Matteo 15:5 Commento

In this chapter, we have our Lord Jesus, as the great Prophet teaching, as the great Physician healing, and as the great Shepherd of the sheep feeding; as the Father of spirits instructing them; as the Conqueror of Satan dispossessing him; and as concerned for the bodies of his people, providing for them. Here is, I. Christ's discourse with the scribes and Pharisees about human traditions and injunctions (Mat 15:1-9). II. His discourse with the multitude, and with his disciples, concerning the things that defile a man (Mat 15:10-20). III. His casting of the devil out of the woman of Canaan's daughter (Mat 15:21-28). IV. His healing of all that were brought to him (Mat 15:29-31). V. His feeding of four thousand men, with seven loaves and a few little fishes (Mat 15:32-39).

Then came to Jesus Scribes and Pharisees,.... After he had wrought so many miracles, particularly that of feeding five thousand men; besides women and children, with five loaves and two fishes: the fame of which had reached Jerusalem, and occasioned much talk there about him: the Scribes and Pharisees, who were his inveterate enemies, hearing thereof, came to him, where he was, in Galilee: to know the truth of these things, to converse with him, and to watch, and observe, what he said and did; which were of Jerusalem, saying. There were Scribes and Pharisees throughout the land, but those of Jerusalem were the chief; they were men of the greatest learning and abilities, and were more expert in their religion and customs: these were either sent by the sanhedrim at Jerusalem, or came of themselves; taking upon them a greater power, and authority of examining, correcting, directing, and advising.

