Augustine of Hippo — Commentary on Scripture

Mark 11:12

Did Christ really want physically to relish and consume fruit himself when he sought the fruit of this fig tree? And if he had found it there, would he then even have eaten it? Did he really want to drink water when he said to the woman of Samaria, “Give me a drink”? When he was on the cross saying “I thirst,” was this really all about his physical thirst? For what does Christ hunger more than our good works? For what does Christ thirst more than our faithful response? On the Psalms

Mark 11:12

Mark, on his side, has recorded in connection with the second day what he had omitted to notice as occurring really on the first—namely, the incident of the expulsion of the sellers and buyers from the temple. On the other hand, Matthew, after mentioning what was done on the second day—namely, the cursing of the fig tree as he was returning in the morning from Bethany into the city—has omitted certain facts which Mark has inserted, namely, his coming into the city, and his going out of it in the evening, and the astonishment which the disciples expressed at finding the tree dried up as they passed by in the morning; and then to what had taken place on the second day, which was the day on which the tree was cursed, he has attached what really took place on the third day—namely, the amazement of the disciples at seeing the tree’s withered condition, and the declaration which they heard from the Lord on the question of the power of faith.

HARMONY OF THE GOSPELS 2.68.131

Mark 11:13

Some who witnessed Christ’s miracles did not understand what they meant, and how they spoke to those who knew they had special meaning. They wondered only at the miracles themselves. Others both marvelled at the miracles, and attained some preliminary understanding of them. For this we must come to the school of Christ himself. Those fixed only upon the plain sense of Scripture tend to focus merely upon miracle for miracles’ sake. Hence they may prematurely conclude that Jesus himself was ignorant of the time of the year, something any ordinary farmer could discern. For it was not yet the season for the tree to bear fruit. Nevertheless, since he was hungry, he looked for fruit on the tree. Does this imply that Christ knew less than what every peasant could easily discern? Surely not. Wouldn’t you expect the maker of the fig tree to know what the ordinary orchard worker would know in a snap? So when he was hungry he looked for fruit on the tree, but he seemed to be looking for something more from this tree. He noted that the tree had no fruit, but was full of leaves. It was at that po…

Some who witnessed Christ’s miracles did not understand what they meant, and how they spoke to those who knew they had special meaning. They wondered only at the miracles themselves. Others both marvelled at the miracles, and attained some preliminary understanding of them. For this we must come to the school of Christ himself. Those fixed only upon the plain sense of Scripture tend to focus merely upon miracle for miracles’ sake. Hence they may prematurely conclude that Jesus himself was ignorant of the time of the year, something any ordinary farmer could discern. For it was not yet the season for the tree to bear fruit. Nevertheless, since he was hungry, he looked for fruit on the tree. Does this imply that Christ knew less than what every peasant could easily discern? Surely not. Wouldn’t you expect the maker of the fig tree to know what the ordinary orchard worker would know in a snap? So when he was hungry he looked for fruit on the tree, but he seemed to be looking for something more from this tree. He noted that the tree had no fruit, but was full of leaves. It was at that point that he cursed it, and it withered away. So what terrible thing had the poor tree done simply in not bearing fruit? Could the tree reasonably be faulted for its fruitlessness? No. But human beings who by their own free will decide not to bear fruit—that is a different matter. Those found wanting in accountability in this case are those who had the benefit of the law, which was meant to bear fruit, but they had no fruit to show for it. They had a full growth of leaves (the law), yet they bore no fruit (works of mercy).

SERMONS ON NEW TESTAMENT LESSONS 48.3

Mark 11:15-17

(de Con. Evan. lib. ii. 67) John, however, relates this in a very different order, wherefore it is manifest that not once only, but twice, this was done by the Lord, and that the first time was related by John, this last, by all the other three.

(de Con. Evan. lib. ii. 68) In this again Mark does not keep the same order as Matthew; because however Matthew connects the facts together by this sentence, And he left them, and went out of the city into Bethany, (Matt. 21:17) returning from whence in the morning, according to his relation, Christ cursed the tree, therefore it is supposed with greater probability that he rather has kept to the order of time, as to the ejection from the temple of the buyers and sellers. Mark therefore passed over what was done the first day when He entered into the temple, and on remembering it inserted it, when he had said that He found nothing on the fig tree but leaves, which was done on the second day, as both testify.

(as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274) Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Mark 11:15

This account of the many sellers who were cast out of the temple was reported by all the Evangelists, including John, but in his case he introduces it in a completely different order.… John proceeds to tell us that he went up to Jerusalem at the season of the Jews’ passover, and when he had made a scourge of small cords drove out of the temple those who were selling in it. This makes it evident that this act was performed by the Lord not on a single occasion, but twice over. Only in the first instance was it recorded by John, but in the last by the other three.

