Matteo 11:8 Commento

In this chapter we have, I. The constant and unwearied diligence of our Lord Jesus in his great work of preaching the gospel (Mat 11:1). II. His discourse with the disciples of John concerning his being the Messiah (Mat 11:2-6). III. The honourable testimony that Christ bore to John Baptist (Mat 11:7-15). IV. The sad account he gives of that generation in general, and of some particular places with reference to the success, both of John's ministry and of his own (v. 16-24). V. His thanksgiving to his Father for the wise and gracious method he had taken in revealing the great mysteries of the gospel (v. 25, 26). VI. His gracious call and invitation of poor sinners to come to him, and to be ruled, and taught, and saved by him (v. 27-30). No Where have we more of the terror of gospel woes for warning to us, or of the sweetness of gospel grace for encouragement to us, than in this chapter, which sets before us life and death, the blessing and the curse.

And it came to pass,.... In the course of things, and as before determined and resolved on, that when Jesus had made an end of commanding his twelve disciples; when he had given them a commission to preach the Gospel, had finished all his instructions he thought fit to give them, and orders he enjoined them, relating to that work; as where they should go, what they should say, how they should behave, and what treatment they should meet with; and had given them all proper advice and encouragement, he departed thence, from the place where he then was: he did not desist either from the ministry of the word, or from working of miracles, but went out into other parts of the country, to teach and to preach in their cities: meaning either in the cities of the Jews, or in the cities of his disciples; and these, either the cities they belonged to, from whence they came, namely, the cities of Galilee; for the disciples were Galilaeans, and in which parts Christ now was; or else the cities where he sent them to preach first, and then came himself, and confirmed their doctrine by his own ministry and miracles.

But what went ye out for to see?.... Since it was not any thing so mean as a shaking reed, or so grand as a man in gay clothing, pray what was it you went out to see? A prophet? This was the truth of the matter, they expected to see a prophet, and they believed he was one; this was the common voice of the people; all held John to be a prophet. This made Herod afraid to put him to death, and the Pharisees to speak against his baptism: now, though this was giving him a great character, to believe and own him to be a prophet, yet it did not come up to his full character. Yea, I say unto you, and more than a prophet; when they saw him, they saw not only a prophet, but one that was greater, and more excellent than any of the prophets that went before him: they prophesied of the Messiah at a distance, and in words not so clear, and easy to be understood; they spoke of him as to come, but he pointed him out with his finger, and declared that he was come; he saw him himself, and showed him to others; he saw the Spirit of God descending on him, and he himself baptized him; his office, as the harbinger of Christ, and the administrator of the ordinance of baptism to him, gave him a preference to all the prophets; and was such an one, as never any man was vested with but himself.

That Lord walked in humility and obscurity, with no definite home: for "the Son of man," said He, "hath not where to lay His head; " unadorned in dress, for else He had not said, "Behold, they who are clad in soft raiment are in kings' houses: " in short, inglorious in countenance and aspect, just as Isaiah withal had fore-announced. If, also, He exercised no right of power even over His own followers, to whom He discharged menial ministry; if, in short, though conscious of His own kingdom, He shrank back from being made a king, He in the fullest manner gave His own an example for turning coldly from all the pride and garb, as well of dignity as of power.

Now His meaning is like this: He was not of himself a waverer; and this ye yourselves showed by your earnestness. Much less could any one say this, that he was indeed firm, but having made himself a slave to luxury, he afterwards became languid. For among men, some are such as they are of themselves, others become so; for instance, one man is passionate by nature, and another from having fallen into a long illness gets this infirmity. Again, some men are flexible and fickle by nature, while others become so by being slaves to luxury, and by living effeminately. "But John," saith He, "neither was such a character by nature, for neither was it a reed that ye went out to see; nor by giving himself to luxury did he lose the advantage he possessed." For that he did not make himself a slave to luxury, his garb shows, and the wilderness, and the prison. Since, had he been minded to wear soft raiment, he would not have lived in the wilderness, nor in the prison, but in the king's courts: it being in his power, merely by keeping silence, to have enjoyed honor without limit. For since Herod so reverenced him, even when he had rebuked him, and was in chains, much more would he have courted him, had he held his peace. You see, he had indeed given proof of his firmness and fortitude; and how could he justly incur suspicions of that kind? Then lest they should say, "But what if at that time indeed he were such an one, but now is changed?" He added also what follows; his garments, his prison, and together with these the prophecy.

