The Divine Lamp

The unfolding of thy words gives light; it imparts understanding to the simple…Make thy face shine upon thy servant, and teach me thy statutes

Archive for the ‘Notes on Mark’ Category

Catholic Scripture Manual on Mark 6:53-56

Posted by Dim Bulb on February 9, 2014

Text in red are my additions.

53 And when they had passed over, they came into the land of Genezareth, and set to the shore.

into the land of Genesareth. A plain on the north- western shore of the lake of Genesareth (i.e., Sea of Galilee), about three miles long and one wide. It has a most rich vegetation and a very warm climate, being 500 feet below the sea-level. All kinds of fruits, grapes, figs, dates, olives, etc. abound there.

set to the shore: moored the boat. St John tells us they disembarked at Capharnaum. In Mark 6:45 Jesus had instructed the disciples to precede him to Bethsaida. These differences vex scholars but the reader should keep in mind that none of the gospels claims to be presenting a strictly chronological presentation of Jesus’ ministry. Recall for example that Luke narrates Jesus’ rejection in Nazareth before any other event in his public ministry, fully aware that events in his ministry had preceded it (Lk 4:16-30, especially verses 23) It’s possible that they did first land in Bethsaida and then visited other cities on the lake, including the land of Genesareth, but Mark has skipped some of the itinerary.

54 And when they were gone out of the ship, immediately they knew him:

immediately they knew him. It was morning, and the people who were on the shore recognised Jesus.

55 And running through that whole country, they began to carry about in beds those that were sick, where they heard he was.

running through the whole country. St Mark s usual graphic style. See Mark 6:32-33.

56 And whithersoever he entered, into towns or into villages or cities, they laid the sick in the streets, and besought him that they might touch but the hem of his garment: and as many as touched him were made whole.

hem of his garment. Doubtless the miracle of the healing of the woman with an issue of blood had been noised abroad. In addition, Orientals believe that the contact with a holy person brings grace and blessing.

as many as touched, etc. This proves they had faith in Christ’s power to heal them.

The crowds gathering to Jesus in both the country and the cities is a common markan motif (Mk 1:32-34; 3:7-10, 20; 4:1, 5:21).

Besought him that they might touch the hem of his garment. The experience of the hemorrhaging woman (Mk 5:27-28) was not unique.

Posted in Bible, Catholic, Catholic lectionary, Christ, Devotional Resources, Notes on Mark, Notes on the Lectionary, Scripture | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Catholic Scripture Manual on Mark 6:1-6

Posted by Dim Bulb on February 3, 2014

1 AND going out from thence, he went into his own country; and his disciples followed him.

Going out from thence. Either out of the house of Jairus, or more probably out of Capliarnaum, where He from this time ceased to have a fixed dwelling-place.

His own country: i.e. Nazareth, where He had been brought up.

followed him. Either Jesus walked on ahead of His disciples, or else He went alone to Nazareth and they joined Him there.

2 And when the Sabbath was come, he began to teach in the synagogue: and many hearing him were in admiration at his doctrine, saying: How came this man by all these things? and what wisdom is this that is given to him, and such mighty works as are wrought by his hands?

to teach in the synagogue. As He had done at His previous visit.

were in admiration. Literally “were astounded,” according to the original signification of the word.

How came this man by all these things? Unable to deny the wisdom and miracles of Jesus, the unbelieving Nazarenes cunningly question the origin of His power, in order to justify their own incredulity. They knew that Jesus had not been highly educated, but that He had worked among them as a carpenter.

wisdom …. mighty works. Not only knowledge to teach and to convince, but also power to confirm His teaching by “mighty works.”

mighty works as are wrought. Those of which they had heard, not
those done on this occasion.

3 Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of James, and Joseph, and Jude, and Simon? are not also his sisters here with us? And they were scandalized in regard of him.

the carpenter. This word in the original may signify a worker in iron, stone, wood, etc., but more generally it refers to a worker in wood. St Mark’s is the only gospel in which we find our Lord called the carpenter. It was customary for every Jew to teach his son a trade, no matter how high his own station. One of their proverbs is, “He who teaches not a trade to his son teaches him to be a thief.” St Paul was a tent-maker by trade (Acts 18:3). Jesus, as a mere village carpenter, would not have earned high wages.

the brother of James, etc. (See Genealogical Table, p. 75.). I can’t reproduce this on the blog.

His sisters: daughters of Mary of Cleophas and of Alpheus (or
Cleophas).

scandalized. This word is coined from the original provincial Greek word. The Greeks used a kind of trap (scandalon) for ensnaring animals. The “scandalon” was that part of the trap which gripped the animal running unwarily against it. Hence to scandalize a person is to entrap and destroy him (Morrison). Here the expression implies that our Lord’s humble origin was the great stumblingblock which irritated the envy and prejudice of His compatriots. See the note under the heading ON SCANDAL at the end of this post.

4 And Jesus said to them: A prophet is not without honour, but in his own country, and in his own house, and among his own kindred.

A prophet, etc. Jesus here quotes a Jewish proverb.

his own country …. house. …. kindred, i.e. Galilee, including the little town of Nazareth; His kindred or distant relations and His nearer relatives.

5 And he could not do any miracles there, only that he cured a few that were sick, laying his hands upon them.

He could not do any miracles …. because of their unbelief. Man’s incredulity circumscribed God’s power in a certain sense; Jesus always exacted faith as a condition for being healed.

6 And he wondered because of their unbelief, and he went through the villages round about teaching.

He wondered because of their unbelief. This shows how truly human
our Lord was. As man He could “wonder,” though as God He foresaw their incredulity. Jesus also “marvelled,” but with pleasure, at the faith of the Centurion. “Which Jesus hearing marvelled; and turning about to the multitude that followed him, he said: Amen, I say to you, I have not found so great faith, not even in Israel” (St Luke 7:9).

It is proverbially difficult for men to acknowledge one of their equals, with whom they have been intimate, as superior to themselves in intellect or merit. “Familiarity breeds contempt” of those who they deem ought not to surpass them. To His own family and kindred, Jesus was an ordinary man, excepting of course to our dear Lady, St Joseph, and those of His kinsmen who were His disciples. This fact alone shews how carefully Mary and Joseph had kept the secrets confided to them. Jesus has passed during the thirty years of His hidden life as the carpenter s son and for no more. The “mighty works” wrought in the neighbourhood of His own home could not convince the incredulous Nazarenes of His sublime mission. Resurrections had been wrought, and the report of these miracles must have reached Nazareth, but since the people wilfully closed their ears and refused to listen to the greatest of Prophets, “neither will they believe if one rise again from the dead” (St Luke 16:31).

through the villages. In the region of Galilee.

ON SCANDAL

It must be carefully noted that giving and taking scandal are totally distinct from each other:

(a) To give scandal, is to lead another into sin, either directly or indirectly, and this sin may take a positive or a negative form. To advise or lead a person to tell a lie is a positive sin of scandal. To abstain without serious reasons from hearing Mass 0n Sundays, and thus by our own negligence, to be the cause of others missing Mass, is a negative sin of scandal. Our Lord strongly denounced the Pharisees for giving scandal. “But woe to you scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites: because you shut the kingdom of heaven against men, for you yourselves do not enter in, and those that are going in you suffer not to enter” (St Matt 23:13). “But he that shall scandalize one of these little ones that believe in me, it were better for him that a mill-stone should be hanged about his neck, and that he should be drowned in the depth of the sea. Wo to the world because of scandals. For it must needs be that scandals come : but nevertheless wo to that man by whom the scandal cometh” (St Matt 18:6, 7).

(b) To take scandal, is to take occasion of sin even from the good actions of our neighbours. It is called Pharisaical scandal, because the Pharisees were guilty of it. “And behold, there was a man who had a withered hand, and they asked him, saying: Is it lawful to heal on the sabbath-days? that they might accuse him” (St Matt. 12:10). “And the ruler of the synagogue (being angry that Jesus had healed on the sabbath) answering said to the multitude, Six days there are wherein you ought to work. In them therefore come and be healed; and not on the sabbath-day" (St Luke 13:14).

Speaking of the Pharisees taking scandal, our Lord says, “Let them alone: they are blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both fall into the pit” (St Matt. 15:14). Catholics who are ignorant of their religion and consequently weak in their faith, are apt to take scandal without a cause. In this, it is not their will that is perverse, but their instruction is insufficient, or their judgment is at fault. With regard to such “weak brethren” it is the duty of an earnest Catholic

(a) to refrain from what might be mistaken for a sin;
(b) to enlighten them as to what the Church teaches on the subject.

Our Lord even worked a miracle to avoid scandal being taken. “But that we may not scandalize them, go to the sea, and cast in a hook: and that fish that shall first come up, take: and when thou hast opened its mouth, thou shalt find a stater: take that, and give it to them for me and thee” (St Matt. 17:26). The Scriptures frequently urge us to circumspection on this point. “All things are lawful to me, but all things are not expedient. All things are lawful to me, but I will not be brought under the power of any” (1 Cor. 6:12). “But take heed lest perhaps this your liberty, become a stumblingblock to the weak”  (1 Cor. 8:9). “From all appearance of evil refrain yourselves” (1 Thess. 5:22).

Posted in Bible, Catholic, Catholic lectionary, Christ, Devotional Resources, Notes on Mark, Notes on the Lectionary, Scripture | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Catholic Scripture Manual on Mark 5:21-43

Posted by Dim Bulb on February 2, 2014

21 And when Jesus had passed again in the ship over the strait, a great multitude assembled together unto him, and he was nigh unto the sea.

Over the strait. The western side of the lake near Capharnaum, which St Matt, calls His own city.

a great multitude. Probably those to whom Jesus had previously preached from the ship were waiting and watching for His return.

assembled together unto him. Literally upon Him, pressing closely around.

22 And there cometh one of the rulers of the synagogue named Jairus: and seeing him, falleth down at his feet.

there cometh. According to St Matthew s account, Jairus did not come immediately when Jesus disembarked, but three other incidents intervened; viz., the healing of the paralytic, the call of Levi, the Pharisees taking scandal because our Lord took food with the publican (St Matt. 9).

