Commentary on Matthew 10.1–10.11

“Then he left the crowds and went into his house, and his disciples came to him, saying, ‘Explain to us the parable of the weeds of the field.’” When Jesus is with the crowds he is not in his house, for the crowds are outside the house; and it is a work of his love for humankind to leave the house and go away to those who cannot come to him. Having spoken enough to the crowds in parables, he dismisses them and goes into his own house, where his disciples come to him, not having stayed behind with those he dismissed. And those who hear Jesus more genuinely first follow him; then, asking about his dwelling, they are allowed to see it, and having come they see, and remain with him, all of them for that day, and perhaps some of them even longer. I think such things are indicated in the Gospel according to John by these words: “The next day again John was standing with two of his disciples.” And further, to show that of those who were allowed to go with Jesus and see his house the one who excels also becomes an apostle, there is added: “One of the two who heard John and followed him was Andrew, the brother of Simon Peter.” So we too, if we wish not to hear Jesus as the crowds do, whom he dismisses when he goes into the house, must take up something exceptional beyond the crowds and become intimate with Jesus, so that as his disciples we may come to him when he has gone into the house, and having come, ask for the explanation of a parable, whether that of the weeds of the field or of any other. And that it may be understood more exactly what reality the house of Jesus represents, let someone gather from the Gospels all that is said about the house of Jesus and what was spoken or done by him in it. For all these things brought together will convince one who attends to this reading that the letters of the Gospel are not simply plain, as some think, but that for the simple they have become simple by a dispensation, while for those who wish and are able to hear them more acutely there are hidden in them things wise and worthy of the Word of God.

“He answered and said, ‘The one who sows the good seed is the Son of Man.’” Although we have treated these things as well as we could in what precedes, nonetheless now too we will say what can be fitted to them, even if it follows another line of explanation. See whether the good seed, the children of the kingdom, can, besides what has already been given, be taken in another way as well: that whatever good things grow in the human soul have been sown by the Word of God who was in the beginning with God, and are offspring of the kingdom of God, so that the sound words about each matter are the children of the kingdom. And while those sleep who do not act according to the command of Jesus, who says, “Watch and pray, that you may not enter into temptation,” the devil, lying in wait, sows what are called weeds, the wicked doctrines, among what some call natural notions and among the good seeds that come from the Word. In this sense the field might be said to be the whole world, and not only the church of God; for in the whole world the Son of Man sowed the good seed and the evil one the weeds, if indeed the weeds are the wicked words, which, coming from wickedness, are children of the evil one. And at the end of things, which is called the consummation of the age, there must be a harvest, so that the angels of God appointed for this may gather up the base doctrines that have grown into the soul and hand them over for destruction to what is called burning with fire, overthrowing them. And so the angels and servants of the Word will gather out of the whole kingdom of Christ all the stumbling blocks present in souls and the thoughts that do lawlessness, and, destroying them, will cast them into the furnace of burning fire. There those who become aware that through sleeping they have received the seeds of the evil one into themselves will weep and, as it were, be angry with themselves; for this is the gnashing of teeth. That is why it is said in the Psalms, “They gnashed their teeth at me.” Then above all the righteous will shine, no longer diversely as at the beginning, but all as one sun in the kingdom of their Father. Indicating a mystery, then, perhaps through all the parts of the explanation of the parable, but perhaps most of all through “Then the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father,” the Saviour adds, “He who has ears to hear, let him hear,” teaching those who think that in the explanation of the parable …

