Thomas Aquinas Commentary Matthew 16

Previously, the Lord demonstrated the sufficiency of the Gospel teaching, showing that it does not require legal observances and, furthermore, that it is necessary not only for one people. Here, He reveals its purity and excellence. Firstly, He shows that it must be kept pure from every tradition. Secondly, through the loftiness of the faith, it soars above all human opinions, as it is said, Jesus came into the quarters of Caesarea Philippi.

Regarding the first point, the following occurs:

1. The slanderous temptation is described.
2. He refutes it.
3. He teaches that one must be on guard against this.

The second part is introduced when it says, But he answered and said to them, etc.; the third part is introduced when it says, And when his disciples had come over the water, etc. Concerning the first of these (the slanderous temptation), he begins by mentioning the place, and second, the tempting question is recounted.

It should be noted that, just as previously, when He had fed the multitudes with the five loaves, He dismissed them, so too here. In this, an example is first given to preachers about when they should not engage themselves but should withdraw, as it is said in Job 39:5, concerning the wild ass: Who hath sent out the wild ass free, and who hath loosed his bonds? etc.

He went up into a boat, so that the multitude would not follow Him. Thus, an obstacle was placed by which they could not follow Him.

Hence, He went up into a boat—that is, into a mind agitated by the waves of this world. As it is written, For thou hast made a way even in the sea, and a path among the waves . He is showing that He must enter there, so that He might rest there.

And came into the coasts of Magedan. Magedan is interpreted as ‘apple,’ and this place signifies Sacred Scripture, where apples and other fruits grow: I went down, to see the fruits of the valleys (Song of Solomon 6:10).

The tempting question follows: And there came to him the Pharisees and Sadducees tempting: and they asked him. As it is written, There is one that humbleth himself wickedly, and his interior is full of deceit . They asked Him to shew them a sign from heaven. Indeed, they asked for a sign from heaven. It is stated: Your fathers did eat manna in the desert (John 6:49), and for this reason, He gave them bread from heaven. Also, The Jews require signs (1 Corinthians 1:22). And in Psalm 73:9, it is said: Our signs we have not seen, etc.

Then He rebukes them, and first, He rebukes them for their slothfulness in believing divine things. For if a man is defective due to the physical nature of his senses, he has an excuse; but when he has wisdom in earthly things and ignorance in spiritual things, he deserves to be rebuked: All men are vain, in whom there is not the knowledge of God .

First, He shows their diligence in regard to earthly things; and second, He shows their slothfulness in regard to spiritual things. He says, therefore: But he answered and said to them: When it is evening, etc. This has a literal and a mystical meaning. The literal meaning is that from certain atmospheric conditions they could recognize a sign of fair weather: When it is evening, you say, It will be fair weather, for the sky is red. Likewise, they could recognize a sign of stormy weather, because they say: Today there will be a storm, for the sky is red and lowering, because a storm denotes sadness. For when the air is turbulent, men are not so happy. Evening redness is a sign of fair weather.

The reason, according to the Philosopher, is that this is caused by the diffusion of the sun’s rays on the water vapors. For when the vapors are many, the rays cannot penetrate them, and then a dark color appears in the air; but when the vapors are dispersed, the rays penetrate. But when that which is fiery dominates, then a red color appears, as appears in a flame, because when it is more elevated, more redness appears in it. For that reason, it is indicated that the vapors are not many, and fair weather is indicated. But if in the morning that which is fiery turns into dew or rain, it is a sign of a storm.

In a mystical sense, the evening signifies Christ’s Passion. In the evening the sun sets, and so Christ suffered at the evening of the world: And who shall be able to think of the day of his coming? And who shall stand to see him? For he is like a refining fire (Malachi 3:2); and, In the evening weeping shall have place, and in the morning gladness (Psalms 29:6). Hence, when a red sky appears in the evening, it signifies fair weather: After a storm thou makest a calm, and after tears and weeping thou pourest in joyfulness (Psalms 3:22). In the resurrection, which is signified by the morning, redness will appear in the martyrs, and it signifies a storm for the sinners. Or, the morning signifies the morning of the judgment day, which redness will precede: A fire shall go before him (Psalms 96:3).

Hence, you have been instructed in these earthly matters. You know then how to discern the face of the sky: and can you not know the signs of the times? There are two times: one corresponds to His first coming, the other to His second coming. Certain signs preceded His first coming: Drop down dew, ye heavens, from above, and let the clouds rain the just: let the earth be opened, and bud forth a saviour, etc. (Isaiah 45:8). And: Verily thou art a hidden God (Isaiah 45:15). But at the end of the world, God will come manifestly, and signs will not appear in the heavens. However, it is not now the time of the Judgment Day. Or it is otherwise: You know then how to discern the face of the sky, etc., as if He were saying, ‘You seek a sign of My coming. It is superfluous to ask for a sign when there are many signs.’ For example, The blind see, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, etc. . This is the sign that Isaiah gave: God himself will come and will save you. Then shall the eyes of the blind be opened (Isaiah 35:4).

Certain men argue from this passage that we should try to know the time of His second coming. Augustine, however, expounds this passage as pertaining to His first coming. The first coming is most certain because it is for our salvation, and salvation is through faith, and faith is through knowledge; for that reason, it is necessary that it be known. But the second coming is for rewarding us; for that reason, it is hidden, so that men might be more careful.

Then He denies the sign they asked for. Hence, it is said, A wicked and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign. A generation is called wicked because it departs from God, for evil exists through departing from God. He forsook God who made him, and departed from God his saviour, as it is stated in Deuteronomy 32:15.

But it is an adulterous generation because they joined themselves to another. As it is written, If I shall have forsaken thee in my life (Psalms 26); and, Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unjust man his thoughts (Isaiah 55:7). This generation seeketh after a sign, and it should not have a sign, because a sign shall not be given it, but the sign of Jonah the prophet. This is because just as Jonah was in the whale’s belly three days and three nights, so, etc., as it was stated in chapter 12.