One of the rulers. Each synagogue was ruled by elders, with a Ruler as head. Some more important synagogues seem to have had several Rulers. Their duties were to conduct the services, and they had the power of excommunicating evil-doers. Therefore they were feared and respected by the Jews and belonged to the highest class of society. (See also Jewish Synagogues, Part IV.)

named Jairus. The Hebrew Jair or Ya-ir, meaning “He will enlighten.” All Hebrew names had a meaning. The names of those whom. Jesus healed are rarely mentioned.

falleth down at his feet. Jairus made the usual oriental salutation, which consisted in kneeling and touching the ground with the forehead. Jairus bent in the direction of Jesus feet, not necessarily touching them.

23 And he besought him much, saying: My daughter is at the point of death, come, lay thy hand upon her, that she may be safe, and may live.

My daughter. From St Luke we gather that she was an only
child, almost twelve years old (Luke 8:42).

point of death. St Matt, has, is even now dead (Matt 9:18). Jairus evidently feared she might be dead by this time.

come, lay thy hand. Jairus must have heard how often our Lord had cured the sick by the imposition of hands. He had not the faith of the centurion who believed our Lord could heal from a distance.

may be safe. Saved from the disease.

24 And he went with him, and a great multitude followed him, and they thronged him.

He went with him. Jesus was satisfied with Jairus faith and went. He knew, too, that one would beg His mercy and compassion on the way thither.

thronged him: consequently our Lord would advance but slowly.

25 And a woman who was under an issue of blood twelve years,

A woman.

Eusebius, bishop of Cesarea (315-320 A.D.), states that she was a Gentile, named Veronica, of Cesarea Philippi (or Paneas). She is said afterwards to have pleaded with Pilate to spare our Lord. He also relates that, as a tribute of gratitude for her cure, she erected at the gate of her house a bronze image representing Jesus standing, while a woman knelt before Him with outstretched hands in the attitude of a suppliant. Julian the Apostate destroyed this image and placed his own statue on the pedestal, but this statue was destroyed by lightning.

An issue of blood. She evidently suffered from chronic haemorrhage. This affliction rendered her legally “unclean,” and unable to take part in ordinary religious and social life. It caused her isolation, acute pain, and prolonged suffering.

26 And had suffered many things from many physicians; and had spent all that she had, and was nothing the better, but rather worse,

suffered many things. Both from the disease itself and the way in which such diseases were treated in those days. Some of them were merely ridiculous superstitious practices, others consisted in potions made of most revolting ingredients.

spent all. She was evidently a person of the higher classes, which, the local tradition confirms.

27 When she had heard of Jesus, came in the crowd behind him, and touched his garment.

heard of Jesus. Learned from eye-witnesses His marvellous works in Galilee.

came in the crowd behind him. In order to escape observation.

touched his garment, A cloak or outer garment having four corners, each of which was adorned with a tassel or fringe. It was prescribed by the law of Moses: “Speak to the children of Israel, and thou shalt tell them to make to themselves fringes in the corners of their garments, putting in them ribands of blue. That when they shall see them, they may remember all the commandments of the Lord, and not follow their own thoughts and eyes going astray after divers things” (Num. 15:38, 39).

The Pharisees wore very large tassels or fringes. It was considered a mark of esteem and veneration to touch the lower tassels.

28 For she said: If I shall touch but his garment, I shall be whole.

For she said: speaking “within herself,” as St Matt, explains; literally she
was saying or repeating to herself, If I shall, etc.

29 And forthwith the fountain of her blood was dried up, and she felt in her body that she was healed of the evil.

forthwith. This was another instantaneous cure.

the fountain . . . was dried up. The poor woman was healed the moment she touched our Lord s garment. Clearly, the fringe alone could not have healed her, but it was the instrument employed by Christ to restore her to health in reward for her faith. Our Lord here sanctions the use of relics, and in the Acts we find that God worked miracles by means of them. “$o that even there were brought from his body to the sick handkerchiefs and aprons, and the diseases departed from them, and the wicked spirits went out of them” (Acts 19:12). It was the faith of the person that obtained the miracle in all these cases, and not some intrinsic magical power in the object by which the healing was conferred. The Church teaches us that the relics of the Saints are to be held in veneration.

of the evil. Of the “disease” or “scourge.”

30 And immediately Jesus knowing in himself the virtue that had proceeded from him, turning to the multitude, said: Who hath touched my garments?

immediately Jesus knowing. Jesus was conscious of His own power to heal, and also that the poor woman had profited by that healing power, in virtue of her faith.

Who hath touched my garments? Not by accident, but animated with lively faith, so that virtue had gone out from Him.

31 And his disciples said to him: Thou seest the multitude thronging thee, and sayest thou who hath touched me?

His disciples said. St Luke 8:45 says, “All denying, Peter and they that were with him” said; the all evidently does not include the woman.

32 And he looked about to see her who had done this.

He looked about to see her. He turned round, knowing well who it was. Probably the woman had shrunk back among the crowd.

33 But the woman fearing and trembling, knowing what was done in her, came and fell down before him, and told him all the truth.

fearing and trembling. Because she had presumed to touch our Lord’s garment. The touch of the “unclean” caused ceremonial defilement until the evening.

told him all. The particulars of her illness, related in verses 25-26, adding the confession of how she had touched Him in order to obtain her restoration to health.

34 And he said to her: Daughter, thy faith hath made thee whole: go in peace, and be thou whole of thy disease.

Daughter. This is the only recorded occasion on which our Lord used this title.

thy faith hath made thee whole. His own power had operated the cure, but her living faith had elicited that power.

35 While he was yet speaking, some come from the ruler of the synagogue’s house, saying: Thy daughter is dead: why dost thou trouble the master any further?

Why dost thou trouble, etc., i.e. why fatigue Him by asking Him to go as far as the ruler s house?

36 But Jesus having heard the word that was spoken, saith to the ruler of the synagogue: Fear not, only believe.

Jesus having heard the word. The news of the child s death. He
at once encouraged the father not to lose heart.

Fear not, only believe: “and she shall be safe” (St Luke 8:50). The daughter was to be healed in reward for the father’s faith. So it is often now. The prayer of faith obtains graces for those for whom we pray.

37 And he admitted not any man to follow him, but Peter, and James, and John the brother of James.

Peter, James and John. These were the chosen three, who were
privileged to witness certain miracles and scenes when the other apostles
were excluded. As usual St Peter stands first. These three witnessed:

(a) The raising of Jairus daughter.
(b) The Transfiguration (St Matt. 17:1).
(c) The Agony in Gethsemani (St Matt. 26:37).

38 And they cone to the house of the ruler of the synagogue; and he seeth a tumult, and people weeping and wailing much.

people weeping and wailing. The tumult was caused by the hired mourners, chiefly women. The poorest Jew, on the death of his wife, was bound by the Rabbinical law to hire at least two flute players and one mourning woman. The men played mournful strains, while the women beat their breasts and uttered loud lamentations. The higher the class to which the deceased belonged, the greater the lamentations. The period of mourning lasted at least eight days; in the case of a king it extended to a month. For more on Jewish mourning customs see further below under the heading MOURNERS AND MINSTRELS.

39 And going in, he saith to them Why make you this ado, and weep? the damsel is not dead, but sleepeth.

ado. Tumult. The hired mourners would probably be in the outer court. St Mark distinguishes between our Lord’s entrance into the house, and His entrance into the room where the child lay dead.

not dead but sleepeth. Death is often spoken of as a sleep (St John 11:11). “These things he said: and after that he said to them: Lazarus our friend sleepeth; but I go that I may awake him out of sleep.” Jesus meant that she would rise again, as from sleep. He had not yet looked on the child when He said this, though He knew she was really dead.

On the basis of the words the damsel is not dead, but sleepeth, some non-Catholic writers have concluded from these words that the child was in a trance, but there is no ground for thus construing our Lord’s words, since He used the same expression when speaking of Lazarus: “our friend sleepeth;” then finding that His Apostles had misunderstood Him, Jesus said to them plainly, “Lazarus is dead” (St John 11:14). St Jerome, speaking on the subject, says, “for God, all are alive;” and St Chrysostom remarks, “in His presence, death was nothing but sleep.”

40 And they laughed him to scorn. But he having put them all out, taketh the father and the mother of the damsel, and them that were with him, and entereth in where the damsel was lying.

laughed him to scorn. They knew she was dead, and misunderstanding the sense of His words, they mocked at Him. The message sent to Jairus, the convoking of the mourners, and their incredulity when told she was sleeping, are all proofs that the child was really dead, and thus the miracle was more evident.

having put them all out. The hired mourners could easily be dismissed.

entereth in where the damsel was lying: in an inner chamber.

41 And taking the damsel by the hand, he saith to her: Talitha cumi, which is, being interpreted: Damsel (I say to thee) arise.

by the hand. Jesus does not refrain from touching a corpse. He was above all legal prescriptions.

Talitha cumi. These words belong to the popular Aramaic dialect, and, as such, would probably be the child s mother-tongue; literally they signify Maid, arise.

St Mark uses this tongue on other occasions. (See Object of St Mark’s Gospel, p. 33.) These examples are proofs that our Lord frequently, if not habitually, spoke Aramaic when treating with the people.

Note on The Aramaic tongue. This tongue was proper to the in habitants and literature of Syria and Mesopotamia. This language is of the Semitic family, and a sister language to Syriac and Chaldee.

(I say to thee). These words are put in parentheses because, though included in the sense of the words, Maid, arise (since every command presupposes a speaker), they are not expressed in words.

42 And immediately the damsel rose up, and walked: and she was twelve years old: and they were astonished with a great astonishment.

immediately. St Mark s favourite word.

rose up and walked. A proof of her perfect restoration to life and health. This is the only miracle of raising the dead mentioned by St Mark. In all, three such miracles are recorded by the Evangelists:

(a) Jairus daughter, raised immediately after death.
(b) The widow s son, who was being carried to the grave.
(c) Lazarus, who had been dead four days.

