Church Fathers Commentary Luke 20

St. Augustine of Hippo: After relating the casting out of those who bought and sold in the temple, Luke omits Christ’s going to Bethany, His return to the city, the details of the fig tree, and the answer given to the astonished disciples concerning the power of faith.

Having omitted all these things, and not pursuing the events of each day in order as Mark does, he begins with these words: And it came to pass, that on one of those days.... By this, we can understand that the event took place on the same day that Matthew and Mark recorded it.

Eusebius of Caesarea: But the rulers, who should have been struck with wonder at one who taught such heavenly doctrines and been convinced by His words and deeds that this was the Christ whom the Prophets had foretold, came to hinder Him, thereby advancing the destruction of the people. For it follows: Tell us, by what authority do you these things? It is as if they were saying, “By the law of Moses, only those descended from Levi have authority to teach and power over the sacred buildings. But you, who are from the line of Judah, are usurping the offices assigned to us.” Yet, O Pharisee, if you had known the Scriptures, you would have recalled that this is the Priest after the order of Melchizedek, who offers to God those who believe in Him through a worship that is above the law. Why then are you troubled? He cast out from the sacred house things that seemed necessary for the sacrifices of the law because He calls us by faith to true righteousness.

The Venerable Bede: Or, when they ask, By what authority do you these things? they are doubting the power of God and want to imply that He does this by the power of the devil. They add, moreover, And who is he that gave you this authority? They most plainly deny the Son of God when they think He performs miracles not by His own power, but by another's. Now our Lord could have refuted such slander with a simple answer, but He wisely asks a question so that they might condemn themselves by either their silence or their words. And He answered and said to them, I will also ask you one thing...

Theophylact of Ohrid: To show that they had always rebelled against the Holy Spirit—and that besides Isaiah, whom they did not remember, they had also refused to believe John, whom they had recently seen—He now, in turn, asks them a question. He was proving that if they had disbelieved so great a prophet as John (who was considered the greatest among them) when he testified about Him, they would in no way believe Him, even if He answered by what authority He did these things.

Eusebius of Caesarea: His question concerning John the Baptist is not about where he came from, but from where he received his authority to baptize. But they did not hesitate to shun the truth. For God sent John as a voice crying, Prepare you the way of the Lord. Yet they dreaded to speak the truth, lest they be asked, “Why did you not believe him?” And they hesitated to blame the forerunner, not from fear of God, but of the people. As it follows, they reasoned among themselves, saying, If we shall say, From heaven; he will say, Why then believed you him not?

The Venerable Bede: It is as if Christ were saying, “The one you confess had his gift of prophecy from heaven also gave testimony about Me. And you heard from him by what authority I do these things.”

It follows, But if we shall say, Of men; the whole people will stone us: for they be persuaded that John was a prophet. Therefore, they perceived that whichever way they answered, they would fall into a trap, fearing the stoning, but fearing the confession of the truth even more.

And so it follows, And they answered, that they could not tell whence it was. Because they would not confess what they knew, they were baffled, and the Lord would not tell them what He knew. As it is written, And Jesus said to them, Neither will I tell you by what authority I do these things.

For there are two main reasons to conceal the truth from those who ask: first, when the questioner is incapable of understanding what he asks, and second, when his hatred or contempt makes him unworthy of an answer.

Eusebius of Caesarea: With the rulers of the Jewish people now assembled in the temple, Christ told a parable, symbolically foretelling the things they were about to do to Him and the rejection that was in store for them.

St. Augustine of Hippo: For the sake of brevity, Matthew has omitted what Luke included: namely, that the parable was spoken not only to the rulers who asked about His authority, but also to the people.

St. Ambrose of Milan: While many derive different meanings from the term "vineyard," Isaiah clearly states that the vineyard of the Lord of Sabaoth is the house of Israel. Who else but God planted this vineyard?

The Venerable Bede: The man who plants the vineyard is the same one who, according to another parable, hired laborers for his vineyard.

Eusebius of Caesarea: However, the parable that Isaiah gives denounces the vineyard itself, whereas our Savior's parable is not directed against the vineyard, but against its cultivators. About them it is added, And he let it out to husbandmen—that is, to the elders of the people, the chief priests, the teachers, and all the nobles.