But why does He mention the sign of the Resurrection rather than another sign? It should be said that salvation came to us through the Resurrection. As Paul writes, If thou believe in thy heart that Christ hath risen up from the dead, thou shalt be saved (Romans 10:9). For by rising, He restored our life, because we will rise through Christ’s Resurrection.

Therefore, this sign was given to the faithful, and all others refer back to this one—for example, that He raised Lazarus, etc. Hence, a sign was not given to these men. To His disciples, however, He gave a sign from heaven when He showed them His glory, as it is stated below in chapter 17. In this way, therefore, He shows their slothfulness.

The next part describes how He confutes them by His action of departing from them: And he left them, and went away. For He does not dwell with the malignant; as it is written, He separates Himself from the perverse . After He confutes them, He teaches that they are to be avoided. In this teaching:

1. The occasion is presented.
2. His teaching is presented.
3. The disciples' misunderstanding is presented.
4. The rebuke of the disciples is presented.
5. The effect of His rebuke is presented.

He says: And when his disciples had come over the water, etc. In this, we should admire the disciples' priorities, because men are accustomed to forget only those things about which they care little. Hence, since they forgot the loaves of bread, they cared little about them and cared only about spiritual things.

Then, Who said to them: Take heed and beware, etc. Here His teaching is presented. By leaven, He means corrupt teachings. Thus, He does not mean the teachings of the Law, but the traditions of the Pharisees, which are called leaven because just as a little leaven corrupts the whole batch, so a little error corrupts one’s whole life. For instance, when a man departs a little from the path, he is afterwards widely separated from it. Hence, the Philosopher in Primo Coeli says that a small error in the beginning becomes a great error in the end.

Spiritual understanding is unleavened bread. Therefore, by bread, true doctrine is understood: With the bread of life and understanding, she shall feed him . Hence, it is said, Take heed and beware, because false doctrine is dangerous. For as long as faith remains in a man, there is no danger; but when the foundation is taken away, there is no hope. As the Psalm says, Rase it, rase it, even to the foundation thereof (Psalms 136:7). Faith is the foundation; A man that is a heretic, after the first and second admonition, avoid (Titus 3:10). Because false doctrine, at first glance, seems to have a solid basis, for that reason He says, Take heed—that is to say, examine carefully. As it is written, Let thy eyes look straight on, and let thy eyelids go before thy steps (Proverbs 4:25).

Afterwards, the disciples’ misunderstanding of these words is recounted: But they thought, etc. For because they had previously collected seven baskets of fragments and had not taken them with them, they supposed that He was saying, ‘You did not take up the bread; but I do not want you to take bread from the Pharisees, because they are animals.’ And, as it is written, The sensual man perceiveth not these things that are of the Spirit of God (1 Corinthians 2:14).

In regard to this understanding, they could have been rebuked on two grounds: first, because they did not understand; and second, because they lacked confidence in God’s power. He did not rebuke them concerning the first point, but concerning the second. He says, therefore, Why do you think within yourselves, O ye of little faith, for that you have no bread? As if He were saying, ‘You understand carnally what you should understand spiritually.’

Do you remember the five loaves among five thousand men, and how many baskets you took up? ‘Cannot I, who have fed so many men, feed you?’ Why do you not understand that it was not concerning bread I said to you; that is to say, ‘I did not speak to you concerning material bread, but rather concerning spiritual bread’? This bread is called doctrine in John 6:64: The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life.

Then they understood, etc. Here the correction is shown: The declaration of thy words giveth light: and giveth understanding to little ones (Psalms 118:130).

Above, the Lord taught that the Gospel teaching ought to be kept pure from the leaven of the Jews; now here He teaches the exalted nature of His doctrine.

He teaches this in three main ways:

1. Firstly, regarding faith in His two natures, His divine and human natures.
2. Secondly, regarding faith in His Passion, where it is said, From that time Jesus began to show to his disciples, etc.
3. Thirdly, regarding His judicial power, where it is said, For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father.

Concerning the first point—faith in His two natures—two aspects are explored:

1. The opinion of the multitudes about Christ is sought.
2. The disciples’ faith is sought, where it is said, But whom do you say that I am?

Regarding the opinion of the multitudes, three things are related:

1. Firstly, the place.
2. Secondly, Christ’s question, where it is said, Whom do men say that the Son of man is?
3. Thirdly, their reply, where it is said, But they said, etc.

Thus, the Evangelist says, Jesus came into the region of Caesarea; and he not only says this, but adds Philippi, because there were two Caesareas: Caesarea Palestinae, where Peter was sent to Cornelius, and this other Caesarea, which is also called Paneas. The first was established in honor of Caesar Augustus, and Philip constructed the latter in honor of Tiberius Caesar.

But why did the Lord ask this question here? It ought to be said that this city was located beyond the borders of the Jews; for that reason, before He chose to question them concerning their faith, He led them away from the Jews. Similarly, it is written that when the Lord led the Jews out of Egypt, He did not lead them out through the grain fields of the Philistines, as it is stated in Exodus 13.

Afterwards, the questioning is related: And he asked his disciples, etc. As Origen says, sometimes when a wise man asks, he teaches.

Thus, we are instructed in many things, so that we may be mindful of what is said about ourselves: if any ill is said about us, we are careful to correct it; if any good is said about us, we are careful to preserve and increase it. Therefore, it is written, Take care of a good name: for this will continue with you, more than a thousand treasures precious and great . For this reason, Christ asked what was being said about Himself.

Likewise, those who know His divinity are called gods—I have said: You are gods (Psalms 82:6)—but those who know His humanity are called men; hence, it is said: Whom do men say that the Son of man is? However, as Hilary says, Christ seemed to be merely a man, and for that reason, He wanted them to know that He is more than just a simple man. Thus, by this, He helps them understand that there is something else in Him.

