Church Fathers Commentary Matthew 5:38-42

"Ye have heard that it was said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: but I say unto you, resist not him that is evil: but whosoever smiteth thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if any man would go to law with thee, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also. And whosoever shall compel thee to go one mile, go with him two. Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away." — Matthew 5:38-42 (ASV)

Glossa Ordinaria: Having taught that we are not to offer injury to our neighbor or irreverence to the Lord, the Lord now proceeds to show how a Christian should conduct himself toward those who injure him.¹

St. Augustine of Hippo: The law, “An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth,” was enacted to repress the flames of mutual hatred and to be a check on their undisciplined spirits. For who, when seeking revenge, was ever content to return only as much harm as he had received? Do we not see people who have suffered some minor injury immediately plot murder, thirst for blood, and struggle to find enough evil to do to their enemies to satisfy their rage?²

The Law puts bounds on this immeasurable and cruel fury by enacting a “lex talionis,” which means that whatever wrong or hurt anyone has done to another, he should suffer the same in return. This is not to encourage rage but to check it. It does not rekindle what was extinguished but prevents the flames already kindled from spreading further. It enacts a just retaliation, which is properly due to the one who has suffered the wrong.

However, the fact that mercy forgives a debt does not make it unjust to have sought payment in the first place. Therefore, while the one who seeks unmeasured vengeance sins, the one who desires only just vengeance does not. It follows that the one who seeks no retribution at all is even further from sin.

I could also state it this way: It was said to them of old, “You shall not take unequal retaliation.” But I say to you, “You shall not retaliate.” This is a completion of the Law. In these words, something is added to the Law that was missing from it; or rather, that which the Law sought to do—namely, to put an end to unequal revenge—is more safely secured when there is no revenge at all.

Pseudo-Chrysostom: For without this command, the commands of the Law could not stand. If, according to the Law, we all begin to render evil for evil, we will all become evil, since those who do harm are numerous. But if, according to Christ, we do not resist evil, then even if the evil are not corrected, at least the good remain good.

St. Jerome: Thus our Lord, by doing away with all retaliation, cuts off the very beginnings of sin. The Law corrects faults; the Gospel removes the occasions for them.

Glossa Ordinaria: Or it may be said that the Lord said this, adding something to the righteousness of the old Law.³

St. Augustine of Hippo: The righteousness of the Pharisees is a lesser righteousness, which consists of not transgressing the measure of equal retribution. This is the beginning of peace, but perfect peace is to refuse all such retribution. Between the first approach (which was contrary to the Law)—namely, returning a greater evil for a lesser one—and the perfection the Lord enjoins on His disciples—namely, returning no evil for evil—there is a middle way: returning an equal evil. This middle way was the passage from extreme discord to extreme peace.⁴

Whoever is the first to do evil to another departs furthest from righteousness. One who does not initiate wrong, but when wronged repays with a heavier wrong, has moved somewhat away from extreme injustice. The one who repays only what he has received moves further still, for it would only be strictly right that the first aggressor should receive a greater injury than he inflicted.

This righteousness, thus partly begun, is perfected by Him who has come to fulfill the Law. He leaves the two intervening steps to be understood. There is the one who repays less than he received, and above him, the one who does not repay at all. Yet even this seems too little for the Lord, if you are not also ready to suffer wrong.

Therefore, He does not say, “Do not render evil for evil,” but rather, “Resist not evil.” This means not only that you should not repay what is done to you, but that you should not even resist it being done to you. He explains this accordingly with the saying, “If any man smite you on your right cheek, offer to him the left also.”

This, being a high form of mercy, is known to those who serve people they love dearly. From such people, when they are morose or insane, they endure many things; and if it is for their health, they offer themselves to endure even more. The Lord, then, the Physician of souls, teaches His disciples to endure with patience the sicknesses of those for whose spiritual health they must provide. For all wickedness comes from a sickness of the mind; nothing is more innocent than one who is sound and has perfect health in virtue.

The actions of the saints in the New Testament serve as examples for understanding those Scriptures that are given as precepts. Thus we read in Luke, “Whoever strikes you on the one cheek, turn to him the other also” (Luke 6:29). Now, there is no example of patience more perfect than the Lord's. Yet He, when He was struck, did not say, “Behold the other cheek,” but rather, “If I have spoken evil, bear witness of the evil; but if well, why do you strike me?” (John 18:23). He thereby shows us that turning the other cheek should be an attitude of the heart.⁵

For the Lord was ready not only to be struck on the other cheek for the salvation of humanity, but to be crucified with His whole body. It may be asked, what does the right cheek expressly signify? Since the face is how a person is known, to be struck on the face is, according to the Apostle, to be condemned and despised. But since we cannot say “right face” and “left face,” and yet we have a twofold reputation—one before God and one before the world—it is distributed, as it were, into the right and left cheek. In this way, any of Christ's disciples who is despised for being a Christian should be ready to be despised even more for any worldly honors he may have.⁶

All the ways in which we suffer wrong can be divided into two kinds: that which cannot be restored, and that which can be restored. In the kind that cannot be restored, we are accustomed to seek the solace of revenge. For what good does it do if, when struck, you strike back? Is the harm done to your body repaid to you by this? No, but the mind, swollen with rage, seeks such consolations.

