Commentary on Matthew, Latin Series 113–117

“Then they spat in his face and struck him with their fists; and others slapped him in the face, saying: Prophesy to us, Christ, who is it that struck you?” Most wickedly, as I think, did those who heard Jesus say, “Truly I say to you, from now on you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the power of God and coming on the clouds of heaven,” dare to spit in his face. For they thought that by doing so they would put him to shame as a liar, and that he who sat at the right hand of power and was to come on the clouds would not endure the disgrace of being spat upon. For they did not know the words of the prophet Isaiah, who prophesied these same things of him, speaking in the person of the Lord Saviour himself: “Why is it that I came, and there was no man? I called, and there was none to obey. Is my hand not strong to deliver, or can I not rescue? Behold, by my rebuke I will make the sea a desert, and make rivers deserts, and their fish will dry up because they have no water, and they will die of thirst. And I will clothe heaven with darkness, and make sackcloth its covering. The Lord gives me a tongue of instruction, so that I may know how I must speak a word. He has set me in the morning; he has added to me an ear to hear, and the instruction of the Lord will open my ears. And I am not unbelieving, nor do I contradict. I gave my back to the scourges, and my cheeks to blows; and I did not turn my face from the shame of spitting; and the Lord God became my helper.” For all who belong to the Church confess that it is Christ who says, “The Lord God gave me a tongue of instruction,” and the rest that I have set out. And I have fittingly set out also the words joined to these above, wishing to show that it was prophesied of that glorious one that he would be spat upon and struck. For to whom else does it fit to say “I came,” except to Christ, who came into the world? Or whom did it befit to say, “I called, and there was none to obey,” except him who came to call the people of the Jews and was not heard, and therefore did not deliver or rescue that people, but forsook them? And it is Christ who says, “Behold, by my rebuke I will make the sea a desert and make rivers deserts,” he who is going to bring about the consummation of the world. For it is he who will clothe heaven with darkness, and clothe it as with sackcloth; and, receiving from the Father a tongue of instruction, he knew how he must speak the word which God had entrusted to him; and God added to him an ear, so that he might hear more than all who hear; and the Father's instruction opened his ear, because he was not unbelieving toward the Father who sent him, nor did he contradict; and by his own work he taught those who desire to learn gentleness and praiseworthy humility. And this was the work by which he taught these things in deed: offering his back to the scourges and his cheeks to blows, and not turning his face from the shame of spitting, so that, as I think, by suffering these things for us himself, he might deliver us, who had all deserved to suffer these indignities. For he did not die for us so that we should not die, but so that we should not die for ourselves; and he was struck with blows and spat upon for us, so that we, who deserved all these things for our sins, should not suffer them for our sins, but, suffering them for righteousness, should accept them gladly. Paul says of the Saviour that “he humbled himself, becoming obedient unto death, even death on a cross.” And it is not unfitting for one who wishes to count in how many ways Christ humbled himself to list, beyond what Paul set out, these too: he humbled himself, becoming obedient unto blows, unto the shame of spitting, unto scourges, and unto death; and because of all these God exalted him. For it was not only because of the death he endured for us that God exalted him, but also because of the blows, the spitting, and the rest. That the insult of spitting is taken as the utmost insult is plain also from the law, in which it is written that if the brother of a dead man will not take his brother's wife, she shall come up to the one who refused to take her as his wife, before the elders, take one sandal off his foot, spit in his face, and say: “So shall they do to the man who will not build up his brother's house.” So Christ did not turn his face from the shame of spitting, so that his face might be glorified more than the face of Moses was glorified, with a glory so great that, in comparison with this glorification, the glorification of Moses' face is done away, as the light of a lamp is done away before the sun, and as knowledge in part is done away when what is perfect has come. And they struck with their fists the holy head of the Church; for which reason they themselves are buffeted by Satan, not so that they may not be exalted, nor so that their power may be made perfect, but so that, handed over to the enemy and avenger, they may receive the due of the sin they committed in striking Jesus. And not content only to spit in his face and strike him with their fists, they also slapped him and mocked him, saying, “Prophesy to us, who is it that struck you?” For this they received an eternal slap, and were deprived of all prophecy, struck and chastised, and not even so willing to receive discipline, as Jeremiah had prophesied of them: “You struck them, and they did not grieve; and they refused to receive discipline.” And now, those who injure anyone of the Church and do these things to him spit in the face of Christ, and