In addition to the three dead raised by our Lord, there are two others mentioned in the Acts of the Apostles. See the raising of Tabitha in Acts 9:36-41; and the raising of Eutychus in Acts 20:9-12.

43 And he charged them strictly that no man should know it: and commanded that something should be given her to eat.

He charged them strictly, etc. Jesus probably wished to avoid renewing the opposition of the Pharisees and Scribes. The prohibition was laid on the parents chiefly. The multitude who had been dismissed could not fail to know and make known the miracle. Later, when Jesus raised Lazarus, He imposes no command to keep silence, for His hour being at hand, He allows his foes then to do their worst.

something should be given her to eat. To prove to the people that the child was really alive, and also to strengthen her. Thus Jesus after His Resurrection, partook of food in presence of His disciples as a proof that He was no phantom. Notice also in this injunction, the tenderness of our Lord.

MOURNERS AND MINSTRELS

They were of both sexes and various classes. The “mourning” of the lower classes consisted chiefly in lamenting, moaning and sighing, and calling on the dead. The educated mourners sang beautiful and impromptu elegies, commemorating the deceased s virtues, and extolling his great name and family. This custom of mourning or wailing over the dead is frequently referred to in holy Scripture. Dr Thomson says:

“There are in every city and community women exceedingly cunning in this business. They are always sent for and kept in readiness. When a fresh company of sympathizers comes in, these women make haste to take up a wailing, that the newly come may the more easily unite their tears with the mourners.”

The knowledge of these Eastern customs explains such texts as: “But Absalom fled, and went to Tholomai the son of Ammuid the king of Gessur. And David mourned for his son every day”(2 Sam 13:37). “And when I heard these words, I sat down and wept, and mourned for many days: and I fasted and prayed before the face of God in heaven” (Neh. 1:4). “And I will pour out upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace, and of prayers: and they shall look upon me, whom they have pierced: and they shall mourn for him as one mourneth for an only son, and they shall grieve over him, as the manner is to grieve for the death of the first-born (Zech. 12:10). “All Juda and Jerusalem mourned for him, particularly Jeremias: whose lamentations for Josias all the singing men and singing women repeat unto this day, and it became like a law in Israel: Behold it is found written in the Lamentations” (2 Chron 35:25).

Posted in Bible, Catholic, Catholic lectionary, Christ, Notes on Mark, Notes on the Lectionary, Scripture | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Catholic Scripture Manual on Mark 5:1-20

Posted by Dim Bulb on February 2, 2014

PRELIMINARY NOTE ON “THE COUNTRY OF THE GERASENS~We are told that this miracle took place “on the other side of the sea” and in the country of the Gerasens. This latter statement has given rise to much discussion, because the best Greek MSS. name three different places as the scene of the miracle. In the revised Anglican translation we find accordingly that St Matthew localises the place as Gradarens, while St Mark reads Gerasens, and St Luke has Gergesens. Of these three places, for geographical reasons, the ancient Gergesa, now Chersha or Khersa, seems to have been the correct one, for it has all the geographical features mentioned by the Evangelists. Gerasa, on the other hand, is situated about thirty miles south-east of Galilee, while Gadara was a large city in Perea, about eight miles from the lake. There is, however, no real discrepancy, as these towns being on the same side of the lake and in the same region, the land between might be named after any one of them.

1 AND they came over the strait of the sea, into the country of the Gerasens.

Gerasens. A district south-east of the lake and opposite Capharnaum. They would probably have arrived early in the morning, as the distance across the lake was about a night s journey ; moreover, there had been a tempest, arid this would have delayed them.

2 And as he went out of the ship, immediately there met him out of the monuments a man with an unclean spirit,

immediately. Probably the demoniac had seen the boat coming in and felt drawn to meet our Lord.

out of the monuments. Throughout Syria there are many natural caves, and it was also customary to hew tombs out of the solid rocks.

“An immense mountain rises directly above Chersha in which are ancient tombs” (Thomson). Many of these tombs belong to very remote periods, even before the time of our Lord. These sepulchres were considered “unclean” on account of the dead having been buried there, hence no Jew would enter them, and demoniacs and other outcasts would hold undisturbed possession of these caves.

a man. St Luke also speaks only of one, while St Matt. (Mt 8:28) mentions two that were possessed. One does not exclude a second; probably the more violent of the two is mentioned as being more dangerous.

with an unclean spirit. The man was possessed by a demon of impurity. See note “Objections Against Demonical Possession Refuted at the end of this post.

3 Who had his dwelling in the tombs, and no man now could bind him, not even with chains.

his dwelling. The Jews made no provision for the mentally afflicted. They bound them when they became violent; otherwise the poor creatures roamed at will throiigh the land. Maniacs, demoniacs, and lepers were alike treated as outcasts.

no man now could bind him. Evidently he had become more and more violent. The devil gave him supernatural strength, as to the man mentioned in the Acts 19:16. “And the man in whom the wicked spirit was, leaping upon them and mastering them loth, prevailed against them, so that they fled out -of that house naked and wounded.”

4 For having been often bound with fetters and chains, he had burst the chains, and broken the fetters in pieces, and no one could tame him.

chains. Bonds in general, particularly for the neck and hands not necessarily metal chains.

no one could tame him. He could neither be restrained by physical force nor subdued by will-power.

5 And he was always day and night in the monuments and in the mountains, crying and cutting himself with stones.

day and night in the monuments, etc. Probably passing his days wandering over the mountains, and his nights in the tombs. St Luke 8:27 says he wore no clothes, and St Matt 8:28 points out that none could pass by that way for fear of the two demoniacs.

cutting himself with stones. Demoniacs were often urged to lacerate
and even to destroy themselves. “Who, wheresoever he taketh him, dasheth him, and he foameth, and gnasheth with the teeth, and pineth away. And I spoke to thy disciples to cast him out, and they could not. And oftentimes hath he cast him. into the fire and into waters, to destroy him.
But if thou canst do anything, help us, having compassion on us” (St Marl 9:17, 21).

6 And seeing Jesus afar off, he ran and adored him.

he ran and adored him. The devils feared Christ, hence their acknowledgment of His divinity. On the other hand, the poor demoniac
may have felt something drawing him to the feet of Jesus; and while the adoration was a forced one on the part of the devil, it may have been a willing homage on the part of the poor demoniac.

7 And crying with a loud voice, he said: What have I to do with thee, Jesus the Son of the most high God? I adjure thee by God that thou torment me not.

What have I to do with thee? These words may mean “What is there in common between us?” or “Why do you trouble us thus?”

Jesus the Son of the most high God. Perhaps- the confession was forced from them, by the sense of power which they felt our Lord exercised over them. Certainly they had no good motive in confessing His divinity, and probably when the confession was publicly made, the devils may have hoped to throw discredit on our Lord, and by admitting that they knew Him, have led the bystanders to conclude that He worked in collusion with them.

This title Son of the most high God occurs here and in St Luke 1:32. From the earliest times we find the title “the most high” applied to God. Melchisedech was called “the priest of the most high God.”  “But Melchisedech the king of Salem, bringing forth bread and wine, for he was the priest of the most high God” (Gen. 14:18).

Balaam employs it. “The hearer of the words of God hath said, who knoweth the doctrine of the highest, and seeth the visions of the Almighty,” etc. (Num. 24:16). Likewise Moses, “When the most high divided the nations; when he separated the sons of Adam, he appointed the bounds of people according to the number of the children of Israel” (Deut. 32:8). It seems to have arisen in consequence of the Jews having been in contact with Gentiles, who held polytheistic creeds. It was frequently used in the formula of exorcism, therefore the title was familiar to the devils, since they were expelled “in the name of the most high.” (See St Luke 8:28; Acts 16:17.)

I adjure thee. Whenever a demoniac comes in presence of our Saviour we notice a btrange mingling of su pplication and arrogance. They evidently feared, and yet would fain defy Him.

torment me not. St Matt, adds “before the time” (Mt 8:29). The devils
do not wish to be sent back to hell. They prefer to roam at will and
torment men. Though they carry their torments with them wherever
they go, yet, evidently from these words, we may infer that they suffered
more intensely when confined to their own place.

8 For he said unto him: Go out of the man, thou unclean spirit.

For he said unto him, i.e. Christ had said to the demon Go out, etc., before the demon adjured Him, saying, Torment me not.

9 And he asked him: What is thy name? And he saith to him: My name is Legion, for we are many.

What is thy name?  Thy: here our Lord addresses the spirit, not
the man. Though there were many devils in the man, one seems to
have acted as spokesman. What have I to do with thee? Torment me
not. Jesus asked the question for the benefit of the Apostles.

Legion. Perhaps the devils wished to strike terror into the souls of the listeners and to give a great idea of their strength and power. A Roman legion varied from 3,000 to 6,000 men, and was a terror to the Jews. The number is not here to be taken literally. It simply implies they were many.

10 And he besought him much, that he would not drive him away out of the country.

he besought him, etc. Notice the four requests made by the devil. He asked Christ:

(a) Not to torment him by driving him out (v. 8).
(b) Not to drive him away out of the country (v. 10).
(c) Not to command them to go into the abyss (i.e. hell) (St Luke 8:31).
(d) That he might go into the swine (v. 12).

11 And there was there near the mountain a great herd of swine, feeding.

near the mountain. There are in the environs of Chersha large plateaus of fertile soil, where abundant pasture and bulbous roots suitable for swine s food are still to be seen.

a great herd of swine feeding. Jews were forbidden to keep swine or to eat swine s flesh. These swine may have belonged to some irreligious Jews or to Gentiles. Probably the herd was the property of more than one man. The greater number of the inhabitants of this region were certainly Gentiles, but there were also Hellenistic, i.e. Greek-speaking Jews living there.

12 And the spirits besought him, saying: Send us into the swine, that we may enter into them.

Send us into the swine. If the devils could enter into a man’s body, still more would they be able to take possession of animals, but they needed our Lord’s permission to do this. The devils doubtless wished to go into the swine

(1) That they might, by destroying the swine, free themselves.
(2) In order to stir up the owners of the herd against our Lord.