Moreover, Christ’s humility is shown because He confesses that He is the Son of man, according to what is written: Learn of me, because I am meek, and humble of heart (Matthew 11:29).

Afterwards, the opinion of the multitudes is related: But they said: Some John the Baptist, etc. Different men thought different things about Christ. The Pharisees were blaspheming Christ, but the multitudes were saying that He was a prophet; for example: A great prophet is risen up among us, etc. (Luke 7:16).

They called Him John because of His counsel, for John preached penance: Do penance: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand (John 3:2). Therefore, they thought He was John, because Christ began in a similar way, saying, Do penance, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand (Matthew 4:17).

Likewise, they held the prophet Elijah in high esteem: Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet, before the coming of the great and dreadful day (Malachi 4:5). Thus, they supposed He was Elijah on account of the power of His words and the force of His preaching: And Elijah the prophet stood up, as a fire, and his word burnt like a torch . And it was said concerning Christ that He was teaching them as one having power (Matthew 7:29).

Similarly, on account of the preeminence of His life, they supposed He was Jeremiah, concerning whom the Lord said: Before I formed you in the bowels of your mother, I knew you: and before you came forth out of the womb, I sanctified you (Jeremiah 1:5). And in the same place (Jeremiah chapter 40), it is stated that Jeremiah was honored by the Gentiles. In a similar way, Christ was held in esteem by foreigners, even though He was being blasphemed by the Jews; for that reason, they compared Him to Jeremiah.

But how is it that they were calling Him Elijah? It was because it is stated in 2 Kings 2 that Elijah was taken up, was still living, and was promised to the Jews for their salvation, as it is stated in Malachi 4. It was also because certain men thought that there is a transmigration of souls; and so, according to this opinion, it was possible that the soul of Elijah had entered into another body.

Jesus says to them: But whom do you say that I am? Here the disciples’ faith is investigated. This involves three parts:

1. Firstly, His question is related.
2. Secondly, the response is related, where it is said, Simon Peter answered.
3. Thirdly, His approval is related, where it is said, And Jesus answering, etc.

Jesus says to them: But whom do you say that I am? It is as if He were to say: ‘So say the multitudes; but because more has been committed to you, therefore, more is required from you. You have seen miracles; for that reason, you ought to reckon Me to be more than this.’

But why did He ask? Did He not know? He did indeed know, but He wanted them to merit by their confession: With the heart, we believe unto justice: but, with the mouth, confession is made unto salvation (Romans 10:10). Thus, things are more meritorious inasmuch as they are more outstanding; and it is as if the multitudes, because they knew the least about Christ, do not give any better reply about Him, and for that reason, etc.

Peter answered and said: You are Christ, the Son of the living God. He replies for himself and for the others; he replies more frequently, and in this his perfect faith is highlighted, because his faith in Christ’s humanity is mentioned. You are Christ, meaning ‘the anointed.’ And it is evident that He was anointed with the oil of the Holy Ghost. Anointing is not fitting for Him according to His divinity, because anointing proceeds from it, but it is fitting for Him according to His humanity. Therefore, Peter says this so that the disciples may esteem Christ’s humanity to be different than the multitudes esteem it to be.

Now the question arises why they were saying that He was a prophet. A prophet was anointed, as it is written concerning Elisha. Kings were anointed, as it is written concerning Saul; likewise, priests were anointed, as it is written in Leviticus. And all these roles were inferred in the name ‘Christ.’ This is because He is also called a king, as it is written: A king shall reign, and shall be wise (Jeremiah 23:5). Likewise, He is called a priest: You are a priest for ever according to the order of Melchizedek (Psalms 109:4). Again, He is called a prophet: The Lord your God will raise up for you a prophet from your nation and from your brethren, etc. (Deuteronomy 18:15).

Similarly, Peter not only confessed His humanity but, having penetrated the shell, he rises above it all the way to His divinity, saying, You are the Son of the living God. For others were calling Him a blasphemer; for instance: For a good work we do not stone you, but for blasphemy; and because you, being a man, make yourself God (John 10:33). But Peter recognized the Son of God.

And Peter says living to exclude the error of the Gentiles, who were calling dead men gods, such as Jupiter and others, as it is stated in Wisdom 13. Likewise, certain men called the elements and other dead things gods, such as the earth, fire, and so on, as it is stated in Wisdom 13; but he calls Him the Son of the living God.

But it should be known that when it is said ‘living God,’ and ‘living man,’ this is said of man through a participation in life; but it is said of God not by participation, because He is the source of life: For with you is the fountain of life (Psalms 35:10). And in John 14:6 it is said: I am the way, and the truth, and the life.

Jesus answering, etc. Here He does two things:

1. Firstly, He approves Peter's confession.
2. Secondly, He commands them to keep quiet, where it is said, Then he commanded his disciples, that they should tell no one that he was Jesus the Christ.

Regarding the first point (His approval), He approves the confession in two ways:

1. Firstly, by praising the one confessing.
2. Secondly, by His reward, where it is said, And I say to you: That you are Peter, etc.

Thus, the Evangelist says, Jesus answered: Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona. ‘Bar’ means ‘son of,’ and ‘Jona’ means ‘dove’ according to its name. Therefore, ‘Bar-Jona’ means ‘son of the dove.’ Christ’s reply seems to correspond to Peter’s confession. This is because Peter had confessed Him to be the Son of God; now Jesus calls him son of the dove, namely, of the Holy Ghost, because his confession could only be made by the Holy Ghost. However, it is thought that he was first called ‘Bar-Joannas,’ that is, the son of John, but this name appears due to an error in the text.

But what is this? Did not others confess that He is the Son of God? Indeed, it is so read of Nathanael in John 1. Likewise, those who were in the boat also confessed this (Matthew 14:33). Why, then, is Peter blessed here, and the others were not? It is because the others confessed Him to be an adopted son of God; here, however, Peter confesses Him to be the natural Son of God. For that reason, he is blessed here in preference to the others, because he was the first one to confess His divinity in this way.