chastise Christ, striking him with fists and slaps. “But Peter was sitting outside in the courtyard. And a maidservant came to him, saying: You too were with Jesus the Galilean. But he denied it before them all, saying: I do not know what you are saying. And when he had gone out to the gateway, another maidservant saw him and said to those who were there: This man was with Jesus of Nazareth. And again he denied it with an oath: I do not know the man. After a little while those who stood by came up and said to Peter: Truly you too are one of them, for your speech betrays you. Then he began to curse and to swear: I do not know the man. And at once the cock crowed. And Peter remembered the word of Jesus, who had said to him: Before the cock crows, you will deny me three times. And he went outside and wept most bitterly.” Considering Peter's denial more fully, we say that no one can say “Lord Jesus” except in the Holy Spirit, as Paul teaches us. And the Holy Spirit was not yet in men at that time, since Jesus had not yet been glorified, as John says. Therefore it was not possible even for such a man as Peter to confess Jesus then; nor, however, was he to be blamed for not confessing Jesus. For to those who confess it is said, “It is not you who speak, but the Spirit of your Father who speaks in you.” But since that Spirit of our Father is able to speak in us, and since it is in our power to give place in us to the Holy Spirit and not to the devil, if we deny, we have no excuse. And perhaps no one who is in the courtyard of Caiaphas the high priest can confess the Lord Jesus unless he has gone out of his courtyard and has been put outside every teaching contrary to Jesus. For those who are there hand on Jewish traditions, not according to the intention of the Scriptures, but according to the commandments and doctrines of men. For consider that Peter, sitting outside, separated from Jesus, and placed in the high priest's courtyard, denied Jesus before them all; and the second time likewise he denied, not having got outside the gate, but wishing to go out and not yet having passed the gate. And the third time too, when those standing by said, “Truly you are one of them,” and when he began to curse himself and to swear, “I do not know the man,” he was still not outside. And all his denials were made in the night and in darkness, before the day came, and the sign of day, that is, the cockcrow, which rouses from sleep those who are willing. To speak by way of example: if Peter had denied after cockcrow, so that it could be said, “The night is far gone, and the day has drawn near; let us walk honestly as in the day,” Peter would have deserved no excuse. And perhaps all men, when they deny Jesus in such a way that the sin of their denial can receive healing, seem to deny him before cockcrow, when the sun of righteousness has not yet risen for them, nor has its rising yet drawn near. But if, after such a sun has risen upon the soul, we sin wilfully after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains for us a sacrifice for sin, but a terrible judgement and a fury of fire that will consume the adversaries. And in the case of Peter, denying at that time, it was not fitting to say, “How much worse punishment, do you think, will they deserve who have trampled the Son of God underfoot, and counted common the blood of the covenant by which they were sanctified, and outraged the Spirit of grace?” For Peter had not yet been sanctified by the blood of Christ, which was the blood of the new covenant, nor did he outrage the Spirit of grace, which he had not yet received, since Jesus had not yet been glorified, and the Holy Spirit was not in men. But if this impious sin of denial has been committed in us, all these things are fittingly said, since we have been sanctified in the blood of the covenant and have received the Spirit of grace. Therefore to count common the most precious blood of the covenant and to outrage the Spirit of grace is worse than all sins, so that we can receive forgiveness neither in this age nor in the age to come if we deny the Son of God. Since, then, for us the night is far gone and the day has drawn near, and the sign of day, the cockcrow, has sounded for us, let us stand, striving against sin to the point of blood, and for the sake of love, which never fails, let us bear all things, so that we may obtain the inheritance with those who are perfected in it. And note this: before cockcrow, and before the Holy Spirit, and in the time of deep night, even if someone has denied often, he can live, as is plain from Peter's denying three times. But if after cockcrow anyone, placed in any danger whatever, has denied even once, it is impossible for him to be renewed to repentance, since he crucifies the Son of God again for himself. Yet let one who has been caught in such a sin of denial look to what is written: “Woe to those who draw their sins as with a long rope, and iniquities as with the strap of a heifer's yoke”; and let him not say, “Our sins are upon us, and how shall we live?” “As I live,” says the Lord, “I do not desire the death of the sinner, but his repentance.” But God himself knows, of whom it is written, “And he in his wisdom will bring evils upon them,” what evils he will bring upon those who deny and do not repent, and what upon those who deny and repent, and what good things upon those who have never denied, either in word before men or … in works. And let us keep far from the first maidservant and the second, and from all who stand in his courtyard or at his gate, so that