But since above, at “Then the righteous will shine like the sun,” we said that the righteous will not shine diversely as before but will all be as one sun, we must set out what occurs to us on the passage. Daniel, it seems, knowing that those who understand are the light of the world, and that the many among the righteous differ in glory, said: “And those who understand will shine like the brightness of the firmament, and from the many righteous like the stars forever.” And the Apostle too, in the words “There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars; for star differs from star in glory; so also is the resurrection of the dead,” says the same as Daniel, having taken this thought from his prophecy. One might ask, then, how they speak of a difference in the light of the righteous, while the Saviour says the opposite: “They will shine as one sun.” I suppose, then, that at the beginning of the blessedness of those who are saved, because those who are not such have not yet been purified, there is the difference in the light of those who are saved; but when, as we have explained, all the stumbling blocks are gathered out of the whole kingdom of Christ, and the thoughts that do lawlessness are cast into the furnace of fire, and the worse things are consumed, and when, as this happens, those who received the words that are children of the evil one come to awareness, then the righteous, having become one light like the sun, will shine in the kingdom of their Father. But for whom will they shine? Or will those below them enjoy their light, as the sun now shines for those on earth? For surely they will not shine for themselves. But perhaps also “Let your light shine before men” can be written threefold on the breadth of the heart, according to what was said by Solomon, so that the light of Jesus’ disciples shines now before the rest of men, and after their departure before the resurrection, and after the resurrection, until all attain to a perfect man and all become one sun; then they will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father. On the parable of the treasure hidden in the field.

“Again, the kingdom of heaven is like treasure hidden in the field, which a man found and hid.” The earlier parables he spoke to the crowds; but this one and the two that follow it, which are not parables but similitudes of the kingdom of heaven, he seems to have spoken to the disciples when he was in the house. Concerning this one and the two that follow, let the attentive reader examine whether they are not parables at all. For in those cases Scripture did not hesitate to prefix the name “parable” to each one, but in these it has not done so. And it did this with reason. For if he spoke to the crowds in parables, and “all these things he spoke in parables, and without a parable he did not speak to them,” but when he has gone into the house he converses not with the crowds but with the disciples who came to him there, it is clear that the things spoken in the house are not parables; for to those outside he speaks in parables, and to those to whom “it has not been given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven.” Someone will say, then: “If these are not parables, what are they?” Perhaps, following the wording of Scripture, we shall say that they are similitudes. A similitude differs from a parable; for it is written in Mark: “To what shall we liken the kingdom of God, or in what parable shall we set it?” From this it is shown that there is a difference between a similitude and a parable. It seems, then, that the similitude is generic and the parable specific. And perhaps the similitude, being the most generic, the genus of the parable, contains among its species both the parable and a similitude that bears the same name as the genus. This happens in other cases too, as those skilled in the assigning of names have observed: they say that “impulse” is the most generic of many species, such as repulsion and impulse, and that in the species “impulse” is used homonymously with the genus, in contrast to repulsion.

Here too we must inquire separately about the field and separately about the treasure hidden in it, and in what way the man, having found this hidden treasure, goes away from joy and sells all that he has in order to buy that field. We must also inquire what the things are that he sells. It seems to me, then, that in these terms the field is the Scripture, planted with the plain words of the literal account, of the law, of the prophets, and with the other thoughts; for the planting of the words of the whole Scripture is great and varied. And the treasure hidden in the field is the thoughts hidden and lying beneath the plain ones, of the wisdom hidden in a mystery, and in Christ, “in whom are hidden the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.” Another might say that the field is the one truly full, which the Lord blessed, the Christ of God, and that the treasure hidden in him is what Paul says is hidden in Christ, when he says of Christ: “In whom are hidden the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.” The heavenly realities, therefore, and the kingdom of heaven, are written as in an image in the Scriptures, which are the kingdom of heaven; or else Christ himself, the king of the ages, is the kingdom of heaven, likened to treasure hidden in the field.

