Thomas Aquinas Commentary Matthew 22

It was said above that Christ’s persecutors were provoked to kill Him for three reasons: His glory, His wisdom (by which He was confounding them), and His justice (by which He was finding fault with them). It has already been discussed how they were provoked by His glory; now, however, it should be said how they were provoked by His wisdom.

This happened in two ways:

1. Firstly, in that He predicted their damnation.
2. Secondly, in that He refuted them by disputing with them, where it is said, Then the Pharisees going, consulted among themselves how to ensnare him in his speech.

In this parable, which sets forth the reprobation of the Jews and the calling of the Gentiles, the following points are covered:

1. Firstly, the lesson of the marriage is related.
2. Secondly, it deals with the calling and the rejection of the Jews, where it is said, And he sent his servants to call them that were invited.
3. Thirdly, it deals with the calling of the Gentiles, where it is said, Then he says to his servants, etc.

He says, therefore, And Jesus answering, spoke. Who was He answering? It is not said that He was speaking with anyone. But they wanted to seize Him; for that reason, He answered not their words but their malice, and so He spoke in parables to them, saying: The kingdom of heaven is likened to a king who made a marriage for his son.

Here, the parable about a marriage is related, and it is similar to the parable related in Luke 14:16. According to Gregory, it does not seem to be the same parable, because in that account there is mention of a supper, while here there is mention of a wedding feast.

Likewise, no one was excluded from that supper; here, however, someone is excluded. Therefore, it is a different parable. By that parable the heavenly feast is understood; by this parable a feast that occurs on earth is understood.

For that reason, the former is called a supper, because no one is excluded from it, but from this feast someone is excluded. According to others, it is said that the parables are the same, because in ancient times the same thing was called a dinner and a supper, as people were not accustomed to eat until the ninth hour.

Or it can be said that Luke says what Matthew omits. But I believe that the parable is a different one. Concerning this parable, let us see who is the man that is king.

And it is said that this man is God. The person of the Father is understood, because He says, for His son. But why does He say, a man that is king? The reason is, as Origen says, because a king (rex) is so-called from ruling (regendo).

We, however, cannot be, nor are we capable of, His kingdom as it truly is, but only according to our present condition. As the eagle enticing her young to fly, and hovering over them, he spread his wings (Deuteronomy 32:11). Therefore, He is called a man that is king because He rules us in a human manner. But when He will be seen as He is, then He will be a king, because then He will rule according to Himself. Hence, the Apostle says: We see now through a glass in a dark manner: but then face to face (1 Corinthians 13:12).

He says, The kingdom of heaven is likened to a king. For just as in an earthly kingdom there are many things, such as a king, a kingdom, and those who serve, so also in that heavenly kingdom. For that reason, it is likened to a king who made a marriage for his son. The son is Christ, concerning whom it is said: That we may be in his true Son. This is the true God and life eternal (1 John 5:20).

What this marriage feast is can be explained in four ways:

1. Firstly, it can be explained as the uniting of Christ’s human nature to the divine nature, such that if the human nature is the spouse, the bridal chamber was the womb of the virgin. For he was as a bridegroom coming out of his bridechamber (Psalms 18:6). This explanation contains some uncertainty, because it could be supposed that the Person of the Father is not different from the Person of the Son.
2. Secondly, it can be said that this bridegroom is the Incarnate Word and the spouse is the Church; hence: This is a great sacrament: but I speak in Christ and in the church (Ephesians 5:32).
3. Thirdly, it can be explained as the uniting of the Word Himself to our souls. For the soul becomes a sharer of God’s glory by faith, and in this way, our wedding feast is made. I will espouse thee in faith (Hosea 2:20).
4. Fourthly, the wedding feast will be made in the general resurrection. Christ is the way of this resurrection: I am the way (John 14:6). Then the marriage feast will be when our mortal bodies will be absorbed by life, as it is stated in 2 Corinthians 5:4.

But if we speak according to Gregory, it should be explained concerning present things, according to which the Church is espoused to Christ, and our soul to God through faith.

The parable continues, concerning the calling of the Jews. This involves two main parts:

1. Firstly, a twofold calling is related.
2. Secondly, their excusing themselves is related, where it is said, But they neglected, etc.

Regarding the first point (the twofold calling), He does two things, in accordance with the two callings. Therefore, He says, And he sent his servants to call them that were invited. According to what Origen says on this text, there are two versions of this passage: one text has the words, He sent his servant, and another has, He sent his servants.

If the text is Servant, then three things should be considered:

1. Firstly, the invitation should be considered.
2. Secondly, the calling should be considered.
3. Thirdly, the second invitation should be considered.

Therefore, the Jews were invited in the Patriarchs; hence, it was said to Abraham: In thy seed shall all the nations be blessed (Genesis 22:18). To Abraham were the promises made and to his seed, etc. (Galatians 3:16). Moses was sent first: It is not so with my servant Moses who is most faithful in all my house (Numbers 12:7). And the passage continues, Why did you not fear him? Yet, And they would not come. While I am yet living, and going in with you, you have always been rebellious against the Lord (Deuteronomy 31:27).

The second calling is through the prophets, concerning whom it is written: The Lord God doth nothing without revealing his secret to his servants the prophets (Amos 3:7).

Alternatively, if the text reads Servants, then by the first servants, the prophets are signified, to whom the Jews were always rebellious: You always resist the Holy Ghost (Acts 7:51). By the second servants, the Apostles are signified, to whom it was said: Go ye not into the way of the Gentiles (Matthew 10:5). Or, as a further alternative under the "Servants" reading, by the 'first prophets' are signified the Apostles, and by the 'second prophets' are signified the successors of the Apostles.

Again he sent other servants. Here, the second invitation is related. An added kindness is indicated on the part of the one inviting, and an added malice on the part of those excusing themselves. In the first calling, the king promised nothing; but in this calling he promises something, because he says, Tell them that were invited, Behold, I have prepared my dinner.

