Commentary on Matthew 16.3–16.7

It does no harm to set out the earlier passage that is similar to the one before us, which runs thus: “Then he charged his disciples to tell no one that he was the Christ,” and so on, up to “and on the third day be raised”; for after this it is said, “And Peter took him aside,” and what follows. Moreover, above it is said that the Saviour was to be killed; but here the manner of the killing is written: being crucified. As long, then, as Jesus was not handed over in Jerusalem to the chief priests and scribes, nor condemned to death, nor mocked, scourged, and crucified, Jerusalem stood, and the so-called sanctuary was not thrown down. But when they dared to do these things to Jesus, then those who handed him over were abandoned, and the chief priests ceased to be chief priests, so that after them there were no more chief priests; and then also the scribes who condemned Jesus to death, hardened in mind and blinded in reason, did not see the intent of the holy writings. And all those who condemned Jesus to death were handed over to death, the enemy of Christ; and having mocked Jesus, they became a mockery when Jerusalem was surrounded by armies, when also “its desolation drew near.” And having scourged Jesus, they themselves were scourged, and are scourged “until the fullness of the Gentiles comes in”; for “he who throws a stone on high throws it on his own head.” And all these things have happened so that the divine oversight might depart from them and pass over to those from the Gentiles who are being saved, together with “the remnant chosen by grace”; for “unless the Lord of hosts had left us offspring, we would have become like Sodom and been made like Gomorrah.” I think that, just as the worship long performed as a copy and shadow of the heavenly things was dissolved because of the heavenly things, and when the true high priest came the symbolic high priest ceased, and when the true sacrifices for sins were offered the symbolic ones were abolished; so, when the true Jerusalem received Jesus, who went up mounted on his own body as on a beast of burden—at which “the daughter of Zion rejoiced greatly,” and the daughter of the Jerusalem above made proclamation—then Jerusalem, the shadow, was destroyed, and the temple of dead stones fell because of the temple of living stones; and the altar below was demolished, since the heavenly altar came into use, Jesus having performed its dedication in the true worship. And if, in one of its meanings, the city is the people, then even now in Jerusalem (by which I mean those who have their hopes set on the earthly place) Jesus is handed over; and the Jews who profess the service of God, being as it were chief priests, and the scribes who boast that they explain the divine writings, condemn Jesus to death by the evil they speak of him. And there is no time when they do not hand Jesus over to the Gentiles, mocking him and his teaching among themselves; and they always scourge with their tongues the godliness that comes through Jesus Christ, and they themselves crucify him by their anathemas and by wishing to destroy his teaching. But he, being stronger than they, rises after a short interval and appears living to those who have received their sight. For now, “who is blind,” as Isaiah says in the person of God, “but my servants? And who are deaf, but those who rule them?” For he says, with great prophetic character and spirit: “You deaf, hear; and you blind, look up and see. And who is blind but my servants? And who are deaf but those who rule them? And the servants of God were blinded.” For Jesus came “for judgment into this world, that those who do not see”—these are the nations—“may see, and that those who see”—Israel—“may become blind.” At any rate, when so great a true light had risen, and the Word showed himself and said, “Behold a man whose name is the Dawn,” they did not see the light, since “their wickedness blinded them, and they did not know the mysteries of God.” And something paradoxical has happened to that people and to the nations. The people saw each of the prophets, who was a lamp, but did not know the Sun of righteousness when he rose; therefore whatever lamp they seemed to have was taken from them. But the people of the nations, sitting in darkness, saw a light—not a small one, such as Israel saw, for each of the prophets was a small light—but “the people sitting in darkness saw a great light,” our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, whose greatness appears as he “reaches mightily from one end of the earth to the other and orders” the churches “well,” now that his Spirit has filled the world and the prophecy has been fulfilled which says, “In the last days the mountain of God shall be manifest”; and now “all the nations go to it,” and this is Christ Jesus. [On the sons of Zebedee.]