When you come to the passage, you will inquire whether the kingdom of heaven is likened only to the treasure hidden in the field, so that the field is understood as something other than the kingdom; or whether it is likened to this whole, treasure hidden in the field, so that the kingdom of heaven, according to the similitude, includes both the field and the treasure hidden in the field. Now a man who comes to the field, whether the Scriptures or the Christ who is made up of things manifest and things hidden, finds the hidden treasure of wisdom, whether in Christ or in the Scriptures. For going about the field, searching the Scriptures and seeking to understand Christ, he finds the treasure in it; and having found it he hides it, thinking it not without danger to disclose to just anyone the secret meanings of the Scriptures or the treasures of wisdom and knowledge in Christ. And having hidden it he goes away, working out how he may buy the field, that is, the Scriptures, to make them his own possession, receiving from those of God the oracles of God with which the Jews were first entrusted. And when the one who has become Christ’s disciple buys the field, “the kingdom of God is taken” from them—which in another parable is a vineyard—“and is given to a nation producing its fruits,” to the one who bought the field by faith, having sold all his possessions and no longer keeping with him anything of what he possessed before; and what he possessed was wickedness. You will apply the same if the field that has the hidden treasure is Christ. For those who left everything and followed him have, as it were, in another sense sold their possessions, so that, having sold and given up those things, and having received in their place from God a good choice of will, being helped by him, they may buy, at the great price that the field is worth, the field that has the treasure hidden in …

“Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a merchant seeking fine pearls.” Since, although there are many merchants trading in many things, the kingdom of heaven is like none of them, but like the one seeking fine pearls, who found one pearl worth the many, a very precious pearl, which he bought in exchange for all, I think it reasonable to examine the nature of the pearl. Observe carefully that he did not say that he sold all the pearls he had; for the one seeking fine pearls sold not only those he had bought but also everything he had, in order to buy that pearl. Now we have found the following about the nature of the pearl among those who have written on stones. Of pearls some are of the land and some of the sea. Those of the land occur only among the Indians and are suited for signets, settings and necklaces. Of the sea pearls, the superior ones are found among the same Indians; they are also the best, and occur in the Red Sea. Second among pearls are those taken from the Ocean off Britain; and third, falling short not only of the first but also of the second, are those found at the Bosporus near Scythia. Further, this was said of the Indian pearl: that it is formed in shells resembling in nature large spiral sea snails. These, it is recorded, feed in the sea as if in troops, as though led by a herd leader, conspicuous in colour and size and different from those under it, so that it is analogous to what is called the king of the bees. It is also recorded about the catching of the superior ones, that is, those in India, that the inhabitants surround a great circle of the shore with nets and dive down, aiming to take out of them all the one that leads; for when this is caught, they say, the catching of the herd under it becomes effortless, none of those under it staying still any longer, but each following the herd leader as though bound by a thong. It is said also that the formation of the pearls in India takes time, the creature undergoing many turns and changes until it is perfected. And this too is recorded: that the shell of the creature that bears the pearl opens as if yawning and, when opened, receives the heavenly dew into itself; when it is filled with dew that is pure and unclouded, it becomes radiant and gives birth to a large and well-proportioned stone. But if it ever receives darkened, irregular and wintry dew, it conceives a cloudy pearl, blemished with spots. And this too we have found: that if, while it is advancing toward the completion of the stone it carries, it is intercepted by lightning, it closes, and as if from fright scatters and pours out its offspring into what are called blisters. Sometimes small ones are born, as if prematurely, with something of cloudiness, but well-proportioned. Further, the Indian pearl has this beyond the others: it is white in colour, like translucent silver, gently shining with a faintly greenish gleam, and generally round in shape; it is also of delicate colour and softer than a stone. It is so delightful to see that, as the writer on stones said, it is praised among the more eminent. And this too is a sign of the best pearl: that its circumference is as if turned on a lathe, its colour whitest and most translucent, and its size the greatest. So much for the Indian pearl. The one from Britain, they say, has a golden surface colour, but is somewhat cloudy and duller in its sparkle; the one in the strait at the Bosporus is darker than the British, livid, quite dim, soft and elongated. And the pearl in the strait at the Bosporus is formed not in the pinnae, a kind of pearl-bearing shellfish, … but in those called mussels; and for these, I mean those at the Bosporus, the feeding ground is in marshes. A fourth kind of pearl is recorded around Acarnania, in the pinnae among the oysters; these are not very good, but irregular in shape and quite turbid and dirty in colour. And there are others besides these around the same Acarnania, to be rejected on every count.