This dinner is spiritual refreshment: She hath slain her victims, mingled her wine, and set forth her table, she hath sent her maids to invite to the tower (Proverbs 9:2–3). My beeves and fatlings are killed.

According to Origen, this saying can be explained to mean the arrangement of God’s wisdom. Strong reasons are called "beeves": He hath taught me, with a strong arm (Isaiah 8:11). Things well-fed, so to speak, are called "fatlings." Fattened birds, which are fed and fattened, are especially called fatlings, and they signify subtle meanings. These subtle meanings become "fattened" when they are multiplied with holy meanings, by which the soul is nourished: Let my soul be filled as with marrow and fatness (Psalms 62:6).

For whatever is necessary is found in Sacred Scripture. For that reason, All things are ready. The law of the Lord is unspotted, converting souls (Psalms 18:8). This is the invitation of Wisdom: Come, eat my bread, and drink the wine which I have mingled for you (Proverbs 9:5).

Alternatively, it signifies spiritual refreshment. By "beeves" the examples of the Saints are signified, which the Lord prepared as an example: Take, my brethren, for example of suffering evil, of labour and patience, the prophets (James 5:10). Therefore, He presents the tribulations of the Saints as an example.

According to Gregory, by "beeves," the Fathers of the Old Testament are signified, because a bull gores with its horns, and in the time of the Fathers vengeance was always being sought, and an eye was commanded to be given for an eye. By "fatlings," the Fathers of the New Testament are signified, who left all things for Christ, are "fattened" with God’s wisdom, and were killed for God’s sake; thus both "beeves" and "fatlings" were killed for God’s sake. All things are ready. Come ye to the marriage. Christ has suffered, He has opened heaven, and He has sent the Apostles.

Or, by "beeves," the priests of the Old Testament are understood, because a bull is an animal used in sacrifices; and by "fatlings," the prophets are understood, who were "fattened" with God’s wisdom.

But they, that is to say, those hardened in malice, neglected. Some people forgo the feast out of negligence; others, however, do so out of malice, namely, those who persecute the preachers. Therefore, He says, But they neglected. And what was the reason? It was because One went to his farm and another to his merchandise.

Outwardly, they seemed to have good reasons, but the Lord did not accept their reasons, because no temporal matters should detain one from coming to God. According to Hilary, by these words, To his farm, He signifies the desire for human glory: They loved the glory of men more than the glory of God (John 12:43); Perhaps these are poor and foolish, that know not the way of the Lord, the judgment of their God (Jeremiah 5:4).

By His saying, Another to his merchandise, the desire of avarice is indicated: From the least of them even to the greatest, all are given to covetousness (Jeremiah 6:13). According to Chrysostom, some people keep busy by laboring with their own hands; others keep busy with merchandise, meaning with their own employment.

He continues: And the rest laid hands on his servants (meaning the Apostles) and, having treated them scornfully, put them to death, because they killed many men of the Old and New Testament. Hence: I send to you prophets and wise men and scribes: and some of them you will put to death, etc. (Matthew 23:34). And here He makes no mention of His own death, but only that of His disciples, because He had mentioned it sufficiently above.

Then their punishment follows: But when the king had heard of it, he was angry, etc. Above, He related the spiritual punishment; here He relates the temporal punishment. Therefore, above, He said, A man that is king; here, however, it is said, The king. This is because the title "man" seems to pertain to kindness, but the title "king" pertains to punishment; for that reason, He is here only called a king: Those whom men could not honor in presence, because they dwelt far off, they brought their resemblance from afar, and made an express image of the king, whom they had a mind to honor: that by this their diligence, they might honor as present, him that was absent .

The king was angry. It should be noted that when anger is attributed to God, it does not signify an emotional disturbance, but rather just retribution. Because those who are angered are accustomed to punish, punishment itself is sometimes called anger. This should be noted in opposition to the heretics, for they usually object, ‘The God of the Old Testament was not good, because He ordered punishments,’ etc.

Therefore, Sending his armies, he destroyed those murderers. His armies are the angelic spirits, or the Roman citizens, who under Titus and Vespasian killed many Jews: The earth is the Lord’s and the fullness thereof (Psalms 23:1). And burnt their city, because their cities were burned: He will burn your cities with fire (Isaiah 1:7). Or it can be understood mystically, namely, their bodies or the assemblies of the heretics.

The calling of the Gentiles follows, and the examination is related. Here, He does three things:

1. Firstly, the command is related.
2. Secondly, the execution of the command is related.
3. Thirdly, the effect of the command is related.

The second part is where it is said, And his servants going forth, etc.; and the third part is where it is said, And the marriage was filled with guests.

Concerning the first point (the command), He does two things:

1. Firstly, He gives the reason for the command.
2. Secondly, He relates the command itself.

He says, therefore, Then he says to his servants: The marriage indeed is ready; but they that were invited were not worthy. The marriage indeed is ready means the Son has taken flesh, according to that passage in Isaiah 5:4: What is there that I ought to do more to my vineyard?

But they that were invited were not worthy means they rendered themselves unworthy. And how did they do so? As it is said: They, not knowing the justice of God and seeking to establish their own, have not submitted themselves to the justice of God (Romans 10:3); and, Because you reject it and judge yourselves unworthy of eternal life, behold we turn to the Gentiles (Acts 13:46). Therefore, by the sin of the Jews, salvation was brought to the Gentiles: Hold fast that which thou hast, that no man take thy crown (Revelation 3:11).

The command follows: Go ye therefore into the highways, etc. By "highways" are understood the various philosophies, because these are what one might call highways, which lead us to the truth. The Gentiles are at the "ends of the highways." Therefore, Go ye into the highways means to those who adhere to erroneous philosophies.

Or it is understood differently: The people that walked in darkness, have seen a great light (Isaiah 9:2). Hence, by "roads" are understood good actions, concerning which it is said, The Lord knoweth the ways that are on the right hand (Proverbs 4:26); by the "ends" is understood whatever can contribute to good actions. As many as you shall find, call to the marriage. Hence, it is said: Go, teach ye all nations (Matthew 28:19).

