1. Then came to Jesus scribes and Pharisees, which were of Jerusalem, saying,
2. Why do your disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread.
RABAN; The men of Gennezareth and the less reamed believe; but they who seem to be wise come to dispute with Him; according to that, you have hid these things from the wise and prudent, and has revealed them to babes. Whence it is said, Then came to him from Jerusalem Scribes and Pharisees.
AUG; The Evangelist thus constructs the order of his narrative, Then came to him, that, as appeared in the passage over the lake, the order of the events that followed that might be shown.
CHRYS; For this reason also the Evangelist marks the time that He may show their iniquity overcome by nothing; for they came to Him at a time when He had wrought many miracles, when He had healed the sick by the touch of His hem. That the Scribes and Pharisees are here said to have come from Jerusalem, it should be known that they were dispersed through all the tribes, but those that dwelt in the Metropolis were worse than the others, their higher dignity inspiring them with a greater degree of pride.
REMIG; They were faulty for two reasons ; because they had come from Jerusalem, from the holy city; and because they were elders of the people, and doctors of the Law, and had not come to learn but to reprove the Lord; for it is added, saying, Why do your disciples transgress the tradition of the elders?
JEROME; Wonderful infatuation of the Pharisees and Scribes! They accuse the Son of God that He does not keep the traditions and commandments of men.
CHRYS; Observe, how they are taken in their own question. They say not, 'Why do they transgress the Law of Moses?' but, the tradition of the elders; whence it is manifest that the Priests had introduced many new things, although Moses had said, you shall not add ought to the word which I set before you this day, neither shall you take ought away from it; and when they ought to have been set free from observances, then they bound themselves by many more; fearing lest any should take away their rule and power, they sought to increase the awe in which they were held, by setting themselves forth as legislators.
REMIG; Of what kind these traditions were, Mark shows when he says, The Pharisees and all the Jews, except they wash their hands oft, eat not. Here then also they find fault with the disciples, saying, For they wash not their hands when they eat bread.
BEDE; Taking carnally those words of the Prophets, in which it is said, Wash, and be you clean, they observed it only in washing the body; hence they had laid it down that we ought not to eat with unwashed hands.
JEROME; But the hands that are to be washed are the acts not of the body, but of the mind; that the word of God may be done in them.
CHRYS; But the disciples now did not eat with washed hands, because they already despise all things superfluous, and attended only to such as were necessary; thus they accepted neither washing nor not washing as a rule, but did either as it happened. For how should they who even neglected the food that was necessary for them, have any care about this rite?
REMIG; Or the Pharisees found fault with the Lord's disciples, not concerning that washing which we do from ordinary habit, and of necessity, but of that superfluous washing which was invented by the tradition of the elders.
10. And he called the multitude, and said to them, Hear, and understand:
11. Not that which goes into the mouth defiles a man; but that which comes out of the mouth, this defiles a man.
CHRYS; Having added weight to His accusation of the Pharisees by the testimony of the Prophet, and not having amended them, He now ceases to speak to them, and turns to the multitudes, And he called the multitude, and said to them, Hear and understand. Because He was about to set before them a high dogma, and full of much philosophy, He does not utter it nakedly, but so frames His speech that it should be received by them.
First, by exhibiting anxiety on their account, which the Evangelist expresses by the words, And he called the multitude to him. Secondly, the time He chooses recommends His speech; after the victory He has just gained over the Pharisees. And He not merely calls the multitude to Him, but rouses their attention by the words, Hear and understand; that is, Attend, and give your minds to what you are to hear. But He said not to them, The observance of meats is nothing; nor, Moses bade you wrongly; but in the way of warning and advice, drawing His testimony from natural things; Not what enters in at the mouth defiles a man, but what goes forth of the mouth that defiles a man.
JEROME; The word here 'makes a man common' is peculiar to Scripture, and is not hackneyed in common parlance. The Jewish nation, boasting themselves to be a part of God, call those meats common, of which all men partake; for example, swine's flesh, shell fish, hares, and those species of animals that do not divide the hoof, and chew the cud, and among the fish such as have not scales. Hence in the Acts of the Apostles we read, What God has cleansed, that call not you common. Common then in this sense is that which is free to the rest of mankind, and as though not in part of God, is therefore called unclean.
AUG; This declaration of the Lord, Not that which enters into the mouth defiles a man, is not contrary to the Old Testament. As the Apostle also speaks, To the pure all things are pure; and Every creature of God, is good. Let the Manicheans understand, if they can, that the Apostle said this of the very natures and qualities of things; while that letter (of the ritual law) declared certain animals unclean, not in their nature but typically, for certain figures which were needed for a time.