But ye say, whosoever shall say to his father or mother,.... That is, it was a tradition of their's, that if a man should say to his father and mother, when poor and in distress, and made application to him for sustenance, it is a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me, and honour not his father, or his mother, he shall be free: or, as Mark expresses it, "it is Corban, that is to say, a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me, he shall be free, and ye suffer him no more to do ought for his father or mother". For the understanding of this tradition, let it be observed, that the word "Corban" signifies a gift, or offering, which was devoted to sacred use; and was unalienable, and could not be converted to any other use; and that this word was used among the Jews, from hence, as the form of an oath, or vow; and therefore, when anyone said "Corban", it was all one, as if he swore by "Corban"; or as if he had said, let it be as "Corban", as unalienable as "Corban": by which oath, or vow, the use of that which was spoken of, whether it respected a man's self, or others, was restrained and prohibited: the rule was (r) this , "if a man said Corban, it was as if he said as Corban, and it was forbidden": and if he used the words "Conem", "Conach", and "Conas", which they call (s) the surnames of Corban, and were no other than corruptions of it, it was all one as if he had said "Corban" itself. There are many instances of this kind of vows, and the form of them in their oral law (t), or book of traditions; "If anyone should say, , "Conem (or "Corban") whatsoever I might be profited by the" sons of Noah, it is free of an Israelite, and forbidden of a Gentile; if he should say, "whatsoever I might be profited" by the seed of Abraham, it is forbidden of an Israelite, and is free of a Gentile--if anyone should say, , "Conem (or "Corban") whatsoever I might be profited by the uncircumcised", it is free of the uncircumcised of Israel, and forbidden of the circumcised of the Gentiles; if he says "Conem (or "Corban") whatsoever I might be profited by the circumcised", it is forbidden of the circumcised of Israel, and free of the circumcised, of the Gentiles.'' Again (u), "if anyone says to his friend, , "Conem (or "Corban") whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me", &c.'' which is exactly the same form as here, unless it should be rather rendered, "whatsoever I might be profited by thee": once more (w), "if a married woman should say to her husband, "Conem (or Corban) whatsoever I might be profited by my father, or thy father, &c".'' Let these instances suffice: the plain and evident sense of the tradition before us, is this; that when, upon application being made to a man by his parents, for support and sustenance, he makes a vow in such form as this, "Corban, whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me"; that is, whatsoever profit or advantage thou mightest have, or expect to have from me, let it be as "Corban", as a gift devoted to God, that can never be revoked and converted to another use; or, in other words, I vow and protest thou shalt never have any profit from me, not a penny, nor a pennyworth of mine. Now, when a man had made such an impious vow as this, according to this tradition, it was to stand firm and good, and he was not to honour his father or mother, or do anything for them, by way of relief: so that our Lord might justly observe upon it as he does; thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect, by your tradition: for if such a vow was valid, and a man was obliged to abide by it, according to the tradition of the elders, and not honour his father and mother, as the law of God requires; it is a plain case, that the command of God was made void by this tradition: nay they expressly say (x) that , "vows fall upon things of a (divine) commandment", as well as upon things in a man's power, and that he is bound by them; so that without sin he cannot do what the law commands; insomuch, that if a man vows a vow, and that it may be ratified, a command must be made void, his vow must stand, and the command be abrogated. So truly and justly does Christ charge them with making the command of God of none effect, by their tradition. It is indeed disputed by the doctors, and at last allowed, that such a vow might be dissolved by a wise man, for the honour of parents (y). "R. Eliezer says, they open to a man, (i.e. the door of repentance, and dissolve his vow,) for the honour of his father and his mother, but the wise men forbid "it". Says R. Tzadok, if they open to him for the honour of his father and mother, they will open to him for the honour of God, and if so, there will be no vows: however, the wise men agreed with R. Eliezer in the affair between a man and his parents, that they should open to him for the honour of them.'' And this could be done only by a wise man; and very probably this last decree was made on account of this just reproof of Christ's, being ashamed any longer to countenance so vile a practice; and even, according to this determination, the vow stood firm till dissolved by of their doctors: so that notwithstanding, Christ's argument is good, and the instance full to prove that for which he brought it: for the above reason it may be, it is, that this tradition Christ refers to is not now extant; but that there was such an one in Christ's time, is certain; he would never have asserted it else; and had it not been true, the Pharisees would have been able to have retired him, and forward enough to have done it: and that such vows were sometimes made, and which were not to be rescinded, is clear from the following fact (z). "It happened to one in Bethhoron, "whose father was excluded, by a vow, from receiving any profit from him": and he married his son, and said to his friend, a court and a dinner are given to thee by gift; but they are not to be made use of by thee, but with this condition, that my father may come and eat with us at dinner;'' which was a device to have his father at dinner, and yet secure his vow. Upon the whole, the sense of this passage is, not that a man excused himself to his parents, according to this tradition, by saying, that his substance, either in whole, or in part, was "Corban", or devoted to the service of God, and therefore they could expect no profit, or relief, from him; but that he vowed that what he had should be as "Corban", and they should be never the better for it: so that a man so vowing might give nothing to the service of God, but keep his whole substance to himself; which he might make use of for his own benefit, and for the benefit of others, but not for his father and mother; who, after such a vow made, were to receive no benefit by it, unless rescinded by a wise man; and which seems to be an explanation of it, made after the times of Christ. (r) T. Hieros. Nedarim, fol. 37. 1. Misn. Nedarim, c. 1. sect. 4. Maimon. Hilch. Nedarim, c. 1. sect. 7. (s) Misn. Nedarim, c. 1. sect. 1, 2. Maimon. Hilch. Nedarim, c. 1. sect. 16. (t) Misn. Nedarim, c. 3. sect. 11. (u) lb. c. 8. sect. 7. Vid. c. 11. sect 3, 4. (w) lb. c. 11. sect. 11. (x) Maimon. Hilch. Nedarim, c. 3. sect. 1. 6, 7. 9. (y) Misn. Nedarim, c. 9. sect. 1. (z) lb. c. 5. sect. 6.