“Then the mother of the sons of Zebedee came to him with her sons,” and so on, up to “And when the ten heard it, they were indignant at the two brothers.” Mark too recorded the like, in this way: “And James and John, the sons of Zebedee, come to him and say to him,” and so on, up to “they began to be indignant at James and John.” In the passage before us it is worth inquiring now into something not to be despised and truly befitting the Gospel of Jesus Christ. For to the simpler and wholly guileless, who do not know how to search the depths of God and of his Scriptures, the letter shows a simplicity in the request and in Jesus’ answer to it; but to those able to test problems even a little, the sense that appears at once is slight and cheap, and has nothing befitting his greatness of mind, especially when Jesus answers. For as in an earthly kingdom those who sit with the king when he is seated in his royal robes are thought to be advanced in honour, as is anyone who administers any of the affairs of the kingdom, so, according to the letter, the mother of the sons of Zebedee—or, as Mark recorded it, James and John—imagining such glory, asked of the Saviour that one of them might sit at his right when he was in his kingdom, and the other at his left. And there was nothing strange in a woman, out of simplicity and lack of learning, thinking to ask for such things; and let it be granted that the two apostles too, as men still imperfect and understanding nothing deeper about the kingdom of Christ, supposed such things about those who would sit with Jesus. But when Jesus too, as though agreeing that it is a great thing for someone to sit at his right or his left, exalts the request and says, “You do not know what you are asking,” and, “It is not mine to give, but it is for those for whom it has been prepared by my Father,” someone who seems to be an intelligent hearer of Scripture might ask what it means to sit at the right or the left of Jesus in his kingdom. And against those who suppose that we inquire into these things too curiously, we must gather what is said about sitting, so that by testing what is gathered for this and comparing the texts with one another, some greatness of doctrine may be able to dawn from a simpler example. For example, in the third book of Kingdoms it is written that Micaiah said: “I saw the God of Israel sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven around him on his right and on his left,” and so on. And in the second book of Chronicles the same Micaiah says something similar in the words: “Hear the word of the Lord. I saw the Lord sitting on the throne of his glory, and all the power of heaven was standing on his right and on his left,” and so on. And in Isaiah it is written: “And it came to pass in the year in which King Uzziah died, I saw the Lord sitting on a throne, high and lifted up,” and so on. Further, in Daniel such things are written: “I watched until thrones were set, and the Ancient of Days sat,” and so on. Similar things can be found also in Ezekiel at the beginning of his prophecy, when he says: “Above the firmament over their heads”—clearly the cherubim’s—“as the appearance of sapphire stone, the likeness of a throne upon it; and upon the likeness of the throne a likeness as the form of a man above.” Also in the hundred and ninth Psalm the words, “The Lord said to my Lord, Sit at my right hand,” show a sitting of the Father, and another of the one who sits at his right. And again in another Psalm the prophet prays and says: “You who sit upon the cherubim, appear”; and again: “God sits upon his holy throne.” And if you wish to take an example from the Gospels as well, hear Matthew recording how Jesus said to the disciples: “Truly I say to you, that you who have followed me, in the regeneration, when the Son of Man sits on the throne of his glory,” and so on; and: “Hereafter you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the power.” And Matthew says this: “When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on the throne of his glory,” and so on; and: “Hereafter you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the power.” Mark says the equivalent in the words: “And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the power and coming with the clouds of heaven”; and Luke says the like in the words: “From now on the Son of Man will be seated at the right hand of the power of God.” And why must one gather more such texts, wishing to present, in place of the cheap, simpler, and lower interpretation of Christ’s sitting in his kingdom and of those who will sit at his right or his left, a more mystical one, so that it may reasonably be examined by those able to rise to divine thoughts, and something may be found worthy of “the spiritual man who judges all things and is himself judged by no one,” who will speak about the words of the Gospel in a way corresponding to Paul’s words about spiritual things? For as Paul, taking what concerns the manna, the rock, and the water from it according to the spiritual law, says, “And all ate the same spiritual food, and all drank the same spiritual drink (for they drank from a spiritual rock that followed them, and the rock was Christ),” so the spiritual man who stands on this rock, giving thanks to God for it and saying of himself, “He set my feet upon a rock and directed my steps,” would say that God’s sitting on a spiritual throne is spiritual, and Christ’s likewise, and that Christ’s sitting at the right hand of the power is spiritual. For nothing is shown in these texts about a bodily sitting, which they defined as the settling of the haunches upon a seat. For it is laughable, because these things are named in bodily terms, to think that certain thrones have been fashioned, of I know not what material, able to receive the sitting of God, or of Christ, or of those who sit at the right or the left of Christ, for whom the Father has prepared this. I do not know whether it is pious to think it bodily that the host of heaven stands, in a bodily way, at the right and the left of God; or again to suppose that those who are saved and praised are on the bodily right of our King Jesus Christ, and those who are blamed and perish on a corresponding bodily left.