The execution of the command follows: And his servants going forth into the ways, gathered together all; But they going forth preached everywhere: the Lord working withal, and confirming the word with signs that followed (Mark 16:20).

But what does He mean when He says, Both bad and good? It can be said that the "bad" are those who were initially bad, and afterwards became good. Or it can be said, when He says, Both bad and good, that He speaks comparatively, because among the latter some are good in respect to civil virtues. Or, He says Both bad and good because after they have been gathered together, the good and the bad will be intermingled.

And the marriage was filled with guests, meaning the faithful. Above, something similar is related: Which, when it was filled, they drew out, and sitting by the shore, they chose out the good into vessels, but the bad they cast forth (Matthew 13:48). And the king went in, etc. Here the examination of those gathered together is related. This involves three aspects:

1. Firstly, the one examining is described.
2. Secondly, the examination is described.
3. Thirdly, the condemnation is described.

The one examining entered: for He enters when He exercises judgment upon them (I will go down and see, Genesis 18:21); likewise, He enters when tribulations threaten the Church. But who is the one examined? He saw there a man who had not on a wedding garment. What is this garment? It is Christ. Let us, who belong to Christ, put on Christ: Put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ (Romans 13:14).

For some put on Christ through the sacrament of Baptism: As many of you as have been baptized in Christ have put on Christ (Galatians 3:27). Others are in Christ through charity and love: But above all these things have charity, which is the bond of perfection. And let the peace of Christ rejoice in your hearts, wherein also you are called in one body (Colossians 3:14–15). Likewise, some put on Christ through conformity of deeds: Put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ (Romans 13:14).

Therefore, the wedding garment is to put on Christ through good actions, through a holy life, and through true charity; and if one of these is lacking, it is bad. Then the examination follows. He next says how the man was at fault. He says, therefore, Friend. He calls him a friend by faith, or because He loved him. Or it can be said that whenever He calls someone "friend" in such circumstances, He says this as a rebuke; thus, He reproaches the man concerning the love with which He had loved him. How camest thou in hither not having on a wedding garment?

But someone might say: ‘On what grounds did He punish him, since He called both the good and the bad?’ But He wanted the bad to come only if they would prepare and dispose themselves to become good.

Then it follows how he was at fault. Therefore, He continues, But he was silent, because the sinner is unable to offer sufficient reason why he despised the wedding garment: If he will contend with him, he cannot answer him (Job 9:3). And it is concluded with the parable’s verdict. A twofold punishment is related: the pain of loss and the pain of sense. This is because in the world one is perfected in three ways: through the intellect, by thinking; through the affections, by tending to the highest good; and likewise, through actions. For this reason, he is punished in three ways.

Hence, the king said to the waiters: Bind his hands and feet, and cast him into the exterior darkness. By his feet are understood his evil affections. In this world, people have feet, but they are not bound, because they can become good. Afterwards, however, they will be bound, because then they cannot change direction: Whatsoever thy hand is able to do, do it earnestly: for neither work, nor reason, nor wisdom, nor knowledge shall be in hell, whither thou art hastening (Ecclesiastes 9:10).

Likewise, a person can now make progress in pondering truths, but then they cannot. For that reason, He says, Cast him into the exterior darkness. For now some sinners are not dark regarding their exterior knowledge, although they are dark regarding their interior knowledge; but then they will have exterior darkness. Or, according to the literal meaning, sinners will be cast into darkness not only in their soul, but also in their body, because they shall be separated from the company of the Saints.

Then the pain of sense follows: There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth. Weeping proceeds from sadness; gnashing proceeds from anger. In the Acts it is said: They gnashed with their teeth at him (Acts 7:54). Some people weep for their sins, and they are humbled and cleansed. In that place, there will be sadness, but not leading to humility; instead, it will turn into anger.

Likewise, there will be gnashing on account of impatience, because the pride of them that hate thee ascendeth continually (Psalms 73:23). Or it can be said that there will be gnashing at the resurrection, because sinners will be punished not only in their souls but also in their bodies; or it is because they will suffer heat and cold: They will pass from the snow waters to excessive heat (Job 24:19).

Then He concludes, Many are called, but few are chosen, because some do not wish to come, and others do not have on a wedding garment. Hence: Strait is the way that leadeth to life: and few there are that find it (Matthew 7:14).

Above, the Lord refuted the Pharisees by a parable; here, He manifests His wisdom in a second way by disputing with them. He does so in two ways:

1. By answering.
2. By objecting, where it is said, And the Pharisees being gathered together, Jesus asked them, etc.

The Lord answers three questions:

1. Concerning the paying of tribute.
2. Concerning the resurrection.
3. Concerning the Law.

The second part is where it is said, That day there came to him the Sadducees; and the third part is where it is said, But the Pharisees, hearing, etc.

Regarding the first point, the Evangelist does three things:

1. The question is related.
2. The answer is related.
3. The effect of His answer is related.

The second part is where it is said, But Jesus knowing their wickedness; and the third part is where it is said, And hearing this, they wondered.

In this question, three things are to be considered:

1. The intention of the questioners.
2. The ministers of the questioners.
3. The question of the questioners.

The intention of the questioners is shown when it is said, the Pharisees going made (meaning among themselves) a plan (actually, they made a foolish plan) how to ensnare him in his speech.

And this was foolish, because He was the Word of God, and the Word of God is not comprehensible: We shall say much, and yet shall want words . Now, it was an ungodly plan: Blessed is the man who hath not walked in the counsel of the ungodly (Psalms 1:1). And: Let not my soul go into their counsel (Genesis 49:6).

The ministers are described when he says: And they sent to him their disciples with the Herodians. But why did they not go themselves? The reason is that they wanted to question Him deceitfully; therefore, had they gone, there would have been no room for deceit. But the disciples themselves were also deceitful: As the judge of the people is himself, so also are his ministers . With the Herodians.

