St John Chapter i : Verses 45-51
 |
| When thou wast under the fig tree, I saw thee. J-J Tissot. Brooklyn Museum. |
46 And Nathanael said to him: Can any thing of good come from Nazareth? Philip saith to him: Come and see.
47 Jesus saw Nathanael coming to him: and he saith of him: Behold an Israelite indeed, in whom there is no guile.
48 Nathanael saith to him: Whence knowest thou me? Jesus answered, and said to him: Before that Philip called thee, when thou wast under the fig tree, I saw thee.
49 Nathanael answered him, and said: Rabbi, thou art the Son of God, thou art the King of Israel.
50 Jesus answered, and said to him: Because I said unto thee, I saw thee under the fig tree, thou believest: greater things than these shalt thou see.
51 And he saith to him: Amen, amen I say to you, you shall see the heaven opened, and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of man.
45 εὑρίσκει Φίλιππος τὸν Ναθαναὴλ καὶ λέγει αὐτῷ· Ὃν ἔγραψεν Μωϋσῆς ἐν τῷ νόμῳ καὶ οἱ προφῆται εὑρήκαμεν, ⸀Ἰησοῦν υἱὸν τοῦ Ἰωσὴφ τὸν ἀπὸ Ναζαρέτ.
45 Invenit Philippus Nathanael, et dicit ei : Quem scripsit Moyses in lege, et prophetae, invenimus Jesum filium Joseph a Nazareth.
46 καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ Ναθαναήλ· Ἐκ Ναζαρὲτ δύναταί τι ἀγαθὸν εἶναι; λέγει αὐτῷ ⸀ὁ Φίλιππος· Ἔρχου καὶ ἴδε.
46 Et dixit ei Nathanael : A Nazareth potest aliquid boni esse? Dicit ei Philippus : Veni et vide.
47 εἶδεν ⸀ὁ Ἰησοῦς τὸν Ναθαναὴλ ἐρχόμενον πρὸς αὐτὸν καὶ λέγει περὶ αὐτοῦ· Ἴδε ἀληθῶς Ἰσραηλίτης ἐν ᾧ δόλος οὐκ ἔστιν.
47 Vidit Jesus Nathanael venientem ad se, et dicit de eo : Ecce vere Israelita, in quo dolus non est.
48 λέγει αὐτῷ Ναθαναήλ· Πόθεν με γινώσκεις; ἀπεκρίθη Ἰησοῦς καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ· Πρὸ τοῦ σε Φίλιππον φωνῆσαι ὄντα ὑπὸ τὴν συκῆν εἶδόν σε.
48 Dicit ei Nathanael : Unde me nosti? Respondit Jesus, et dixit ei : Priusquam te Philippus vocavit, cum esses sub ficu, vidi te.
49 ἀπεκρίθη ⸂αὐτῷ Ναθαναήλ⸃· Ῥαββί, σὺ εἶ ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ, σὺ ⸂βασιλεὺς εἶ⸃ τοῦ Ἰσραήλ.
49 Respondit ei Nathanael, et ait : Rabbi, tu es Filius Dei, tu es rex Israel.
50 ἀπεκρίθη Ἰησοῦς καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ· Ὅτι εἶπόν σοι ⸀ὅτι εἶδόν σε ὑποκάτω τῆς συκῆς πιστεύεις; μείζω τούτων ⸀ὄψῃ.
50 Respondit Jesus, et dixit ei : Quia dixi tibi : Vidi te sub ficu, credis; majus his videbis.
51 καὶ λέγει αὐτῷ· Ἀμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω ⸀ὑμῖν, ὄψεσθε τὸν οὐρανὸν ἀνεῳγότα καὶ τοὺς ἀγγέλους τοῦ θεοῦ ἀναβαίνοντας καὶ καταβαίνοντας ἐπὶ τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου.
51 Et dicit ei : Amen, amen dico vobis, videbitis caelum apertum, et angelos Dei ascendentes, et descendentes supra Filium hominis.
Annotations
45. Philip findeth Nathanael, &c. “Not by chance,” as Cyril saith; “but he sought him with great diligence, for he knew that he was a very diligent searcher of the Scriptures.” It would appear that he found him at Cana of Galilee, which was the native place of Nathanael, as is plain from chap. xxi. 2.
Nathanael, his friend and comrade. You will inquire who was this Nathanael?
1. Claudius Espenæus, commenting on 2 Tim. iv., says that Nathanael was the same as Ursicinus, the first Bishop of Bourges.
