John Calvin Commentary Matthew 14:3

"For Herod had laid hold on John, and bound him, and put him in prison for the sake of Herodias, his brother Philip`s wife." — Matthew 14:3 (ASV)

Luke currently omits this narrative because he had explained it previously; and as for me, as I do not want to annoy my readers by writing the same thing twice, I will handle this passage more briefly.³⁵⁴ The Evangelists relate that John was seized because he had openly condemned Herod for carrying off Herodias and for his incestuous marriage with her. Josephus assigns a different reason: namely, that Herod, fearing a change of affairs for himself, regarded John with suspicion (Josephus, Antiquities 18.5.2). It is possible that this was the pretext the tyrant used to excuse his crime, or that such a report circulated, for it frequently happens that various motives are assigned for unjust violence and cruelty. The actual reason, however, is pointed out by the Evangelists: Herod was offended by the holy man because he had been reproved by him.

Josephus is mistaken in supposing that Herodias was carried off, not from his brother Philip, but from Herod, King of Chalcis, his uncle (Josephus, Antiquities 18.5.4). For not only was the crime still recent when the Evangelists wrote, but it was committed in plain sight of everyone. The fact, stated elsewhere by Josephus (Josephus, Antiquities 18.4.6), that Philip was a person of amiable dispositions, I have no doubt, emboldened Herod to expect that an outrage committed against a mild, gentle, and peaceable man would go unpunished. Another probable conjecture may be mentioned. There is greater reason to suppose that Herodias was married to her uncle Philip than to her grand-uncle (her grandfather’s brother), who must have been at that time in the decrepitude of old age. Now Herod Antipas (who is mentioned here) and Philip were not brothers by the same mother, for Herod was the son of Marthaca, the third wife of Herod the Great, and Philip was the son of Cleopatra.³⁵⁵

To return to the Evangelists, they tell us that John was thrown into prison because he had reproved Herod’s crime more freely than the tyrant's ferocity could endure. The atrocious nature of the deed was in itself sufficiently detestable and infamous, for not only did Herod keep another man’s wife in his own house, whom he had torn away from lawful marriage, but the person against whom he had committed this outrage was his own brother. When, in addition to this, he was boldly reproved by John, Herod had some reason to fear that sedition would suddenly break out. His lust did not allow him to correct his fault; but having imprisoned the prophet of God, he assured himself of peace and freedom.³⁵⁶

Ignorance of history has led many people into a fruitless debate: “Have I a right to marry the woman who was formerly married to my brother?” Though natural modesty recoils from such a marriage,³⁵⁷ John still condemns the rape more than the incest; for it was by violence or stratagem³⁵⁸ that Herod had deprived his brother of his lawful wife. And, this consideration apart, it would have been less lawful for him to marry his niece than to marry his brother’s widow. There can be no doubt that such a flagrant crime was universally blamed. But while others cursed Herod in his absence, John alone went into his presence and reproved him boldly to his face, hoping to bring him to repentance.

From this we learn with what unshaken fortitude the servants of God ought to be armed when they deal with princes. For in almost every court, hypocrisy and servile flattery are prevalent; and the ears of princes, accustomed to this smooth language, do not tolerate any voice that reproves their vices with any severity. But as a prophet of God should not overlook such a shocking crime, John stepped forward—though a disagreeable and unwelcome adviser—and, rather than fail in his duty, did not hesitate to incur the tyrant’s displeasure, even though he knew Herod was so strongly ensnared by the prostitute that he could hardly be moved from his purpose.

³⁵⁴ The allusion is to his exposition of Luke iii. 19, 20, which will be found in , which will be found in Harmony, vol. 1. vol. 1. p. 222. — . — Ed.

³⁵⁵ “The apparent discrepancy between Josephus and the sacred historians is removed, as was formerly suggested, (Harmony, vol. 1. vol. 1. p. 223, n. 1,) by a hypothesis which appears to be generally admitted, that the name of the person in question was ,) by a hypothesis which appears to be generally admitted, that the name of the person in question was Herod-Philip. — — Ed.

³⁵⁶ “Il se fait accroire qu’il sera en repos, et qu’il pourra continuer sa meschancete sans aucune crainte;” — “he makes himself believe that he will be at ease, and that he will have it in his power to continue his wickedness without any dread.”;” — “he makes himself believe that he will be at ease, and that he will have it in his power to continue his wickedness without any dread.”

³⁵⁷ “Combien que l’honneste naturelle condamne un tel marriage;” — “though natural decency condemns such a marriage.”;” — “though natural decency condemns such a marriage.”

³⁵⁸ “Ou par force et violence, ou par quelque ruse et moyen subtil;” — “either by force and violence, or by some trick and cunning method.”;” — “either by force and violence, or by some trick and cunning method.”