Who are these Herodians? According to what is mentioned in Luke, Judea was made tributary to the Romans under Herod. This son of Antipater, a foreigner, was made king by the Romans; for that reason, he wanted to compel the Jews to pay tribute to the Romans. Therefore, there were the Herodians, that is to say, his servants deputed to collect Herod’s quota. But this Herod was dead at this time, and he had left three sons. One was Herod Antipas, and this son was then ruling, as it is said in Luke 23, that he was also ruling at the time of the Lord’s death; for that reason, it was easy for his servants to go with them.

But why did they go with the Herodians? One reason is that the Herodians were zealous for the Emperor. For that reason, the disciples of the Pharisees brought them along, so that if He said that the tribute ought to be paid, they might accuse Him to the Pharisees; but if He said that it ought not to be paid, then the Herodians would seize Him. Likewise, these men were unknown, for which reason they supposed that He would not perceive their deceit; therefore, they were acting contrary to that which is written: I have not sat with the council of vanity: neither will I go in with the doers of unjust things (Psalms 25:4). Alternatively, when Judea was made tributary to the Romans, they were divided, because some were saying that the people dedicated to God ought not to be tributary to a man; but others were saying that because Caesar was going to battle for the peace of all, all ought to give tribute to Caesar. Therefore, those who were saying that tribute ought to be given to Caesar were called Herodians.

Having presented the ministers, the question is presented. It unfolds in two parts:

1. The flattery is related.
2. The question is related, where it is said, Tell what dost thou think.

Wicked men begin with flattery: Who speak good things, but evils are in their hearts (Psalms 28:3). They praise Him in three ways:

1. They praise His person.
2. They praise His doctrine.
3. They praise His constancy.

They praise His person on account of His dignity and virtue. They praise Him for His dignity when they say, Master. Although they lie in their hearts, not considering Him a master but a seducer (as it is stated below, Matthew 27:63: We have remembered, that that seducer said: After three days I will rise again, etc.), nevertheless, He was truly a Master, as it is said (Matthew 23:8): One is your master, etc.

Likewise, they praise Him when they say, We know that thou art a true speaker. A true speaker is one who speaks the truth, and this belongs to God and to Him who is joined to God: I said in my excess: Every man is a liar (Psalms 115:11); But God is true and every man a liar (Romans 3:4). Christ is joined to God by union and is therefore a true speaker.

They praise His doctrine when they say, And teachest the way of God in truth. Firstly, it is necessary that one know what one teaches: Which I have learned without guile, and communicate without envy . Likewise, some people teach, but not profitable things; He, on the contrary, teaches profitable things, namely, the way of God: I am the Lord thy God that teach thee profitable things (Isaiah 48:17). Again, some people teach things pertaining to God, but not in truth, such as heretics; He, however, teaches in truth. Concerning this, it is written: Shew, O Lord, thy ways to me, and teach me thy paths, etc. (Psalms 24:4).

They praise Him for His constancy when they say, Neither carest thou for any man, meaning one does not omit, for fear of anyone, what ought to be said or done: Who art thou, that thou shouldst be afraid of a mortal man? (Isaiah 51:12). And why is this? For thou dost not regard the person of men, namely, contrary to God. For one respects a person who, for the sake of a human being, omits to say the truth which ought to be said: Neither shall you respect any man’s person (Deuteronomy 1:17).

And see how malicious they were. The question had two parts: whether they ought not to pay tribute (which pertains to God’s honor), or whether they ought to pay (which pertains to the favor of men). Therefore, they wanted Him to seek God’s favor and teach the way of God, so that if He said they ought not to pay (which they preferred), He would be immediately seized by the Herodians.

The question follows: Tell us therefore… Is it lawful to give tribute to Caesar, or not? Tribute was money given per person.

The answer follows: But Jesus knowing their wickedness, said. He answers their thoughts first, and then their words, where it is said, Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s.

It belongs to a human being to answer words, but to God to answer thoughts. Therefore, since Christ is God and man, it follows that He answers both: The searcher of hearts and reins is God (Psalms 7:10).

Ye hypocrites. He rightly calls them hypocrites, because hypocrites are properly those who have one thing in their mouth and another in their heart. Why do you tempt me? For this was forbidden: Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God (Deuteronomy 6:16).

These men addressed Christ with smooth talk; Christ, however, answers harshly, because He is responding to their hearts, not to their words. Likewise, an example is given to us that we ought not to believe flatterers: A prince that gladly heareth lying words, hath all his servants wicked (Proverbs 29:12).

Similarly, when one wishes to answer, one cannot better refute an opponent than by using their own words. Therefore, He first puts forth a question, and then He draws the truth from their answer. First, He asks about a coin, and then He asks about its appearance, for He wished to show their intention clearly: The learning of the wise is easy (Proverbs 14:6).

He says: Shew me the coin of the tribute, namely, the denarius that is given for the tribute. This denarius is worth ten ases, and everyone paid one denarius.

Then He asks about its appearance, saying, Whose image and inscription is this? For writing is put on every type of State money, and so it was on this coin. They say, Caesar’s: do not think that they are referring to Caesar Augustus, but to Tiberius Caesar. And you should know that the Lord was not asking due to ignorance, but rather due to the need to impart the truth gradually. He was certainly old enough, and had lived among men long enough, to know well the appearance of the denarius, but He asked in order to make an illustration. Afterwards, He concludes the truth, Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s; and to God, the things that are God’s; it is as if He said: “You belong to God and to Caesar, and you have for your use what belongs to God and to Caesar.

You have natural riches from God, namely, bread and wine, and from these, give to God. You have these man-made things, such as the denarii, from Caesar, and render these to Caesar.” Mystically, it is as follows: “We have a soul which is made to God’s image; for that reason, we ought to render it to God. In regard to the things that we have from the world, we ought to have peace with the world.” Holy men, even in this life, have been raised up from the world; nevertheless, because they have social intercourse with others in the world, they ought to strive after Babylon’s peace, as it is stated in Baruch 1.