2. The Greek Menæa says that Nathanael is the same as the Apostle Simon the Cananite. He is there commemorated on the 22d of April as follows: “The Holy Apostle Nathanael, which was Simon Zelotes, of Cana in Galilee, where Christ at the marriage feast turned the water into wine.” He is also commemorated in the Menæa on the 10th of May.
3. and more probably, Rupertus and Jansen in this passage think Nathanael is the Apostle Bartholomew. They show this, firstly, because the other Evangelists always join together Philip and Bartholomew, as John here joins Philip and Nathanael. Secondly, because we nowhere read of Christ’s calling Bartholomew, unless it were this call of Nathanael. Thirdly, because the other three Evangelists who make mention of Bartholomew make no mention of Nathanael, and vice versâ with S. John. Fourthly, because S. John (xxi. 2) associates Nathanael with the Apostles Peter, Thomas, James, and John in fishing, and the vision of Jesus. It would seem therefore that he was an Apostle, and yet it is not apparent who else he could be if he were not Bartholomew. Fifthly, because Bartholomew does not seem to be a proper name, but only to signify that he was the son of Tolmai; and his proper name seems to have been Nathanael. Sixthly, because Christ said of Nathanael, Behold an Israelite indeed, in whom is no guile. And then Christ promises him a vision of angels ascending and descending upon Himself. Christ therefore seems to have specially loved him, and to have chosen him for a friend and Apostle.
S. Augustine, however, dissents from this view, because he thinks Nathanael was a doctor of the Law. He discoursed with S. Philip out of the law. But Christ did not choose for His Apostles men learned in the Law, but rude and ignorant fishermen. To this it may be replied that Nathanael was a student, but not a doctor of the Law. Just as Philip, Andrew, and Peter all discoursed out of the Law concerning the coming of Messiah. If, however, Nathanael was not an Apostle, he was certainly a disciple, wherefore L. Dexter (Chron. ad A.D. 101) says, “Nathanael, one of the seventy disciples of the Lord, sleeps in Treuga, a city of Spain,” now called Leon. Another writer adds that he slept in the Lord on the 30th of November.
Nathanael means in Hebrew the gift of God, or God gave, or given by God; in Latin, Adeodatus. The prince of the tribe of Issachar in the time of Moses was called Nathanael (Num. i. 8). It may be that our Apostle was descended from him, and took his name.
Jesus the son of Joseph of Nazareth. For Nazareth is only three hours distant from Cana, so that Nathanael of Cana might easily know of Jesus of Nazareth, Joseph’s son, as he was commonly reputed to be.
46. And Nathanael said to him: Can any thing of good come from Nazareth? For Nazareth of Galilee was a place ignoble and obscure, and despised by the Jews. Wherefore the Pharisees say (vii. 52), out of Galilee a prophet riseth not. “How then, O Philip, canst thou think that Christ is sprung from Nazareth, especially when Micah foretold that Christ was to spring from Juda and David, and to be born at Bethlehem?” So S. Chrysostom, who adds, “He shows therefore both knowledge of the Scripture, and simplicity of disposition, as well as a vehement desire for the coming of Christ in that he did not despise Philip’s words. For he knew that Philip might be deceived with regard to things to be commemorated in his country.” And Philip was partly wrong; for though Christ was conceived at Nazareth, He was born at Bethlehem, of which Philip was at this time ignorant.
Philip saith to him: Come and see. Syriac, Come and thou shalt see. “I will not dispute with thee about Nazareth, but come, see and hear Jesus: and you shall experience what I have experienced, that you may be ravished with His love, and believe that He is the very Christ.” Listen to S. Chrysostom. “Philip does not tell him how He is the Christ, and how the prophets have foretold, but he leads him to Jesus, knowing that he will not go away from Him if he tastes His words and His doctrine. If you only see Him, he says, if you only speak with Him, you will at once agree with me.” “We ought to believe,” says Cyril, “that there was a certain unspeakable loveliness in the words of Christ which attracted the minds of the hearers by its great sweetness.”