But perhaps Christ’s being restored to the kingdom and receiving back his own rule—when the sin that reigns in the mortal bodies of human beings has been abolished, and every rule and authority and power that rules the wicked—this is his sitting on the throne of his glory; and his making all things right-hand things to God, so that nothing is any longer left-hand toward him, this is what will take place in those who will be at the right hand of the power, who are to see, as their pattern, the right hand of the power, and to sit at his right and his left in the kingdom of Christ the Word. These God restores, having worked together with them and prepared them to come near to the preeminence of Christ, so that the foremost of those who come near is at his right, being as it were … to him and cleaving to the things of the Word, while the one who is lower is near his left. And see whether you can understand as Christ’s right the creatures called invisible, and as his left the visible and bodily ones; yet Christ reigns over all. Already, of those who come near him, some have been allotted the right-hand and intelligible things, others the left-hand and perceptible things. And perhaps the true mother of the sons of Zebedee, whom the Saviour called Boanerges, that is, sons of thunder, is thunder; and she, judging great things of her sons James and John (for they were great), and thinking that they could hold the first places above all created nature, as men who had received her great voice, came and asked the Lord to seat one of them at his right and the other at his left. And the Saviour, reproving even this great-voiced mother of James and John as not knowing who are the preeminent, and that so great a gift is a grace of the God over all, who breathes with, works with, and establishes in such preeminence those whom he knows to be fit, said: “You do not know what you are asking,” and: “To sit at my right or at my left is not mine to give, but it is for those for whom it has been prepared by my Father.” The one who is able will consider which things are given by the Saviour and which by the Father, seeing that there are some things which the Son would not give, but the Father himself. And if the Gospels too present something of this kind—in some places bringing in the Saviour praying about certain powers, that his requests may be granted him by the Father, and in others acting without prayer, as one who already has what he had asked for—it is bold to inquire into it; nevertheless let the one who is able examine these things too, with reverence. Wishing, I think, to show the mother of the sons of Zebedee, and them, that what they lacked for the completion of what is attainable among men was no ordinary thing, he answered, after “You do not know what you are asking,” with the words: “Are you able to drink the cup that I am about to drink?” or, as Mark recorded it: “Are you able to drink the cup that I drink, or to be baptized with the baptism with which I am baptized, to be bapti-

In these words one will also ask what the cup is and what the baptism is, as being different from one another, and as requiring no ordinary power in the one who is to drink and to be baptized—who is to drink no other cup than the one Jesus was about to drink, and likewise to be baptized with the baptism with which the Lord himself was about to be baptized. Most people, then, refer both to the ordering of martyrdom, without showing whether it has two aspects indicated by the two names while being one in reality, or whether two things too can be indicated by them. We do not reject this interpretation, but we consider whether these two names can indicate something else besides. And since it is a great task to treat them precisely now, we shall set out a few things to establish what appears to us in the passage. To show that martyrdom is indicated by them, one will use not only the words, “Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from me”—as a cup that is drunk with toil by the one who takes up the contests of martyrdom, until he drinks it to the end, having endured in the trial of martyrdom all that is brought upon him—but also what is said in the hundred and fifteenth Psalm: “What shall I render to the Lord for all that he has rendered to me? I will take the cup of salvation and call upon the name of the Lord. I will pay my vows to the Lord before all his people. Precious in the sight of the Lord is the death of his holy ones.” For we can render nothing more to the Lord for the benefits we have received than to take the cup of salvation eagerly, and to call upon the name of the Lord in order to drink it; and in drinking it to the end one pays all his vows to the Lord before all his people. And he taught clearly here what the cup is, by adding to the words about the cup: “Precious in the sight of the Lord is the death of his holy ones.” In concept, martyrdom is two things, one of which is called the cup of salvation and the other