And this is because all things that are of the flesh, which are of the world, or of the men with whom they live, they render to God. The effect follows: And hearing this, they wondered and, leaving him, went their ways.

This was surprising, because when His wisdom was seen they should have been converted; but they could not catch Him, and so they withdrew: Thy knowledge is become wonderful to me: it is high, and I cannot reach to it (Psalms 138:6).

Here, the second question is presented, and the Evangelist does three things:

1. The question is presented.
2. The response is presented.
3. The effect is presented.

The second part is where it is said, And Jesus answering, etc.; and the third part is where it is said, And the multitudes hearing it were in admiration.

Regarding the first point, initially, the disposition and condition of those asking are described, and secondly, the question is presented. The Evangelist says, therefore, That day. And why is it said "on that day"? It is not without reason, because when they had seen those men confounded, they sought Him, and not without presumption. But, according to Chrysostom, they had agreed with each other to catch Him in His speech, and everyone wanted the honor of victory. For that reason, when those men were confounded, these men wished to come forward; His troops have come together, and have made themselves a way by me (Job 19:12).

For there were two sects: the Pharisees (that is, the separated ones) and the Sadducees (that is, the just ones). The Sadducees erred in doctrine because they did not accept the Prophets, nor did they believe in the resurrection. Likewise, they believed that when the body died, the entire person perished. And this is what the Evangelist refers to when he says, Who say there is no resurrection.

The question follows:

1. They cite the Law.
2. They present a case.
3. They pose their question.

The Evangelist says, therefore, And they asked him, saying: Master, Moses said: If a man die having no son, etc. This is found in Deuteronomy 25.

What was the reason for this law? The people were carnal; therefore, they were only seeking temporal things. For it is clear that a man is himself unable to remain on earth after he dies, and so it is a consolation for him that he remain in his own likeness, namely, in his son. Nature desires this, so that what cannot be preserved in itself may be preserved in its own likeness. Thus, if someone died without a son, Moses addressed this situation with this law: namely, that a brother should marry his wife. A stranger, who was in no way related to him, was not chosen. Moreover, a stranger would not have as great a care for his house and family as a brother would. This is what Moses says: He shall raise up offspring to his brother, meaning he would beget a son who would receive that brother’s inheritance.

After citing the Law, they presented the case, saying, There were with us seven brethren: and the first having married a wife, died; and not having issue, left his wife to his brother, etc. It may be that such a case occurred, or that they concocted it. Nevertheless, according to Augustine, the seven brothers signify evil men who, in the seven ages of the world, die without fruit. The Apostle says: What fruit therefore have (or had) you then in those things of which you are now ashamed? (Romans 6:21). This woman represents worldly living. As it is written, They shall perish but thou remainest: and all of them shall grow old like a garment (Psalms 101:27).

Therefore, they inquire: All died, and all had her. At the resurrection therefore, whose wife of the seven shall she be, as she cannot be the wife of them all? This reasoning is flawed. It is also aimed against the Pharisees, because they (the Pharisees) believed that the resurrection would be much like this current life, where everyone would take back his wife, his possessions, and so on. Hence, the Sadducees ask, Whose wife shall she be? since she cannot be the wife of all of them. This notion is rejected in Job: Nor shall he return any more into his house (Job 7:10). Therefore, a man will not rise again to the same way of life.

The response follows:

1. He shows their error and its cause.
2. He subtly reveals the truth.

Thus, the Evangelist says, Jesus answering, said: You err, meaning you hold an erroneous opinion. As it is written, They thought, and were deceived: for their own malice blinded them .

And what is the cause of their error? Not knowing the Scriptures. Therefore, they were not meditating on God’s commandments. As the Psalm says, I have had understanding above ancients: because I have sought thy commandments (Psalms 118:100). Consequently, one who meditates on God’s commandments can avoid errors. Therefore, Jesus said, Search the scriptures (John 5:39). These men, on the contrary, were not searching, and so they erred, just as some people do who misunderstand.

Likewise, some people err by not knowing God’s power, wishing to measure God’s power by the standard of lesser powers. As Paul writes, The invisible things of God from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made (Romans 1:20). Jesus states, In the resurrection they shall neither marry nor be married. He proves His assertion. And because He had identified two reasons for their error—namely, that they did not know the Scriptures nor the power of God—He first declares that they were ignorant of God’s power, and second, that they were ignorant of the Scriptures.

And since He spoke about the Scriptures first (as a cause of error), why are they addressed second in His explanation? Chrysostom replies that when someone disputes with a person who errs out of malice, one should first cite an authority. However, when someone disputes with a person who errs out of ignorance, one should first present a reason, and afterward, an authority. This is what the Lord does here.

First, He presents a reason based on God's power; thus, He says: In the resurrection they shall neither marry nor be married. In the first place, according to the literal meaning, it is true, They shall neither marry, etc., because then it will not be necessary as it is now.

Jerome says: “Nubere is used one way in Latin and another in Greek. In Latin, ‘to marry’ (nubere) is said only of women; hence, it is not said of either sex in the passive voice. But in Greek, men marry (that is, they take wives), while women are married (but do not ‘marry’ in the active sense).” Therefore, Jesus says, They shall neither marry (referring to men) nor be married (referring to women).

For since marriage is for the procreation of children—so that a man, who cannot be preserved in himself, is continued in his own likeness—it follows that when the resurrection to immortality takes place, marriages will not be necessary. For that reason, these men erred: they did not know God’s power. As Jesus says, they shall be as the angels of God in heaven.

That state is the state of reward and the goal of this life. As Job asks, Shall man that is dead, thinkest thou, live again? all the days in which I am now in warfare, I expect until my change come (Job 14:14). That life will be accompanied by the understanding of resplendent things.

But why will they be similar to the angels? It is because they will be immune from the passions. For now, a person has an intellect joined to the senses, and in this, the angels are superior. But then, the intellect will be purified; therefore, they will be similar to the angels. As it is written, For even as an angel of God, so is my lord the king, that he is neither moved with blessing nor cursing (2 Samuel 14:17). Thus, those who have a soul elevated above the passions are similar to the angels. Now, the passions that especially make people brutish are the passions of sexual intercourse, which are part of marriage; and so, in the resurrection, they will neither marry nor be married.