Therefore to take an instance in the swine and the lamb, by nature both are clean, because naturally every creature of God is good; but in a certain typical meaning the lamb is clean, and the swine unclean. Take the two words, 'fool,' and 'wise,' in their own nature, as sounds, or letters, both of them are pure, but one of them because of the meaning attached to it, not because of any thing in its own nature may be said to be impure. And perhaps what the swine are in typical representation, that among mankind is the fool; and the animal, and this word of two syllables (stultus) signify someone and the same thing.
That animal is reckoned unclean in the law because it does not chew the cud; but this is not its fault but its nature. But the men of whom this animal is the emblem, are impure by their own fault, not by nature; they readily hear the words of wisdom, but never think upon them again. Whatever of profit you may hear, to summon this up from the internal region of the memory through the sweetness of recollection into the mouth of thought, what is this but spiritually to chew the cud? They who do not this are represented by this species of animal.
Such resemblances as these in speech, or in ceremonies, having figurative signification, profitably and pleasantly move the rational mind; but by the former people, many such things were not only to be heard, but to be kept as precepts. For that was a time when it is necessary not in words only, but in deeds, to prophesy those things which hereafter were to be revealed. When these had been revealed through Christ, and in Christ, the burdens of observances were not imposed on the faith of the Gentiles; but the authority of the prophecy was yet confirmed. But I ask of the Manicheans, whether this declaration of the Lord, when He said that a man is not defiled by what enters into his mouth, is true or false? If false, why then does their doctor Adimantus bring it forward against the Old Testament? If true, why contrary to its tenor do they consider that they are thus defiled?
JEROME; The thoughtful reader may here object and say, If that which enters into the mouth defiles not a man, why do we not feed on meats offered to idols? Be it known then that meats and every creature of God is in itself clean; but the invocation of idols and demons makes them unclean with those at least who with conscience of the idol eat that which is offered to idols; and their conscience being weak is polluted, as the Apostle says.
REMIG; But if any one's faith be so strong that he understands that God's creature can in no way be defiled, let him eat what he will, after the food has been hallowed by the word of God and of prayer; yet so that this his liberty be not made au offense to the weak, as the Apostle speaks.
12. Then came his disciples, and said to him, Did you know that the Pharisees were offended, after they heard this saying?
13. But he answered and said, Every plant, which my heavenly Father has not planted, shall be rooted up.
14. Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.
JEROME; 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.
CHRYS; When the Pharisees heard the things that went before, they made no reply to them, because He had so mightily overthrown them, not only refuting their arguments, but detecting their fraud, but they, not the multitudes, were offended at them; Then came his disciples to him and said, did you know that the Pharisees were offended after they heard this saying?
JEROME; As this word 'scandalum' (offense or stumbling block) 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, Who by word or deed has given an occasion of falling to any.
CHRYS; Christ does not remove the stumbling block out of the way of the Pharisees, but rather rebukes them; as it follows, But he answered and said, Every plant which my heavenly Father has not planted shall be rooted up. This Manichaeus affirmed was spoken of the Law, but what has been already said is a sufficient refutation of this. For if He had said this of the Law, how would He have above contended for the Law, easing, Why transgress you the commandment of God through your tradition? Or would He have cited the Prophet? Or how, if God said, Honor your father and your mother, is not this, being spoken in the Law, a plant of God?
HILARY; What He intends then by a plant not planted of Hid Father, is that tradition of men under cover of which the Law had been transgressed, this He instructs them must be rooted up.
REMIG; Every false doctrine and superstitious observance with the workers thereof cannot endure; and because it is not from God the Father, it shall be rooted up with the same. And that only shall endure which is of God.
JEROME; Shall that plant also be rooted up of which the Apostle says, I planted, Apollos watered? The question is answered by what follows, but God gave the increase. He says also, you 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 has 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 you a true vine, wholly a right seed, how then art you turned into the bitterness of a strange vine? 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 w as planted, none other can root it up unless its own will consents thereto.
GLOSS; Or, the plant here spoken of may be the doctors of the Law with their followers, who had not Christ for their foundation. Why they are to be rooted up, He adds, Let them alone; they are blind, leaders of the blind.
RABAN; They are blind, that is, they want the light of God's commandments; and they are leaders of the blind, inasmuch as they draw others headlong, erring, and leading into error whence it is added, If the blind lead the blind, they both fall into the ditch.
JEROME; 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. To the same end the Savior commands evil teachers to be left to their own will, knowing that it is hardly that they can be brought to the truth.
Catena Aurea Matthew 15