And since this had no shade of contrariety to the law, to command men to wash their hands, He brings forward another tradition, which is opposed to the law. And what He saith is like this. "They taught the young, under the garb of piety, to despise their fathers." How, and in what way? "If one of their parents said to his child, Give me this sheep that thou hast, or this calf, or any such thing, they used to say, 'This is a gift to God, whereby thou wouldest be profited by me, and thou canst not have it.' And two evils hence arose: on the one hand they did not bring them to God, on the other they defrauded their parents under the name of the offering, alike insulting their parents for God's sake, and God for their parents' sake." But He, omitting the first, the reward appointed for them that honor their parents, states that which is more awful, the punishment, I mean, threatened to such as dishonor them; desiring both to dismay them, and to conciliate such as have understanding; and He implies them to be for this worthy of death. For if he who dishonors them in word is punished, much more ye, who do so in deed, and who not only dishonor, but also teach it to others. "Ye then who ought not so much as to live, how find ye fault with the disciples?" "And what wonder is it, if ye offer such insults to me, who am as yet unknown, when even to the Father ye are found doing the like?" For everywhere He both asserts and implies, that from Him they began with this their arrogance. But some do also otherwise interpret, "It is a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me;" that is, I owe thee no honor, but it is a free gift from me to thee, if indeed I do honor thee. But Christ would not have mentioned an insult of that sort. And Mark again makes this plainer, by saying, "It is Corban, by whatsoever thou mightest be profiled by me;" which means, not a gift and present, but properly an offering.

For the Scribes and Pharisees desiring to overturn this foregoing most provident law of God, that they might bring in their impiety under the mask of piety, taught bad sons, that should any desire to devote to God, who is the true parent, those things which ought to be offered to parents, the offering to the Lord should he preferred to the offering them to parents. Or it may briefly have the following sense; Ye compel children to say to their parents, What gift soever I was purposing to offer to God, you take and consume upon your living, and so it profits you; as much as to say, Do not so.

(Verse 4 onwards) For God said, 'Honor your father and mother, and whoever curses his father or mother, let him be put to death.' But you say, 'Whoever says to his father or mother, Whatever help you would have received from me is given to God,' and does not honor his father or mother, you have made void the commandment of God because of your tradition. Hypocrites, well did Isaiah prophesy of you, saying, 'This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me' (Exodus 20, Leviticus 20). But they worship me without cause, teaching doctrines and commandments of men. And, calling the multitude to him, he said to them: Hear and understand. Honor in the Scriptures is not only felt in greetings and deference to offices, but also in acts of charity and the offering of gifts (Exodus 20:12, 21 and Leviticus 20). The Apostle says, 'Honor widows who are truly widows' (1 Timothy 5:3); here honor is understood as a gift. And in another place: Elders are to be honored with double honor, especially those who labor in the word and doctrine of God (ibid., 17). And by this command we are commanded not to close the mouth of the ox that is treading out the corn (Deut. XXV) . And may the worker be worthy of his wage (Luke X) . The Lord had commanded, considering the weaknesses, ages, and hardships of parents, that children should honor their parents even in providing for their basic needs. The scribes and Pharisees, desiring to undermine this most provident Law of God and to introduce impiety under the name of piety, taught the worst sons that if anyone wished to vow to God (who is the true Father) those things which are to be offered to parents, the offering of the Lord should take precedence over the gifts of the parents; or certainly, the parents themselves, fearing that they would incur the crime of sacrilege by rejecting what had been consecrated to God, were consumed by poverty. And so it happened that the offering of children, under the pretext of the temple of God, went to the profits of the priests. This wicked tradition of the Pharisees came from another occasion. Many, having debts to pay and unwilling to repay what was owed, entrusted it to the priests, so that the money collected would be used for the services of the temple and their own needs. And this can also be understood briefly. He says, 'You compel the children to say to their parents: whatever gift I was going to offer to God, I consume it as food for you, Father, and it benefits you, Mother, so that they, fearing to receive what seems to be dedicated to God, would rather live in poverty than eat from the consecrated offerings.'