Origen says: “It seems that he did not confess Him to be the Son of God before.” But how did Christ send them to preach? Origen answers that, at the beginning, they were not preaching that He was Christ, but they were merely preaching penance. Likewise, it may be that they were preaching that He is Christ, but this was the first time that Peter was confessing Him to be the Son of God in this specific manner. Therefore, Christ specially rewards him here.

Blessed are you, Simon, etc., because beatitude is in knowledge: Now this is eternal life: That they may know you, the only true God (John 17:3). But knowledge is twofold: one kind is by natural reason, and another is above reason. The first does not give beatitude, because it is doubtful and therefore does not satisfy the mind. Beatitude, however, ought to satisfy a natural desire, and this will be had in heaven: Eye has not seen, nor ear heard, what things God has prepared for those who love him (Isaiah 64:4). Therefore, in this life, inasmuch as a man can perceive more of this knowledge, he is more blessed: Blessed is the man that finds wisdom (Proverbs 3:13). Thus, He says, Blessed are you, meaning, ‘you begin to be blessed.’

Because flesh and blood has not revealed it to you. This can be expounded such that “flesh and blood” are taken to mean one’s human connections or earthly teachers, as in Galatians 1:16: Immediately I condescended not to flesh and blood. Thus: Flesh and blood has not revealed it to you; that is to say, you did not have this knowledge from the tradition of the Jews, but from a revelation of God.

Likewise, in Christ there were His flesh, blood, and divinity. Therefore, because Peter did not look to flesh and blood, it is said to Him, Blessed are you, because you do not judge according to what flesh and blood reveal, but according to what My Father reveals. Or, it means you do not have this knowledge from your own natural efforts, but from My Father. For no one knows the Son, but the Father (Luke 10:22). For it belongs to the One to make known, to whom it belongs to know. Thus, No one knew the Son except the one to whom the Father willed to reveal Him (Luke 10:22). There is a God in heaven that reveals mysteries (Daniel 2:28).

And I say to you: That you are Peter, etc. Here Christ gives the reward for Peter’s confession. Because Peter had confessed His humanity and divinity, the Lord gives him a reward. This reward has two parts:

1. Firstly, He gives him a name.
2. Secondly, He gives him power.

Concerning the first part of the reward (the name):

1. Firstly, He gives Peter his name.
2. Secondly, He gives the reason for the name, where it is said, And upon this rock I will build my church.

And for this purpose Christ came into this world: to found His Church. Behold I will lay a stone in the foundations of Zion, a tried stone, a cornerstone, a precious stone, founded in the foundation (Isaiah 28:16). This was signified by the stone that Jacob put under his head and anointed, as it is stated in Genesis 28. This stone is Christ, and from this anointing all Christians are called Christians; thus, we are not only called Christians from Christ, but also from the rock. For that reason, He specially names him: You are Peter, from the rock which is Christ.

Although, according to Augustine, it seems that this name was not given at this time, but was given at the beginning: You shall be called Cephas (John 1:42). Or it can be said that it was then promised, and it was here given. As a sign of this, it is said, upon this rock I will build my church. A distinctive characteristic of a rock is that it is placed in a foundation; likewise, another characteristic of a rock is that it gives firmness. He is likened to a wise man that built his house upon a rock (Matthew 7:24).

Thus, this can be explained as referring to Christ: And upon this rock, that is, Christ, so that He may be its foundation, and the Church, having been placed on this foundation, may gain firmness. Augustine, in his book of Retractions, says that this passage may be explained in multiple ways, and he left it to his listeners to adopt the explanation they prefer. For instance, this passage may be expounded such that the words this rock signify Christ: And the rock was Christ (1 Corinthians 10:4). And elsewhere, it is written: Another foundation no one can lay, but that which is laid: which is Christ Jesus (1 Corinthians 3:11). There is another exposition: Upon this rock, meaning upon you who are a rock, because you yourself draw from Me that you are a rock. And just as I am a rock, so upon you who are a rock I will build My Church, etc.

But what is this? Are both Christ and Peter the foundation? It must be answered that Christ, in Himself, is the foundation, but Peter is the foundation insofar as he confesses Christ and insofar as he is His vicar. Built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief cornerstone, etc. (Ephesians 2:20). There are twelve foundations of the city: And in them, the twelve names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb (Revelation 21:14).

Christ, in Himself, is the foundation; but the Apostles are foundations as well—not in themselves, but through Christ’s delegation and through the authority given them by Christ: The foundations thereof are the holy mountains (Psalms 86:1). But Peter’s house especially, which was founded upon the rock, shall not be demolished, as said above in Matthew chapter 7. Thus, this house can be assaulted, but it cannot be conquered.

And the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. They shall fight against them, and shall not prevail (Jeremiah 1:19). And what are the gates of hell? They are the heretics: because just as one enters a house through a gate, so one enters into hell through these heretics. Likewise, the gates of hell are tyrants, devils, and sins.

And although other churches could be corrupted by heretics, nevertheless the Roman Church was not corrupted by heretics, because it was founded upon a rock. Thus, in Constantinople, there were heretics, and the labor of the Apostles was lost; only the Church of Peter remained inviolate. Therefore, it is written: I have prayed for you, Peter, that your faith may not fail (Luke 22:32). And this is not only ascribed to the Church of Peter but also to the faith of Peter, and to the whole Western Church. For this reason, I believe that the Western faithful ought to have more reverence for Peter than for the other Apostles.

And I will give to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven. Here the second gift is related which Christ, according to His humanity, gave to Peter. For He founded the Church in the world and appointed Peter to be His Vicar, so that Peter might give the Church entrance into heaven. Therefore, He gave him that ministry, and thus He gave him the keys. For a key gives entrance; therefore, Peter has the ministry of giving entrance. And Christ does two things:

1. Firstly, He entrusts the keys.
2. Secondly, He teaches their use, where it is said, And whatever you shall bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven, etc.

