And they came to Jerusalem. And when Jesus had entered the temple, he began to cast out all who were selling and buying in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the money changers and the chairs of them that sold doves. And he suffered not that any man should carry a vessel through the temple. And he taught, saying to them : Is it not written : My house shall be called the house of prayer to all nations 1 but you have made it a den of thieves. Which when the chief priests and scribes had heard, they sought how they might destroy him ; for they feared him, because the whole multitude was in admiration at his doctrine. And they found not what to do to him. And he was teaching daily in the temple, and all the people were held in suspense, hearing him. And when evening was come, he went forth out of the city.”
On reverence for the Temple precincts. “ What is the reverence of the Temple ? That none go into the Mountain of the Temple (or the Court of the Gentiles) with his staff and his shoes, with his purse, and dust upon his feet : and that none make it a common thoroughfare nor make it a place of spitting” (Talmud). Even in the case of the site of a ruined synagogue, the same law held good. Hence Jesus in cleansing the Temple was merely insisting on the observance of a law, with which all the Israelites were acquainted. On both occasions when He drove out the vendors, He was devoured by zeal for God’s House.
The Temple shekel. This sum, equal in value to about 1s. 2d. of our money, was rigorously exacted from all Jews. Lightfoot, speaking on this subject, quotes from the Talmud and the treatise Shekalim : — “ It is an affirmative (i.e. as opposed to what the Jews called negative precepts) precept of the Law, that every Israelite should give half a shekel yearly : even the poor who live by alms, are obliged to this, and must either beg the money of others, or sell their clothes to pay half a shekel, as it is said, ‘ The rich shall give no more, the poor shall give no less.’ In the first day of the month Adar, they make a public proclamation concerning these shekels that every one .... be ready to pay it. On the fifteenth day, the exchangers sat in every city civilly requiring this money : they received it of those that gave it, and compelled those who did not. On the five and twentieth day they sat in the Temple .... and from him that did not give, they forced a pledge, even his very coat. ”
Note. — St Jerome regarded the cleansing of the Temple as one of our Lord’s greatest miracles, and he based his opinion on the following reasons : —
(a) Jesus was considered by many only as the despised “ Prophet of Galilee.”
(b) The Sanhedrin was bitterly opposed to Him, and would have supported the traders in their opposition, had they offered any.
(c) In working other miracles, Jesus had dealt with disease and inanimate objects. Here He triumphs over the will of so vast a multitude. St Jerome attributes their obedience as being due to a supernatural light in our Lord’s eyes, and to an irresistible splendour that overawed them. On the other hand, there may have been no miracle, for our Lord’s demeanour was majestic at all times, and when intensified by His zeal and indignation, it must have been irresistible. In addition, He was accompanied by a vast multitude of enthusiastic followers, and “ the mighty deeds ” that all had witnessed, would have given Christ such a prestige that none could resist His commands. Even the Sanhedrin “feared him.” Lastly, there must have been a consciousness of wrong-doing in the souls of those whom He cast out, and a sense of guilt generally makes men timid and docile.
Totus tuus ego sum
Et omnia mea tua sunt;
Tecum semper tutus sum:
Ad Jesum per Mariam.
No comments:
Post a Comment