If the Lord had intended a higher meaning unfavorable to John, as many imagine that he did, in saying “Blessed is the one who takes no offense at me,” why does he now speak about John with highest praise? Because the crowd that was present did not know the inner purpose of John’s question. They thought John doubted Christ, although he himself had prophesied about him. Now the crowd learns that John asked not on his own behalf but on that of his disciples. “Why did you go out into the wilderness?” To see a man like a reed who is blown about by every wind, a man so irresolute that he cannot make up his mind about what he himself previously predicted? Or else, perhaps he is pricked by the goad of his envy for me, and his preaching runs after an empty fame, and he covets the money he may get by it? But why should this man desire wealth for abundance of feasting? He feeds on locusts and wild honey. Or wealth to wear soft clothes? His clothes are made of camel’s hair. But people who are flatterers, and run after money, and covet wealth, and overflow with luxury and wear soft clothes—such people live in the palaces of kings. Thus it is shown that the austere way of life and the strict preaching must avoid the halls of kings and turn away from the palaces of the luxurious.

(Verse 8.) But what did you go out to see, a prophet? Yes, I tell you, and more than a prophet. In him, John is greater than the other prophets, because while they had predicted someone who was to come, he pointed to the one who has already come, saying: Behold the Lamb of God, behold him who takes away the sins of the world. And because to the privilege of being a prophet, John added the reward of baptizing his Lord, it follows that he increased in merits, fulfilling the testimony of Malachi, in which even an angel is prophesied (Mal. II). However, here the term 'angel' cannot be understood as referring to John by nature, but rather by the dignity of his office, that is, as a messenger who announced the coming of the Lord.

This teaches that an austere life and strict preaching ought to shun kings' courts and the palaces of the rich and luxurious.

Mystically; By the garment wherewith his body is clothed is his mind shown, that it is lost in luxury and self-indulgence. The kings are the fallen angels; they are they who are powerful in this life, and the lords of this world. Thus, They that are clothed in soft raiment are in kings' houses; that is, those whose bodies are enervated and destroyed by luxury, it is clear are possessed by dæmons.

(Doctr. Christ. iii. 12.) In all such things we blame not the use of the things, but the lust of those that use them. For whoever uses the good things in his reach more sparingly than are the habits of those with whom he lives, is either temperate or superstitious. Whoever again uses them in a measure exceeding the practice of the good among whom he lives, either has some meaning therein, or else is dissolute.

But still more is added about the description of him: "But what did you go out into the desert to see? A man clothed in soft garments? Behold, those who are clothed in soft garments are in the houses of kings." For John is described as having been clothed in woven camel's hair. And what does it mean to say, "Behold, those who are clothed in soft garments are in the houses of kings," except to demonstrate by a clear statement that those who flee from enduring hardships for God do not serve the heavenly King but an earthly one, but rather, devoted only to external things, they seek the softness and pleasure of the present life? Therefore let no one think that there is no sin in the extravagance and pursuit of clothing, because if this were not a fault, the Lord would in no way have praised John for the roughness of his garment. If this were not a fault, the apostle Peter would never have restrained women through his epistle from the desire for costly garments, saying: "Not in costly apparel." Consider, therefore, what a fault it is for men also to desire that from which the pastor of the Church took care to prohibit even women. Although what is said about John not being clothed in soft garments can also be understood in another way through its symbolic meaning. For he was not clothed in soft garments because he did not nurture the life of sinners with flatteries, but rebuked them with the force of harsh denunciation, saying: "Brood of vipers, who has shown you how to flee from the wrath to come?" Hence it is also said through Solomon: "The words of the wise are like goads, and like nails driven deep." For the words of the wise are compared to nails and goads because they do not know how to caress the faults of sinners, but to pierce them.

