Jerome
Nicene & Post-Nicene · AD 325–500 · 5,299 passages across 63 books
Commentary
Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man.
(Verse 11.) It is not what enters into the mouth that defiles a person; but what proceeds out of the mouth, this defiles a person. The word, properly speaking, is communicated through Scripture and is not worn out in everyday conversation. The Jewish people, boasting to be a part of God, call common foods, which all humans use, 'unclean.' For example, pork, oysters, rabbits, and other animals that do not have split hooves, do not chew the cud, and are not scale-covered in fish. And it is also written in the Acts of the Apostles: 'What God has cleansed, you must not call common' (Acts 10:15). Therefore, that which is commonly available to other people, and is as if it is not from God's side, is called impure. It is not what enters the mouth that defiles a person, but what comes out of the mouth that defiles a person. Let a wise reader oppose and say: If what enters the mouth does not defile a person, then why do we not eat idol-offerings? And the Apostle writes: You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons (1 Corinthians 10:20). Therefore, it must be understood that whil…
Then came his disciples, and said unto him, Knowest thou that the Pharisees were offended, after they heard this saying?
In one of the Lord's discourses the whole superstition of Jewish observances had been cut down. They placed their whole religion in using or abstaining from certain meats. As this word 'scandalum' (offence or stumblingblock) is of such frequent use in ecclesiastical writings, we will shortly explain it. We might render it in Latin, 'offendiculum,' or 'ruina,' or 'impactio;' and so when we read, Whosoever shall scandalize, we understand, Whoso by word or deed has given an occasion of falling to any. Shall that plant also be rooted up of which the Apostle says, I planted, Apollos watered? (1 Cor. 3:6.) The question is answered by what follows, but God gave the increase. He says also, Ye are God's husbandry, a building of God; and in another place, We are workers together of God. And if when Paul plants, and Apollos waters, they are in so doing workers together with God, then God plants and waters together with them. This passage is abused by some who apply it at once to two different kinds of men; they say, 'If every plant, which the Father hath not planted shall be rooted up, then t…
As this word 'scandalum' (offence or stumblingblock) is of such frequent use in ecclesiastical writings, we will shortly explain it. We might render it in Latin, 'offendiculum,' or 'ruina,' or 'impactio;' and so when we read, Whosoever shall scandalize, we understand, Whoso by word or deed has given an occasion of falling to any.
Shall that plant also be rooted up of which the Apostle says, I planted, Apollos watered? (1 Cor. 3:6.) The question is answered by what follows, but God gave the increase. He says also, Ye are God's husbandry, a building of God; and in another place, We are workers together of God. And if when Paul plants, and Apollos waters, they are in so doing workers together with God, then God plants and waters together with them. This passage is abused by some who apply it at once to two different kinds of men; they say, 'If every plant, which the Father hath not planted shall be rooted up, then that which He has planted cannot be rooted up.' But let them hear these words of Jeremiah, I had planted thee a true vine, wholly a right seed, how then art thou turned into the bitterness of a strange vine? (Jer. 2:21.) God indeed has planted it, and none may root up His planting. But since that planting was through the disposition of the will of him which was planted, none other can root it up unless its own will consents thereto.
This is also the same as that Apostolic injunction, A heretic after the first and second admonition reject, knowing that such a one is perverse. (Tit. 3:10, 11.) To the same end the Saviour commands evil teachers to be left to their own will, knowing that it is hardly that they can be brought to the truth.
But he answered and said, Every plant, which my heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be rooted up.