Likewise, some have said that not all will rise, but only men. Augustine, however, rejects this, saying that both sexes will rise, for gender will not be preserved only in men. Christ refutes this opinion when He says they will neither marry nor be married. From these words, it is to be understood that both sexes will rise, but they will neither marry nor be married.

And concerning the resurrection of the dead, etc. After showing that they were ignorant of God’s power, here He shows that they were ignorant of the Scriptures. Thus, have you not read that which was spoken by God, saying to you: I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? This is written in Exodus 3:6.

But Jerome asks: since other passages are more explicit concerning the resurrection (such as those found in Isaiah 6, Ezekiel 33, and Daniel 12), why did Jesus cite this passage, which is ambiguous? Jerome answers that they did not accept the Prophets, but only the five books of Moses.

And how does this passage serve His argument? He says: I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. God is called the God of those who worship Him. Therefore, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob worship Him. But worshipping God does not belong to the dead, but to the living. Therefore, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob live—not in respect to the body, but they live in respect to the soul. But does this prove the resurrection? It does, because the Sadducees were saying that there is no soul. He, however, shows that the soul remains; and if the soul remains, then there is also a resurrection, because the soul is naturally inclined to the body.

But what does He mean when He says that He is not the God of the dead? This is true in regard to the body. Nevertheless, He is also the God of the dead, because the dead live in regard to the spirit. As Paul says, Whether we die, we die unto the Lord (Romans 14:18). Likewise, the passage counters heretics who condemn the Patriarchs of the Old Testament, because here it says that they live according to the soul. Similarly, God is spoken of in the singular, because in other nations, everyone has his own god, whereas Scripture says, Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God is one Lord (Deuteronomy 6:4).

The effect of His words follows: namely, that the multitudes were in admiration. As the Psalm says, Thy testimonies are wonderful, O Lord, etc. (Psalms 118:129).

Previously, the Lord answered the question concerning the payment of tribute and the question about the resurrection. Here, however, He answers a question about the comparison of the divine commandments. Matthew does two things:

1. He describes the wickedness of those asking.
2. He relates the question, where it is said, Master, which is the great commandment in the law?

He describes their wickedness in regard to three things:

1. In regard to their shamelessness.
2. In regard to their deliberate malice.
3. In regard to their trickery.

He describes their wickedness in regard to their shamelessness, when it is said, Hearing that he had silenced. He had just refuted the disciples of the Pharisees and the Sadducees; therefore, from this, they had enough reason to believe Him and to be ashamed.

Therefore, Chrysostom says, “Envy and anger nourish and cause shamelessness.” But these men do not give up on account of this; rather, they still question Him. Most impudent dogs, they never had enough (Isaiah 56:11). And it is indicated that, although they heard this, nevertheless, they were not silent.

One man keeps silence spontaneously, and this is prudence. Likewise, another man keeps silence because silence is imposed upon him, and this belongs to the impudent. There is one that holds his peace, because he knows not what to say: and there is another that holds his peace, knowing the proper time ; A time to keep silence, and a time to speak (Ecclesiastes 3:7).

Likewise, their deliberate malice is mentioned, namely, so that they might better convict Him, they are gathered together at the same time: The princes met together, against the Lord (Psalms 2:2). They came together. It can be said that the Pharisees and the Sadducees came together, because even though they were different sects, they were united in tempting the Lord. Or, the Pharisees came together against the Lord.

Likewise, their trickery is indicated, because when they had been gathered together in a crowd, they did not want all to question Him, but only one of them. This was so that if he were defeated, the others would not be ashamed, and if he were to triumph, they would all glory in him. And one of them, a teacher of the law, asked him, tempting him, for he did not have the intention of learning: They have opened their mouths upon me, and reproaching me they have struck me on the cheek (Job 16:11).

Here an objection can be made concerning the literal meaning: namely, that Mark says that He said, You are not far from the kingdom of God (Mark 12:34). And so, how is it said here that he was tempting Him?

Augustine solves this objection, saying that he came initially with the intention of tempting, but when Christ had satisfied him, he consented to Him. And, in this way, that he tempted Him should be referred to the beginning of the conversation; that he was not far from the kingdom of God should be referred to the end. And so it is not surprising if the Lord’s words changed his motivation.

It should be known, however, that some men tempt from the fact that they are unsure, because, according to what the Wise Man says, He that is hasty to give credit, is light of heart . This man, when he had heard many things about Christ, wanted to see if such things were true; and this temptation was not bad. Hence, he says, Master, which is the great commandment in the law?

Nevertheless, this question seemed to be slanderous and presumptuous, because all of God's commandments are great: The commandment is a lamp, and the law a light (Proverbs 6:23). Moreover, he asked vaguely, since all are great, so that if He were to answer concerning one, he would object about another. Similarly, his question was presumptuous, because one should not ask about a great commandment who has not fulfilled the least: Why does your heart elevate you, and why do you stare with your eyes, as if they were thinking great things? (Job 15:12).

And it could have been that there was a controversy among them about this question, for some were saying that salvation was in some external acts; hence, This people honors me with their lips: but their heart is far from me (Isaiah 29:13). But the Lord answers that it is only in the internal acts. Hence, His answer follows, Jesus said to him: You shall love the Lord your God, etc.

And He not only answers the proposed question, but He also teaches the truth.

1. He teaches which commandment is the first.
2. He teaches that the second commandment is similar to it.
3. He gives the reason.

The second part is where it is said, And the second is like to this, etc. The third part is where it is said, On these two commandments depends the whole law and the prophets. He says, therefore, You shall love the Lord your God, etc. This passage is written in Deuteronomy 6:5.