But let us see what the keys are. A locked house prevents entrance, but a key removes this obstacle. The kingdom of heaven has an obstacle to entry, but the obstacle is not on its part—I looked, and behold a door was opened (Revelation 4:1)—rather, it is on our part, namely sin, because nothing defiled shall enter into it.

Christ removed these obstacles through His Passion, because He has washed us from our sins in his own blood (Revelation 1:5). And He shared this benefit with us so that, through Peter’s ministry, our sins are taken away. This is accomplished through the power of Christ’s blood; thus, the sacraments have power by virtue of Christ’s Passion. Therefore, He says, I will give to you the ministry, etc., and I will lay the keys of David upon you (Isaiah 22:22).

But He says, I will give to you, for the keys were not made yet, and a thing cannot be given before it exists. These keys were to be made in His Passion; thus, their efficacy was in the Passion. Therefore, here He promises to give the keys to Peter, but He gave them to him after the Passion, when He said: Feed my sheep (John 21:17).

But why does He say “keys” (plural)? It is because to absolve is to remove obstacles. For there are two obstacles, corresponding to two things that are required: namely, power and knowledge.

But what is this? Are there not some priests who do not have this knowledge? You could understand this statement to mean that they do have knowledge, because no one has the key of knowledge except a priest. However, what is called “knowledge” here is not intellectual learning or an acquired skill, etc., but rather the authority of discerning. Thus, a judge, for example, may not have knowledge in the first sense (intellectual learning) but nevertheless possess it in the second sense if he has the authority of discerning. Conversely, someone may have knowledge in the first sense but not in the second if he does not have authority. Therefore, the authority of discerning is what is called knowledge here, and any priest has this kind of knowledge so that he may discern in absolving.

Afterwards, He sets forth the use of the keys: Whatever you shall bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven. But it seems that their use is not appropriately described, because the use of a key is not to bind but to open. I say that this is indeed a fitting description of the use of keys. For heaven was opened—I saw a door opened (Revelation 4:1). Thus, it is not necessary that heaven itself be opened further, but that a person who is bound, and who ought to enter heaven, should be loosed.

But here some errors should be avoided. These include:

1. The first, mentioned in the Gloss, is that some people wrongly assumed that priests are able to absolve everyone they choose to absolve and take them into heaven. But this cannot stand, because to change wills belongs to God alone.
2. Another error is that a priest does not absolve but merely declares that a person is absolved. This, however, takes away the power of the sacrament, because the sacraments of the New Law produce what they signify, whereas the sacraments of the Old Law do not. Thus, if nothing were produced, it would not be a sacrament of the New Law.
3. Thirdly, some people say that in sin there are three things: the guilt, the debt, and the punishment.

According to this third view, a person is absolved from two of these (guilt and debt) through contrition. However, when a person is absolved from these, they remain obliged to the temporal punishment, which a person is unable by themselves to remove and avoid. For that reason, they say, the keys are given, which lessen some of this punishment and bind to some punishment.

Nevertheless, it seems to me that this view is incorrect, because the sacraments of the New Law give grace, and grace is ordained to be a remedy not primarily for punishment, but for guilt.

Therefore, I say that it is thus in this sacrament of Confession, just as it is in the sacrament of Baptism, which has a spiritual instrumental power by which it cleanses from guilt.

Thus, Augustine says: “What is the power of water, that it washes the flesh and takes away guilt?” So I say that in the priest there is a spiritual instrumental power, by reason of which he is called a minister, and he ministerially effects the forgiveness of guilt, just as the water of Baptism does.

But the latter (Baptism) causes a difficulty, because in our time mostly children come to Baptism. If an adult comes forward to be baptized, they come either insincerely or sincerely. They come insincerely if they come without a renewal of their soul, and then sin is not forgiven. They come sincerely if they come with the intention of confessing their sins; thus, grace is required, or the intention of conversion, and this is from grace. Grace takes away guilt. Therefore, in the sacrament of Baptism, the adult coming forward, if they prepare themselves, receives the forgiveness of guilt. So too in the sacrament of Penance, to which only adults approach, one is not contrite unless one has the intention of subjecting oneself to the discernment and judgment of the priest.

If one is not contrite, the effect is not obtained, just as it would not be obtained in Baptism. But it can happen that someone not completely contrite approaches the sacrament of Penance, who, by the power of the grace conferred in this sacrament, is made contrite when it has been completed. For that reason, the words Whatever you shall loose should be understood to mean, ‘whatever you shall loose by administering absolution.’

And He says, Whatever, because the priest not only absolves from guilt but also from punishment. He says, Shall be loosed in heaven, meaning it will be accounted as absolved in heaven, just as it is concerning Baptism. Therefore, the priest ought to say, ‘I absolve you,’ just as he says, ‘I baptize you.’

But someone could inquire how the priest binds. It should be known that a priest is God’s minister, and the action of God’s minister depends upon the act of the Lord. Thus, in the same way that the Lord binds and looses, so the priest binds and looses ministerially. God looses by infusing grace and binds by not infusing grace; so the priest looses by the sacrament (by administering the sacrament) but binds by not administering the sacrament.

Alternatively, it is said that “heaven” here designates the present Church. Thus: Whatever you shall bind or loose (for example, by excommunication) shall be bound or loosed in regard to the administration of the sacraments of the Church. Consequently, some people maintain that this administration—this binding and loosing—is only upon earth, such that it does not extend to the dead.

But this view is condemned, because this power extends not only to the living but also to the dead. Therefore, if the administration of the sacraments is ascribed to both binding and loosing, the meaning is: Whatever you shall bind upon earth (that is, while you are dwelling upon earth), it shall be bound also in heaven.

