St Matthew Chapter XXI : Verses 23-27
Contents
- Matt. xxi. 23-27. Douay-Rheims text & Latin text (Vulgate).
- Notes on the text.
- Additional Notes: The arrival of the deputation from the Sanhedrin. On the signs of a true Prophet.
Matt. xxi. 23-27
 |
| The Sanhedrin question Jesus. J-J Tissot. Brooklyn Museum. |
Et cum venisset in templum, accesserunt ad eum docentem principes sacerdotum, et seniores populi, dicentes : In qua potestate hæc facis? et quis tibi dedit hanc potestatem?
24 Jesus answering, said to them: I also will ask you one word, which if you shall tell me, I will also tell you by what authority I do these things.
Respondens Jesus dixit eis : Interrogabo vos et ego unum sermonem : quem si dixeritis mihi, et ego vobis dicam in qua potestate haec facio.
25 The baptism of John, whence was it? from heaven or from men? But they thought within themselves, saying:
Baptismus Joannis unde erat? e cælo, an ex hominibus? At illi cogitabant inter se, dicentes :
26 If we shall say, from heaven, he will say to us: Why then did you not believe him? But if we shall say, from men, we are afraid of the multitude: for all held John as a prophet.
Si dixerimus, e cælo, dicet nobis : Quare ergo non credidistis illi? Si autem dixerimus, ex hominibus, timemus turbam : omnes enim habebant Joannem sicut prophetam.
27 And answering Jesus, they said: We know not. He also said to them: Neither do I tell you by what authority I do these things.
Et respondentes Jesu, dixerunt : Nescimus. Ait illis et ipse : Nec ego dico vobis in qua potestate hæc facio.
Notes
23. there came to him ... the chief priests, etc. St Mark completes the narrative. Cf. And they come again to Jerusalem . . . and there come to him the chief priests and the scribes and the ancients. Hence this was a deputation from the various bodies forming the Sanhedrin. The chief priests and the Scribes represented the religious constituent, and the ancients, the political and executive. Having together, they came in a body to question our Lord. This step was evidently the result of their plotting (see St Luke xix. 47).
as he was teaching, etc. St Luke adds, and preaching the gospel. They approached Christ when he was walking in the temple (St Mark). He would be walking in one of the porches or courts. In like manner, a deputation from the Sanhedrin had been sent to question St John the Baptist (see St John i. 19-26),
By what authority, etc. ? They propose a double question —
(a) Did Christ claim a human or divine authority ?
(b) Who had sanctioned or authorized His teaching ?
There is here, perhaps, a suggestion that they considered Him inspired by Beelzebub, as they had previously affirmed. The Jews had a law that no man could teach without having rabbinical authorization.
Those who aspired to the office of teacher studied under some famous rabbi, who, when they were sufficiently qualified, gave them a diploma to that effect. The degrees were (1) Rabbi, (2) Elder, (3) Judge. It was the duty of the Sanhedrin to examine the credentials of those who taught, in order to preserve the Law in all its purity. They were exercising a legal right in questioning our Lord, but they were not exercising it in a proper spirit. As on previous occasions, they came tempting Him. They knew the despised Prophet of Galilee had no diploma from their rabbis, so practically they were asking for a sign, as they had done after the first cleansing of the Temple (see St John ii. 13-33).
dost thou these things ? They evidently referred to our Lord’s recent acts, and to the triumphal procession into Jerusalem — to His acceptation of the “ Hosannas ” of the multitude, and the cleansing of the Temple. Possibly this last action was the one which made them most bitter, since it was a reproach and a silent condemnation for tolerating an abuse, which they should have prevented. They avoid using the word “ miracle,” though they must have known of the resurrection of Lazarus, of the cure of Bartimeus, and of the blind and lame whom He cured, after casting the vendors forth from the Temple.
24. I also will ask you one word, — i.e. “ one thing ” (λόγον ἕνα). The question was one which, if they had answered honestly, contained the required information. For if they accepted St John as a prophet, as they professed to do, they were bound to accept his testimony that Christ was the Messias.
which if you shall tell me, etc. The other Synoptists add here. Answer me. Jesus speaks as a master in Israel, as one having power, and not as the scribes (St Mark i. 22).
25. The baptism of John whence was it, etc.? Here the word “ baptism ” stands for the mission of St John the Baptist, baptism being one of its distinctive features. Another was his testimony to Christ as the Messias. Jesus asks a counter-question, from whom St John the Baptist derived his authority, and whether he had a human or divine sanction, for the Baptist held no diploma from the rabbis.
from heaven, or from men ? As the leaders of the Jews, they ought to know whether St John was a true prophet or an impostor. The expression “from heaven” means, of course, “from God” (see Acts v. 38, 39). The Talmudists frequently employed the word “heaven” as a synonym for God, and in contrast to “ men.”