(Hom. in Ev. vi. 3.) Let no one suppose that there is nothing sinful in luxury and rich dress; if pursuit of such things had been blameless, the Lord would not have thus commended John for the coarseness of his raiment, nor would Peter have checked the desire of fine clothes in women as he does, Not in costly raiment. (1 Pet. 3:3) (ubi. sup.) Also John was not clothed in soft raiment, that is, he did not encourage sinners in their sinful life by speaking smooth things, but rebuked them with sharpness and rigour, saying, Generation of vipers, &c. (Mat. 3:7)

Denying them any basis for saying that John later became soft by giving himself over to luxury, He says, This cannot be; that his clothing is made of hair shows that he is an enemy of luxury. For if he were wearing soft clothing and living in kings' houses, if he so desired luxury he would not be in prison. So then, learn that it does not befit a true Christian to wear luxurious clothing.

Likewise, he is not inconstant as seeking profit. Why then did you go out? For all riches pertain to some bodily use, such as food or clothing. And it is evident that neither of these had any influence. Therefore, there is no reason to believe that he says this for any advantage: Why then did you go out? To see a man clothed in soft raiment? But why does he make no mention of food? Because there was no question on that point. But he was clothed in camel's hair. Hence those who wear soft raiment are not in the desert but in kings' houses. Chrysostom explains it another way: Some are lightheaded by nature, others from pleasure, as Hosea (4:11) says: "Fornication and wine and intoxication take away understanding." He removes the first by what he said above; the second, when he says, wear soft garments; therefore, he is not inconstant from the pleasures of life. But here a question can be raised about being clothed in pleasures: Is it a sin? If not, it should not have been charged against that rich man, who dressed in purple and fine linen every day (Lk 16:19). Augustine says that such things are not to be considered, but the intention of the user; for one should be dressed after the custom of those among whom he lives. Therefore, the custom needs further clarification. Hence some dress more sparingly, some more ornately; and both ways require a distinction. If more sparingly, then it is either for a good intention, and this is good, or is for vainglory, and this is evil. If more ornately, it is on account of pride, and this is evil; or for a symbol, as a bishop or priest, and this is good. Mystically, by men who wear soft garments are signified flatterers; for he is dressed in soft garments who is mollified by complimentary words, as proud men seek glory from words: "If a ruler listens to the words of a lie, all his officials will be wicked" (Pr 29:12).

THE IMPRISONED BAPTIST'S MESSAGE TO HIS MASTER--THE REPLY, AND DISCOURSE, ON THE DEPARTURE OF THE MESSENGERS, REGARDING JOHN AND HIS MISSION. ( = Luke 7:18-35). (Mat. 11:1-19) And it came to pass, when Jesus had made an end of commanding his twelve disciple--rather, "the twelve disciples," he departed thence to teach and to preach in their cities--This was scarcely a fourth circuit--if we may judge from the less formal way in which it was expressed--but, perhaps, a set of visits paid to certain places, either not reached at all before, or too rapidly passed through, in order to fill up the time till the return of the Twelve. As to their labors, nothing is said of them by our Evangelist. But Luke (Luk 9:6) says, "They departed, and went through, the towns," or "villages," "preaching the Gospel, and healing everywhere." Mark (Mar 6:12-13), as usual, is more explicit: "And they went out, and preached that men should repent. And they cast out many devils (demons) and anointed with oil many that were sick, and healed them." Though this "anointing with oil" was not mentioned in our Lord's instructions--at least in any of the records of them--we know it to have been practiced long after this in the apostolic Church (see Jam 5:14, and compare Mar 6:12-13) --not medicinally, but as a sign of the healing virtue which was communicated by their hands, and a symbol of something still more precious. It was unction, indeed, but, as BENGEL remarks, it was something very different from what Romanists call extreme unction. He adds, what is very probable, that they do not appear to have carried the oil about with them, but, as the Jews used oil as a medicine, to have employed it just as they found it with the sick, in their own higher way.