Homilies on the Gospel of St. Matthew

Matt. XIII. 53.

“And it came to pass, that, when Jesus had finished these parables, He departed thence.”

Wherefore said He, “these”? Because He was to speak others besides. And wherefore, again, does He depart? Desiring to sow the word everywhere.

“And when He had come into His own country, He taught them in their synagogue.”

And what does he now call His country? As it seems to me, Nazareth. “For He did not many mighty works there,” it is said, but in Capernaum He did miracles: wherefore He said also, “And thou, Capernaum, which art exalted unto Heaven, shall be brought down to hell; for if the mighty works, which have been done in you, had been done in Sodom, it would have remained until this day.”

But having come there, while He slackens somewhat in His miracles; so as not to inflame them unto more envy, nor to condemn them more grievously, by the aggravation of their unbelief: He yet puts forth a doctrine, having no less of wonder in it than the miracles. For these utterly senseless men, when they ought to have marvelled, and to have been amazed at the power of His words, they on the contrary hold Him cheap, because of him who seemed to be His father; yet we know they had many examples of these things in the former times, and from fathers of no note had seen illustrious children. For so David was the son of a certain mean husbandman, Jesse; and Amos, the child of a goatherd, and himself a goatherd; and Moses too, the lawgiver, had a father very inferior to himself. When they therefore, for this especially, ought to adore and be amazed, that being of such parents He spoke such things, it being quite manifest, that so it was not of man's care, but of God's grace: yet they, what things they should admire Him for, for those they despise Him.

He is moreover continually frequenting the synagogues, lest if He were always abiding in the wilderness, they should the more accuse Him as making a schism, and fighting against their polity. Being amazed therefore, and in perplexity, they said, “Whence has this man this wisdom, and these powers?” either calling the miracles powers, or even the wisdom itself. “Is not this the carpenter's son?” The greater then the marvel, and the more abundant the ground of amaze. “Is not His mother called Mary, and His brethren James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas? And His sisters, are they not all with us? Whence has this man these things? And they were offended in Him.”

Do you see that Nazareth was where He was discoursing? “Are not his brethren,” it is said, “such a one, and such a one?” And what of this? Why, by this especially you ought to have been led on to faith. But envy you see is a poor base thing, and often falls foul of itself. For what things were strange and marvellous, and enough to have gained them over, these offended them.

What then says Christ unto them? “A prophet,” says He, “is not without honor, save in his own country, and in his own house: and He did not,” it is said, “many mighty works, because of their unbelief.” But Luke says, “And He did not there many miracles.” And yet it was to be expected He should have done them. For if the feeling of wonder towards Him was gaining ground (for indeed even there He was marvelled at), wherefore did He not do them? Because He looked not to the display of Himself, but to their profit. Therefore when this succeeded not, He overlooked what concerned Himself, in order not to aggravate their punishment.

And yet see after how long a time He came to them, and after how great a display of miracles: but not even so did they endure it, but were inflamed again with envy.

Wherefore then did He yet do a few miracles? That they might not say, “Physician, heal yourself.” That they might not say, “He is a foe and an enemy to us, and overlooks His own;” that they might not say, “If miracles had been wrought, we also should have believed.” Therefore He both wrought them, and stayed: the one, that He might fulfill His own part; the other, that He might not condemn them the more.

And consider thou the power of His words, herein at least, that possessed as they were by envy, they did yet admire. And as with regard to His works, they do not find fault with what is done, but feign causes which have no existence, slaying, “In Beelzebub He casts out the devils;” even so here too, they find no fault with the teaching, but take refuge in the meanness of His race.

But mark thou, I pray you, the Master's gentleness, how He reviles them not, but with great mildness says, “A prophet is not without honor, save in his own country.” And neither here did He stop, but added, “And in his own house.” To me it appears, that with covert reference to His very own brethren, He made this addition.

But in Luke He puts examples also of this, saying, that neither did Elias come unto His own, but to the stranger widow; neither by Eliseus was any other leper healed, but the stranger Naaman; and Israelites neither received benefit, nor conferred benefit, but the foreigners. And these things He says, signifying in every instance their evil disposition, and that in His case nothing new is taking place.

2. “At that time Herod the tetrarch heard of the fame of Jesus.” For Herod the king, this man's father, he that slew the children, was dead.

But not without a purpose does the evangelist signify the time, but to make you observe also the haughtiness of the tyrant, and his thoughtlessness, in that not at the beginning did he inform himself about Christ, but after a very long time. For such are they that are in places of power, and are encompassed with much pomp, they learn these things late, because they do not make much account of them.

But mark thou, I pray you, how great a thing virtue is, that he was afraid of him even when dead, and out of his fear he speaks wisely even concerning a resurrection.

“For he said,” it is mentioned, “unto his servants, This is John, whom I slew, he is risen from the dead, and therefore the mighty powers do work in him.” Do you see the intensity of his fear? For neither then did he dare to publish it abroad, but he still speaks but to his own servants.

But yet even this opinion savored of the soldier, and was absurd. For many besides had risen from the dead, and no one had wrought anything of the kind. And his words seem to me to be the language both of vanity, and of fear. For such is the nature of unreasonable souls, they admit often a mixture of opposite passions.

But Luke affirms that the multitudes said, “This is Elias, or Jeremias, or one of the old prophets,” but he, as uttering forsooth something wiser than the rest, made this assertion.

But it is probable that before this, in answer to them that said He was John (for many had said this too), he had denied it, and said, “I slew him,” priding himself and glorying in it. For this both Mark and Luke report that he said, “John I beheaded.” But when the rumor prevailed, then he too says the same as the people.

Then the evangelist relates to us also the history. And what might his reason be for not introducing it as a subject by itself? Because all their labor entirely was to tell what related to Christ, and they made themselves no secondary work besides this, except it were again to contribute to the same end. Therefore neither now would they have mentioned the history were it not on Christ's account, and because Herod said, “John is risen again.”

But Mark says, that Herod exceedingly honored the man, and this, when reproved. So great a thing is virtue.

Then his narrative proceeds thus: “For Herod had laid hold on John, and bound him, and put him in prison, for Herodias' sake, his brother Philip's wife. For John said unto him, It is not lawful for you to have her. And when he would have put him to death, he feared the people, because they counted him as a prophet.”

And wherefore does he not address his discourse at all to her, but to the man? Because it depended more on him.

But see how inoffensive he makes his accusation, as relating a history rather than bringing a charge.