(Verse 13.) But he answered and said, Every plant which my heavenly Father planted not, shall be rooted up. Even those things which seem plain in the Scriptures, are full of questions. Every plant, he says, which my heavenly Father planted not, shall be rooted up. Therefore, that plantation also shall be rooted up, of which the Apostle says, I have planted, Apollos watered (1 Cor. III, 6). But the question is resolved by what follows: But God gave the increase (Ibid., 9). He himself also says: You are God's field, God's building (1 Corinthians 3:9). And in another place: We are God's co-workers. Now if we are co-workers, then God is the one who plants and waters, while Paul and Apollos are only servants who work with God (1 Corinthians 3:6-7). Some people misuse this passage, introducing various interpretations, and say: If the planting that the Father did not plant will be uprooted, then the planting that he did plant cannot be uprooted. But listen to what Jeremiah says: 'I planted a true vineyard, how have you turned into the bitterness of a foreign vine?' (Jeremiah II, 21). Indeed…
Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.
Then answered Peter and said unto him, Declare unto us this parable.
This is also the same as that Apostolic injunction, A heretic after the first and second admonition reject, knowing that such a one is perverse. (Tit. 3:10, 11.) To the same end the Saviour commands evil teachers to be left to their own will, knowing that it is hardly that they can be brought to the truth. He is reproved by the Lord, because He supposed that to be spoken parabolically, which was indeed spoken plainly. Which teaches us that that hearer is to be blamed who would take dark sayings as clear, or clear sayings as obscure. Some cavil at this, that the Lord is ignorant of physical disputation in saying that all food goes into the belly, and is cast out into the draught; for that the food, as soon as it is taken, is distributed through the limbs, the veins, the marrow, and the nerves. But it should be known, that the lighter juices, and liquid food after it has been reduced and digested in the veins and vessels, passes into the lower parts through those passages which the Greeks call 'pores,' and so goes into the draught. The principle therefore of the soul is not accordin…
He is reproved by the Lord, because He supposed that to be spoken parabolically, which was indeed spoken plainly. Which teaches us that that hearer is to be blamed who would take dark sayings as clear, or clear sayings as obscure.
Some cavil at this, that the Lord is ignorant of physical disputation in saying that all food goes into the belly, and is cast out into the draught; for that the food, as soon as it is taken, is distributed through the limbs, the veins, the marrow, and the nerves. But it should be known, that the lighter juices, and liquid food after it has been reduced and digested in the veins and vessels, passes into the lower parts through those passages which the Greeks call 'pores,' and so goes into the draught.
The principle therefore of the soul is not according to Plato in the brain, but according to Christ in the heart, and by this passage we may refute those who think that evil thoughts are suggestions of the Devil, and do not spring from our proper will. The Devil may encourage and abet evil thoughts, but not originate them. And if he be able, being always on the watch, to blow into flame any small spark of thought in us, we should not thence conclude that he searches the hidden places of the heart, but that from our manner and motions he judges of what is passing within us. For instance, if he see us direct frequent looks towards a fair woman, he understands that our heart is wounded through the eye.
Do not ye yet understand, that whatsoever entereth in at the mouth goeth into the belly, and is cast out into the draught?
(Ver. 17, 18.) Do you not understand that everything that enters the mouth goes into the stomach and is expelled into the sewer? But the things that come out of the mouth come from the heart, and those defile a person. All the passages of the Gospels among heretics and evil-doers are full of scandals. And some people falsely accuse this statement, saying that the Lord, ignorant of physical processes, thinks that all foods go into the stomach and are digested there: whereas immediately after being ingested, the nourishment is distributed through the limbs and veins, as well as the marrow and nerves. And so, many people who suffer from a constant stomach disorder, immediately vomit what they have eaten after meals and snacks, and yet they are still corpulent: because at the first touch, more liquid food and drink are poured through the limbs. But while these people want to criticize the ignorance of others, they show their own. For although a thin and liquid food, when it has been cooked and digested in the veins and limbs, passes through the hidden passages of the body, which the Gree…
For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies:
Then Jesus went thence, and departed into the coasts of Tyre and Sidon.