HARMONY OF THE GOSPELS 2.67

Mark 11:18

De Con. Evan, ii, 67: John, however, relates this in a very different order, wherefore it is manifest that not once only, but twice, this was done by the Lord, and that the first time was related by John, the last, by all the other three. de Con. Evan, ii, 68: In this again, Mark does not keep the same order as Matthew; because however Matthew connects the facts together by this sentence, “And He left them, and went out of the city into Bethany,” returning from whence in the morning, according to his relation, Christ cursed the tree, therefore it is supposed with greater probability that he rather has kept to the order of time, as to the ejection from the temple of the buyers and sellers. Mark therefore passed over what was done the first day when He entered into the temple, and on remembering it inserted it, when he had said that He found nothing on the figtree but leaves, which was done on the second day, as both testify. Wherefore it is added, “For they feared Him, because all the people were astonished at His doctrine. For He taught themas one having authority, and not as the Sc…

De Con. Evan, ii, 67: John, however, relates this in a very different order, wherefore it is manifest that not once only, but twice, this was done by the Lord, and that the first time was related by John, the last, by all the other three.
de Con. Evan, ii, 68: In this again, Mark does not keep the same order as Matthew; because however Matthew connects the facts together by this sentence, “And He left them, and went out of the city into Bethany,” returning from whence in the morning, according to his relation, Christ cursed the tree, therefore it is supposed with greater probability that he rather has kept to the order of time, as to the ejection from the temple of the buyers and sellers. Mark therefore passed over what was done the first day when He entered into the temple, and on remembering it inserted it, when he had said that He found nothing on the figtree but leaves, which was done on the second day, as both testify. Wherefore it is added, “For they feared Him, because all the people were astonished at His doctrine. For He taught themas one having authority, and not as the Scribes” and Pharisees, as is said elsewhere.

Mark 11:20-21

(de Con. Evan. ii. 68) The meaning is not that it dried up at the time, when they saw it, but immediately after the word of the Lord; for they saw it, not beginning to dry up, but completely dried up; and they thus understood that it had withered immediately after our Lord spoke.

(as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274) Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Mark 11:23

Note that Jesus said “for him,” not “for me,” and not “for the Father.” Yet it is certain that no human being does such a thing without God’s gift and workings. Mark well that even if no actual instances of perfect righteousness may be found among humans, that does not rule out perfect righteousness as if it were formally impossible. For it might have been realized if only sufficient responsive willing had been applied, enough to suffice for so great a deed.

ON THE SPIRIT AND THE LETTER 63

Mark 11:28

Fearing a stoning, but fearing more an admission of the truth, they answered the truth with a lie, reminiscent of the Scripture: “injustice has lied within herself.” For they said, “We know not.” And because they had shut themselves up against him, by asserting that they did not know what they knew, the Lord did not open up to them because they did not knock. For it has been said, “Knock and it will be opened to you.” But they not only had not knocked that it might be opened, but by their denial they barricaded the door itself against themselves. And the Lord said to them, “Neither do I tell you by what authority I do these things.”

TRACTATE ON JOHN 2.9

Mark 12:7

But how will you insure that the inheritance will be yours? Merely because you killed him? Hold on! You in fact did kill him, yet the inheritance is still not yours. Do you not recall the Psalm which says: “I lie down and sleep,” and then adds, “I wake again”? did you miss that point? While you were gloating that you had killed him, he was sleeping. The Psalm says: “I slept.” Just while they were raging and would kill me, what was I doing? “I slept.” And if I had not willed it, I would not even have slept, for “I have power to lay down my life, and I have power to take it up again.” So let the oppressors rage. Let the earth even be “given into the hands of the wicked,” let the flesh be left to the hands of persecutors, let them suspend him on wood with nails transfixed, pierced with a spear. The one who lies down and sleeps simply adds: “I rise again.”

ON PSALM 41: ON THE FEAST OF THE MARTYRS 9

Mark 12:9

(de Con. Evan. ii. 70) Matthew indeed subjoins that they answered and said, He will miserably destroy those wicked men, (Matt. 21:41) which Mark here says was not their answer, but that the Lord after putting the question, as it were answered Himself. But we may easily understand either that their answer was subjoined without the insertion of, they answered, or they said, which at the same time was implied; or else, that their answer, being the truth, was attributed to the Lord, since He also Himself gave this answer concerning them, being the Truth.

(as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274) Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Mark 12:16

The image of the Emperor appears differently in his son and in a piece of coin. The coin has no knowledge of its bearing the image of the prince. But you are the coin of God, and so far highly superior, as possessing mind and even life, so as to know the One whose image you bear.

SERMONS ON NEW TESTAMENT LESSONS 43

Mark 12:17

Caesar seeks his image; render it. God seeks his image; render it. Do not withhold from Caesar his coin. Do not keep from God his coin. To this they could not think of anything to answer. For they had been sent to slander him. And they went back saying: No one could answer him. Why? Because he had shattered their teeth in their mouth.

ON THE PSALMS 58.8

Mark 12:17

We are God’s money. But we are like coins that have wandered away from the treasury. What was once stamped upon us has been worn down by our wandering. The One who restamps his image upon us is the One who first formed us. He himself seeks his own coin, as Caesar sought his coin. It is in this sense that he says, “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s,” to Caesar his coins, to God your very selves.