Having gathered these things from the treatise on stones, I say that the Saviour, knowing the difference among pearls, of which in the one kind some are fine and others base, said: “The kingdom of heaven is like a merchant seeking the fine pearls.” For if some pearls were not also base, it would not have been said, “seeking fine pearls.” Among words of every sort that profess the truth, and among those who bring them, he seeks the pearls. And let the shells that conceive from the heavenly dew and become pregnant with the word of truth from heaven be—if I may so name them—the prophets: these are the fine pearls which the merchant in the present text seeks. And the herd leader of the pearls, with whose finding the others are found together, the very precious pearl, is the Christ of God, the Word who surpasses the precious letters and thoughts of the law and the prophets; when he has been found, all the others too are easily taken. The Saviour converses with all the disciples as with merchants who not only seek the fine pearls but have also found them and possess them, where he says: “Do not throw your pearls before the swine.” That this was said to the disciples is clear from what precedes those words: “Seeing the crowds, he went up on the mountain, and when he sat down his disciples came to him”; for in the sequence of those words it is said: “Do not give what is holy to the dogs, nor throw your pearls before the swine.” Perhaps, then, the one who does not have pearls, or the very precious pearl, is not even a disciple of the Saviour—fine pearls, I mean, not the cloudy or the misty, such as are the words of the heterodox, which are born not toward the east but toward the west or the north, if we must also take this into account because of the difference we found in pearls born in different places. And perhaps the turbid words and the heresies wrapped up in the works of the flesh are the misty pearls, and those born in marshes, which are not fine.

You will connect with the one seeking fine pearls the saying, “Seek, and you will find,” and this: “Everyone who seeks finds.” For what are you seeking? Or what does everyone who seeks find? I will venture to say: the pearls, and the pearl which the one who has given all and suffered the loss of all acquires; the one on account of whom Paul says, “I have suffered the loss of all things, that I may gain Christ,” meaning by “all things” the fine pearls, and by “that I may gain Christ” the one very precious pearl. A lamp, then, is precious to those in darkness, and there is need of a lamp until the sun rises; and precious too is the glory on the face of Moses—and, I think, of the prophets as well—and a fine sight, by which we are led on so as to be able to see the glory of Christ, to whom the Father bears witness, saying, “This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” But “what was glorified has not been glorified in this respect because of the glory that surpasses it”; and we need first the glory that admits of being done away, for the sake of the glory that surpasses it, as we need the knowledge that is in part, which will be done away when the perfect comes. Every soul, then, that comes into infancy and is travelling toward perfection needs, until the fullness of time comes upon it, a tutor, stewards and guardians, so that after all these things the one who formerly differed in nothing from a slave, though he is lord of all, may, set free from tutor, stewards and guardians, receive his father’s inheritance—which corresponds to the very precious pearl and to the perfect that comes and does away with what is in part—when one is able to contain the surpassing worth of the knowledge of Christ, having first been exercised in the kinds of knowledge that are, if I may so put it, surpassed by the knowledge of Christ. But the many, not having understood the beauty of the many pearls of the law and the knowledge, still in part, of all prophecy, think that without these being made clear and fully grasped they can find the one very precious pearl and behold the surpassing worth of the knowledge of Christ Jesus, in comparison with which all things that come before such great and lofty knowledge—not being refuse by their own nature—appear as refuse; they are perhaps the dung put round the fig tree by the vinedresser, which is the cause of its bearing fruit.