we may not be near those who make anyone who is beside them deny. We will know who the high priest's maidservant is if we understand who is the handmaid of God, of whom it is written, “I am your servant, and the son of your handmaid.” And you will be able to know what the courtyards of the high priest are if you understand what are the courts of the house of the Lord, of which it is written, “Behold, bless the Lord now, all you servants of the Lord, who stand in the house of the Lord, in the courts of the house of our God.” And if we must say something of the other maidservant too, so as to withdraw from her as well, let us understand what is written: “As the eyes of a maidservant look to the hands of her mistress, so our eyes look to the Lord our God, until he has mercy on us.” I think the first maidservant of the high priest, who makes the disciples of Christ deny, is to be understood as the synagogue of the Jews according to the flesh, who often forced the faithful to deny; the second maidservant as the assembly of the Gentiles, who themselves, persecuting Christians, compelled them to deny; and the third, those standing in the courtyards, as the ministers of the various heresies, who likewise compel people to deny the truth of Christ. And in the night Peter not only denies three times, but also curses himself and swears, “I do not know the man.” At that time he still knew Christ according to the flesh, and could not yet say, “Even if we once knew Christ according to the flesh, yet now we know him so no longer.” For as long as the sign of day did not appear, Peter, as he denied, did not remember the words of Jesus. But after the angel of God cried out to him, then he remembered the words of Jesus, who had said to him, “Before the cock crows, you will deny me three times.” And when he remembered Christ's word, he was no longer in the high priest's courtyard, nor near its gate, but outside; otherwise he would never have wept. For, as it is written, “he went outside and wept most bitterly.” So, as in Luke the sinful woman wept in repentance at the Lord's feet, here Peter, having gone out of the high priest's courtyard, weeps at its gate from the bitterness of his sin, making his weeping bitter in repentance.

“When morning came, all the chief priests and the elders of the people took counsel against Jesus to put him to death; and they bound him, led him away, and handed him over to Pontius Pilate the governor.” Whoever stumbles in darkness and night deserves pardon; but whoever stumbles in broad day can never blame error as having held him fast, especially when he stumbles while having within himself the lamp of the body, but only his own lack of self-control. We have said this to show that Christ's disciples stumble in the night, as their Lord foretold, “All of you will stumble because of me this night,” and that Peter denied three times before cockcrow. But all the chief priests and elders of the people, who take counsel against Jesus when morning has come, sin in the light, that is, knowingly, as is written of this counsel, that they took counsel together with one consent, as it is written in the Psalms, to put Christ to death, thinking by his death to extinguish his teaching and the faith in him among those who believed in him as the Son of God. Taking such counsel against him, the rulers of the worship of the letter that kills, and the elders, ministers of condemnation, bound Jesus, who looses men from bonds and says to those in bonds, “Come out”; who frees the fettered and says, “Let us break their bonds”; who had loosed from her bonds the daughter of Abraham whom Satan had bound for eighteen years, so that she was no longer bent over, she who before could not look up. And they bound him, though he was willing; and in being bound he broke the snares of those very bonds, so that the chief priests and elders of the Jews no longer have bonds against men, the Lord, that is, breaking them in himself. And if anyone demands of me a Scripture showing this, about the breaking of the bonds with which the chief priests and elders bound Jesus, let him understand that Jesus himself says this concerning himself through the prophet, “Let us break their bonds,” as if to say: the bonds of the rulers, priests, and elders, or much more of those rulers who worked in them, and of the kings of the earth who stood up, and the rulers who gathered together against the Lord and against his Christ, “and let us cast their yoke from us.” It will satisfy you still more, so that you accept that even though those who took counsel against him brought Jesus in bound, Jesus nonetheless broke the bonds, if you understand what is written of Samson, who was often bound and broke the bonds of the foreigners, because he was a Nazirite of God and had hair full of power. If, then, he, because of the power of the hair on his head, could break the bonds of the foreigners with which they had often bound him, how much more Christ, who after so many wonders and mighty works that he did gave himself willingly to bonds, letting the power of his divinity sleep within him and consenting to be bound, without doubt broke the bonds that surrounded him? Of these bonds the bonds of Samson were a mystery.

“And they handed him over to Pontius Pilate.” Whether both names of the governor have some meaning fitting the dispensation of the Lord Saviour is not easy to answer definitively. For the roots from which these names, Pontius and Pilate, are derived may move someone. But whether one is rightly moved or not, let each who is able consider and judge.