TRACTATE ON JOHN 40.9

Mark 12:24

The Sadducees do not have our hope for the resurrection, since they “know neither the scriptures nor the power of God,” who is able to restore what is lost, to raise what is dead to life, to revive what has rotted away, to gather together what is corruptible and finite. The Lord promised to do this, and he gives as a guarantee the promises he has already fulfilled. So let your faith speak of this to you, since your hope will not be disappointed even though your love may be put to the test.

LETTER 263, TO SAPIDA

Mark 12:28

(de Con. Evan. ii. 73) Nor let it trouble us that Matthew says, that he who addressed this question to the Lord tempted Him; for it may be that though he came as a tempter, yet he was corrected by the answer of the Lord. Or at all events, we must not look upon the temptation as evil, and done with the intention of deceiving an enemy, but rather as the caution of a man who wished to try a thing unknown to him.

(as quoted by Aquinas, AD 1274) Catena Aurea by Aquinas

Mark 12:31

This virtue consists in nothing else but in loving what is worthy of love; it is prudence to choose this, fortitude to be turned from it by no obstacles, temperance to be enticed by no allurements, justice to be diverted by no pride. Why do we choose what we exclusively love, except that we find nothing better? But this is God, and if we prefer or equate any creature with God, we know nothing about loving ourselves. We are made better by approaching closer to him than whom nothing is better. We go to him not by walking, but by loving. We will have him more present to us in proportion as we are able to purify the love by which we draw near to him, for he is not spread through or confined by corporeal space; he is everywhere present and everywhere wholly present, and we go to him not by the motion of our feet but by our conduct. Conduct is not usually discerned by what one knows but by what one loves; good or bad love makes good or bad conduct.

LETTER 155, TO MACEDONIUS

Mark 12:37

For that through which Mary had been made was not dying, but that which was made from Mary was dying. The eternity of [his] divinity was not dying, but the weakness of [his] flesh was dying. Therefore he made that reply, distinguishing in the faith of believers the one who came from the one through whom he came. For he, God and Lord of heaven and earth, came through a woman as his mother. In regard to the fact that he was Lord of the world, Lord of heaven and earth, he was also, of course, Lord of Mary; and in regard to the fact that he was creator of the world, creator of heaven and earth, he was also the creator of Mary. But insofar as it was said, “made of a woman, made under the law,” he was the son of Mary. He was the Lord of Mary, he was the son of Mary; he was the creator of Mary, he was created from Mary. Do not be amazed that he is both son and Lord. For as he was [the son] of Mary, so, also, he was said to be the son of David; indeed the son of David precisely because the son of Mary. Hear the apostle speaking clearly: “who was born of the seed of David, according to the fl…

For that through which Mary had been made was not dying, but that which was made from Mary was dying. The eternity of [his] divinity was not dying, but the weakness of [his] flesh was dying. Therefore he made that reply, distinguishing in the faith of believers the one who came from the one through whom he came. For he, God and Lord of heaven and earth, came through a woman as his mother. In regard to the fact that he was Lord of the world, Lord of heaven and earth, he was also, of course, Lord of Mary; and in regard to the fact that he was creator of the world, creator of heaven and earth, he was also the creator of Mary. But insofar as it was said, “made of a woman, made under the law,” he was the son of Mary. He was the Lord of Mary, he was the son of Mary; he was the creator of Mary, he was created from Mary. Do not be amazed that he is both son and Lord. For as he was [the son] of Mary, so, also, he was said to be the son of David; indeed the son of David precisely because the son of Mary. Hear the apostle speaking clearly: “who was born of the seed of David, according to the flesh.” Hear that he was also the Lord of David; and let David himself say this: “The Lord said to my Lord, ‘Sit at my right hand.’ ” And Jesus himself proposed this to the Jews, and by it refuted them. Therefore just as he was both the son and the Lord of David, the son of David according to the flesh, the Lord of David according to [his] divinity, so he was the son of Mary according to the flesh and the Lord of Mary according to [his] majesty. Because, therefore, she was not the mother of [his] divinity and what she sought would be a miracle through [his] divinity, he answered her, “What is it to me and to you, woman?” But that you may not think that I am denying you as my mother, “My hour has not yet come.” For there shall I acknowledge you when the weakness of which you are the mother has begun to hang on the cross.

TRACTATE ON JOHN 8.9

Mark 12:37

He spoke in the hearing of those whom he wished profitably to instruct on his authority, and to turn away from the teaching of the scribes, whose knowledge of Christ amounted then only to this, that he was made of the seed of David according to the flesh. They did not understand that he was God, and on that ground also the Lord even of David.

HARMONY OF THE GOSPELS 2.74

Mark 12:43

But what, brethren, is more mighty than that not only Zacchaeus should acquire the kingdom of heaven by the half of his goods, but even the widow for two pennies, and that each should possess an equal share there? What is greater than that the same kingdom should be worth treasures to the rich man, and a cup of cold water to the poor?

ON THE PSALMS 112.3