Pseudo-Chrysostom: Has your return blow restrained him from striking you again? On the contrary, it has likely provoked him to another blow. For anger is not checked by meeting anger; it is only irritated further.

St. Augustine of Hippo: From this, the Lord judges that the weakness of others should be borne with compassion, rather than our own feelings be soothed by their pain. For the kind of retribution that aims at correction is not forbidden here, as this is indeed a part of mercy. Nor does such an intention prevent the one who seeks to correct another from being ready, at the same time, to endure more at his hands.⁷

However, it is required that punishment be inflicted by one to whom power is given in the ordinary course of things, and with the same mindset a father has toward a child he is correcting—one whom it is impossible for him to hate. Holy men have punished some sins with death in order to strike a wholesome fear into the living. In such cases, the harm was not the criminal's death, but the likelihood that his sin would have increased had he lived.

Thus, Elijah punished many with death. But when the disciples wanted to follow his example, they were rebuked by the Lord. He did not censure the Prophet's example itself, but their ignorant application of it, seeing that they desired the punishment not for the sake of correction, but out of angry hatred. Yet after He had instilled love of neighbor in them and had given them the Holy Spirit, there was no lack of instances of such vengeance. For example, Ananias and his wife fell down dead at Peter's words, and the Apostle Paul delivered some to Satan for the destruction of the flesh. Yet some, with a kind of blind opposition, rage against the temporal punishments of the Old Testament, not knowing the mindset with which they were inflicted.

But who of a sober mind would say to kings, “It is of no concern to you who lives religiously or who lives profanely”? It cannot even be said to them that it is no concern of theirs who lives chastely or unchastely. It is indeed better for people to be led to serve God by right teaching than by penalties. Yet, as experience has shown us, it has benefited many to first be coerced by pain and fear, so that they might be taught afterward, or be made to conform in deed to what they had learned in words. The better sort of people are indeed led by love, but the majority of people are moved by fear. Let them learn from the case of the Apostle Paul how Christ first constrained him and afterward taught him.⁸

Therefore, in this kind of injury which tends to provoke vengeance, Christians will observe a middle course: hatred should not be caused by the injuries they receive, and yet wholesome correction should not be neglected by one who has the right of either counsel or power.⁹

St. Jerome: Mystically interpreted, when we are struck on the right cheek, He did not say, “offer him your left,” but “the other,” for the righteous person does not have a left side. That is, if a heretic strikes us in a debate and tries to wound us regarding a right-hand doctrine, let him be met with another testimony from Scripture.

St. Augustine of Hippo: The other kind of injury is that in which full restitution can be made. Of these, there are two types: one relates to money, the other to work. He speaks of the first of these when He continues, “Whoever will sue you for your coat, let him have your cloak also.” Just as the cheek denotes injuries from the wicked that admit no restitution except revenge, so this analogy of the garments denotes an injury that does admit restitution. And this, like the former, is rightly understood as a preparation of the heart, not as a display of outward action.

What is commanded regarding our garments is to be observed in all things that we, by any right, call our own worldly property. For if the command is expressed in terms of these necessary articles of life, how much more does it apply to superfluities and luxuries? And when He says, “He who will sue you,” He clearly intends to include everything for which it is possible for us to be sued.

It may be asked whether this is to be understood of slaves, for a Christian ought not to possess his slave on the same footing as his horse, even though the horse might be worth more money. And if your slave has a milder master in you than he would have in the one who seeks to take him from you, I do not know that he ought to be given up as lightly as your coat.

Pseudo-Chrysostom: For it would be an unworthy thing for a believer to stand in his own cause before an unbelieving judge. Or if a believer—who, though a believer, must still be a worldly person—sues you out of necessity, even if he has reverenced you for the worthiness of your faith, you will lose the worthiness of Christ for the sake of worldly business. Furthermore, every lawsuit irritates the heart and excites evil thoughts. For when you see dishonesty or bribery used against you, you rush to support your own cause by similar means, even though you might have originally intended nothing of the sort.