Leaving the Scribes and Pharisees and those cavillers, He passes into the parts of Tyre and Sidon; that He may heal the Tyrians and Sidonians; And Jesus went thence, and departed into the coasts of Tyre and Sidon. Not from pharisaical pride, or the superciliousness of the Scribes, but that He might not seem to contravene His own decision, Go not into the way of the Gentiles. For He was unwilling to give occasion to their cavils, and reserved the complete salvation of the Gentiles for the season of His passion and resurrection. The disciples, as yet ignorant of the mysteries of God or moved by compassion, beg for this Chananæan woman; or perhaps seeking to be rid of her importunity. He says that He is not sent to the Gentiles, but that He is sent first to Israel, so that when they would not receive the Gospel, the passing over to the Gentiles might have just cause. And He adds of the house of Israel, with this design, that we might rightly interpret by this place that other parable concerning the stray sheep. Note how perseveringly this Chananæan woman calls Him first Son of Davi…
Not from pharisaical pride, or the superciliousness of the Scribes, but that He might not seem to contravene His own decision, Go not into the way of the Gentiles. For He was unwilling to give occasion to their cavils, and reserved the complete salvation of the Gentiles for the season of His passion and resurrection.
The disciples, as yet ignorant of the mysteries of God or moved by compassion, beg for this Chananæan woman; or perhaps seeking to be rid of her importunity.
He says that He is not sent to the Gentiles, but that He is sent first to Israel, so that when they would not receive the Gospel, the passing over to the Gentiles might have just cause.
And He adds of the house of Israel, with this design, that we might rightly interpret by this place that other parable concerning the stray sheep.
Note how perseveringly this Chananæan woman calls Him first Son of David, then Lord, and lastly came and worshipped him, as God.
The Gentiles are called dogs because of their idolatry; who, given to the eating of blood, and dead bodies, turn to madness.
Wonderful are shown the faith, patience, and humility of this woman; faith, that she believed that her daughter could be healed; patience, that so many times overlooked, she yet perseveres in her prayers; humility, that she compares herself not to the dogs, but to the whelps. I know, she says, that I do not deserve the children's bread, and that I cannot have whole meat, nor sit at the table with the master of the house, but I am content with that which is left for the whelps, that through humble fragments I may come to the amplitude of the perfect bread.
And the daughter of this Chananæan I suppose to be the souls of believers, who were sorely vexed by a dæmon, not knowing their Creator, and bowing down to stones.
Wonderful change of things! Once Israel the son, and we the dogs; the change in faith has led to a change in the order of our names. Concerning them is that said, Many dogs hare come about me; while to us is said, as to this woman, Thy faith hath made thee whole. (Ps. 22:16.)
Have mercy on me, Lord, son of David. For He knew how to call upon the son of David, because she had already gone out of her borders, and had abandoned the error of the Tyrians and Sidonians by changing their place and faith.
My daughter is being tormented by an evil spirit. I think the Canaanite people believed that those who were tormented by evil spirits were ignorant of the Creator and worshipped stones.
But he answered her not a word. And his disciples came and besought him, saying, Send her away; for she crieth after us.
And his disciples approached him, saying: Send her away because she cries out after us. At that time, the disciples still ignorant of the mysteries of the Lord, either moved by mercy, or desiring to be free from her persistence, were asking for the Canaanite woman, whom another Evangelist calls the Syrophoenician woman (Mark 7), or wanting to avoid her importunity; because she shouted more frequently not for the purpose of calling a compassionate person, but to call for a harsh physician.
But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
Then came she and worshipped him, saying, Lord, help me.
And she said, Truth, Lord: yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their masters' table.
And Jesus departed from thence, and came nigh unto the sea of Galilee; and went up into a mountain, and sat down there.
What the Latin translator calls 'debiles' (maimed), is in the Greek χυλλοὺς which is not a general term for a maimed person, but a peculiar species, as he that is lame in one foot is called 'claudus,' so he that is crippled in one hand is called χυλλός.
He said nothing concerning the maimed, because there was no one word which was the opposite of thisa.
He goes up into the mountain, that as a bird He may entice the tender nestlings to fly.