“Then Judas, who had betrayed him, seeing that he was condemned, was moved by repentance and brought back the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and elders, saying: I have sinned in betraying innocent blood. But they said: What is that to us? See to it yourself. And throwing down the pieces of silver in the temple, he withdrew, and went and hanged himself with a noose. But the chief priests took the pieces of silver and said: It is not lawful to put them into the treasury, since it is the price of blood. And after taking counsel among themselves, they bought the potter's field as a burial place for strangers. For this reason that field has been called Akeldama, that is, the field of blood, to this day. Then was fulfilled what was spoken through the prophet Jeremiah, saying: And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of him who was priced, whom they priced from the sons of Israel, and they gave them for the potter's field, as the Lord appointed for me.” Let those answer me who bring in certain fables about natures, thinking they speak the truth, and not knowing that their opinion accuses the Creator of injustice, as though he made some vessels for honour without their virtue being the cause that leads them to honour, and others for dishonour without their sins being the cause that leads them to dishonour. For if Judas was of a nature that perishes, how did he undergo such great repentance that he was not overcome by desire for the thirty pieces of silver, for which he had undertaken the impious boldness of betrayal? For if they refer to the property of natures the saying, “A bad tree cannot bear good fruit,” let them say whether Judas did not breathe some goodness (even if not perfectly, nor turning as he ought) in this very act of bringing back the thirty pieces of silver, from which comes also what he says when he recognizes his sin, “I have sinned in betraying innocent blood”; and whence could this come except from the good planting of the mind and from the seed of virtue sown in every rational soul, which Judas did not cultivate, and so fell into such a sin? If any man is of a perishing nature, without doubt Judas above all was of such a perishing nature. And it would without doubt have seemed so, if, having betrayed innocent blood, he had either not brought back the money, taking delight in it, or, bringing it back, had not said, “I have sinned in betraying innocent blood.” And if Judas had said what he said after Christ's resurrection from the dead, it might perhaps plausibly be said that the very power of his resurrection compelled him to repent of the deed and confess his sin. But as it is, as soon as he saw Jesus handed over to Pilate, he was pricked to the heart and repented, perhaps also remembering what Jesus had often said to his disciples about his coming resurrection. So Judas, seeing the greatness of his crime, did repent, and speaking from repentance of heart confessed his sin in having betrayed innocent blood; but he did not repent according to knowledge, as he ought to have repented. For he thought to go ahead of his Master, who was about to die, in death, and to meet him with a naked soul, so that by confessing and entreating he might obtain mercy. That is why he judged and condemned himself, in that he had sinned knowingly; and he did not look to what Job had said when placed in such great calamities, “Would that I could kill myself, or ask another to do this for me”; nor did he see that it is not fitting for a servant of God to drive himself out of this life, but to await God's judgement in this too. Now let us see whether, God granting, we can explain what is hidden from many in this passage, in the words, “Judas, who had betrayed him, seeing that he was condemned, was moved by repentance and brought back the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests,” and the rest. If it had been written that Judas did this after Pilate's sentence, after he had Jesus scourged and handed him over to the Jews to be crucified, we would without doubt raise no such question about the words, “seeing that he was condemned.” But as it is, how did Judas see that he had been condemned? For Jesus had not yet been condemned, nor even questioned by Pilate. Perhaps, then, someone will say, forcing the sense, that by the reflection of his mind he saw the outcome, that Jesus was condemned, from seeing him handed over by the chief priests and elders of the people. But another will say that what is written, “Judas, seeing that he was condemned,” refers to Judas himself. For when the chief priests and elders of the people had handed Jesus over to Pilate, Judas then perceived his own evil, and understood that one who had dared such things was without doubt judged and condemned by God. Perhaps Satan too, who after the dipped bread had entered into Judas, stayed with him until Jesus was handed over to Pilate; and after he had done what he wished, he left him; and when the devil had left, Judas understood and saw that, having betrayed innocent blood, he was condemned by God, and his mind could understand, being now free and no longer having the devil at work in it. So, when the devil had left him, he could take up repentance and bring back the thirty pieces of silver to those who had given them; and when the devil had left him, he could say what he could not have said before the devil left him. For while the devil still filled his heart he could not say, “I have sinned in betraying innocent blood.” But we do not say this as though the devil, having left such a person, no longer lies in wait for him; rather he watches again for a time, to see whether he can attach himself to him again; and after someone has recognized his second sin, the devil watches in him for an opening for a third