13 And Jesus immediately gave them leave. And the unclean spirits going out, entered into the swine: and the herd with great violence was carried headlong into the sea, being about two thousand, were stifled in the sea.

the herd with great violence was carried headlong. Near Chersha, a little to the south, a steep mountain rises almost perpendicularly from the sea. The swine rushing down the sides of this mountain with great violence could not have checked their course on arriving at the edge of the abrupt descent, but must inevitably have fallen into the sea.

two thousand. St Mark alone mentions the number.

stifled. Suffocated in the water. Jesus, as God, has a right to give or take worldly possessions as He wills. If the owners of the swine were Jews, they were breaking the law and deserved to lose their herds. If they were Gentiles, they had probably induced the Jews, in view of profit, to trade in swine, and thus gave scandal. In any case God can always, without injustice, take back what comes from Him, and we know that famine and pestilence have been frequently sent as chastisements. This miracle and that of “the cursing of the barren fig-tree” are the only two miracles of destruction which our Lord wrought.

14 And they that fed them fled, and told it in the city and in the fields. And they went out to see what was done:

they that fed them fled, etc. They ran away in fear and told all whom they met. The owners of the herds would have dwelt in the city. Hence they went out into the plains to see what was done (v. 14).

15 And they came to Jesus, and they see him that was troubled with the devil, sitting, clothed, and well in his wits, and they were afraid.

they come …. and see him, i.e. the demoniac.

Mark the contrast:

(a) The demoniac, now well in his wits.
(b) sitting at His feet. No longer roaming about, crying out, or cutting himself with stones.
(c) clothed: instead of naked.

they were afraid. Awed by the evident miracle.

16 And they that had seen it, told them, in what manner he had been dealt with who had the devil; and concerning the swine.

In this verse St Mark relates the scene as an eye-witness might have done. Those who had seen the miracle are eager to give all details to the newcomers, and also they wish to exonerate themselves from all blame for the loss of the swine.

17 And they began to pray him that he would depart from their coasts.

they began to pray him, etc. They regretted the loss of the swine, and feared to incur other losses. St Peter, in his humility, once said, “Depart from me, Lord,” but the Gerasens did not ask our Lord to depart on account of their unworthiness, but simply from interested worldly motives.

18 And when he went up into the ship, he that had been troubled with the devil, began to beseech him that he might be with him.

He went up into the ship. Our Lord granted their request. He does not force His graces on the unwilling. These Gerasens were also selfish, not considering the blessings which the poor demoniac had received. Jesus returned there about a year later.

that he might be with him. He wished to accompany our Lord, either out of gratitude, or perhaps he feared the devils might again take possession of him when Jesus had left.

19 And he admitted him not, but saith him: Go into thy house to thy friends, and tell them how great things the Lord hath done for thee, and hath had mercy thee.

tell them how great things, etc. The man now delivered was to be a disciple of Jesus and tell what God had done for him. Thus some at least, must have been prepared to receive our Lord when He returned there.

20 And he went his way, and began to publish in Decapolis how great things Jesus had done for him: and all men wondered.

Decapolis. A district containing a league of ten cities. It was established by Pompey the Great, in order to conquer and subjugate the native bands of robbers and Bedouins. (See Geog. Notes, page 83.)

Objections against Demoniacal Possession refuted

It has been objected by non-believers that there is no such thing as “possession by the devil,” but that what is and has been so called, is merely a form of disease, such as insanity, epilepsy, or some nervous complaint. They base their assertion on the fact, that many of the symptoms are similar, since maniacs and persons afflicted with fits, gnash their teeth, foam at the mouth, and strive to injure or destroy them selves. To this objection we can give the following answers:

I. The Jews (who had the true faith) believed in possession by the devil, since they attributed certain diseases to the power of the devil.

(a) “And when they were gone out, behold they brought him a dumb
man possessed with a devil” (St Matt 9:32). “Then was offered to
him one possessed with a devil blind and dumb : and he healed him so
that he spoke and saw” (St Matt. 12:22). “Master, I have brought
my son to thee having a dumb spirit” (St Mark 9:16).

(b) They distinguished between persons afflicted with disease and
those possessed by devils. “And when it was evening after sunset,
they brought to him all that were ill, and that were possessed with
devils” (St Mark 1:32). “Who were come to hear him, and to be healed
of their diseases. And they that were troubled with unclean spirits, were cured” (St Luke 6:18).

(c) They accused our Lord of being thus possessed. “Why seek you
to kill me? The multitude answered and said: Thou hast a devil; who seeketh to kill thee?” (St John 7:20). “And the scribes who were come from Jerusalem, said : He hath Beelzebub, and by the prince of devils he casteth out devils” (St Mark 3:22).

II. A spirit or personality only could reveal the divinity of our Lord, could fear being cast into the abyss, or desire to remain in a given locality. Such manifestations are not within the compass of a mere disease.

III. Our Lord distinctly teaches that there is such a thing as possession by devils, since

(a) He gives His Apostles power to cast out devils, and they used this power. “Lord, the devils also are subject to us in thy name.”  “I saw Satan like lightning falling from heaven.”  “But yet rejoice not in this, that spirits are subject unto you” (St Luke 10:17, 18, 20).

(b) He warns them that certain devils are difficult to expel (St Mark 9:28).

(c) The sudden cure of the Gerasen demoniac, and the consequent possession of the swine and their destruction, shew that the afflicted man was not suffering from a disease, since this could not be transferred to animals.

IV. The Church, following the teaching of Christ, has always believed in demoniacal possession, therefore she has

(a) instituted, under the guidance of the Holy Ghost, special ministers and rites in order to expel evil spirits:

(b) established and preserved the custom of blessing people and things, which has, among other objects, that of preventing them from being possessed by the devil.

 

Posted in Bible, Catholic, Catholic lectionary, Devotional Resources, Notes on Mark, Notes on the Lectionary, Scripture | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Bishop MacEvilly on the Martyrdom of St John the Baptist (Matt 14:1-12; Mark 6:17-29)

Posted by Dim Bulb on August 24, 2013

Text in red are my additions. This post was compiled from the Bishop’s commentary on the Gospels of Matthew and Mark.

Mar 6:17  For Herod himself had sent and apprehended John, and bound him prison for the sake of Herodias the wife of Philip his brother, because he had married her.

St Matthew (Mt 14:1) introduces the account with the words at that time. What precise period is here referred to, is a subject of dispute. It happened after the beheading of the Baptist. It is inferred from the Gospel of St. John (6:4), that the Baptist was beheaded some time near the Pasch. For, the departure of our Redeemer on hearing of John’s death (v. 13 of this chapter), is identified with that recorded (John 6:1), when He performed the miracle of the multiplication of the bread.

Which Pasch it is that “was near at hand” (John 6:4) is uncertain. It most likely was the fourth Pasch, after our Lord’s baptism. Before this Pasch, John was beheaded. This occurred after the mission of the Apostles, recorded (10), as is clear from Mark (6:14), Luke (9:7), both of whom immediately subjoin John’s decollation to the narrative of the mission of the Apostles; and both say, that it was after the Apostles returned from their mission, our Lord was informed of the Baptist’s death; and then it was, the departure of our Redeemer recorded in verse 13 of this chapter took place. St. Matthew states in this chapter (v. 13), that it was after our Redeemer heard of John’s death while traversing Galilee, teaching and performing miracles, He retired and departed across the water.

“Herod.” Antipas, the son of Herod the Great, who put the Holy Innocents to death. In Matthew 14:1 he is identified as the Tetrarch; his term designates the governor of the fourth part of a province or kingdom. Among the Romans, who divided the conquered kingdoms into Tetrarchites, the term, “Tetrarch,” was applied to all those who exercised supreme power, and enjoyed dignity next to that of king. This Herod Antipas, was Tetrarch of Galilee. He obtained the fourth part of his father’s kingdom. Archelaus, obtained one-half, with the title of Ethnarch, and Philip governed the remaining fourth with the title of Tetrarch. This was in accordance with the will of Herod the Great, which was confirmed by the Romans. This Antipas is styled “king,” verse 9 (Mark 6:14), on account of the similarity between the supreme power he exercised, and that wielded by a king.

“The wife of Philip, his brother.” Matthew has “Because of Herodias, his brother’s wife.” There is some difference of opinion as to who this Herodias was. The common opinion seems to be, that she was daughter of Aristobulus, son of Herod the Great, by Mariamne, the last of the Asmonean kingly race. She was sister to Herod Agrippa, and, consequently, she was niece to this very Herod Antipas, who was brother to her father, Aristobulus, both brothers having different mothers. She was married to Herod Philip, brother to this Herod Antipas. Whether this was Philip, the Tetrarch of Iturea and Trachonitis (Luke 3:1), or a different Philip, also son of Herod the Great, of whom there is no mention made in Herod’s will and distribution of his dominions, and who must have, therefore, lived in a private station, is disputed. If the narrative of Josephus (Lib. Antiq. xviii. c. 5), be credited, it could not be Philip the Tetrarch (Luke 3:1). For, he states that Herodias’s daughter, by Philip—before she married Herod Antipas—named Salome, “was married to Philip, the son of Herod, and Tetrarch of Trachonitis.” The Philip, then, whom Herodias married first must be quite a different person. Others, rejecting this testimony of Josephus, who, they say, was deceived in this, assert, that the Philip referred to (Luke 3:1), as Tetrarch, &c., was the first husband of Herodias. Herod Antipas, on his way to Rome (as we are informed by Josephus, ibidem), in the sixteenth year of Tiberius, lodged in the house of his brother Philip, for whose wife Herodias, he conceived a wicked passion; and obtained her consent to leave her husband, and live with him on his return from Rome, on condition of his sending away his wife, who was daughter of Aretas, king of Arabia. This latter, on being informed of Herod’s designs and resolution to espouse Herodias, fled to her father for protection, who, in defence of his daughter’s honour and rights, waged war on Herod, and cut his army to pieces. (Josephus, Lib. Antiq. xviii., &c.) The Baptist sternly rebuked Herod for his incestuous and adulterous connexion with Herodias, her former husband and his own wife being still alive. Even if we suppose Philip, her former husband to be dead, as some assert, though Josephus positively states the contrary; still, Antipas, though not a Jew, any more than his father, Herod the Great, was, however, like him, a Jewish proselyte, bound by the law of Moses, which forbade marriage with a deceased brother’s wife (Lev. 18:16; 20:21), save in the case of the deceased brother dying without issue (Deut. 25:5). In the present instance there was issue, viz., the wicked daughter spoken of in this chapter. The marriage was, therefore, unlawful. Hence, the zeal of the Baptist in reproaching Herod with this scandalous adulterous connexion—scandalous, especially, in one occupying his elevated station.