It should be said that Christ immediately gave this power to Peter; but the other disciples receive this power from Peter. For that reason, lest it be supposed that these things were said only to Peter, He says to all the apostles: Whose sins you shall forgive, etc. (John 20:23). And for this reason, the Pope, who is in St. Peter’s place, has full power immediately from God, but the other Apostles have their power from him.

Above, Peter’s confession of Christ’s divinity was related; here, Christ commands silence for a time, specifically, that they do not say that He is Christ.

But here there is a question. Because, previously, the Lord had sent the disciples to preach the kingdom of God, how does He here forbid them to preach? According to a superficial literal sense, it can be said that He did not previously command them to proclaim Christ, but the kingdom of God. But because the proclamation of the kingdom of God includes in itself the proclamation of Christ, therefore, it seems that here He forbids what He commanded before.

Jerome says that He does not forbid what they had preached before, because He had previously commanded that Jesus be preached, but here He commands them not to call Him Christ. For Christ is a name of dignity; Jesus is the name of the Savior. Therefore, it was said: You shall call his name Jesus (Matthew 1:21). Origen answers that the Apostles were speaking about Christ as a great man, but He wanted no mention to be made of Christ at that time, so that He would later seem greater to them. This is similar to how a teaching is sometimes presented beforehand, allowing those being taught time to grasp it. Or it should be said that the previous passage, And going, preach, saying (Matthew 10:7), should not be associated with the time before the Passion, but with the time after the Passion.

Therefore, it is mentioned there that they will be dragged before kings and governors, and so on, and this did not occur before the Passion.

But why did the Lord now command this to be kept silent? It was because the people would see Him suffering, and when some people are confused by a great man suffering, they are more inclined to be scandalized. For that reason, He commanded this silence.

Chrysostom says: “If what is planted is uprooted, it cannot be so quickly planted.” Therefore, if the faith had been planted and then uprooted by the Passion, it would not have been so quickly replanted afterwards. Thus, many things must not be said in order to avoid scandal. And it is clear that this is the reason He commands this to be kept silent, because He immediately makes His Passion known; therefore, it is added, From that time Jesus began to show to his disciples, that he must go to Jerusalem, and suffer many things (Matthew 16:21).

Concerning this, He does three things:

1. He foretells the Passion.
2. He rebukes His disciple, where it is said, Who turning, said to Peter (Matthew 16:23).
3. He teaches the faith, where it is said, Then Jesus said to his disciples (Matthew 16:24).

Regarding the first point, He does two things: first, He foretells the Passion, and second, He foretells His Resurrection, where it is said, And the third day rise again (Matthew 16:21). Concerning the foretelling of the Passion, He mentions the place, the instigators, and its accomplishment. He says, therefore, From that time Jesus began to show to his disciples (Matthew 16:21). He spoke of His Passion here, in Matthew 17, and in Matthew 20.

But before this time, He had not foretold this. So why did He begin to foretell this now? It was because He had made Himself known to the Apostles. But why did He not foretell this before? It was because if He had foretold His Passion before their faith had been strengthened, they might have left Him. But now they believed in the true God, and for that reason, He began to foretell it.

And he says, to show, not to tell; because things made visible to the eye are told, but things understood are shown. For that reason, He was telling things to the Jews, but He was showing things to the disciples; Ought not Christ to have suffered these things and so, to enter into his glory? (Luke 24:26). Thereafter, when He says, He must go (Matthew 16:21), He mentions the place.

And why does He go to Jerusalem? He mentions the reason. In that He says, Jerusalem (Matthew 16:21), the first reason is that God’s Temple was there, the place where sacrifices occurred. Now the sacrifices of the Old Law were figures of that sacrifice which was on the altar of the Cross; for that reason, He willed that the truth would appear in the place where the figure was present: And He has delivered himself for us, an oblation and a sacrifice to God for an odor of sweetness (Ephesians 5:2).

Another reason is that the prophets suffered in Jerusalem, as it is written below: Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you that kill the prophets and stone those who are sent to you (Matthew 23:37). He wished, therefore, to suffer there to show that their death was a sign of Christ’s Passion.

Likewise, ‘Jerusalem’ means ‘vision of peace,’ and the Passion itself was making peace: Making peace as to the things that are on earth and the things that are in heaven (Colossians 1:20). Moreover, He wished to suffer there so that through this, there might be a way for us to the spiritual Jerusalem: But that Jerusalem which is above is free: which is our mother (Galatians 4:26).

But from whom did He suffer? From the ancients (Matthew 16:21). This is because He suffered under their direction. The one by whose authority something happens is considered to do the deed; therefore, they are more responsible for killing Him than the soldiers are. Thus, by this the people’s malice is indicated, because those who seem better are found to be worse.

For some people are withdrawn from sin on account of their age, others on account of their knowledge, and others on account of their dignity. Nevertheless, age did not withdraw them, because He suffered from the ancients; nor were they withdrawn by their knowledge, because He suffered from the scribes; nor were they withdrawn by their dignity, because He suffered from the chief priests . I will go therefore to the great men, and will speak to them: for they have known the way of the Lord, the judgment of their God: and behold these have altogether broken the yoke more (Jeremiah 5:5).

Likewise, it was a sort of abasement and humiliation, because when a man suffers from the common people, it is not a great matter; but when a man suffers from the wise and from those who seem to be good men, it is a great abasement. Therefore, it is written, Your own nation and the chief priests have delivered you up to me (John 18:35).

Similarly, He suffered unto death; for that reason He says, And be put to death (Matthew 16:21). As it is written, Whom they killed, hanging him upon a tree (Acts 10:39); and, Christ shall be slain: and the people that shall deny him shall not be his (Daniel 9:26). But the joy of the Resurrection is added: And the third day rise again (Matthew 16:21); On the third day he will raise us up (Hosea 6:3).