Theophylact of Ohrid: Alternatively, each one of the people is the vineyard, and each is also the husbandman, for every one of us takes care of himself. After committing the vineyard to the husbandmen, he went away; that is, he left them to be guided by their own judgment. This is why the text says, And went into a far country for a long time.

St. Ambrose of Milan: This is not to say that our Lord journeys from place to place, since He is always present everywhere. Rather, He is more present to those who love Him, while He removes Himself from those who do not regard Him. He was absent for a long time so that His coming to require His fruit would not seem too early. For the greater the indulgence, the less excusable the obstinacy.

St. Cyril of Alexandria: Alternatively, God removed Himself from the vineyard for many years. Since the time He was seen to descend in the likeness of fire on Mount Sinai, He no longer granted them His visible presence. During this time, however, He continually sent His prophets and righteous men to give warning, as the parable continues: And at the time of the vintage he sent a servant to the husbandmen, that they should give him of the fruit of the vineyard.

Theophylact of Ohrid: He says "of the fruit of the vineyard" because He wished to receive not the whole fruit, but only a part. For what does God gain from us, except the knowledge of Him, which is also our profit?

The Venerable Bede: It is rightly written "fruit," not "increase," for there was no increase in this vineyard. The first servant sent was Moses, who for forty years sought from the husbandmen the fruit of the law which he had given. But he was angry with them, for they provoked his spirit. This is why it says, But they beat him, and sent him away empty.

St. Ambrose of Milan: And so He sent many others, whom the Jews sent back to him disgraced and empty, since they could reap nothing from them. As the parable continues, And again he sent another servant.

The Venerable Bede: The other servant represents David, who was sent after the giving of the law to stir up the husbandmen to good works through the music of his psalms. But they, on the contrary, declared, What portion have we in David, neither have we inheritance in the son of Jesse. This is why the parable says, And they beat him also, and entreated him shamefully, and sent him away empty.

But God does not stop here, for the parable continues, And again he sent a third. By this we must understand the company of prophets who constantly visited the people with their testimony. But which of the prophets did they not persecute? As the parable says, And they wounded him also, and cast him out.

Our Lord elsewhere shows that these three successions of servants symbolically represent all the teachers under the law, when He says, For all those things must be fulfilled which were written in the law of Moses, and the Prophets, and the Psalms, concerning me.

Theophylact of Ohrid: After the prophets had suffered all these things, the Son is sent, as the parable continues: Then said the Lord of the vineyard, What shall I do? The Lord of the vineyard speaks with doubt not because of ignorance—for what is there that the Lord does not know?—but He is said to hesitate so that the free will of man may be preserved.

St. Cyril of Alexandria: The Lord of the vineyard also ponders what He should do, not because He needs ministers, but because, having tried every means of human help without His people being healed in any way, He now adds something greater. As He goes on to say, I will send my beloved son: it may be they will reverence him when they see him.

Theophylact of Ohrid: Now, He said this not because He was ignorant that they would treat Him worse than they did the prophets, but because the Son ought to be reverenced by them. If they were still to be rebellious and slay Him, this would crown their iniquity. Therefore, so that no one could say that the divine presence was the necessary cause of their disobedience, He purposely uses this doubtful manner of speaking.

St. Ambrose of Milan: When the only-begotten Son was sent to them, the unbelieving Jews, wishing to get rid of the Heir, put Him to death by crucifying Him and rejected Him by denying Him. Christ is the Heir and also the Testator. He is the Heir because He survives His own death; and from the testament that He Himself bequeathed, He reaps, as it were, the inherited profits in our spiritual progress.

The Venerable Bede: But our Lord most clearly proves that the Jewish rulers crucified the Son of God not from ignorance but from envy. For they knew it was He to whom it was said, I will give you the heathen for your inheritance. And they cast him out of the vineyard, and slew him. This is because Jesus, so that He might sanctify the people by His blood, suffered outside the gate.

Theophylact of Ohrid: Since we have already assumed the vineyard to be the people, not Jerusalem, it can perhaps be more accurately said that the people indeed killed Him “outside the vineyard.” That is, our Lord suffered apart from the hands of the people, because in truth the people did not inflict death upon Him with their own hands, but delivered Him over to Pilate and the Gentiles.

However, some have understood the vineyard to be the Scripture. By not believing it, they killed the Lord. In this sense, our Lord is said to have suffered “outside the vineyard”—that is, outside of Scripture.

The Venerable Bede: Or was He cast out of the vineyard and slain because He was first driven out of the hearts of the unbelievers and then fastened to the cross?

St. John Chrysostom: It was not by accident but as part of the divine plan that Christ came after the prophets. God does not do all things at once, but in His great mercy accommodates Himself to humanity. For if they despised His Son coming after His servants, they would have been even less likely to listen to Him had He come before. For those who did not listen to the lesser commands, how would they have listened to the greater ones?

St. Ambrose of Milan: He rightly asks them a question so that they might condemn themselves by their own words, as the text says: What then will the Lord of the vineyard do to them?

St. Basil the Great: This is what happens to those who are condemned, who have nothing to say in response to the plain evidence of justice. But it is a characteristic of divine mercy not to inflict punishment in secret, but to foretell it with warnings, so that it might call people to repentance. And so it says here, He shall come and destroy those husbandmen.

St. Ambrose of Milan: He says, "the Lord of the vineyard will come," because the Father's majesty is also present in the Son, or because in the last times He will be more graciously present by His Spirit in the hearts of people.

St. Cyril of Alexandria: The Jewish rulers were therefore shut out because they resisted their Lord’s will and made the vineyard entrusted to them barren. The cultivation of the vineyard was then given to the Priests of the New Testament. At this point, as soon as the Scribes and Pharisees understood the point of the parable, they objected, saying, God forbid. However, they did not escape in any way, because of their obstinacy and disobedience to the faith of Christ.

Theophylact of Ohrid: Now, Matthew seems to relate the parable differently, saying that when our Savior asked, What will he do then to the husbandmen? the Jews answered, he will miserably destroy them. But there is no contradiction between the two accounts. The Jews at first gave that answer, but then, realizing the parable was aimed at them, they said, God forbid, as Luke relates here.

St. Augustine of Hippo: Alternatively, in the crowd we are discussing, there were those who deceitfully asked our Lord by what authority He acted, and there were also those who, not deceitfully but faithfully, cried aloud, Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.

Therefore, some in the crowd would have said, He will miserably destroy those husbandmen, and let out his vineyard to others. This response can rightly be considered the words of our Lord Himself, either because of its truth or because of the unity of the members with the Head. At the same time, others would have said to those who gave this answer, God forbid, because they understood the parable was spoken against them.

The passage continues: And he beheld them, and said, What is this then that is written, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner?

The Venerable Bede: It is as if He said: How can the prophecy be fulfilled, unless Christ, being rejected and killed by you, is preached to the Gentiles, who will believe in Him? In this way, as the cornerstone, He may build one temple to Himself from both nations.

Eusebius of Caesarea: Christ is called a stone on account of His earthly body—cut out with hands, as in the vision of Daniel—because of His birth from the Virgin. But the stone is neither silver nor gold, because He is not a glorious King, but a man, lowly and despised, which is why the builders rejected Him.

Theophylact of Ohrid: For the rulers of the people rejected Him when they said, This man is not of God. But He was so useful and so precious that He was made the head of the corner.

St. Cyril of Alexandria: Holy Scripture compares the gathering of the two nations, Jew and Gentile, into one faith to a corner. For the Savior has joined both peoples into one new man, reconciling them in one body to the Father. Therefore, that stone is a saving help to the corner it creates, but to the Jews who resist this spiritual union, it brings destruction.

Theophylact of Ohrid: He mentions two kinds of condemnation or destruction for them. The first is a destruction of their souls, which they suffer by being offended in Christ. He alludes to this when He says, Whosoever shall fall upon that stone shall be shaken to pieces.

The second is their captivity and extermination, which the Stone they despised brought upon them. He points to this when He says, But upon whomsoever it shall fall, it shall grind him to powder, or winnow him. For the Jews were winnowed throughout the whole world like chaff from the threshing floor. And mark the order of things: first comes the wickedness committed against Him, then follows the just vengeance of God.

The Venerable Bede: Alternatively, the one who is a sinner, yet believes in Christ, indeed falls upon the stone and is shaken, for he is preserved for salvation through repentance. But “upon whomsoever it shall fall”—that is, the one upon whom the stone itself has come down because he denied it—it will grind him to powder, so that not even a broken piece of a pot will be left in which to drink a little water.

Or, by those who “fall upon Him,” He means those who only despise Him and therefore do not yet utterly perish, but are shaken so violently that they cannot walk upright. But as for those “upon whom it falls,” He will come to them in judgment with everlasting punishment. Therefore, it will grind them to powder, so that they may be like the dust which the wind scatters from the face of the earth.

St. Ambrose of Milan: The vineyard is also a symbol for us. For the husbandman is the Almighty Father, the vine is Christ, and we are the branches. The people of Christ are rightly called a vine, either because it bears on its front the sign of the cross, because its fruits are gathered at the end of the year, or because to all people—poor and rich, servants and masters alike—there is an equal allotment in the Church without distinction.

And as the vine is joined to the trees, so is the body to the soul. Loving this vineyard, the husbandman is accustomed to dig around it and prune it, lest it grow too lush in the shade of its own leaves and its unfruitful boasting of words hinder the ripening of its true character. Here must be the vintage of the whole world, for here is the vineyard of the whole world.

The Venerable Bede: Or, understanding it in a moral sense, a vineyard is leased to every one of the faithful to cultivate, in that the mystery of baptism is entrusted to them to work out. A first, second, and third servant are sent when the Law, the Psalms, and the Prophets are read. But the servant who is sent is said to be treated shamefully or beaten when the word that is heard is despised or blasphemed.

The person who, by sin, tramples underfoot the Son of God kills the heir who is sent, as much as is in his power to do so. When the wicked husbandmen are destroyed, the vineyard is given to another; that is, the humble are enriched with the gift of grace that the proud person rejected.

St. Cyril of Alexandria: Realizing the parable was spoken about them, it would have been fitting for the rulers of the Jews to turn from evil, since they had been warned about the future. But paying little attention to this, they instead found a new opportunity for their crimes. The commandment of the Law, which says, You shall not kill the innocent and righteous, did not restrain them; instead, the fear of the people held back their wicked plan. For they placed the fear of man before reverence for God. The reason for their plan is given: they realized that He spoke this parable against them.

The Venerable Bede: And so, by seeking to kill Him, they proved the truth of what He had said in the parable. For He Himself is the Heir, whose unjust death He said would be punished. They are the wicked husbandmen who sought to kill the Son of God.

This same sin is also committed daily in the Church. It happens whenever someone who is a brother in name only is ashamed or afraid to violate the unity of the Church's faith and peace, which he secretly detests, because of the many good people with whom he lives. And because the chief priests wanted to seize our Lord but could not do it themselves, they tried to accomplish it through the governor, as the text continues.

St. Cyril of Alexandria: They seemed to be joking, but they were serious, forgetful of God, who asks, Who is this that hides his counsel from me? For they came to Christ, the Savior of all, as if He were an ordinary man, so that they might trap Him in His speech.

Theophylact of Ohrid: They laid snares for our Lord, but got their own feet entangled in them. Listen to their cunning: And they asked Him, saying, “Master, we know that you speak and teach rightly.”

The Venerable Bede: This smooth and clever question was intended to trick the one answering into saying that he fears God more than Caesar, as the next part of their flattery shows: “Neither do you show partiality to anyone, but you teach the way of God in truth.” They said this to trick Him into saying that they should not pay the tribute. This was so that the governor's guards (who, according to the other Evangelists, were present) could immediately seize Him as a leader of rebellion against the Romans upon hearing it.

And so they proceeded to ask, “Is it lawful for us to give tribute to Caesar, or not?” There was a great division among the people on this issue. Some argued that for the sake of security and peace, they ought to pay the tribute, seeing that the Romans fought for everyone's protection. The Pharisees, on the other hand, declared that the people of God, who already gave tithes and first fruits, should not be subject to human law.

Theophylact of Ohrid: Their plan was that if He said they should give tribute to Caesar, He would be accused by the people of placing the nation under the yoke of slavery. But if He forbade them to pay the tax, they would denounce Him to the governor as one who stirs up rebellion. But He escaped their snares, as the text continues: Perceiving their craftiness, he said to them, “Why do you test me? Show me a penny. Whose image and inscription does it have?”

St. Ambrose of Milan: Our Lord teaches us here how cautious we ought to be in our answers to heretics or Jews, as He said elsewhere, “Be wise as serpents.”

The Venerable Bede: Let those who attribute our Savior's question to ignorance learn from this passage that Jesus was perfectly able to know whose image was on the coin. He asks the question so that He might give a fitting answer to their words, as the text continues: They answered and said, “Caesar’s.” We must not suppose this means Augustus, but rather Tiberius, for all the Roman emperors were called Caesar after the first one, Gaius Caesar.

From their answer, our Lord easily resolves the question, as it follows: And he said to them, “Then render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.”

Titus of Bostra: It is as if He said, “You test me with your words; now obey me with your actions. You bear Caesar's image and you have accepted his rule; therefore, give tribute to him, and give fear to God.” For God does not require money, but faith.

The Venerable Bede: Likewise, render to God the things that are God's: that is, tithes, first fruits, offerings, and sacrifices.

Theophylact of Ohrid: And observe that He did not say, “give,” but “render.” For it is a debt. Your ruler protects you from enemies and makes your life peaceful. Surely then you are obligated to pay him tribute. In fact, this very coin that you carry you have received from him. Return, then, the king's money to the king. God has also given you understanding and reason; return these to Him, so that you may not be compared to the beasts but may walk wisely in all things.

St. Ambrose of Milan: Therefore, if you do not want to offend Caesar, be unwilling to possess worldly goods. And you rightly teach that we must first render the things that are Caesar's. For no one can belong to the Lord unless he has first renounced the world. Oh, what a painful chain it is to make a promise to God and not to pay! The contract of faith is far greater than one of money.

Origen of Alexandria: Now, this passage contains a mystery. For there are two images in a person: one that he received from God, as it is written, Let us make man in our own image; and another from the enemy, which he has taken on through disobedience and sin, having been lured and won over by the enticing bait of the prince of this world.

For just as the coin has the image of the worldly emperor, so the one who does the works of the power of darkness bears the image of the one whose works he does. He says, then, “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s,” which means to cast away the earthly image. This enables you, by putting on the heavenly image, to render to God the things that are God's—namely, to love God. These are the things Moses says God requires of us. But God makes this demand of us not because He needs us to give Him anything, but so that when we have given it, He might grant us this very same gift for our salvation.

The Venerable Bede: Now, those who should have believed in such great wisdom were instead amazed that in all their cunning they had found no opportunity to trap Him. As the text continues: And they could not trap him in his words before the people. And they marveled at his answer and were silent.

Theophylact of Ohrid: This was their main objective—to rebuke Him before the people—but they were unable to do so because of the wonderful wisdom of His answer.

The Venerable Bede: There were two heresies among the Jews. One was that of the Pharisees, who boasted in the righteousness of their traditions, and for this reason the people called them “separated.” The other was that of the Sadducees, whose name signified “righteous,” claiming to be something they were not. When the Pharisees went away, the Sadducees came to tempt Him.

Origen of Alexandria: The heresy of the Sadducees not only denies the resurrection of the dead but also maintains that the soul dies with the body. Watching for an opportunity to trap our Savior in His words, they proposed a question at the very time they observed Him teaching His disciples about the resurrection, as it follows: And they asked him, saying, Master, Moses wrote to us, If a brother...

St. Ambrose of Milan: According to the letter of the law, a woman is compelled to marry, however unwilling, so that a brother may raise up offspring for his deceased brother. The letter therefore kills, but the Spirit is the source of love.

Theophylact of Ohrid: The Sadducees, relying on a weak foundation, did not believe in the doctrine of the resurrection. Because they imagined the future life in the resurrection to be carnal, they were justly misled. Therefore, reviling the doctrine of the resurrection as an impossibility, they invented the story: There were seven brothers...

The Venerable Bede: They devised this story to prove the foolishness of those who assert the resurrection of the dead. For this reason, they presented a crude fable in order to deny the truth of the resurrection.

St. Ambrose of Milan: Mystically, this woman is the synagogue, which had seven husbands, as it is said to the Samaritan woman, You had five husbands. This is because the Samaritans follow only the five books of Moses, while the synagogue, for the most part, follows seven. From none of them has she received the seed of a continuing lineage, and so she can have no share with her husbands in the resurrection, because she perverts the spiritual meaning of the precept into a carnal one. For the law does not point to any carnal brother who should raise up offspring for his deceased brother. Rather, it points to that brother who, from among the spiritually dead people of the Jews, would claim for himself the wisdom of divine worship as his wife and from her raise up offspring in the Apostles. These Apostles, left as if unformed in the womb of the synagogue, have, according to the election of grace, been deemed worthy to be preserved by the infusion of a new seed.

The Venerable Bede: Alternatively, these seven brothers correspond to the reprobate, who are fruitless in good works throughout the entire life of this world, which revolves in a cycle of seven days. As they are carried away by death one after another, at last the course of this evil world—like the barren woman—also passes away.

Theophylact of Ohrid: But our Lord shows that in the resurrection there will be no carnal relations, and in this way He overthrew their doctrine along with its weak foundation, as it follows: And Jesus said to them, The children of this world marry...

St. Augustine of Hippo: For marriages are for the sake of children, children are for the sake of succession, and succession exists because of death. Where there is no death, therefore, there are no marriages. And so it follows, But they which shall be accounted worthy...

The Venerable Bede: This must not be taken to mean that only those who are worthy will rise again or be without marriage, for all sinners will also rise again and will remain without marriage in that new world. But our Lord chose to mention only the elect, so that He might stir the minds of His hearers to contemplate the glory of the resurrection.

St. Augustine of Hippo: Just as our speech is formed by syllables that appear and then pass away, so too human beings, whose own existence is a sequence of arrivals and departures, make up the order of this world, which is constructed with the temporary beauty of things. But in the future life, the Word we will enjoy is not formed by such a succession of syllables but possesses all things eternally and at once. Therefore, those who partake of that Word—for whom it alone will be life—will neither depart through death nor be replaced by birth, just as it is now with the angels, as it follows: For they are equal to the angels.

St. Cyril of Alexandria: For just as the multitude of angels is very great, yet they are not multiplied by procreation but exist by creation, so also for those who rise again, there is no longer any need for marriage, as it follows: And are the children of God.

Theophylact of Ohrid: It is as if He said: Because it is God who brings about the resurrection, those who are regenerated by the resurrection are rightly called the sons of God. For in the regeneration of those who rise again, there is nothing carnal—neither sexual union, nor the womb, nor birth.

The Venerable Bede: Alternatively, they are equal to the angels and are the children of God because, having been made new by the glory of the resurrection, they rejoice in the perpetual beholding of God’s presence, with no fear of death, no stain of corruption, and no quality of an earthly condition.

Origen of Alexandria: But because the Lord says in Matthew what is omitted here, You do err, not knowing the Scriptures, we must ask the question: where is it written, They shall neither marry, nor be given in marriage? For in my view, no such thing is to be found in either the Old or New Testament. Instead, their entire error crept in from reading the Scriptures without understanding. For it is said in Isaiah, My elect shall not have children for a curse. From this they suppose that something similar will happen in the resurrection. But Paul, interpreting all these blessings as spiritual and knowing they are not carnal, says to the Ephesians, You have blessed us in all spiritual blessings.

Theophylact of Ohrid: To the reason already given, the Lord added the testimony of Scripture: Now that the dead are raised, Moses also showed at the bush, when the Lord said, I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. It is as if He said: If the patriarchs had returned to nothing, no longer living with God in the hope of a resurrection, He would not have said, I am, but, I was. For we are accustomed to speak of things that are dead and gone in this way. But since He said, I am, He shows that He is the God and Lord of the living. This is what follows: He is not a God of the dead, but of the living, for all live to him. For though they have departed from this life, they still live with Him in the hope of a resurrection.

The Venerable Bede: Alternatively, He says this so that after proving that souls endure after death (which the Sadducees denied), He could then introduce the resurrection of the bodies, which along with the souls have done good or evil. But the true life is the one that the righteous live to God, even if they are dead in the body. To prove the truth of the resurrection, He could have brought far more obvious examples from the Prophets, but the Sadducees accepted only the five books of Moses, rejecting the oracles of the Prophets.

St. John Chrysostom: Just as the saints claim the common Lord of the world as their own—not to diminish His dominion, but to testify to their affection in the way that lovers do, who cannot bear to share their love with many but desire to express a unique and special attachment—so too does God call Himself especially the God of these men, thereby not narrowing His dominion but enlarging it. For it is not the multitude of His subjects that manifests His power so much as the virtue of His servants. Therefore, He does not delight as much in the title “God of heaven and earth” as He does in being called “the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.” Among men, servants are named by their masters; for we say, “the steward of a certain man.” But in this case, on the contrary, God is called the God of Abraham.

Theophylact of Ohrid: When the Sadducees were silenced, the Scribes, who were their opponents, praised Jesus, saying to Him, “Master, you have spoken well.”

The Venerable Bede: And since they had been defeated in argument, they asked Him no further questions but instead seized Him and handed Him over to the Roman authorities. From this we may learn that while the poison of envy can be subdued, it is very difficult to silence it completely.

Theophylact of Ohrid: Although our Lord was about to enter into His Passion, He proclaims His own Godhead, and does so not carelessly or boastfully, but with humility. For He puts a question to them and, having left them perplexed, allows them to reason out the conclusion, as it follows: And he said to them, How do they say that Christ is David’s son?

St. Ambrose of Milan: They are not blamed here because they acknowledge Him to be David’s Son, for in doing so the blind man was considered worthy to be healed. And the children, by saying, “Hosanna to the Son of David,” offered God the highest glory and praise. Rather, they are blamed because they do not believe Him to be the Son of God.

For this reason, it is written what David himself says in the book of Psalms: The Lord said to my Lord. Both the Father is Lord and the Son is Lord, yet there are not two Lords, but one Lord, for the Father is in the Son and the Son is in the Father. He sits at the right hand of the Father because He is coequal with the Father and inferior to none, as it follows: Sit at my right hand. He is not honored by sitting at the right hand, nor is He degraded by being sent. Where the fullness of divinity is present, degrees of dignity are not a consideration.

St. Augustine of Hippo: By this “sitting,” we must not imagine a physical posture of the limbs, as if the Father sat on the left and the Son on the right. Instead, we must interpret “the right hand” itself to be the power that was received by the Man who was assumed into God, so that He who first came to be judged would then come to judge.

St. Cyril of Alexandria: Alternatively, the fact that He sits at the Father’s right hand proves His heavenly glory. For if their thrones are equal, their majesty is equal. When the word “sitting” is used in reference to God, it signifies a universal kingdom and power. Therefore, He sits at the right hand of the Father because the Word—who proceeds from the substance of the Father—did not set aside His divine glory when He was made flesh.

Theophylact of Ohrid: He shows, then, that He is not opposed to the Father but is in agreement with Him, since the Father opposes the Son’s enemies, as it is written: Until I make your enemies your footstool.

St. Ambrose of Milan: We must, therefore, believe that Christ is both God and man, and that His enemies are made subject to Him by the Father—not because of any weakness in His own power, but because of the unity of their nature, since the one works in the other. For the Son also subjects enemies to the Father, as He glorifies the Father on earth.

Theophylact of Ohrid: Therefore, He asks the question and, after raising their doubts, leaves them to deduce the conclusion, as it follows: David therefore calls him Lord; how then is he his son?

St. John Chrysostom: Truly, David was both the ancestor and the servant of Christ: the first according to the flesh, and the second in the Spirit.

St. Cyril of Alexandria: In the same way, in response to the new Pharisees—who neither confess that the Son of the holy Virgin is the true Son of God nor that He is God, but instead divide the one Son into two—we pose the same objection: How then is the Son of David also David’s Lord, and by a divine rather than a human lordship?