Mar 6:18  For John said to Herod: It is not lawful for thee to have thy brother’s wife.

“It is not lawful for thee to have thy brother’s wife.” (Lev. 18:16). Although this Herodias was niece of Philip, her husband, as well as of Herod Antipas, with whom she lived in adultery, this relationship was not an impediment to her marriage with Philip, nor is it anywhere reckoned among marriage impediments in the Jewish law. Hence, she is called by John the Baptist, “thy brother’s wife.”

Mar 6:19  Now Herodias laid snares for him: and was desirous to put him to death and could not.

“Laid snares for him. ” Some see in Herodias a connection with Jezebel (1 Kings 18:4, 13; 19:1-10). Some also see an allusion to the part played by Zeresh in the plot against Mordecai (Esther 5:9-14).

Mar 6:20  For Herod feared John, knowing him to be a just and holy man: and kept him, and when he heard him, did many things: and he heard him willingly.

“Feared,” is interpreted by many to mean, revered, stood in reverential awe of him, on being apprised of his virtues. Although, in the first instance, he may have been animated with feelings quite different, when he cast him into prison.

“And kept him,” guarded him against the violence and snares of Herodias. The Greek word συνετηρει can refer to guarding or conserving something, but it can also refer to a careful mental consideration. Most modern translations prefer the former meaning, the latter is rather tautological in light of the remainder of the verse.

“And did many things,” conformably to the counsels given by John.

Mar 6:21  And when a convenient day was come, Herod made a supper for his birthday, for the princes, and tribunes, and chief men of Galilee.

“A convenient day,” i.e., a festal day, convenient for Herodias’ wicked designs against the Baptist—a convenient day to work on the feelings of Herod. The Greek word translated as “convenient day” is ευκαιρου, it refers to an opportune time. The word is used in reference to Judas’ plot against Jesus in Mark 14:11.

“Herod made a supper…for the princes, and tribunes, and chief men of Galilee.” This may be intended to recall the banquet Ahasuerus gave in chapter 1 of Esther (see Father Eugene LaVerdiere’s THE BEGINNING OF THE GOSPEL, Volume 1, pages 166-168 for more connections with Esther).

Mar 6:22  And when the daughter of the same Herodias had come in, and had danced, and pleased Herod, and them that were at table with him, the king said to the damsel: Ask of me what thou wilt, and I will give it thee.

The circumstance of permitting dancing during the feast, shows the voluptuousness practised in the court of Herod; for, even amongst the most abandoned of the Roman Emperors, such was not allowed.

Mar 6:23  And he swore to her: Whatsoever thou shalt ask I will give thee, though it be the half of my kingdom.

Heated with wine and blinded by passion, Herod “promised to give her whatsoever she would ask” (Mt 14:7). St. Mark adds, “though it were half his kingdom.” This rash and foolish promise he confirmed with the solemn sanction of an oath.

Mar 6:24  Who when she was gone out, said to her mother, What shall I ask? But her mother said: The head of John the Baptist.
Mar 6:25  And when she was come in immediately with haste to the king, she asked, saying: I will that forthwith thou give me in a dish, the head of John the Baptist.

Instructed by her mother, whom she went to consult after receiving the promise (Mark 6:24), she asked to get on the spot, without any delay, the head of John the Baptist, lest, if time for reflection were given him, he might repent of the promise. “I will that forthwith thou give me in a dish, the head of John the Baptist”. She wished for this, to be the more certain of his death; for, her mother dreaded lest, through the influence of the Baptist, Herod would send her away in disgrace.

Mar 6:26  And the king was struck sad. Yet because of his oath, and because of them that were with him at table, he would not displease her:

“The king was struck sad.” Some are of opinion, with St. Jerome, that the king was really glad of the pretext this opportunity, as it were, afforded him, of carrying out his designs against the Baptist; and that the whole affair of the request on the part of Salome—the daughter of Herodias—was previously agreed on by common concert between Herod and his adulterous wife. Others, with St. Augustine, consider that Herod was really “sad.” For, besides that the Evangelist says so, in the plainest terms, it is most likely, that, although, Herod, in the beginning, when he cast the Baptist into prison, would have him slain, had he not dreaded a popular commotion (v. 5); still, in the course of his imprisonment, he began to reverence his sanctity, and willingly listened to him (Mark 6:20), and was, therefore, sorry for the rash promise he made. Moreover, all the circumstances under which he was called upon to put him to death, the time, the place, the odium, attached to so unnatural a proceeding, were calculated to cause him real sorrow.

“Yet because of his oath,” &c., that is, to avoid violating his oath, as if he did not add perjury to homicide in keeping so impious and rash a promise. The observance of an oath, having for object the perpetration of evil, is no less sinful and criminal than was its original utterance. It is an insult to God to invoke Him as witness to the perpetration of evil, as if this were pleasing to Him. St. Jerome asks, if it were the head of her mother she asked, would Herod have given it to her?

“And because of them that sat with him at table.” He did not wish to incur the reproach of fickleness or inconstancy, before the chief men of Galilee, whom he had assembled around him on the occasion.

Mar 6:27  But sending an executioner, he commanded that his head should be brought in a dish.
Mar 6:28  And he beheaded him in the prison, and brought his head in a dish: and gave to the damsel, and the damsel gave it her mother.

“But sending the executioner…he beheaded him in prison”. Josephus says, the prison where John was incarcerated was in the castle of Macherus, near the Sea Asphaltites, or Dead Sea, beyond the Jordan. This castle was in Herod’s dominions; for, he ruled Galilee and the district beyond the Jordan. (Josephus, Lib. 12, Antiq.) Hence, it is inferred by some, that this great banquet was given in the castle of Macherus itself; otherwise, the head of the Baptist could not be called for and given on the spot. Others deny Josephus’ account of the prison of the Baptist. They maintain, that he was imprisoned in Galilee, and that it was there Herod gave this entertainment to his nobles.

“and brought his head in a dish, and gave to the damsel, and the damsel gave it to her mother.” The mother, the wicked Herodias, was the instigator of the entire barbarous proceeding. St. Jerome (Lib. 3, contra Rufin, c. 11), tells us, that this monster made it her inhuman pastime to prick, with a bodkin, the tongue of the Saint. The same is recorded of Fulvia, in regard to Cicero. This same Herod, four years after he had treated the Redeemer of the world, as a mock king and a fool, in the crowded streets of Jerusalem, was banished, with his wicked wife, after they had been deprived of all their earthly possessions, their kingdom being added to that of Agrippa, by Caius to Lyons, in Gaul, where, we are informed by Josephus (Antiq. xviii. 7), they died in great misery, although it is said by others, and by the same Josephus, that his place of banishment by Caius was Spain, whither his wife followed him (Josephus, de Bel. Jud. ii. 9). Nicephorus (Lib. i., Histor. c. 20), and others state, that Salome, by a just judgment of God, met with a most miserable, but appropriate death. While crossing the ice in winter, it broke; and she was plunged in as far as the shoulders; then, the ice coming again together, severed her head from her body.

Mar 6:29  Which his disciples hearing came, and took his body, and laid it in a tomb.

The disciples of the Baptist, who, it seems, had access to his prison (Matt. 11:2), came, and taking away his body, had it honourably interred. St. Jerome informs us that it was interred in Sebaste, formerly called Samaria. Joseph of Arimathea will do the same for Jesus after his crucifixion (Mk 15:42-46).

Posted in Bible, Catholic, Catholic lectionary, Christ, Devotional Resources, Notes on Mark, Notes on the Lectionary, Scripture | Tagged: , , , , , | 1 Comment »

Aquinas’ Catena Aurea on Mark 11:27-33

Posted by Dim Bulb on May 25, 2013

27. And they come again to Jerusalem: and as he was walking in the temple, there come to him the chief priests, and the scribes, and the elders,
28. And say unto him, By what authority doest thou these things? and who gave thee this authority to do these things?
29. And Jesus answered and said unto them, I will also ask of you one question, and answer me, and I will tell you by what authority I do these things.
30. The baptism of John, was it from heaven, or of men? answer me.
31. And they reasoned with themselves, saying, If we shall say, From heaven; he will say, Why then did ye not believe him?
32. But if we shall say, Of men; they feared the people: for all men counted John, that he was a prophet indeed.
33. And they answered and said unto Jesus, We cannot tell. And Jesus answering saith unto them, Neither do I tell you by what authority I do these things.

THEOPHYLACT. They were angry with the Lord, for having cast out of the temple those who had made it a place of merchandize, and therefore they come up to Him, to question and tempt Him. Wherefore it is said: And they come again to Jerusalem: and as he was walking in the temple, there come to him the Chief Priests, and the Scribes, and the elders, and say unto him, By what authority doest thou these things? and who gave thee authority to do these things? As if they had said, Who art thou that doest these things? Dost thou make thyself a doctor, and ordain thyself Chief Priest?

BEDE. (ubi sup.) And indeed, when they say, By what authority doest thou these things, they doubt its being the power of God, and wish it to be understood that what He did was the devil’s work. When they add also, Who gave thee this authority, they evidently deny that He is the Son of God, since they believe that He works miracles, not by His own but by another’s power.