47. Jesus saw Nathanael coming to him: and he saith of him: Behold an Israelite indeed, in whom there is no guile. He is a follower of the candour, simplicity, and sanctity of Israel, that is, of the patriarch Jacob, from whom he was descended. Wherefore the Syriac translates, Behold a son of Israel indeed. Jesus shows that He knew the pure state of Nathanael’s mind, that thereby Nathanael might know that Jesus was not a mere man, but that He was also God, and the Searcher of hearts. S. Chrysostom thinks that Christ alludes to what Nathanael had said to Philip, Can any good thing come out of Nazareth? As if Jesus had said, “I am not displeased with what thou hast said about Me, because I know thou hast a candid mind, and art anxious to know the truth.”
48. Nathanael saith to him: Whence knowest thou me? “Observe,” says S. Chrysostom, “the consistency of the man. He is not puffed up by praise, but he proceeds to inquire accurately, that he may learn something certain about Christ.”
Jesus answered, and said to him: Before that Philip called thee, when thou wast under the fig tree, I saw thee. “When thou wast alone under the fig tree, and thoughtest that no one saw thee, I saw thee, and know what thou wast doing in secret there. Hence thou mayest gather that I am greater than man, even Messiah, the Son of God.” So S. Cyril, S. Augustine, and others.
Mystically, S. Gregory (Moral. l. 18, c. 20), Under the fig tree, i.e., beneath the shadow of the Law, I saw thee, that I might transfer thee to the vine of My Gospel.
Tropologically, learn from hence that God and Christ are everywhere present, and are to be feared, when thou art alone in thy chamber; yea, when thou secretly thinkest and desirest anything in thy heart, Christ is looking at thee, and beholding thy thoughts and desires. Take heed therefore lest thou do anything, or desire, or think anything, which will offend the eyes of His majesty. For so He beheld Nathanael, and what he was doing under the fig tree. So also God saw Adam under a fig tree eating its forbidden fruit.
49. Nathanael answered him, and said: Rabbi, thou art the Son of God . Son of God: that is, His natural and consubstantial Son, for this is the plain meaning of the words. So SS. Cyril, Augustine, Maldonatus, &c. But S. Chrysostom, Euthymius, Lyra, &c., think Nathanael was ignorant that Christ was God, and only believed that He was the adopted Son of God, by a peculiar grace by which he saw that He was superior to all other prophets and saints.
I am disposed to think that Philip, from the testimony of John the Baptist concerning Jesus (ver. 34), believed Him to be the Son of God, but in a confused sort of way, without clearly discerning between natural and adoptive sonship, and that he persuaded Nathanael to think as he did himself. For although John the Baptist in saying that Christ was the Son of God meant His natural Son, by the Hypostatic Union of the Humanity with the Word, Philip and Nathanael did not as yet understand this until they had been more fully taught.
thou art the King of Israel, i.e., Messiah, son of David and Solomon, and therefore heir of the kingdom of the twelve tribes of Israel. This is what David foretold in the 2nd Psalm, speaking in the person of Christ: “But I am appointed king by him over Sion his holy mountain, preaching his commandment. The Lord hath said to me: Thou art my son, this day have I begotten thee. ” From hence it is clear that David foretold that Messiah would be the Son of God by nature. But few before John the Baptist and Christ Himself clearly and fully understood this. The Œcumenical Council of Constantinople, by a constitution of Pope Vigilius, pronounces an anathema against those who would explain the words of Nathanael, Thou art the Son of God, to be so applied to Christ as though He were not very God, but as it were of the household of God, and were named God on account of the friendship which he had with God.
50. Jesus answered, and said to him: Because I said unto thee, I saw thee under the fig tree, thou believest: greater things than these shalt thou see. Jesus answered—greater things—the greater mysteries of My doctrine, life, passion, resurrection, by which thou shalt know not only that I am the King and Lord of Israel, but of the whole universe of heaven, and of the angels.
51. And he saith to him: Amen, amen I say to you, you shall see the heaven opened : not that the heaven was to be in reality cleft, but because it was to afford a passage to the angels going in and out, like as it were a door that is opened. Thus heaven shall appear to be opened. This is the figure of speech called catachresis. In like manner, the heaven seemed to be opened at Christ’s baptism. So too S. Stephen, when he was stoned, saw Jesus standing at the right hand of God. By this vision it is signified that heaven, which had been shut for four thousand years because of the sins of men, was now to be opened by Christ.
and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of man, to obey Him as their King. This is the force of the Greek ἐπὶ, which answers to the Hebrew al. Wherefore Vatablus translates under the Son of Man, as though Christ said, “under My power and sway, as I will and command.” So Frank Lucas.