For all things, then, there is a season, and a time for every matter under heaven; there is a time to gather the fine pearl stones, and a time, after gathering them, to find one very precious pearl, when it is fitting for one to go away and sell all that he has in order to buy that pearl. For just as everyone who is to become wise in the words of truth must first be taught the elements, and pass through the elementary teaching more fully, and value it highly—yet not remain in the elements, as one who honoured them at the beginning, but having passed on to perfection, be grateful for the introduction as having been useful at the earlier stage—so the things of the law and the prophets, when perfectly understood, are an elementary teaching toward the perfect understanding of the Gospel and of the whole meaning of the works and words of Christ Jesus.

“Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a net that was cast into the sea.” In portraits and statues the likenesses are not likenesses in every respect of the things of which they are made. A portrait painted in wax on a flat wooden board, for example, has the likeness of the surface with its colour, but no longer preserves the depressions and projections, only an appearance of them; the moulding of statues tries to preserve the likeness in the depressions and projections, but no longer in colour; and if a wax cast is made, it tries to preserve both—I mean both the colour and the hollows and projections—but it is not an image of what lies in depth. So too, I would have you understand, in the similitudes of the Gospel the kingdom of heaven, when it is likened to something, is likened not in all the features of the thing to which it is compared, but in those which the subject in hand requires. Here too, then, “the kingdom of heaven is like a net that was cast into the sea,” not, as some think who distort the passage, so as to show that there are different underlying natures among the wicked and righteous who have come into the net, so that because of “gathering from every kind” one should think there are many different natures of the righteous, and likewise of the wicked. For all the Scriptures that show free will stand against such an interpretation, blaming those who sin and approving those who do right; for blame would not justly follow those who belong to such kinds by nature, nor praise those of the better kinds. For the cause of fish being bad or good does not lie in the souls of the fish, but in that which the Word knew when he said, “Let the waters bring forth creeping things that have living souls,” when also “God made the great sea creatures and every soul of living creeping things, which the waters brought forth according to their kinds.” There, then, the waters brought forth every soul of living creeping things according to their kinds, the cause not lying in the soul itself; but here it is we who are the cause of being good kinds, worthy of what are called vessels, or rotten and worthy to be cast out. For it is not nature in us that is the cause of wickedness but deliberate choice, which works evil; and so neither is nature the cause of righteousness, as if it could not admit unrighteousness, but the word which we have received, which makes men righteous. For one cannot see the kinds of water creatures changing from bad fish, as fish go, to good, or from the better to the worse; but among men one can always see the righteous or the wicked either arriving at virtue from wickedness, or falling away from progress toward virtue into the flood of wickedness. That is why in Ezekiel this is written concerning the one who turns from lawlessness to keeping the divine commandments: “And the lawless man, if he turns from all his lawless deeds which he has done,” and so on as far as “that he turn from his wicked way and live”; and concerning the one who falls away from progress toward virtue into the flood of wickedness, this: “But when a righteous man turns from his righteousness and commits unrighteousness,” and so on as far as “and in his sins which he has sinned, in them he shall die.” Let those who introduce natures on the strength of the parable of the net tell us: the lawless man who later turns from all his lawless deeds which he has done, and keeps the commandments of the Lord, and does righteousness and mercy—of what nature was he when he was lawless? Surely not of the praiseworthy one. But if of the blameworthy, of what nature could he reasonably be said to be when he turns from all his lawless deeds which he has done? If of the bad nature because of his former deeds, how did he change to the better? If of the good nature because of his later deeds, how, being of a good nature, was he lawless? You will raise the same difficulty about the righteous man who turns from his righteousness and commits unrighteousness in all the lawless deeds. For before he turned from righteousness, while he was engaged in righteous works, he was not of a bad nature; a bad nature could not be in righteousness, since a bad tree—wickedness—cannot produce good fruits, the fruits of virtue. And again, if he were of a good and unchangeable nature, he would not have turned from the good, after having been called righteous, from his righteousness to commit unrighteousness in all the lawless deeds which he did.