THEOPHYLACT. Further, they said this, thinking to bring Him to judgment, so that if He said, by mine own power, they might lay hold upon Him; but if He said, by the power of another, they might make the people leave Him, for they believed Him to be God. But the Lord asks them concerning John, not without a reason, nor in a sophistical way, but because John had borne witness of Him. Wherefore there follows: And Jesus answered and said unto them, I will also ask of you one question, and answer me, and I will tell you by what authority I do these things. The baptism of John, was it from heaven, or of men? answer me.

BEDE. (ubi sup.) The Lord might indeed have confuted the cavils of his tempters by a direct answer, but prudently puts them a question, that they might be condemned either by their silence or their speaking, which is evident from what is added, And they reasoned with themselves, saying, If we shall say, From heaven; he will say, Why then did ye not believe him? As if He had said, He whom you confess to have had his prophecy from heaven bore testimony of Me, and ye have heard from him, by what authority I do these things. It goes on: But if we shall say, Of men; they feared the people. They saw then that whatever they answered, they should fall into a snare; fearing to be stoned, they feared still more the confession of the truth. Wherefore it goes on: And they answered and said unto Jesus, We cannot tell.

PSEUDO-JEROME. They envied the Lamp, and were in the dark, wherefore it is said, I have ordained a lamp for mine anointed; his enemies will I clothe with shame. (Ps. 132:17, 18) There follows: And Jesus answering saith unto them, Neither do I tell you by what authority I do these things.

BEDE. (ubi sup.) As if He had said, I will not tell you what I know, since ye will not confess what ye know. Further, we must observe that knowledge is hidden from those who seek it, principally for two reasons, namely, when he who seeks for it either has not sufficient capacity to understand what he seeks for, or when through contempt for the truth, or some other reason, he is unworthy of having that for which he seeks opened to him.

Posted in Bible, Catholic, Catholic lectionary, Christ, fathers of the church, liturgy, Notes on Mark, Notes on the Lectionary, Quotes, Scripture, St Thomas Aquinas | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

Aquinas’ Catena Aurea on Mark 10:17-27

Posted by Dim Bulb on May 25, 2013

17. And when he was gone forth into the way, there came one running, and kneeled to him, and asked him, Good Master, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life?
18. And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God.
19. Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Defraud not, Honour thy father and mother.
20. And he answered and said unto him, Master, all these have I observed from my youth.
21. Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me.
22. And he was sad at that saying, and went away grieved: for he had great possessions.
23. And Jesus looked round about, and saith unto his disciples, How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God!
24. And the disciples were astonished at his words. But Jesus answereth again, and saith unto them, Children, how hard is it for them that trust in riches to enter into the kingdom of God!
25. It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.
26. And they were astonished out of measure, saying among themselves, Who then can be saved?
27. And Jesus looking upon them saith, With men it is impossible, but not with God: for with God all things are possible,

BEDE. (ubi sup.) A certain man had heard from the Lord that only they who are willing to be like little children are worthy to enter into the kingdom of heaven, and therefore he desires to have explained to him, not in parables, but openly, by the merits of what works a man may attain everlasting life. Wherefore it is said: And when he was gone forth into the way, there came one running, and kneeled to him, and asked him, Good Master, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life?

THEOPHYLACT. I wonder at this young man, who when all others come to Christ to be healed of their infirmities, begs of Him the possession of everlasting life, notwithstanding his love of money, the malignant passion which afterwards caused his sorrow.

CHRYSOSTOM. (Hom. in Matt. 63) Because however he had come to Christ as he would to a man, and to one of the Jewish doctors, Christ answered him as Man. Wherefore it goes on: And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but the One God. In saying which He does not exclude men from goodness, but from a comparison with the goodness of God.

BEDE. (ubi sup.) But by this one God, who is good, we must not only understand the Father, but also the Son, who says, I am the good Shepherd; (John 10:11) and also the Holy Ghost, because it is said, The Father which is in heaven will give the good Spirit to them that ask him. (Luke 2:15. Vulg.) For the One and Undivided Trinity itself, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, is the Only and One good God. The Lord, therefore, does not deny Himself to be good, but implies that He is God; He does not deny that He is good Master, but He declares that no master is good but God.

THEOPHYLACT. Therefore the Lord intended by these words to raise the mind of the young man, so that he might know Him to be God. But He also implies another thing by these words, that when you have to converse with a man, you should not flatter him in your conversation, but look back upon God, the root and fount of goodness, and do honour to Him.

BEDE. (ubi sup.) But observe that the righteousness of the law, when kept in its own time, conferred not only earthly goods, but also eternal life on those who chose it. Wherefore the Lord’s answer to one who enquires concerning everlasting life is, Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill; for this is the childlike blamelessness which is proposed to us, if we would enter the kingdom of heaven. On which there follows, And he answered and said unto him, Master, all these have I observed from my youth. We must not suppose that this man either asked the Lord, with a wish to tempt him, as some have fancied, or lied in his account of his life; but we must believe that he confessed with simplicity how he had lived; which is evident, from what is subjoined, Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him. If however he had been guilty of lying or of dissimulation, by no means would Jesus, after looking on the secrets of his heart, have been said to love him.

ORIGEN. (in Evan. tom. xv. 14) For in that He loved, or kissed himp, He appears to affirm the truth of his profession, in saying that he had fulfilled all those things; for on applying His mind to him, He saw that the man answered with a good conscience.

PSEUDO-CHRYSOSTOM. (Cat. in Marc. Oxon.) It is worthy of enquiry, however, how He loved a man, who, He knew, would not follow Him? But this is so much as to say, that since he was worthy of love in the first instance, because he observed the things of the law from his youth, so in the end, though he did not take upon himself perfection, he did not suffer a lessening of his former love. For although he did not pass the bounds of humanity, nor follow the perfection of Christ, still he was not guilty of any sin, since he kept the law according to the capability of a man, and in this mode of keeping it, Christ loved him.

BEDE. (ubi sup.) For God loves those who keep the commandments of the law, though they be inferior; nevertheless, He shews to those who would be perfect the deficiency of the law, for He came not to destroy the law, but to fulfil it. Wherefore there follows: And said unto him, One thing thou lackest; go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, follow me; (Matt. 5:17) for whosoever would be perfect ought to sell all that he has, not a part, like Ananias and Sapphira, but the whole.

THEOPHYLACT. And when he has sold it, to give it to the poor, not to stage-players and luxurious persons.

CHRYSOSTOM. (ubi sup.) Well too did He say, not eternal life, but treasure, saying, And thou shalt have treasure in heaven; for since the question was concerning wealth, and the renouncing of all things, He shews that He returns more things than He has bidden us leave, in proportion as heaven is greater than earth.

THEOPHYLACT. But because there are many poor who are not humble, but are drunkards or have some other vice, for this reason He says, And come, follow me.

BEDE. (ubi sup) For he follows the Lord, who imitates Him, and walks in His footsteps. It goes on: And he was sad at that saying, and went away grieved.

CHRYSOSTOM. (ubi sup.) And the Evangelist adds the cause of his grief, saying, For he had great possessions. The feelings of those who have little and those who have much are not the same, for the increase of acquired wealth lights up a greater flame of covetousness. There follows: And Jesus looked round about, and said unto his disciples, How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God.

THEOPHYLACT. He says not here, that riches are bad, but that those are bad who only have them to watch them carefully; for He teaches us not to have them, that is, not to keep or preserve them, but to use them in necessary things.

CHRYSOSTOM. (ubi sup.) But the Lord said this to His disciples, who were poor and possessed nothing, in order to teach them not to blush at their poverty, and as it were to make an excuse to them, and give them a reason, why He had not allowed them to possess any thing. It goes on: And the disciples were astonished at his words; for it is plain, since they themselves were poor, that they were anxious for the salvation of others.

BEDE. But there is a great difference between having riches, and loving them; wherefore also Solomon says not, He that hath silver, but, He that loveth silver shall not be satisfied, with silver. (Eccl. 5:10) Therefore the Lord unfolds the words of His former saying to His astonished disciples, as follows: But Jesus answereth again, and saith unto them, Children, how hard it is for them that trust in their riches to enter the kingdom of God. Where we must observe that He says not, how impossible, but how hard; for what is impossible cannot in any way come to pass, what is difficult can be compassed, though with labour.

CHRYSOSTOM. (ubi sup.) Or else, after saying difficult, He then shews that it is impossible, and that not simply, but with a certain vehemence; and he shews this by an example, saying, It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven.

THEOPHYLACT. It may be that by camel, we should understand the animal itself, or else that thick cable, which is used for large vessels.

BEDE. (ubi sup.) How then could either in the Gospel, Matthew and Joseph, or in the Old Testament, very many rich persons, enter into the kingdom of God, unless it be that they learned through the inspiration of God either to count their riches as nothing, or to quit them altogether. Or in a higher sense, it is easier for Christ to suffer for those who love Him, than for the lovers of this world to turn to Christ; for under the name of camel, He wished Himself to be understood, because He bore the burden of our weakness; and by the needle, He understands the prickings, that is, the pains of His Passion. By the eye of a needle, therefore, He means the straits of His Passion, by which He, as it were, deigned to mend the torn garments of our nature. It goes on; And they were astonished above measure, saying among themselves, Who then can be saved? Since the number of poor people is immeasurably the greater, and these might be saved, though the rich perished, they must have understood Him to mean that all who love riches, although they cannot obtain them, are reckoned in the number of the rich. It goes on; And Jesus looking upon them saith, With men it is impossible, but not with God; which we must not take to mean, that covetous and proud persons can enter into the kingdom of Heaven with their covetousness and pride, but that it is possible with God that they should be converted from covetousness and pride to charity and lowliness.

CHRYSOSTOM. (ubi sup.) And the reason why He says that this is the work of God is, that He may shew that he who is put into this path by God, has much need of grace; from which it is proved, that great is the reward of those rich men, who are willing to follow the 1discipline of Christ.

THEOPHYLACT. Or we must understand that by, with man it is impossible, but not with God, He means, that when we listen to God, it becomes possible, but as long as we keep our human notions, it is impossible. There follows, For all things are possible with God; when He says all things, you must understand, that have a being; which sin has not, for it is a thing without being and substance.. Or else: sin does not come under the notion of strength, but of weakness, therefore sin, like weakness, is impossible with God. But can God cause that not to have been done which has been done? To which we answer, that God is Truth, but to cause that what has been done should not have been done, is falsehood. How then can truth do what is false? He must first therefore quit His own nature, so that they who speak thus really say, Can God cease to be God? which is absurd.