And Peter taking him, began to rebuke him (Matthew 16:22). Here He rebukes His objecting disciple. First, Peter's objection is related; second, Christ’s response is related, where it is said, Who turning, said to Peter (Matthew 16:23). And taking him (Matthew 16:22)—either taking Him in his gaze, or taking Him aside—lest he seem presumptuous by rebuking the Lord before the others, he said, Lord, be it far from you, this shall not be unto you (Matthew 16:22). The Lord had highly praised his confession and had given him power because he had recognized that He is the Son of God. For this reason, Peter thought that if Christ were to be put to death, his own faith would be proven false, and Christ would not be God. Therefore, he reproached Him.

He maintained in his heart that He was the Son of God, yet he did not take into consideration that God should not be reproached, as it is said: You reprove him by words, who is not equal to you, and you speak that which is not good for you (Job 15:3). But he still kept some faith in His divinity, because in Mark it is stated, Have mercy upon yourself, O Lord, and do not deliver yourself up to death. Who turning about said: Go behind me, Satan (Mark 8:33).

Here Christ's response is related. Hilary expounds this passage as follows: The devil, seeing that Christ had announced His Passion and knowing the testimonies of the Prophets, incited Peter to say this so that he might dissuade Him. Therefore, the Lord, seeing that Peter did not speak on his own initiative, rebuked him. For that reason, He said to Peter, Go behind me (Matthew 16:23), so that a period could be placed there (separating it from what follows), and then He said to Satan, Satan, you are a scandal to me (Matthew 16:23).

Jerome says that he does not think Peter spoke due to the devil's suggestion, but from an affection of piety; therefore, he spoke ignorantly. Thus, in Christ's response, three things occur: first, the admonition; second, the rebuke; and third, the reason for the rebuke. There is an admonition because He says, Go, Peter. Therefore, Go behind me, Satan (Matthew 16:23) has the same meaning as what was said previously to the devil (Matthew 4:10). Or, Go behind me means "follow me." ‘Satan’ means ‘adversary.’ Therefore, one who contradicts the divine plan is called a satan. You are a scandal to me (Matthew 16:23); that is to say, you wish to hinder My plan.

But is there no scandal to those who love God? Origen says that for the perfect, there is no scandal. Therefore, they are not scandalized. Thus, Peter took scandal, but Christ did not. Or it is that He considers the scandal of His members to be His own. Therefore, Paul says: Who is scandalized, and I am not scandalized? (2 Corinthians 11:29). Therefore, because Peter could be a scandal to the others, Christ said, You are a scandal to me (Matthew 16:23), meaning not on His own account, but on account of His members.

But what is this? Above He had said, You are Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church (Matthew 16:18); here, however, He calls him Satan.

Jerome says that Peter did not yet possess the things the Lord had promised. But because he would have these things in the future, the Lord could still call him Satan for his current failings. Chrysostom says that Christ wanted to show what humans can do by themselves versus what they can do by God’s grace. Previously, by God’s grace, Peter recognized Christ’s divinity. But when Peter relied on his own human understanding, his humanity and weakness appeared, so much so that Christ called him Satan. Thus, the Lord sometimes allows even mature believers to fall, so that they might recognize their human limitations.

And because this passage should be understood in this way, it aligns well with what follows. Therefore, Christ gives this reason: Because you do not savor the things that are of God (Matthew 16:23).

For before, Peter had said, You are the Son of God (Matthew 16:16), and there he understood according to the divinity; but here he understands from a human perspective. The sensual man does not perceive these things that are of God (1 Corinthians 2:14); He who is a fool, lays open his folly (Proverbs 13:16). Peter flees from the death of the flesh, but the Spirit of God does not; therefore, it is said: Greater love than this no man has, that a man lay down his life for his friends (John 15:13).

Then Jesus said to his disciples (Matthew 16:24). Here He exhorts them to imitate His Passion. First, the Evangelist relates the exhortation; second, he relates the reason for the exhortation, where it is said, He who will save his life, shall lose it (Matthew 16:25); and third, Christ confirms His exhortation, where it is said, What does it profit a man, if he gain the whole world (Matthew 16:26). So Peter wished to hinder the Passion, but Christ invites them, saying: If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me (Matthew 16:24). It is as if He were saying: ‘It is necessary that you be prepared to imitate Christ’s Passion.’ Martyrs imitate the Passion corporally in a special way, but spiritual people imitate it spiritually, by dying spiritually for Christ.

Therefore, this passage can be read as referring to a physical cross. Chrysostom says: “Therefore when He said, Peter, Go behind me (Matthew 16:23), you may understand that He spoke only to Peter. But when He said, If any man will come (Matthew 16:24), He wants all people to come to Him.” And He says, will, because a person is drawn more effectively who is willingly drawn, than one who is drawn by compulsion: I will freely sacrifice to you (Psalms 53:8). Thus He states three requirements: that a person deny himself, that he take up his cross, and that he follow Christ.

Chrysostom says that Christ speaks by an analogy. If you had a son whom you saw behaving badly, and if you did not care, you would effectively disown him. So if you wish to follow the Lord’s Passion, you should also consider yourself as nothing: And I became as a man that does not hear: and that has no reproofs in his mouth (Psalms 37:15). And it is written: They have beaten me, but I was not aware of pain: they drew me, and I did not feel it (Proverbs 23:35).

And take up his cross, and follow me (Matthew 16:24): this means that he should be ready to suffer the cross, or die a most painful and shameful death. As it is written, Let us condemn him to a most shameful death . Therefore, a person should be ready to suffer any death whatever for God’s sake. To suffer for one’s own sins is shameful, but to suffer for God’s sake is not shameful. Therefore, it is said: Let none of you suffer as a murderer, or a thief, or a railer, or coveter of other men’s things. But, if as a Christian, let him not be ashamed: but let him glorify God in that name (1 Peter 4:15).