Observe (1.) that Christ, in calling Nathanael an Israelite in whom was no guile, evidently alludes to the vision of angels ascending and descending in the ladder from earth to heaven, which the Patriarch Jacob saw at Bethel (Gen. xxviii. 12). So S. Augustine. For Israel, or Jacob, was a type of Christ. For Christ is the true Israel, i.e., having power with God. Christ is the Patriarch of Christians, the founder of Bethel, the House of God, i.e., the Church both militant and triumphant.
2. Christ, by what He says about this vision of the angels ascending to Himself, signifies that He is the Prince not only of men, but of angels, and therefore true God, the Son of God. For the angels ascend and descend to Him as His ministers, that they may obey and fulfil all His commands both in heaven and earth. So S. Cyril and Chrysostom.
You will ask, When did this descent and ascent of the angels to Christ take place? 1. S. Chrysostom thinks it took place when Christ suffered His agony and bloody sweat in the garden, when an angel appeared, strengthening Him (S. Luke, xxii. 44). Also when the angels appeared to the woman to announce His resurrection (S. Matt. xxviii).
2. S. Cyril thinks it took place at His baptism; for then it was that by the ministry of angels a dove was formed, and flew down upon Christ, which was the sign of the Holy Ghost. But this had already taken place when Christ spoke to Nathanael.
3. Euthymius thinks it took place at the ascension; for then all the angels accompanied Him as He went up, like servants their prince, and soldiers their king.
4. Toletus thinks that it is continually taking place in the Church, which Christ rules by means of the angels.
5. Maldonatus thinks it will take place in the Day of Judgment; for then all the angels, both good and bad, will stand in His presence—the good, that they may after the Judgment lead the righteous to heaven; the bad, that they may carry the wicked to hell.
6. Frank Lucas understands the words to refer to the miracles of Christ, and the heavenly gifts, in which the angels were employed by Christ in this life, and afterwards. Jesus means, he says, that at the bidding of the Son of Man from henceforth heaven should seem to be open, with the angels going and coming, because in a short time the angels, being commanded by the Son of Man, would bring great abundance of God’s great gifts to the earth, which all would behold,—even the healing of the sick, the cleansing of the lepers, giving sight to the blind, the justification of the wicked, the effusion of the Holy Ghost. And since all of these are manifest gifts of God, heaven could not seem other than to be opened, and the holy angels, by whom heavenly things are ministered, to serve, at the bidding of the Son of Man, by those who beheld Him bestowing them upon many. Christ therefore is here speaking of all kinds of miracles and heavenly gifts, which, immediately after the calling of Nathanael, He was about to manifest in the whole period of His mortal life, and after His ascension, in the government of the Church until the end of the world. All these meanings are true and apposite.
But because Christ specially promises this vision of angels to Philip and Nathanael to strengthen and augment their faith in Him, this ascent and descent of the angels upon Him was not fulfilled either at His baptism, passion, resurrection, or ascension. Therefore we say that the words more plainly, simply, and expressly imply that this was an open, or manifest, and peculiar vision of angels coming to the living Christ, such as was given to Jacob, who was a type of Christ. Wherefore that vision of Jacob presignified a similar vision of angels to Christ, a vision like that which took place at His birth, when the angels who descended to Him sang, Glory to God in the highest. But where and when this angelic vision took place the Evangelists do not tell us, just as they omit many other acts in the life of Christ. So Jansen.
This vision took place (1.) to show that Christ had reconciled men and angels, earth and heaven, and had restored the mutual communion and friendship which existed in Paradise.
2. To show that Christians are strangers and foreigners on earth, and ought to converse with angels, and imitate the angelic life, as “fellow-citizens with the saints, and of the household of God.”
3. To assign angels to us as our guardians, to defend us against all the attacks of men and evil spirits, to urge us to the practice of heroic virtues, and when we die to carry us to heaven. For the angels ascend to bear our sighs and prayers to God: they descend to bring God’s gracious gifts to us.
4. To declare the majesty of Christ and the obedience and reverence of the angels to Him. For He, as S. Chrysostom says, has been set “far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come” (Eph. i. 21).
+ + +
SUB tuum præsidium confugimus, Sancta Dei Genitrix. Nostras deprecationes ne despicias in necessitatibus, sed a periculis cunctis libera nos semper, Virgo gloriosa et benedicta. Amen.
The Vladimirskaya Icon. >12th century.
Totus tuus ego sum
Et omnia mea tua sunt;
Tecum semper tutus sum:
Ad Jesum per Mariam.
No comments:
Post a Comment