Posted in Bible, Catholic, Catholic lectionary, Christ, fathers of the church, liturgy, Notes on Mark, Notes on the Lectionary, Quotes, Scripture, St Thomas Aquinas | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Aquinas’ Catena Aurea on Mark 10:13-16

Posted by Dim Bulb on May 18, 2013

Ver 13. And they brought young children to Him, that He should touch them: and His disciples rebuked those that brought them.14. But when Jesus saw it, He was much displeased, and said unto them, “Suffer the little children to come unto Me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God.” 15. Verily I say unto you, “Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein.”16. And He took them up in His arms, put His hands upon them, and blessed them.

Theophylact: The wickedness of the Pharisees in tempting Christ, has been related above, and now is shewn the great faith of the multitude, who believed that Christ conferred a blessing on the children whom they brought to Him, by the mere laying on of His hands.  Wherefore it is said: “And they brought young children to Him, that He might touch them.”

Chrys.: But the disciples, out of regard for the dignity of Christ, forbade those who brought them. And this is what is added: “And His disciples rebuked those who brought them.” But our Saviour, in order to teach His disciples to be modest in their ideas, and to tread under foot worldly pride, takes the children to Him, and assigns to them the kingdom of God.  Wherefore it goes on: “And He said unto them, Suffer the little children to come unto Me, and forbid them not.”

Origin, in Matt., XV, 7: If any of those who profess to hold the office of teaching in the Church should see a person bringing to them some of the foolish of this world, and low born, and weak, who for this reason are called children and infants, let him not forbid the man who offers such an one to the Saviour, as though he were acting without judgment. After this He exhorts those of His disciples who are already grown to full stature to condescend to be useful to children, that they may become to children as children, that they may gain children [1Co_9:22]; for He Himself, when He was in the form of God, humbled Himself, and became a child.  One which He adds: “For of such is the kingdom of heaven.”

Chrys.: For indeed the mind of a child is pure from all passions, for which reason, we ought by free choice to do those works, which children hate by nature.

Theophylact: Wherefore He says not, “for of” these, but “of such is the kingdom of God,” that is, of persons who have both in their intention and their work the harmlessness and simplicity which children have by nature. For a child does not hate, does nothing of evil  intent, nor though beaten does he quit his mother; and though she clothe him in vile garments, prefers them to kingly apparel; in like manner he, who lives according to the good ways of his mother the Church, honours nothing before her, nay, not pleasure, which is the queen of many; wherefore also the Lord subjoins, “Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein.”

Bede: That is, if ye have not innocence and purity of mind like that of children, ye cannot enter into the kingdom of heaven. Or else, we are ordered to receive the kingdom of God, that is, the doctrine of the Gospel, as a little child, because as a child, when he is taught, does not contradict his teachers, nor put together reasonings and words against them, but receives with faith what they teach, and obeys them with awe, so we also are to receive the word of the Lord with simple obedience, and without any gainsaying.  It goes on: “And He took them up in His arms, put His hands upon them, and blessed them.”

Pseudo-Chrys., Vict. Ant, e Cat. in Marc.: Fitly does He take them up into His arms to bless them, as it were, lifting into His own bosom, and reconciling Himself to His creation, which in the beginning fell from Him, and was separated from Him. Again, He puts His hands upon the children, to teach us the working of his divine power; and indeed, He puts His hands upon them, as others are wont to do, though His operation is not as that of others, for though He was God, He kept to human ways of acting, as being very man.

Bede: Having embraced the children, He also blessed them, implying that the lowly in spirit are worthy of His blessing, grace and love.

Posted in Bible, Catholic, Catholic lectionary, Christ, Devotional Resources, fathers of the church, liturgy, Notes on Mark, Notes on the Lectionary, Quotes, Scripture, St Thomas Aquinas | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Aquinas’ Catena Aurea on Mark 4:1-20.

Posted by Dim Bulb on January 29, 2013

Theophylact: Although the Lord appears in the transactions mentioned above to neglect His mother, nevertheless He honours her; since on her account He goes forth about the borders of the sea.

Wherefore it is said, “And Jesus began to teach again by the sea-side, &c.”

Bede, in Marc., 1, 18: For if we look into the Gospel of Matthew, it appears that this same teaching of the Lord at the sea, was delivered on the same day as the former. For after the conclusion of the first sermon, Matthew immediately subjoins, saying, “The same day went Jesus out of the house, and sat by the sea-side.”

Pseudo-Jerome: But He began to teach at the sea, that the [p. 73] place of His teaching might point out the bitter feelings and instability of His hearers.

Bede: After leaving the house also, He began to teach at the sea, because, quitting the synagogue, He came to gather together the multitude of the Gentile people by the Apostles.

Wherefore it continues: “And there was gathered unto Him a great multitude, so that He entered into a ship, and sat in the sea.”

Chrys., Hom. in Matt., 44: Which we must understand was not done without a purpose, but that He might not leave any one behind Him, but have all His hearers before His face.

Bede: Now this ship shewed in a figure the Church, to be built in the midst of the nations, in which the Lord consecrates for Himself a beloved dwelling-place.

It goes on: “And He taught them many things by parables.”

Pseudo-Jerome: A parable is a comparison made between things discordant by nature, under some similitude. For parable is the Greek for a similitude, when we point out by some comparisons what we would have understood. In this way we say an iron man, when we desire that he should be understood to be hardy and strong; when to be swift, we compare him to winds and birds. But He speaks to the multitudes in parables, with His usual providence, that those who could not take in heavenly things, might conceive what they heard by an earthly similitude.

Chrys.: For He rouses the minds of His hearers by a parable, pointing out objects to the sight, to make His discourse more manifest.

Theophylact: And in order to rouse the attention of those who heard, the first parable that He proposes is concerning the seed, which is the word of God.

Wherefore it goes on, “And He said to them in His doctrine.”

Not in that of Moses, nor of the Prophets, because He preaches His own Gospel.
“Hearken: behold, there went out a sower to sow.” Now the Sower is Christ.

Chrys.: Not that He went out in space, Who is present in all space, and fills all, but in the form and economy by which He is made more near to us through the clothing of flesh. For since we were not able to go to Him, because sins impeded our path, He went out to us. But He went out, preaching in order to sow the word of piety, which He spake abundantly. Now He does not needlessly repeat the same word, when He says, “A sower went out to sow,” for sometimes a sower goes out that he may break up (p. 74) land for tillage, or to pull up weeds, or for some other work. But this one went out to sow.

Bede, in Marc., 1, 19: Or else, He went out to sow, when after calling to His faith the elect portion of the synagogue, He poured out the gifts of His grace in order to call the Gentiles also.

Chrys.: Further, as a sower does not make a distinction in the ground which is beneath him, but simply and without distinction puts in the seed, so also He Himself addresses all. And to signify this, He says, “And as he sowed, some fell by the way-side.”

Theophylact: Take notice, that He says not that He threw it in the way, but that it fell, for a sower, as far as he can, throws it into good ground, but if the ground be bad, it corrupts the seed. Now the way is Christ; but infidels are by the way-side, that is, out of Christ.

Bede: Or else, the way is a mind which is a path for bad thoughts, preventing the seed of the word from growing in it. And therefore whatsoever good seed comes in contact with such a way, perishes, and is carried off by devils.

Wherefore there follows, “And the fowls of the air came and devoured it up.” And well are the devils called fowls of the air, either because they are of a heavenly and spiritual origin, or because they dwell in the air.

Or else, those who are about the way are negligent and slothful men.

It goes on: “And some fell on stony ground.”

He calls stone, the hardness of a wanton mind; He calls ground, the inconstancy of a soul in its obedience; and sun, the heat of a raging persecution.

Therefore the depth of earth, which ought to have received the seed of God, is the honesty of a mind trained in heavenly discipline, and regularly brought up in obedience to the Divine words. But the stony places, which have no strength for fixing the root firmly, are those breasts which are delighted only with the sweetness of the word which they hear, and for a time with the heavenly promises, but in a season of temptation fall away, for there is too little of healthful desire in them to conceive the seed of life.

Theophylact: Or, the stony persons are those who adhering a little to the rock, that is, to Christ, up to a short time, receive the word, and afterwards, falling back, cast it away.

It goes on: “And some fell among thorns;” by which are marked souls which care for many things. For thorns are cares.

Chrys.: But further He mentions good ground, saying, “And other fell on good ground.” For the difference of the fruits follows the quality of the ground. But great is the love of the Sower for men, for the first He commends, and rejects not the second, and gives a place to the third.

Theophylact: See also how the bad are the greatest number, and the few are those who are saved, for the fourth part of the ground is found to be saved.

Chrys.: This, however, the greater portion of the seed is not lost through the fault of the owner, but of the earth, which received it, that is, of the soul, which hears. And indeed the real husbandman, if he sowed in this way, would be rightly blamed; for he is not ignorant that rock, or the road, or thorny ground, cannot become fertile. But in spiritual things it is not so; for there it is possible that stony ground may become fertile; and that the road should not be trodden down, and that the thorns may be destroyed, for if this could not take place, he would not have sown there. By this, therefore, He gives to us hope of repentance.

It goes on, “And He said unto them, He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.”

Bede: As often as this is inserted in the Gospel or in the Apocalypse of John, that which is spoken is mystical, and is pointed out as healthful to be heard and learnt. For the ears by which they are heard belong to the heart, and the ears by which men obey and do what is commanded are those of an interior sense.
There follows, “And when He was alone, the twelve that were with Him asked of Him the parable; and He said unto them, Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God, but to them that are without all things are done in parables.”