Likewise, the Lord said through Moses: What does the Lord your God require of you, but that you fear the Lord your God? (Deuteronomy 10:12). Therefore, the Lord commands two things: namely, fear and love.

And why does the Lord not answer concerning fear, as He does concerning love? It should be said that certain men fear God, who fear to suffer from Him, such as those who fear the punishment of hell, or who fear to lose something that they have from God. This is servile fear, because one loves that for which one fears punishment. There are others who fear God Himself for His own sake, who fear to offend Him; and such fear is from love, and one fears because one loves.

Therefore, the beginning of fear is love: God is charity: and he that abides in charity abides in God, and God in him (1 John 4:16). And, therefore, He says, You shall love the Lord; He does not say, ‘You shall fear,’ because He is primarily lovable, as He is the first end, and everything else is loved on account of the end. Therefore, he who loves God as his end, loves Him with his whole heart: Be converted to me with all your heart (Joel 2:12). And, however much you try, you will not be able to encompass Him, because God is greater than the whole heart.

But what does it mean when He says, With your whole heart and with your whole soul and with your whole mind? Chrysostom explains these words as follows: ‘Because in love there are two things: one, which is the origin of love, and a second, which is the effect and consequence of love. The origin of love is twofold. For love can arise from passion and from the judgment of reason: it arises from passion when a man does not know how to live without that which he loves; it arises from reason, in that he loves as reason dictates.’ He says, therefore, that a man loves with his whole heart who loves physically; a man loves with his whole soul who loves from the judgment of reason.

And we should love God in both ways: physically, so that our heart is physically inclined towards God; hence, in Psalm 83:3, it is said: My heart and my flesh have rejoiced in the living God. The second thing is the consequence of love, because that which I love, I willingly see, I willingly think of it, and I willingly do what pleases it: He who loves me, will keep my word (John 14:23); and I refer everything to it: How lovely are your tabernacles, O Lord of hosts! my soul longs and faints for the courts of the Lord (Psalms 83:2).

And we can add what Mark adds, And with your whole strength (Mark 12:33), because he who loves God commits himself to Him and expends his strength upon Him. Similarly, Augustine distinguishes between the heart, the soul, and the mind, according to the three things that proceed from them. From the heart, thoughts come forth, as it is stated above in chapter 15; from the soul, life proceeds; and from the mind, knowledge and understanding proceed. Hence, in that He says, With your whole heart, it is meant that we should direct all our thoughts to Him; in that He says, with your whole soul, it is meant that we should direct our whole lives to Him; in that He says, with your whole mind, it is meant that all our knowledge should be referred to Him, that is to say, taking our knowledge captive to His service: Bringing into captivity every understanding unto the obedience of Christ (2 Corinthians 10:5).

A commentary by a certain master explains that the soul is God’s image according to its powers: its memory, understanding, and will. So, what is said, With your heart, refers to the understanding; what is said, with your soul, refers to the will; and what is said, with your mind, refers to the memory, such that one lives entirely for God.

Origen explains the passage thus: You shall love the Lord your God with your whole soul, so that you should be prepared to lay down your life for Him if it is necessary: I will lay down my life for you (John 13:37). But there is a difference between the mind and the heart. For the mind (mens) is so-called from measuring (metiendo); the heart is taken for simplicity of understanding. The mind, however, is taken from its relationship to speaking, because by words, the understanding or a thought is measured. Hence, He means to say that in our speaking and in our meditations we should love God totally.

Having asserted this, He adds, This is the greatest and the first commandment. It is the greatest in its extension, for it is this commandment in which all the commandments are contained, because in this commandment the love of neighbor is contained, according to what is said: He who loves God also loves his brother (1 John 4:21). For that reason, it is the greatest. Likewise, it is first in origin, and greatest in importance and extension. It is not the first in Scripture, because in Scripture the first commandment was, Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God is one (Deuteronomy 6:4). And why? It is because every inclination of an appetitive power is directed towards love. For that reason, we have the commandment that we worship God in love: Love therefore is the fulfilling of the law (Romans 13:10); Being rooted and founded in charity (Ephesians 3:17).

Secondly, He relates the second commandment: And the second is like to this: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. He wished to indicate that in the commandments there is an order. And what is the reason for this? It is evident that the commandments pertain to acts of the virtues. Now the virtues have an order, because one depends upon another, and so, just as the virtues have an order, so also do the commandments have an order.

But why does He say that it is similar to the first? It is because when a person is loved, since humanity is made in God's likeness, God is loved in that person. For that reason, it is similar to the first commandment, because it pertains to the love of God.

But what does He understand by the name of neighbor, when He says, You shall love your neighbor? This point is sufficiently expressed in the parable, where it is asked, Which, in your opinion, was his neighbor? (Luke 10:36), and it is answered, He that showed mercy to him. Hence, he who should show mercy to us, or we ourselves to others, is included under the name of neighbor. But there is no rational creature to whom we should not show pity, and vice versa; and, for that reason, men and angels are included under the name of neighbor.

And what He says, as yourself, is not understood to mean as much as oneself, because this would be contrary to the order of charity; but as yourself, meaning for the same reason why you love yourself, or in the same manner that you love yourself. For the same reason, namely, that you should not love yourself on account of yourself, but on account of God, and also, in this way, you should love your neighbor: Do all to the glory of God (1 Corinthians 10:31).

Likewise, by the very fact that you love yourself, you love yourself in him for whom you want something good for yourself; and such is good, because it is in accord with oneself and God's law, and this is the good of justice. So also, you should desire the good of justice for your neighbor; hence, you should love him either because he is just, or because he is becoming just.

Likewise, you should love him in the same manner as yourself, because when I say, ‘I love this thing,’ I am saying ‘I want its good.’ Hence, the act of love refers to two things: either it refers to that which is good, or to a good which I want for it. Thus, I love this thing because I want it to be good for me. Hence, a man loves temporal goods because he knows that they are good for himself; but some men love a thing because it is good in itself. In this manner, you should love yourself, and also your neighbor.