26. If we shall say, etc. We may conclude that, since they had to agree upon a common answer, they withdrew a little and consulted each other.
Either this conversation was overheard at the time, or it was made known by some of those who took part in it, and who became converts to Christianity later on, or it was revealed to the Evangelists by the Holy Ghost.
The deputation find themselves in a double dilemma. There were four possible answers ; (1) “ From heaven” ; (2) “ From men” ; (3) “ We know not”; (4) “We decline to answer.” Any one of these answers involved them in a false position. If they replied “ from heaven,” they foresaw clearly what answer our Lord would make ; and to reply “ from men” would arouse the anger of the people and endanger their own lives. By pleading ignorance, they would lose their prestige as spiritual leaders of the people. If they declined to reply, they shewed their insincerity and hypocrisy, and revealed that their question was dictated, not by zeal for the purity of their Mosaic faith, but by unworthy motives, such as jealousy and hatred.
we are afraid of the multitude. St Luke gives the cause of their fear more explicitly : But if we say, Of men, the whole people will stone us ; for they are persuaded that John was a prophet. They feared lest the Jews in their anger should “ overwhelm them with stones,” as the verb signifies in the Greek (καταλιθάσει). This strong expression shews the intensity of their fear. St Bede says, “ They feared being stoned, but they feared still more to confess the truth. ”
27. We know not. They express thus their unwillingness to say what they think of St John the Baptist’s mission. The Sanhedrin had hated and feared St John, and had they dared, would have denied him to be a prophet, but they were forced into recognizing him as such through fear of the people. In reality, they had rejected St John, as they were now rejecting Christ.
Neither do I tell you. Jesus had utterly confounded His enemies, and they can make no reply, nor do they dare reiterate their question.
Additional Notes
The arrival of the deputation from the Sanhedrin. Jesus and His little band of disciples were surrounded in the cloisters of the Temple by a “ formidable deputation, imposing alike in its numbers and its stateliness. The chief priests, heads of the twenty-four courses, the learned scribes, the leading rabbis, representatives of all the constituent classes of the Sanhedrin, were there to overawe Him whom they despised as the poor, ignorant Prophet of despicable Galilee, by the presence of all that was venerable in age, eminent in wisdom, or imposing in authority in the great council of the nation. The people whom He was engaged in teaching made reverent way for them, lest they should pollute those floating robes and ample fringes with a touch ; and when they had arranged themselves around Jesus, they sternly and abruptly asked Him, ‘ By what authority dost thou these things ? ’ ’’ (Farrar). These words give us a vivid verbal picture of the scene that took place when the Sanhedrin questioned our Lord.
On the signs of a true Prophet. The chief priests and Scribes, as the spiritual guides of Israel, were bound to exercise a supervision over those who taught the people, or took to themselves the office of prophets. In Deut. xviii. 20-22 we read : “ But the prophet, who being corrupted with pride, shall speak in my name things that I did not command him to say, or in the name of strange gods, shall be slain. And if in silent thought thou answer : How shall I know the word that the Lord hath not spoken ? thou shalt have this sign : Whatsoever that same prophet foretelleth in the name of the Lord, and it cometh not to pass : that thing the Lord hath not spoken, but the prophet hath forged it by the pride of his mind ; and therefore thou shalt not fear him.” St John the Baptist came as a prophet of God and announced the coming of ‘‘one mightier.” Had the Sanhedrin searched to know the truth respecting St John the Baptist, they would have learnt the extraordinary circumstances relating to his birth. Some of the Pharisees had gone out to St John in the wilderness and had heard his doctrine. Many had seen him point out Jesus as the Lamb of God, and had seen his prophecy realized. “ He, upon wliom thou shalt see the Spirit descending and remaining upon him, he it is that baptizeth with the Holy Ghost.” Therefore, according to the test imposed by the Law, St John was a true prophet, since his predictions were fulfilled, and consequently Christ was the Messias, On this occasion Jesus “had recourse to a method familiar to both Jews and Greeks, of answering by interrogation, and solving one question by proposing another, which if candidly answered, would solve the former” (MacEvilly, Comm., p. 387).
Totus tuus ego sum
Et omnia mea tua sunt;
Tecum semper tutus sum:
Ad Jesum per Mariam.
No comments:
Post a Comment