deception. And if we must use examples too, let us look in the first Epistle to the Corinthians at the man who had his father's wife; for he could not have fallen into such an evil without great work of the devil. He repented of this evil, as Scripture itself testifies, and was grieved with a grief according to God, the grief that works a repentance steadfast unto salvation. But after he had taken on such grief, the devil attached himself to him again, wishing to magnify that very grief beyond measure, so that it would no longer be according to God, but, becoming excessive, would swallow up the grieving man beyond measure and beyond what he ought to grieve, and so Satan would swallow him up in excessive grief. The Apostle, foreseeing this, counsels the Corinthians to confirm their love toward him, giving this reason: “Lest,” he says, “such a one be swallowed up by excessive grief. For we are not ignorant of his designs.” Something similar happened in Judas, who betrayed Jesus. In the likeness of that grief which works a repentance steadfast unto salvation, he too was grieved, and after he was moved by repentance he brought back the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests, saying, “I have sinned in betraying innocent blood”; and this itself belonged to repentance and saving grief. But because he never guarded his heart, nor grieved wisely, but took on the excessive grief sent upon him by the devil, who wished to swallow him up in excessive grief, therefore, having thrown those pieces of silver back into the temple, he went and hanged himself with a noose. For if, after he had brought back the money and confessed that he had sinned in betraying innocent blood, he had not gone and hanged himself, but had sought a place for repentance and kept a time of repentance, perhaps he would also have found him who said, “As I live, I do not desire the death of the sinner, but his repentance.” And I think that Judas, understanding something greater about the Saviour, threw the thirty pieces of silver nowhere else but into the temple, where he knew the Lord had driven the sheep and oxen out of the temple and said to those who sold doves, “Take these things out of here, and do not make my Father's house a house of trade.” So, utterly despairing of himself because he understood the greatness of his sin, he threw those pieces of silver into the temple, went away, and hanged himself. And those who received the pieces of silver wished to observe something lawful, and not to put them into the treasury, where the people's offerings were gathered for the needs of the poor; for they thought it impious to put the price of blood into the treasury. So they took counsel and bought with that money the field of a potter, a worker in clay. For they saw that it was more fitting for the money, since it was the price of blood, to be spent on the dead and on a place for the dead and for burial, than to go into the treasury or to some honourable need. But since there are differences among places of the dead too (for many are buried, as they wish, in their fathers' tombs, while some, because of certain calamities, are often buried in strangers' tombs), they took the price of the blood of Jesus and used it to buy the field of some potter, so that dead strangers might be buried there, not as they wished, but because some adverse chance brought it about. And if it is fitting to understand “strangers” spiritually too, we say that strangers are those who to the end are aliens from God and strangers to his covenants. Such strangers, then, have such an end: to be buried in the potter's field, which was bought with the price of blood. For the righteous are those who say, “We were buried with Christ” in a new tomb hewn in the rock, a hewn tomb where no one of the dead had yet been laid. But those who to the end are strangers to Christ and aliens from God will, without doubt, say accordingly: “We were buried with strangers in the field of the potter who works clay, which was bought with the price of blood, and we are in the field that is called the field of blood.” But as for what the evangelist says after this, “Then was fulfilled what had been spoken through the prophet Jeremiah, saying,” and the rest: among the writings, Jeremiah is not found anywhere in his books to have prophesied this, whether in those read in the churches or in those transmitted among the Jews. If anyone can know, let him show where it is written. I suspect either that there is an error in the text, and Jeremiah was put for Zechariah, or that there is some secret writing of Jeremiah in which it is written. The text in the prophet Zechariah is this: “And I will say to them: If it is good in your sight, give me my wages, or refuse; and they fixed my wages at thirty pieces of silver. And the Lord said to me: Put them into the furnace, and see if it is tested, as I was tested for them. And I took the thirty pieces of silver and cast them into the house of the Lord, into the furnace.” And if anyone thinks that by saying this he gives offence, let him consider whether this is not prophesied somewhere in the secret writings of Jeremiah, knowing that the Apostle too cites certain secret writings, as when he says somewhere, “What eye has not seen, nor ear heard”; for this is found written in no canonical book, but only in the Secrets of Elijah the prophet. Again, what he says, “As Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses,” is not found in the public scriptures, but in a secret book entitled the Book of Jannes and Jambres. Hence some have dared to reject the Epistle to Timothy, as containing a text from a secret writing, but they could not. But that anyone has rejected the first Epistle to the Corinthians as spurious for this reason has never reached my ears.