baptism. Insofar as one endures the pains, it is a cup, drunk to the end by the one who bears all that is brought upon him, taking up and as it were drinking the pains, and not thrusting them away nor casting them out and vomiting them. And insofar as the one who has endured receives forgiveness of sins, it is baptism. For if baptism promises forgiveness of sins, as we have received concerning the baptism in water and Spirit, and the one who has endured the baptism of martyrdom also receives forgiveness of sins, martyrdom might reasonably be called baptism. And that forgiveness of sins comes to the one who has endured martyrdom is clear from the words: “Everyone who confesses me before men, I too will confess him before my Father in heaven.” The Saviour confesses before the Father in heaven everyone who has confessed, even if before the confession he happened to have sinned in any way whatever; for if he will not confess those who have sinned in any way whatever, the words “Everyone, then, who will confess me,” and what follows, will not be true. But I do not think that the Saviour will confess before the Father in heaven one who remains guilty of any sin whatever; for confession before the Father belongs to one who speaks boldly about the one confessed, as worthy of confession before the Father. And let it not unsettle us that in Mark the Saviour both drinks the cup and is baptized with the baptism. For when John “came into all the region around the Jordan, preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins,” Jesus too comes to John to be baptized by him, as though washing away our sins, so that we too may be cleansed by his washing; or rather, our being cleansed is shown by his martyrdom, inasmuch as he was baptized taking up our sins, in order to loose them both from us and from himself. Therefore “the death he died, he died to our sin,” since he died to sin—not his own, but ours—if indeed such a thing seems reasonable to some. And the sons of Zebedee drank the cup and were baptized with the baptism, since Herod killed James the brother of John with the sword, and the king of the Romans, as tradition teaches, condemned John, who bore witness for the word of truth, to the island of Patmos. John teaches about his own martyrdom without saying who condemned him, speaking thus in the Apocalypse: “I John, your brother and partner in the tribulation and the kingdom and the endurance in Jesus, was on the island called Patmos because of the word of God,” and what follows; and he seems to have seen the Apocalypse on the island.

But the one who adds to the explanation given of the cup and the baptism says something like this: Just as there is a food of the Saviour, about which he says, “My food is to do the will of him who sent me and to accomplish his work,” so there is a cup corresponding to that food. It is bold to distinguish it from the food and to set it out in concrete terms; nevertheless let the one who is able consider whether the food is the practical life and the drink the contemplative. For corresponding to the eating, which consists in doing the will of the one who sent him and accomplishing his work, is the drinking of the will of the one who sent him and the perfecting of the knowledge of it. Whether the words, “My flesh is truly food, and my blood is truly drink,” can or cannot be referred to this distinction, you too will judge. For someone might say that action is truly food, and contemplation truly drink; and the one who says this will say that it is for this reason that he first gives the bread to the disciples, having blessed and broken it, since action comes first; and after this, “taking a cup and giving thanks, he gave it to them, saying, Drink of it, all of you,” since, when the matters of action have been set in order, one goes on to the contemplation of them. For according to the prophet it is said: “Sow for yourselves unto righteousness, gather the vintage unto the fruit of life,” so that first we may do what is needful; and after this he says: “Light for yourselves the light of knowledge.” For it is by a road, after purifying one’s character, that one would travel to knowledge and be enlightened in it. These things too have been said by way of digression, for the deeper examination of the cup. And in the twenty-second Psalm there is said first, “You have prepared a table before me, over against those who afflict me”; and next, “Your cup, intoxicating me, as the very best.” Let the reader of this writing not reproach us on the ground that we ought somehow to have explained the recorded sittings of God or of Christ; for we answer that our purpose was only to put to shame, by the texts about sitting, the lower interpretation, and to draw the reader away from it. For one would need at another time to make a special inquiry about the sitting, standing, and walking of Christ, which the present explanation does not require; for the digression would have become very great and untimely.