Pseudo-Chrys., Vict. Ant. e Cat. in Marc.: As if He said unto them, You that are worthy to be taught all things which are fitted for teaching, shall learn the manifestation of parables; but I use parables with them who are unworthy to learn, because of their wickedness. For it was right that they who did not hold fast their obedience to that law which they had received, should not have any share in a new teaching, but should be estranged from both; for He shewed by the obedience of His disciples, that, on the other hand, the others were become unworthy of mystical doctrine. But afterwards, by bringing in a voice from prophecy, He confounds (p. 76) their wickedness, as having been long before reproved.

Wherefore it goes on, “that seeing they might see, and not perceive, &c.” [see Isa 6:9] as if He said that they prophecy might be fulfilled which foretells these things.

Theophylact: For it was God Who made them to see, that is, to understand what is good. But they themselves see not, of their own will making themselves not to see, lest they should be converted and correct themselves, as if they were displeased at their own salvation.

It goes on, “Lest at any time they should be converted, and their sins be forgiven them.”

Pseudo-Chrys., Vict. Ant. e Cat. in Marc.: Thus, therefore, they see and they do not see, they hear and do not understand, for their seeing and hearing comes to them from God’s grace, but their seeing and not understanding comes to them from their unwillingness to receive grace, and closing their eyes, and pretending that they could not see; neither do they acquiesce in what was said, and so are not changed as to their sins by hearing and seeing, but rather are made worse.

Theophylact: Or we may understand in a different way His speaking to the rest in parables, that seeing they might not perceive, and hearing, not understand. For God gives sight and understanding to men who seek for them, but the rest He blinds, lest it become a greater accusation against them, that though they understood, they did not choose to do what they ought.

Wherefore it goes on, “Lest at any times they should be, &c.”

Augustine, Quaest, 14, in Matt.: Or else they deserved this, their not understanding, and yet this in itself was done in mercy to them, that they might know their sins, and, being converted, merit pardon.

Bede: To those then who are without, all things are done in parables, that is, both the actions and the words of the Saviour, because neither in those miracles which He was working, nor in those mysteries which He preached, were they able to acknowledge Him as God. Therefore they are not able to attain to the remission of their sins.

Pseudo-Chrys., Vict. Ant. e Cat. in Marc.: But His speaking to them only in parables, and yet not leaving off speaking to them entirely, shews that to those who are placed near to what is good, though they may have no good in themselves, still good is shewn disguised.

But when a man approaches it with reverence and a right heart, he wins for himself an abundant revelation of mysteries; when on the contrary his thoughts are not sound,  he will be neither made worthy of those things which are easy to many men, nor even of hearing them.

There follows, “And He said unto them, Know ye not this parable, how then shall ye know all parables?”

Pseudo-Jerome: For it was necessary that they to whom He spoke in parables should ask for what they did not understand, and learn by the Apostle whom they despised, the mystery of the kingdom which they themselves had not.

Gloss.: And for this reason, the Lord in saying these things, shews that they ought to understand both this first, and all following miracles.

Wherefore explaining it, He goes on, “The sower soweth the word.”

Chrys., in Matt., Hom. 44: And indeed the prophet has compared the teaching of the people to the planting of a vine; (Is 5) in this place however it is compared to sowing, to shew that obedience is now shorter and more easy, and will sooner yield fruit.

Bede: But in this exposition of the Lord there is embraced the whole range of those who might hear the words of truth, but are unable to attain to salvation. For there are some to whom no faith, no intellect, nay no opportunity of trying its usefulness, can give a perception of the word which they hear; of whom He says, “And these are by the wayside.” For unclean spirits take away at once the word committed to their hearts, as birds carry away the seed of the trodden way. There are some who both experience its usefulness and feel a desire for it, but some of them the calamities of this world frighten, and others its prosperity allures, so that they do not attain to that which they approve. Of the first of whom He says, “And these are they who fell on stony ground;” of the latter, “And these are they which are sown among thorns.” But riches are called thorns, because they tear the soul with the piercing of its own thoughts, and after bringing it to sin, they, as one may say, make it bleed by inflicting a wound.

Again He says, “And the toil of this world, and the deceitfulness of riches;” for the man who is deceived by an empty desire of riches must soon be afflicted by the toils of continual cares.

He adds, “And the lusts of other things;” because, whosoever despises the commandments of God, and wanders away lustfully seeking other things, is unable to attain to the joy of beatitude. And concupiscences of this sort choke the word, because they do not allow a good desire to enter into the heart, and, as it were, stifle the  entrance of vital breath.

There are, however, excepted from these different classes of men, the Gentiles who do not even have grace to hear the words of life.

Theophylact: Further, of those who receive the seed as they ought there are three degrees.

Wherefore it goes on, “And these are they who are sown on good ground.”

Those who bear fruit an hundred-fold are those who lead a perfect and an obedient life, as virgins and hermits. Those who bear fruit sixty-fold are those who are in the mean as continent persons (ed. note: The word translated continentes . . . means ascetics, who mix in the affairs of the world; whereas hermits lived quite out of them, and gave themselves up to contemplation; caenobites came between the two, living together in convents, and combined both the practical and contemplative life, see Greg. Naz. Or. 43, 62) and those who are living in convents.

Those who bear thirty-fold are those who though weak indeed, bear fruit according to their own virtue, as laymen and married persons.

Bede: Or he bears thirty-fold, who instills into the minds of the elect faith in the Holy Trinity; sixty-fold, who teaches the perfection of good works; a hundred-fold, who shews the rewards of the heavenly kingdom.

For in counting a hundred, we pass on to the right hand (ed. note: “He alludes to the mode of counting among the ancients. All numbers were signified by fingers of the left hand, either straight or variously bent, up to a hundred; and then they changed to the right. Consult Caelius Rhodiginus, Lectionum Antiq. lib. 23, cap. 11, 12.” Benedictine note on Greg. Hom. in Ezec. lib. 2, Hom., 5); therefore that number is fitly made to signify everlasting happiness.

But the good ground is the conscience of the elect, which does the contrary to all the former three, which both receives with willingness the seed of the word committed to it, and keeps it when received up to the season of fruit.

Pseudo-Jerome: Or else the fruits of the earth are contained in thirty, sixty, or a hundred-fold, that is, in the Law, the Prophets, and the Gospel.

Posted in Bible, Catholic, Christ, Devotional Resources, fathers of the church, liturgy, Notes on Mark, Notes on the Lectionary, Quotes, Scripture, St Thomas Aquinas | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Aquinas’ Catena Aurea on Mark 3:31-35

Posted by Dim Bulb on January 27, 2013

Mar 3:31  There came then his brethren and his mother, and, standing without, sent unto him, calling him.
Mar 3:32  And the multitude sat about him, and they said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren without seek for thee.
Mar 3:33  And he answered them, saying, Who is my mother, or my brethren?
Mar 3:34  And he looked round about on them which sat about him, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren!
Mar 3:35  For whosoever shall do the will of God, the same is my brother, and my sister, and mother.

Theophylact: Because the relations of the Lord had come to seize upon Him, as if beside Himself, His mother, urged by the sympathy of her love, came to Him.

Wherefore it is said, “And there came unto Him His mother, and, standing without, sent unto Him, calling Him.”

Chrys.: From this it is manifest that His brethren and His mother were not always with Him; but because He was beloved by them, they come from reverence and affection, waiting without.

Wherefore it goes on, “And the multitude sat about Him, &c.”

Bede: The brother of the Lord must not be thought to be the sons of the ever-virgin Mary, as Helvidius says, nor the sons of Joseph by a former marriage, as some think, but rather they must be understood to be His relations.

Pseudo-Chrys., Vict. Ant. e Cat. in Marc.: But another Evangelist says, that His brethren did not believe on Him. (Jn 7:5) With which this agrees, which says, that they sought Him, waiting without, and with this meaning the Lord does not mention them as relations.

Wherefore it follows, “And He answered them, saying, Who is My mother or My brethren?”

But He does not here mention His mother and His brethren altogether with reproof, but to shew that a man must honour his own soul above all earthly kindred; wherefore this is fitly said to those who called Him to speak with His mother and relations, as if it were a more useful task than the teaching of salvation.

Bede; see Ambr. in Luc. 6, 36: Being asked therefore by a message to go out, He declines, not as though He refused the dutiful service of His mother, but to shew that He owes more to His Father’s mysteries than to His mother’s feelings. Nor does He rudely despise His brothers, but, preferring His spiritual work to fleshly relationship, He teaches us that religion is the bond of the heart rather than that of the body.

Wherefore it goes on, “And looking round about on them which sat about Him, He said, Behold My mother and My brethren.”

Chrys.: By this, the Lord shews that we should honour those who are relations by faith rather than those  who are relations by blood. A man indeed is made the mother of Jesus by preaching Him (ed. note: Nearly the same idea occurs in St. Ambrose, in Lc 2,8); for He, as it were, brings forth the Lord, when he pours Him into the heart of his hearers.

Pseudo-Jerome: But let us be assured that we are His brethren and His sisters, if we do the will of the Father; that we may be joint-heirs with Him, for He discerns us not by sex but by our deeds.

Wherefore it goes on: “Whosoever shall do the will of God, &c.”

Theophylact: He does not therefore say this, as denying His mother, but as shewing that He is worthy of honour, not only because she bore Christ, but on account of her possessing every other virtue.

Bede: By mystically, the mother and brother of Jesus means the synagogue, (from which according to the flesh He sprung,) and the Jewish people who, while the Saviour is teaching within, come to Him, and are not able to enter, because they cannot understand spiritual things.

But the crowd eagerly enter, because when the Jews delayed, the Gentiles flocked to Christ; but His kindred, who stand without wishing to see the Lord, are the Jews who obstinately remained without, guarding the letter, and would rather compel the Lord to go forth to them to teach carnal things, than consent to enter in to learn spiritual things of Him.

If therefore not even His parents when standing without are acknowledged, how shall we be acknowledged, if we stand without? For the word is within and the light within.

Posted in Bible, Catholic, Christ, Devotional Resources, fathers of the church, liturgy, Notes on Mark, Notes on the Lectionary, Quotes, Scripture, St Thomas Aquinas | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

 
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 144 other followers

%d bloggers like this: