Church Fathers Commentary Matthew 16

St. John Chrysostom: Just as the Lord sent the crowds away after the miracle of the five loaves, so also now He sends them away—not on foot, but by boat, so that the crowds might not follow Him. And He sent away the multitude, and entered into a ship, and came into the coasts of Magedan.

St. Augustine of Hippo: Mark says Dalmanutha; no doubt it is the same place under a different name, for many copies of the Gospel according to Mark have Magedan.¹

Rabanus Maurus: This Magedan is the country opposite Gerasa, and is interpreted as “fruits” or “a messenger.” It signifies a garden, of which it is said, A garden enclosed, a fountain sealed (Song of Songs 4:12), in which the fruits of virtues grow and where the name of the Lord is announced.

This teaches us that after preachers have ministered the word to the crowd, they ought to refresh themselves with the fruits of virtue within the chamber of their own heart.

It follows: And there came to him Pharisees and Sadducees, tempting him, and they desired him to show them a sign from heaven.

Remigius of Auxerre: What astonishing blindness of the Pharisees and Sadducees! They asked for a sign from heaven, as though the things they now saw were not signs. John shows what sign they desired, for he relates that after the feeding with the five loaves, the crowds came to the Lord and said, What sign do you do, that we may see it and believe you? Our fathers ate manna in the desert, as it is written, He gave them bread from heaven to eat (John 6:30-31).

Therefore, when they say here, Show us a sign from heaven, they mean, “Cause it to rain manna for one or two days, so that the whole people may eat, as was done for a long time in the desert.” But He, looking into their thoughts as God and knowing that they would not believe even if a sign from heaven were shown to them, would not give them the sign for which they asked. As it follows, But he answered and said to them, When it is evening, you say, It will be fair weather; for the sky is red, etc.

St. Jerome: This is not found in most copies of the Greek text.ⁱ The meaning, however, is clear: that fair and rainy days can be foretold by the condition and harmony of the elements. Yet the Scribes and Pharisees, who seemed to be doctors of the Law, could not discern the Savior's coming from the predictions of the Prophets.

St. Augustine of Hippo: We might also understand this saying in this way: When it is evening, you say, It will be fair weather, for the sky is red, refers to the fact that by the blood of Christ's passion at His first coming, the forgiveness of sin is given. And the words, And in the morning, It will be foul weather today, for the sky is red and lowering, mean that at His second coming He will come with fire before Him.²

Glossa Ordinaria: Alternatively: The sky is red and lowering means that the Apostles suffer after the resurrection, by which you may know that I will judge hereafter. For if I do not spare the good who are mine from present suffering, I will not spare others hereafter. You can therefore discern the face of the sky, but the signs of the times you cannot.

Rabanus Maurus: By the signs of the times He means His own coming, or passion, to which the evening redness of the heavens may be compared. He also means the tribulation that will come before His second coming, to which the morning redness with the lowering sky may be compared.

St. John Chrysostom: Just as there is one sign in the sky for fair weather and another for rain, so you ought to think concerning me. Now, in this My first coming, there is a need for these signs that are done on the earth; but those that are done in heaven are reserved for the time of the second coming.

Now I come as a physician, but then I will come as a judge. Now I come in secret, but then I will come with great splendor, when the powers of the heavens will be shaken. But now is not the time for those signs; now I have come to die and to suffer humiliation. As it follows, An evil and adulterous generation seeks after a sign, and there shall no sign be given it, but the sign of the prophet Jonah.

St. Augustine of Hippo: Matthew has already recorded this. From this we may learn for our own information that the Lord spoke the same things many times. This helps us understand that when there are contradictions that cannot be explained, it may be because the same sayings were uttered on two different occasions.

Glossa Ordinaria: He says, Evil and adulterous generation, meaning it is an unbelieving generation, having a carnal and not a spiritual understanding.³

Rabanus Maurus: A sign from heaven, such as they asked for, is not given to this generation that tempted the Lord in this way, though many signs are given on the earth. A sign is given only to the generation of those who sought the Lord, in whose sight He ascended into heaven and sent the Holy Spirit.

St. Jerome: But what is meant by the sign of Jonah has been explained above.

St. John Chrysostom: When the Pharisees heard this, they should have asked Him what He meant. But they had not asked at first with any desire to learn, and therefore the Lord leaves them, as it follows: And he left them, and went his way.

St. Jerome: That is, leaving the evil generation of the Jews, He passed over the strait, and the people of the Gentiles followed Him.

St. Hilary of Poitiers: Observe that we do not read here, as in other places, that He sent the crowds away and departed. Instead, because the error of unbelief held the minds of the presumptuous, it is said that He left them.

Glossa Ordinaria: As the Lord had left the Pharisees because of their unbelief, He now teaches His disciples to be on their guard against their doctrine. From this it follows, And when His disciples were come to the other side, they had forgotten to take bread. ¹

Remigius of Auxerre: They were bound to their Master with such great affection that they were unwilling to part from Him for even a moment. In this, it should be observed how far they were from any longing for delicacies, when they took so little care for necessities that they had even forgotten to take bread, without which human weakness cannot support itself.

He said to them, Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.

St. Hilary of Poitiers: In this, the Apostles are admonished not to be partakers of the doctrine of the Jews. The works of the Law were established to produce faith and to prefigure the things that were to come. Those who lived when truth itself had arrived should not look for further types of truth, lest the teaching of the Pharisees, which did not know Christ, should hinder the effect of Gospel truth.

St. Jerome: For he who takes heed of the leaven of the Pharisees and the Sadducees does not observe the precepts of the Law and of the letter, but neglects the traditions of men so that he may do the commandments of God. This is the leaven of which the Apostle speaks, A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump (1 Corinthians 5:6).

By every means, we should also avoid the leaven that Marcion, Valentinus, and all the heretics possessed. For the nature of leaven is such that when mixed with flour, what seemed to be a small amount increases to a large quantity and brings the whole mixture to its own flavor.

Thus, if heretical doctrine has cast just a small spark into your breast, in a short time a mighty flame is raised and carries the whole disposition of the man along with it.

St. John Chrysostom: Why did He not say plainly, "Take heed of the doctrine of the Pharisees"? Because He wanted to remind them of what had been done in the multiplication of the loaves, knowing they were forgetful. To have given them this charge so bluntly would have seemed unreasonable. However, finding fault with them on an occasion they themselves provided prepared the way for the charge. Therefore, the Evangelist brings forward their thoughts: But they thought within themselves, saying, It is because we have taken no bread.

St. Jerome: How could they have no bread, since as soon as they had filled seven baskets they entered the boat and came to the region of Magedan? There they heard that they ought to take heed of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees. But the Scripture is witness that they had forgotten to take the baskets with them.

St. John Chrysostom: Because the disciples were still fixated on Jewish observances, the Lord sharply rebukes them for the benefit of all. So it follows, But Jesus knowing their thoughts said to them, O you of little faith, why do you reason among yourselves because you have no bread?

Glossa Ordinaria: This is to say: Why do you think that I spoke of earthly bread, for which you ought not to have a thought, having seen Me make such an abundant surplus from so little? ²

St. John Chrysostom: He does this so that He might remove from them all anxiety about food. But why did He not reprove them when they said, "Whence should we have so much bread in the wilderness?" for that seemed a more fitting occasion. He did not blame them at that time, so that He would not seem to be urged on by their words to perform miracles, and He was unwilling to find fault with them in front of the people.

Furthermore, the charge was more reasonable now, when they were anxious about food after two miracles of multiplying loaves. Observe with what mildness He rebukes them; He even provides an answer for them Himself, saying, Do you not yet understand, nor remember the five loaves?

Glossa Ordinaria: This is to say: Do you not understand the mystery, nor remember the miracle? ³

St. John Chrysostom: By this He was recalling what was past and rousing their attention to what was to come.

St. Jerome: Thus He takes this occasion to instruct them on what is meant by the five loaves and the seven loaves, and the five thousand and the four thousand who were fed in the desert. For if the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees signified not earthly food, but corrupt traditions and heretical dogmas, why should not the food with which the people of God are fed signify true and uncorrupt doctrine?

St. John Chrysostom: So that you may learn what force Christ's reproof had on His disciples and how it roused their sluggish spirit, hear what the Evangelist says: Then they understood that he told them not to beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and the Sadducees.

Yet, He had not interpreted this for them. This instruction from the Lord, then, drew them away from Jewish observances, made them attentive instead of careless, and lifted them out of their little faith. Consequently, whenever they seemed to have only a small provision of bread, they would have no fear about food but would instead despise all those things.

Glossa Ordinaria: As soon as the Lord had taken His disciples away from the teaching of the Pharisees, He then suitably proceeded to lay the deep foundations of Gospel doctrine. To give this greater solemnity, it is introduced by the name of the place: When Jesus came into the region of Caesarea Philippi.¹

St. John Chrysostom: He adds “of Philip” to distinguish it from the other Caesarea, that of Strato. He asks this question in that location, leading His disciples far away from the Jews, so that, being free from all fear, they could freely say what was on their minds.²

St. Jerome: This Philip was the brother of Herod, the tetrarch of Ituraea and the region of Trachonitis. He gave the city, which is now called Paneas, the name of Caesarea in honor of Tiberius Caesar.

Glossa Ordinaria: When He was about to confirm the disciples in the faith, He first sought to remove the errors and opinions of others from their minds. Therefore, the text continues: And he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that the Son of Man is?³

Origen of Alexandria: Christ asks this question of His disciples so that from their answer we may learn that there were various opinions about Christ among the Jews at that time. He also does this so that we should always investigate what opinions people may form of us. If anything bad is said about us, we may remove the reasons for it; if anything good, we may increase the reasons for it.

Glossa Ordinaria: So by this example of the Apostles, the followers of bishops are instructed that whatever opinions they may hear from others concerning their bishops, they should report these to them.⁴

St. Jerome: The question is beautifully put: Whom do men say that the Son of Man is? For those who speak of the Son of Man are men, but those who understand His divine nature are called not men but gods.

St. John Chrysostom: He does not ask, Whom do the Scribes and Pharisees say that I am? but, Whom do men say that I am? He does this to examine the minds of the common people, which were not corrupted by evil. For although their opinion of Christ was far below what it should have been, it was still free from willful wickedness, whereas the opinion of the Pharisees was full of great malice.

St. Hilary of Poitiers: By asking, Whom do men say that the Son of Man is? He implied that something should be thought about Him beyond what was apparent, for He was the Son of Man. In asking for people’s opinion of Himself, we should not think that He was making a confession about Himself; for what He asked for was something hidden, to which the faith of believers must extend.

We must hold to a form of confession where we mention the Son of God in such a way that we do not forget the Son of Man, for the one without the other offers us no hope of salvation. Therefore, He said emphatically, Whom do men say that the Son of Man is?

St. Jerome: He does not ask, Whom do men say that I am? but, Whom do men say that the Son of Man is? so that He would not seem to be asking about Himself ostentatiously. Observe that wherever the Old Testament has “Son of Man,” the phrase in Hebrew is “Son of Adam.”

Origen of Alexandria: Then the disciples recount the diverse opinions of the Jews relating to Christ: And they said, Some say John the Baptist,ⁱ following Herod’s opinion; others Elijah, supposing either that Elijah had been born a second time or that, having remained alive in the body, he had now appeared; others Jeremiah, whom the Lord had ordained to be a prophet to the Gentiles, not understanding that Jeremiah was a type of Christ; or one of the prophets. This last was a similar error, because the things God spoke through the prophets were not fulfilled in them, but in Christ.

St. Jerome: It was as easy for the crowds to be wrong in supposing Him to be Elijah or Jeremiah as it was for Herod to be wrong in supposing Him to be John the Baptist. This is why I wonder that some interpreters have sought for the causes of these various errors.

St. John Chrysostom: After the disciples recounted the opinions of the common people, He then, with a second question, invited them to higher thoughts about Him. Therefore, the text continues, Jesus says to them, But whom do you say that I am? You who are with Me always and have seen greater miracles than the crowds ought not to share the opinion of the crowds. For this reason, He did not ask them this question at the beginning of His preaching, but only after He had performed many signs and had also spoken to them many things concerning His deity.

St. Jerome: Observe how in this part of the discourse the Apostles are called not men, but gods. For after He had asked, Whom do men say that the Son of Man is? He adds, But whom do you say that I am? It is as if to say: “They, being men, think of Me as a man; but you, who are gods, whom do you think I am?”

Rabanus Maurus: He inquires about the opinions of His disciples and of outsiders, not because He was ignorant of them. He asks His disciples so that He might give a fitting reward for their confession of a correct faith. He inquires about the opinions of outsiders so that, by having the wrong opinions stated first, it might be proven that the disciples had received the truth of their confession not from common opinion, but from the hidden treasure of the Lord’s revelation.

St. John Chrysostom: When the Lord inquires about the opinion of the crowds, all the disciples answer. But when all the disciples are asked, Peter, as the mouth and headⁱ of the Apostles, answers for all, as it is written: Simon Peter answered and said, You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.

Origen of Alexandria: With his confession, You are the Christ, Peter denied that Jesus was any of the things the Jews supposed, for they were ignorant of this. But he added something more: the Son of the living God, who had said through His prophets, As I live, says the Lord (Ezekiel 33:11). He was therefore called the living Lord, but in a more special way, being preeminent above all that has life. For He alone has immortality and is the fountain of life, which is why He is rightly called God the Father. For He is life, as it were, flowing from a fountain, who said, I am the life (John 14:6).

St. Jerome: He calls Him “the living God” in comparison to those gods who are considered gods but are dead—such as Saturn, Jupiter, Venus, Hercules, and the other monstrous idols.

St. Hilary of Poitiers: This is the true and unalterable faith: that from God came forth God the Son, who has eternity from the eternity of the Father. That this God took a body to Himself and was made man is a perfect confession. Thus, He embraced everything by expressing both His nature and His name, in which lies the sum of all virtues.

Rabanus Maurus: It was by a remarkable distinction that the Lord Himself highlighted the lowliness of the humanity He had taken upon Himself, while His disciple shows us the excellence of His divine eternity.

St. Hilary of Poitiers: This confession of Peter received a worthy reward, because he had seen the Son of God in the man. Therefore it is written: Jesus answered and said to him, Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven.

St. Jerome: Christ makes this reply to the Apostle for the testimony Peter had spoken concerning Him: You are the Christ, the Son of the living God. The Lord said to him, Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah. Why? Because flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father. That which flesh and blood could not reveal was revealed by the grace of the Holy Spirit. By his confession, then, he obtains a title that signifies he had received a revelation from the Holy Spirit, whose son he shall also be called; for Bar-Jonah in our language means “son of a dove.”

Others take it in the simple sense that Peter is the son of John,ⁱ according to the question in another place, Simon, son of John, do you love me? (John 21:15). They affirm that it is a copyist’s error to write Bar-Jonah here instead of Bar-Joanna, dropping one syllable. Now, Joanna is interpreted as “the grace of God.” But either name has a mystical interpretation: the dove signifies the Holy Spirit, and the grace of God signifies the spiritual gift.

St. John Chrysostom: It would be meaningless to say, “You are the son of Jonah,” unless He intended to show that Christ is as naturally the Son of God as Peter is the son of Jonah—that is, of the same substance as the one who begot him.

St. Jerome: Compare what is said here, flesh and blood has not revealed it to you, with the apostolic declaration, Immediately I was not content with flesh and blood (Galatians 1:16). In that passage, the expression refers to the Jews, so that here also the same thing is shown in different words: that Christ was revealed to him as the Son of God not by the teaching of the Pharisees, but by the grace of God.

St. Hilary of Poitiers: Alternatively, he is blessed because to have looked and seen beyond human sight is a matter for praise. He did not behold that which is of flesh and blood, but saw the Son of God by the revelation of the heavenly Father, and he was considered worthy to be the first to acknowledge the divinity that was in Christ.

Origen of Alexandria: We must inquire here whether the disciples knew He was the Christ when they were first sent out, for this statement shows that Peter then confessed for the first time that He was the Son of the living God. Consider whether you can solve such a question by saying that to believe Jesus is the Christ is less than to know Him. If so, we might suppose that when they were sent to preach, they believed Jesus was the Christ, and afterward, as they progressed, they knew Him to be so.

Or must we answer this way? That at that time the Apostles had the beginnings of a knowledge of Christ and knew a little about Him, and that they progressed afterward in their knowledge of Him. This progress enabled them to receive the knowledge of Christ revealed by the Father, like Peter, who is blessed here not only because he says, You are the Christ, but much more because he adds, the Son of the living God.

St. John Chrysostom: Truly, if Peter had not confessed that Christ was born of the Father in a unique sense, there would have been no need for a revelation. Nor would he have been worthy of this blessing for confessing Christ to be one of many adopted sons. Before this, those with Him in the boat had said, Truly you are the Son of God. Nathanael also said, Rabbi, you are the Son of God (John 1:49). Yet these men were not blessed, because they did not confess the same kind of sonship that Peter confesses here. They thought of Him as one among many, not a son in the true sense—or, if chief above all, yet not of the same substance as the Father.

But see how the Father reveals the Son, and the Son the Father. Confession of the Son comes from no one else but the Father, and confession of the Father from no one else but the Son. From this passage it is also clear that the Son is of the same substance and is to be worshiped together with the Father. Christ then proceeds to show that many would later believe what Peter had now confessed, which is why He adds, And I say to you, that you are Peter.

St. Jerome: It is as if to say: “You have said to me, You are the Christ, the Son of the living God, therefore I say to you—not as mere words that have no effect, but I say to you, and for Me to speak is to bring it into beingⁱ—that you are Peter.” For just as the light by which the Apostles were called the light of the world proceeded from Christ, along with the other names the Lord gave them, so upon Simon who believed in Christ the Rock, He bestowed the name of Peter (Rock).

St. Augustine of Hippo: But let no one suppose that Peter received that name here. He received it at the time when John relates that it was said to him, You shall be called Cephas, which is interpreted, Peter (John 1:42).⁵

St. John Chrysostom: And pursuing the metaphor of the rock, it is rightly said to him as follows: And upon this rock I will build my Church.

That is, on this faith and confession I will build my Church. Here He shows that many would come to believe what Peter had confessed, and in doing so, He elevates Peter’s understanding and makes him His shepherd.

St. Augustine of Hippo: I have said in a certain passage concerning the Apostle Peter that it was on him, as on a rock, that the Church was built. But I know that since then I have often explained these words of the Lord, You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church, as meaning it was built upon Him whom Peter confessed, saying, You are the Christ, the Son of the living God. In this way, Peter, named after this rock, would represent the Church, which is built upon this rock. For it was not said to him, “You are the rock,” but, You are Peter. But the rock was Christ (1 Corinthians 10:4), and because Simon confessed Him as the whole Church confesses Him, he was named Peter. Let the reader choose which of these two opinions seems more probable.⁶

St. Hilary of Poitiers: In this giving of a new name is the blessed foundation of the Church, and a rock worthy of that building which would break up the laws of hell, burst the gates of Tartarus, and shatter all the shackles of death. And to show the firmness of this Church, thus built upon a rock, He adds, And the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Glossa Ordinaria: That is, they shall not separate it from the love and faith in Me.⁷

St. Jerome: I suppose the “gates of hell” to mean vice and sin, or at least the doctrines of heretics by which people are ensnared and drawn into hell.

Origen of Alexandria: But in heavenly things, every spiritual sin is a gate of hell, to which the gates of righteousness are opposed.

Rabanus Maurus: The gates of hell are the torments and promises of persecutors. Also, the evil works of unbelievers and their worthless conduct are gates of hell, because they show the path to destruction.

Origen of Alexandria: He does not specify what it is that they shall not prevail against—whether the rock on which He builds the Church, or the Church which He builds on the rock. But it is clear that the gates of hell will not prevail against either the rock or the Church.

St. Cyril of Alexandriaⁱ: According to this promise of the Lord, the Apostolic Church of Peter remains pure and spotless from all deception or heretical fraud, above all heads, bishops, and primates of churches and peoples, with its own pontiffs, with most abundant faith, and with the authority of Peter. While other churches must blush for the errors of some of their members, this one reigns alone, immovably established, enforcing silence and stopping the mouths of all heretics. And we,ⁱ not drunk with the wine of pride, confess together with it the model of truth and of the holy apostolic tradition.

St. Jerome: Let no one think that this is said of death, implying that the Apostles would not be subject to the condition of death, when we see their martyrdoms are so illustrious.

Origen of Alexandria: Therefore, if we, by the revelation of our Father who is in heaven, confess that Jesus Christ is the Son of God while also living our lives as citizens of heaven, it will also be said to us, You are Peter. For everyone who is an imitator of Christ is a Rock. But whoever the gates of hell prevail against is neither to be called a rock upon which Christ builds His Church, nor a Church or part of the Church which Christ builds upon a rock.

St. John Chrysostom: Then He speaks of another honor for Peter when He adds, And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven. It is as if to say, “As the Father has given you knowledge of Me, I also will give something to you, namely, the keys of the kingdom of heaven.”

Rabanus Maurus: Because he had confessed the King of heaven with a zeal beyond the others, he is deservedly entrusted more than the others with the keys of the heavenly kingdom. This was so it might be clear to all that without that confession and faith, no one can enter the kingdom of heaven. By the “keys of the kingdom,” He means discernmentⁱ and power: power, by which he binds and looses; and discernment, by which he separates the worthy from the unworthy.

It follows, And whatever you shall bind; that is, whoever you judge unworthy of forgiveness while he lives, shall be judged unworthy by God. And whatever you shall loose; that is, whoever you judge worthy to be forgiven while he lives, shall obtain forgiveness for his sins from God.

Origen of Alexandria: See how great the power of that rock is upon which the Church is built, that its judgments are to remain firm as though God Himself gave judgment through it.

St. John Chrysostom: See how Christ leads Peter to a high understanding of his role. The things He promises to give him here belong to God alone: namely, to forgive sins and to make the Church immovable amidst the storms of so many persecutions and trials.

Rabanus Maurus: But this power of binding and loosing, though it seems given by the Lord to Peter alone, is indeed also given to the other Apostlesⁱ and is even now in the bishops and presbyters in every Church. But Peter received the keys of the kingdom of heaven in a special way, and a supremacy of judicial power, so that all the faithful throughout the world might understand that all who in any way separate themselves from the unity of the faith, or from communion with him, can neither be loosed from the bonds of sin nor enter the gate of the heavenly kingdom.

Glossa Ordinaria: This power was entrusted specially to Peter, so that by this we might be invited to unity. For this reason, He appointed him the head of the Apostles, so that the Church might have one principal vicar of Christ to whom the different members of the Church could turn if they ever had dissensions among them.⁸

But if there were many heads in the Church, the bond of unity would be broken. Some say that the words “on earth” denote that power was not given to men to bind and loose the dead, but only the living; for he who would loose the dead would do this not on earth, but after his life on earth.

Second Council of Constantinople (Concil. Con. ii. Collat. 8): How is it that some presume to say that these things are said only of the living? Do they not know that the sentence of anathema is nothing other than separation? Those who are guilty of grievous faults are to be avoided, whether they are among the living or not, for it is always necessary to flee from the wicked. Moreover, various letters have been read from Augustine of blessed memory, who was of great renown among the African bishops, which affirmedⁱ that heretics ought to be anathematized even after death. Other African bishops have also preserved such an ecclesiastical tradition. And the Holy Roman Church has also anathematized some bishops after death, even though no accusation had been brought against their faith during their lifetime.ⁱ

St. Jerome: Bishops and presbyters, not understanding this passage, assume for themselves something of the lofty pretensions of the Pharisees. They suppose that they may either condemn the innocent or absolve the guilty, whereas what will be inquired into before the Lord will be not the sentence of the priests, but the life of the one being judged.

We read in Leviticus about the lepers, how they are commanded to show themselves to the priests. If they have leprosy, they are then made unclean by the priest; not that the priest makes them leprous and unclean, but that the priest has knowledge of what is and is not leprosy, and can discern who is clean and who is unclean. In the same way, then, as the priest there makes the leper unclean, here the bishop or presbyter does not bind or loose those who are without sin or guilt. Rather, in discharging his function, when he has heard the varieties of their sins, he knows who is to be bound and who is to be loosed.

Origen of Alexandria: Therefore, let the one who binds or looses another be without blame, so that he may be found worthy to bind or loose in heaven. Moreover, to him who is able by his virtues to shut the gates of hell, the keys of the kingdom of heaven are given as a reward. For when someone has begun to practice any kind of virtue, it, as it were, opens itself before him—with the Lord opening it through His grace—so that the same virtue is found to be both the gate and the key of the gate. But it may be that each virtue is itself the kingdom of heaven.

Origen of Alexandria: Since Peter had confessed Him to be Christ, the Son of the living God, and because He did not want them to preach this in the meantime, He adds, Then charged he his disciples that they should tell no man, that he was Jesus the Christ.

St. Jerome: When He sends His disciples to preach above and commands them to proclaim His advent, this seems contrary to His command here that they should not say He is Jesus the Christ. It seems to me that it is one thing to preach Christ, and another to preach Jesus the Christ. Christ is a common title of dignity, while Jesus is the proper name of the Savior.

Origen of Alexandria: Or, they then spoke of Him in lowly words, as only a great and wonderful man, but had not yet proclaimed Him as the Christ. Yet if anyone insists that He was proclaimed as Christ even at the first, they may say that He now chose for that first, brief announcement of His name to be left in silence and not repeated, so that the little they had heard concerning Christ might be absorbed into their minds. Or, the difficulty may be solved this way: the more complete account of their preaching Christ does not belong to the time before His resurrection, but to the time that would follow it. The command now given is meant for the present time, for it would be of no use to preach Him while being silent concerning His cross. Moreover, He commanded them to tell no one that He was the Christ, preparing them to later say that He was the Christ who was crucified and who rose again from the dead.

St. Jerome: But so that no one should suppose this is merely an explanation and not a gospel interpretation, what follows explains the reasons for His forbidding them to preach Him at that time: Then began Jesus to shew unto his disciples that he must needs go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and Scribes, and Chief Priests, and be put to death, and rise again the third day.

The meaning is this: "Preach about Me when I have suffered these things," for it will be of no use for Christ to be preached publicly, and for His majesty to be spread abroad among the people, when after a short time they will see Him scourged and crucified.

St. John Chrysostom: For something that has once taken root and is then torn up is retained with difficulty by the multitude if it is planted again; but that which, once rooted, has remained unmoved ever after is easily brought to further growth. He therefore dwells on these sorrowful things and repeats His discourse on them, so that He may open the minds of His disciples.

Origen of Alexandria: And observe that it is not said, "He began to say," or "to teach," but "to show," for just as things are said to be shown to the senses, so the things which Christ spoke are said to be shown by Him. Indeed, I do not think that the things seen by those who witnessed Him suffering in the flesh were shown to them as clearly as this representation in words showed the disciples the mystery of the passion and resurrection of Christ. At that time, He only "began to show them," and afterwards, when they were more able to receive it, He showed them more fully, for all that Jesus began to do, He also accomplished.

He must go to Jerusalem, to be put to death in the Jerusalem that is below, but to rise again and reign in the heavenly Jerusalem. But when Christ rose again, and others had risen with Him, they no longer sought the Jerusalem that is below, or the house of prayer in it, but the one that is above.

He suffers many things from the elders of the earthly Jerusalem so that He may be glorified by those heavenly elders who receive His mercies. He rose again from the dead on the third day so that He might deliver from the evil one. For those who are so delivered, He purchases this gift: that they be baptized in spirit, soul, and body, in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit. These three are perpetually present to those who, through them, have been made children of light.

Origen of Alexandria: While Christ was still speaking the beginning of the things He was showing them, Peter considered these things unworthy of the Son of the living God. Forgetting that the Son of the living God does nothing worthy of blame, he began to rebuke Him. This is what is meant by the words, "And Peter took him, and began to rebuke him."

St. Jerome: We have often said that Peter had a fervent zeal and a very great affection for the Lord and Savior. Therefore, after his confession and the reward he had heard about from the Savior, he did not want that confession to be destroyed. He thought it impossible that the Son of God could be put to death. Instead, he takes Him aside affectionately, so that he might not seem to be rebuking his Master in the presence of his fellow disciples. He begins to chide Him with the feeling of one who loved Him and to contradict Him, saying, "Be it far from you, Lord." Or, as it is better in the Greek, ιλεως σοι Κυριε, ου μη εσται σοι τουτο, that is, "Be gracious to Yourself, Lord; this shall not happen to You."

Origen of Alexandria: It was as if Christ Himself needed a propitiation. Christ allows his affection but charges him with ignorance, as it follows: "He turned and said to Peter, 'Get behind me, Satan! You are an offense to me.'"

St. Hilary of Poitiers: The Lord, knowing this was a suggestion born of the devil's craft, says to Peter, "Get behind me," meaning that Peter should follow the example of His passion. But to the one by whom this expression was suggested, He turns and says, "Satan, you are an offense to me." For we cannot suppose that the name of Satan and the sin of being an offense would be imputed to Peter after such great declarations of blessedness and power had been granted to him.

St. Jerome: But to me, this error of the Apostle, proceeding from the warmth of his affection, will never seem a suggestion of the devil. Let the thoughtful reader consider that this blessedness of power was promised to Peter for the future, not given to him at the present time. Had it been conveyed to him immediately, the error of a false confession would never have found a place in him.

St. John Chrysostom: For what wonder is it that this should befall Peter, who had never received a revelation concerning these things? So that you may learn that the confession he made about Christ was not from himself, observe how he is at a loss in these matters that had not been revealed to him. Judging the things of Christ by human and earthly principles, he considered it demeaning and unworthy of Him to suffer. Therefore the Lord added, "For you do not savor the things that are of God, but the things that are of men."

St. Jerome: It is as if to say, "It is My will, and the Father's will, that I should die for the salvation of humanity. You, considering only your own will, would not have the grain of wheat fall into the ground so that it may bring forth much fruit. Therefore, since you speak what is opposed to My will, you ought to be called My adversary." For "Satan" is interpreted as "adverse" or "contrary."

Origen of Alexandria: Yet the words with which Peter is rebuked and those with which Satan is rebuked are not, as is commonly thought, the same. To Peter it is said, "Get behind me, Satan," that is, "Follow me, you who are contrary to my will." To the Devil it is said, "Go your way, Satan," which implies not "behind me," but "into everlasting fire." He, therefore, said to Peter, "Get behind me," as to one who through ignorance was ceasing to walk after Christ. And He called him Satan, as one who, through ignorance, held a view contrary to God. But he is blessed to whom Christ turns, even if He turns only to rebuke him.

But why did He say to Peter, "You are an offense to me," when in the Psalm it is said, "Great peace have they who love your law, and there is no offense to them" (Psalm 119:165)? It must be answered that not only is Jesus not offended, but neither is any person who is perfect in the love of God. And yet, one who does or says anything that is by nature an offense may be an offense even to someone who is incapable of being offended. Or, He may consider every disciple who sins as an offense, as Paul says, "Who is offended, and I do not burn?" (2 Corinthians 11:29).