According to Gregory, this passage should be understood concerning spiritual mortification. One practices self-denial in three ways:

1. A person denies himself when he gives up his prior state of sin: Reckon that you are dead to sin (Romans 6:11).
2. A person practices self-denial if he is not in sin, and transfers himself to the state of perfection: If by any means I may attain to the resurrection which is from the dead. Not as though I had already attained, or were already perfect: but I follow after, if I may by any means apprehend, wherein I am also apprehended by Christ Jesus (Philippians 3:11–12).
3. Similarly, a person practices self-denial who gives up his own will: For I, through the law, am dead to the law, that I may live to God; with Christ I am nailed to the cross (Romans 2:19). And: If one died for all, then all were dead (2 Corinthians 5:14).

The word ‘cross’ is so called from the word ‘torment.’ A person is spiritually tormented whose mind is tormented out of compassion for his neighbor, as the Apostle says: Weep with those who weep (Romans 12:15). A person is likewise tormented who is tormented through penance: Those who are Christ’s have crucified their flesh, with the vices and concupiscences (Galatians 5:24).

And follow me (Matthew 16:24). Many feel compassion but do not follow God. He who feels compassion and is in sin does not follow God, because Christ came to destroy sin. Likewise, if you afflict yourself for vainglory, you do not follow God: When you fast, do not be like the hypocrites, sad. For they disfigure their faces, that they may appear to men to fast (Matthew 6:16).

For he who will save his life, shall lose it (Matthew 16:25). Here the reason is given for this admonition, and the reason is from the greatness of the reward. This can be read in two ways. For there is a twofold well-being: the well-being of the soul, which belongs to the just, and the well-being of the body, which belongs to all creatures, even the beasts. Men and beasts you will preserve, O Lord (Psalms 35:7).

Therefore, we may say: He who will save his life (by not giving up his physical life, by not taking up his cross) shall lose it (Matthew 16:25). Above Christ said, If any man will (Matthew 16:24), and here He says, he who will (Matthew 16:25). Therefore, just as the former could be interpreted in two ways, so also the latter. He who will save (that is, because he would not be killed or because he would not feel compassion) his life (or rather his soul), which is the principle of bodily life, shall lose it. You have destroyed all those who are disloyal to you (Psalms 72:27). And he who shall lose his life (by giving himself up to death, by denying himself pleasures) for my sake, shall find it (Matthew 16:25). I have labored a little, and have found much rest .

Or it can be understood as follows: He who will save his life also wills to lead it to everlasting salvation (My salvation shall be forever (Isaiah 51:6)) shall lose it (either by suffering death or by abstaining from carnal delights). He who shall lose his life for my sake (that is, he who forsakes carnal desires) shall find it (namely, true life). We also are weak in him: but we shall live with him (2 Corinthians 13:4).

For what does it profit a man, if he gain the whole world and suffer the loss of his own soul? (Matthew 16:26). Here Christ confirms His exhortation with a reason. Someone might say: ‘I do not care; I prefer the present life to the other one.’ And Christ counters this. First, He counters this by pointing to that inestimable life, and second, by the irrecompensable harm to the soul. He says, therefore, What does it profit (Matthew 16:26)? What do these temporal things profit you, if you lose your soul? It is natural for humans to love the end more than the means to the end, such as valuing the body more than riches. Therefore, it is natural that all things be abandoned for the health of the body.

If the contrary occurs, it is the perversity of passion. Likewise, it is natural to love the soul more than the body; therefore, the wise person is one who would prefer to suffer corporally rather than endure a great disgrace. If this is so, then a person ought to choose the salvation of his soul rather than the health of his body, even if he could possess the whole world.

But what does it profit a man, if he gain the whole world and suffer the loss of his own soul? (Matthew 16:26). It is as if He were saying: ‘The detriment of the soul is inestimable harm.’ Likewise, someone might say: ‘If I have my soul and I lose it, I will be able to recover it.’ For that reason, the Lord counters this, saying, Or what exchange shall a man give for his soul? (Matthew 16:26). It is as if He were saying, ‘There is none.’ He will not accept for satisfaction ever so many gifts (Proverbs 6:35).

But can he never be redeemed? Redeem your sins with alms (Daniel 4:24). It should be said that here Christ speaks regarding the complete loss of one’s soul, because a person would not be able to recover it unless he had first found it; but when he is contrite, he finds it again. Gregory expounds this differently: “There is a twofold time of the Church, the time of prosperity and the time of adversity: there are adverse things which should be embraced in adversity, and prosperous things which should be forsaken in prosperity.”

For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father (Matthew 16:27). Here Christ discusses His judicial power. First, His judicial power is related; second, He replies to a tacit objection. Perhaps you will say: ‘Why should I follow You and take up my cross, and so on?’ It is because of the Son of Man’s judgment and power. He has given him power to do judgment, because he is the Son of man (John 5:27). Do not be sad that He will be condemned by the ancients, because He shall come in the glory of his Father (Matthew 16:27); nor that He will be condemned before many people, because He shall come with his angels (Matthew 16:27). Every tongue should confess that the Lord Jesus Christ is in the glory of God the Father (Philippians 2:11). And: And when the Son of Man shall come in his majesty, and all the angels with him, then shall he sit upon the seat of his majesty (Matthew 25:31). Then He will render to everyone according to their works.

Afterwards, He replies to a tacit objection: Amen I say to you (Matthew 16:28). It is as if He were saying: ‘I have told you that the Son of Man will come, and so on. But do not be surprised. Why? I want to show you something, because there are some of them that stand here, that shall not taste death (Matthew 16:28).’ Sinners are swallowed by death, but the just taste death. These men were Peter, John, and James. Till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom (Matthew 16:28). This was a sign of their future glory.

But He did not name them because of the envy of the others. They might have been envious because more was given to these three than to the others. Likewise, the others might have been displeased if He had shown them nothing special. Alternatively, it can be said that the kingdom of God is the Church. For that reason, there is someone who will not taste death, such as John, till he sees the Son of man coming in his kingdom (Matthew 16:28); that is, until the Church was expanded, because he lived so long that he saw the Church expanded and many [local] churches built.