Afterwards, He gives the reason why these two are the greatest commandments: On these two commandments depends the whole law and the prophets. The whole doctrine of the Law and the prophets depends on these commandments. In morals, the end is what principles are in speculative science: for science proceeds from principles to conclusions, and so all science is judged by its principles, just as in all practical matters, all depends on the end. The end of the commandment is charity (1 Timothy 1:5); therefore, all the others depend on these two, and this is Augustine's explanation.

Origen explains this as follows: ‘On these, meaning on the observance of these, depends the understanding of the Law and of the prophets, because those who observe these things merit the understanding of the Law and the prophets.’ You that fear the Lord, love him, and your hearts shall be enlightened ; By your commandments I have had understanding: therefore have I hated every way of iniquity (Psalms 118:104).

And the Pharisees being gathered together, Jesus asked them. After He had responded to them, He wished to question them in turn. The Evangelist does two things:

1. A question is related.
2. Its effect is related, where it is said, No man was able to answer him a word.

Concerning the first point, He does three things:

1. He proposes a question.
2. The answer is related.
3. He objects against the answer.

He says, therefore: And the Pharisees being gathered together, Jesus asked them. Now they had been gathered together to tempt Him; hence, He proposes the question, What do you think of Christ? Whose son is he?

This question was very difficult, and it was appropriate. It was very difficult, because it is found in Isaiah 53:8: Who shall declare his generation? It was also appropriate, because they held the opinion that He was only a man and did not believe that He was God; for then they would not have tempted Him, because it is written: You shall not tempt the Lord your God (Deuteronomy 6:16). Therefore, to show that He is God, He says, What do you think of Christ? Whose son is he?

The response follows: They say to him: David’s. For there was a twofold generation of Christ: one according to His flesh, and another according to His divinity, according to which He is the Son of God the Father, concerning which it is said, You are my son, this day have I begotten you (Psalms 2:7). Hence, they reply concerning His generation according to the flesh when they say, David’s. I will raise up to David a just branch (Jeremiah 23:5). And: Who was made to him of the seed of David, according to the flesh (Romans 1:3). And their answer was inadequate, because they did not know Him well enough.

Then He objects so that they might gather that there is another generation: How then does David in spirit call him Lord, saying: The Lord said to my Lord: Sit on my right hand? (Psalms 109:1). It is stated in the Law that a father is greater than a son. A son is not, therefore, the lord of his father. Hence, either Christ is not the son of David, or there is something greater in Him than in David, since David calls Him Lord. But perhaps they might say that David was deceived, an objection He eliminates because David is saying this in spirit; hence, The men of God spoke, inspired by the Holy Ghost (2 Peter 1:21).

Now we can see three things in the passage from the Psalms. Firstly, we see His preeminence over the saints, His equality to the Father, and His dominion over the rebellious.

We see His preeminence over the saints when He says: The Lord said to my Lord. The Lord, namely, the Father, to my Lord, namely, to the Son. For the Son Himself has dominion over all the saints, for no saint is illuminated except by the true light. He, however, is the true light: The life was the light of men (John 1:4). Therefore, if He Himself is the light, by participation in which all the saints receive light, He has preeminence over all the saints as to that light. And so it is said, With you is the principality in the day of your strength: in the brightness of the saints, etc. (Psalms 109:3). Hence, He is the source of the brightness of the saints.

Likewise, His equality with the Father is mentioned when it is said, Sit on my right hand. This does not mean there are seats occupying a place, but it is said metaphorically, because the honorable place is to sit at the right side. To say is to utter a word. What else does it mean when the Lord said, Sit on my right hand, except that ‘By begetting Me, the Word, He gave Me power, equality, and authority?’ It can also be explained regarding temporal things, meaning in the greater temporal goods, but that is not to the point. For the Lord is always seen on the right side, as, for example, in Mark 16:5: They saw a young man sitting on the right side. And Stephen saw Jesus standing on the right hand of God.

And what will happen to His enemies? They will all be made subject to Him. Hence, it is added, Until I make your enemies your footstool. These enemies are either those completely lacking the faith, or those who do not wish to obey and be subject to Him. Hence, He makes these men your footstool. For a footstool is something that is placed under a man’s feet; now, that which is under a man is completely subject to him, whereas that which is in his hand is not necessarily subject to him. Some men are made to be a footstool as a punishment, others are made to be a footstool for their salvation: it is a punishment for those who do not wish to do His will, but it is for the salvation of those who do His will.

But the Arians object: ‘Therefore, He is not equal to the Father.’ I say that two things are found in Scripture: both that He is subject to the Father, and that He is equal to the Father. For he must reign, until he has put all his enemies under his feet (1 Corinthians 15:25). Likewise, Christ will subject all things to Himself: Who will reform the body of our lowness, made like to the body of his glory (Philippians 3:21). Hence, He says this to show His unity of power; therefore, everything that the Father can do, the Son can also do.

But what does it mean when He says, until I make your enemies your footstool? These words seem to imply that after He has made His enemies subject, He will no longer sit on His right hand. It should be said that until sometimes implies a determined time, other times it implies an unlimited time. Here, it certainly implies an unlimited time.

But someone might say: ‘Do not many men rebel against Christ?’ Indeed, it is true that many rebel, and therefore, there could have been a doubt regarding the time when many were rebelling against Christ. For that reason, Christ willed to express this.

If David then calls him Lord, how is he his son? Therefore, the Son is also the Lord, because He is the son of David according to the flesh, since He derived His lineage from him, and He is the Lord according to His divinity.

And no man was able to answer him a word. Here, the effect is related, and it is twofold, because Christ was the answerer (respondens) and the questioner (opponens). Because He was questioning, no man was able to answer: If he will contend with him, he cannot answer him one for a thousand (Job 9:3). Likewise, because in answering He had silenced them, for that reason, it continues, Neither dared any man from that day forth ask him any more questions. Therefore, you can see that these men were not asking questions so that He might teach them, but so that they might tempt Him: Ask your father, and he will declare to you (Deuteronomy 32:7).