St. Augustine of Hippo: The Lord here forbids His disciples to have lawsuits with others over worldly property. Yet, since the Apostle allows such cases to be decided between brethren and before arbiters who are brethren—but utterly disallows them outside the Church—it is clear that this is a concession to weakness, which is pardonable.¹⁰

St. Gregory the Great: There are some who are to be endured, insofar as they rob us of our worldly goods. But there are others whom we ought to hinder—and do so without breaking the law of charity—not only so that we are not robbed of what is ours, but also lest they destroy themselves by robbing others. We ought to fear much more for the people who rob us than to be eager to save the inanimate things they take from us. When peace with our neighbor is banished from the heart over a matter of worldly possession, it is plain that our estate is loved more than our neighbor.¹¹

St. Augustine of Hippo: The third kind of wrong, which concerns labor, includes both those that admit restitution and those that do not. For he who forcibly demands a man's service and makes him give aid against his will can either be punished for his crime or return the labor. In this kind of wrong, then, the Lord teaches that the Christian mind is most patient and prepared to endure even more than is demanded: “If a man compels you to go with him one mile, go with him two more.” This, likewise, is meant not so much as actual service with your feet, but as a readiness of mind.¹²

St. John Chrysostom: The word here used signifies to drag unjustly, without cause, and with insult.¹³

St. Augustine of Hippo: Let us suppose, therefore, it says, “Go with him two more,” so that the number three might be completed, by which perfection is signified. In this way, whoever does this might remember that he is fulfilling perfect righteousness. For this reason, He conveys this precept through three examples, and in this third example, He adds a twofold measure to the single measure, so that the threefold number may be complete.

Or we may consider it as though, in enforcing this duty, He had begun with what was easiest to bear and had advanced gradually. First, He commanded that when the right cheek is struck, we should turn the other also, thereby showing ourselves ready to endure another wrong. Second, to him who would take your coat, He bids you part with your cloak (or “garment,” as some copies read), which is either just as great a loss or perhaps a little greater. In the third, He doubles the additional wrong He would have us be ready to endure. And seeing that it is a small thing not to harm unless you also show kindness, He adds, “Give to him who asks of you.”

Pseudo-Chrysostom: Because wealth is not ours but God's, God would have us be stewards of His wealth, not its lords.

St. Jerome: If we understand this only in terms of alms, it cannot apply to the situation of most people who are poor. Even the rich, if they were always giving, would not be able to continue giving forever.

St. Augustine of Hippo: Therefore, He does not say, “Give all things to him who asks,” but, “Give to everyone who asks,” so that you should only give what you can give honestly and rightly. For what if someone asks for money to use in oppressing an innocent person? What if he asks for your consent to an impure sin? We must, then, give only what will harm neither ourselves nor others, as far as a person can judge. And when you have refused an unacceptable request, so that you do not send away empty-handed the one who asked, you should show the righteousness of your refusal. Such correction of an unlawful petitioner will often be a better gift than granting his request.

For it is more beneficial to take food from the hungry if the certainty of provision causes him to neglect righteousness, than it is to supply him with food so that he might consent to an act of violence and wrong.¹⁴

St. Jerome: But this may be understood of the wealth of doctrine—a wealth which never fails, but the more it is given away, the more it abounds.

St. Augustine of Hippo: That He commands, “And from him who would borrow from you, do not turn away,” must be referred to the attitude of the mind, for “God loves a cheerful giver” (2 Corinthians 9:7). And everyone who receives, in effect, borrows, though it is not he who will repay, but God, who restores to the merciful many times over.¹⁵

Or, if you prefer to understand borrowing as only taking with a promise to repay, we must understand the Lord's command as embracing both kinds of aid: whether we give outright or lend to receive back again. And of this last kind of showing mercy it is well said, “Do not turn away.” That is, do not be reluctant to lend, as though God will not repay you simply because a person will. For what you do by God's command cannot be without fruit.

Pseudo-Chrysostom: Christ bids us to lend, but not on usury. For he who gives on such terms does not bestow his own but takes from another; he loosens one chain only to bind with many, and he gives not for the sake of God's righteousness, but for his own gain. For money taken on usury is like the bite of an asp; just as the asp's poison secretly consumes the limbs, so usury turns all our possessions into debt.

St. Augustine of Hippo: Some object that this command of Christ is altogether inconsistent with civil life in commonwealths. “Who,” they say, “would allow his estate to be pillaged by an enemy when he could hinder it? Or who would not repay the evil suffered by a plundered Roman province upon the plunderers, according to the rights of war?” But these precepts of patience are to be observed in the readiness of the heart. That mercy—not to return evil for evil—must always be fulfilled by the will.¹⁶

Yet we must often use a merciful sharpness in dealing with the headstrong. In this way, if an earthly commonwealth keeps the Christian commandments, even war will not be waged without good will, for the purpose of establishing a peaceful harmony of godliness and righteousness among the vanquished. For that victory is beneficial to the one from whom it snatches the license to sin. Indeed, nothing is more unfortunate for sinners than the good fortune of their sins, which nourishes an impunity that brings punishment later and strengthens an evil will, as if it were an internal enemy.

1. non occ.
2. cont. Faust., xix, 25
3. non occ.
4. Serm. in Mont., i, 19
5. de Mendac., 15
6. Serm. in Mont., i, 19
7. Serm. in Mont., i, 20
8. Epist. 185, 5
9. Serm. in Mont., i, 20
10. Enchir., 78
11. Mor., xxxi, 13
12. Serm. in Mont., i, 19
13. Hom. xviii
14. Epist., 93, 2
15. Serm. in Mont., i, 20
16. Epist., 138, 2