(Quæst. Ev. i. 16.) Otherwise; The gift whatsoever thou offerest on my account, shall profit thee; that is to say, Whatsoever gift thou offerest on my account, shall henceforth remain with thee; the son signifying by these words that there is no longer need that parents should offer for him, as he is of age to offer for himself. And those who were of age to be able to say thus to their parents, the Pharisees denied that they were guilty, if they did not show honour to their parents.

The scribes were entirely preoccupied with something else. The Lord instead was teaching them to take care of the needs of the body, so long as they were encouraged to cultivate virtue. When the Pharisees observed his disciples unconcerned about washing, they censured him on the grounds that he had not taught them with enough care that it was a matter of utmost importance that they not eat what they had not washed. What reply, then, does the Lord make to this? “Why do you transgress the commandments of God for the sake of your tradition?” Thus he reframes the question into an even graver accusation. They had not only broken God’s command but also misused it for mistaken ends. The metaphor shifts: God had commanded that parents be honored by their children. That honor was owed to them to such an extent that whichever of their children sinned stubbornly against them merely by word would be condemned. “But you say, ‘If any one tells his father or his mother, What you would have gained from me is given to God, he need not honor his father. You say that it is up to the children whether to honor their parents or not. You imply that a son says nothing out of bounds to a father when he says, “I will give a thank offering instead of taking care of you, my own father, and no further care is to be taken of you.” In this way, by your own peculiar traditions, you yourselves are dishonoring the gifts of almighty God.

The Pharisees were accusing the disciples of transgressing the commandment of the elders, but Christ shows that the Pharisees were transgressing the law of God (See Ex. 20:12; 21:16). For they were teaching sons to give nothing to their parents but to offer whatever they had to the treasury of the temple. There was a coffer in the temple in which he who so wished could put money, and the contents were distributed to the poor. So the Pharisees first persuaded sons not to give anything to their parents but to offer it instead to the treasury of the temple, and then taught them to say, "O my father, the help that you seek from me is a gift, that is, it is offered to God." And then the Pharisees and the sons would divide the money among themselves, and the parents were being left uncared for in their old age. The money lenders had the same practice. For if one of them would lend money to someone who proved to be a bad debtor who did not pay back what was owed, then the money lender would say to the ungrateful debtor, "What you owe me is Corban," that is, a gift offered to God. Then the debtor, as one who was now in debt to God, would pay up although unwillingly. This is what the Pharisees were teaching sons to do.

(ap. Anselm.) In this interpretation the sense will be, What I offer to God will profit both you and myself; and therefore you ought not to take of my goods for your own needs, but to suffer that I offer them to God. (ap. Anselm.) Or the sense may be, Whosoever, that is, of you young men, shall say, that is, shall either be able to say, or shall say, to his father or mother, O father, the gift that is of me devoted to God, shall it profit thee? as it were an exclamation of surprise; you ought not to take it that you may not incur the guilt of sacrilege. Or, we may read it with this ellipsis, Whosoever shall say to his father, &c. he shall do the commandment of God, or shall fulfil the Law, or shall be worthy of life eternal.

But you say etc. Here he touches on how they transgress. And first he shows this; second, he presents the authority. And regarding the first, he shows their custom; second, what followed. He says you say: whoever shall say to his father or mother etc. This is read in many ways. In one way, so that it is a complete construction, and then it reads thus: whoever, i.e., anyone whatsoever, shall say, i.e., shall be able to say. In another way, so that it is an incomplete construction, thus whoever shall say etc., supply: keeps the commandment, and is free from punishment. What does this saying mean? It is explained in three ways. Rabanus said that spiritual good is to be preferred to temporal good; therefore they said to those who had poor parents that they should say to them: father, do not be displeased if I do not give you necessities, because the offering that I make profits you spiritually. But this was not true, according to that saying: the Most High does not approve the gifts of the wicked. And Prov. 28:24: he that steals anything from his father or from his mother and says this is no sin, is the partner of a murderer. Therefore if someone has a father or mother and they cannot live without him, he who would say to them, go overseas, or enter religious life, falls under this condemnation. There is another exposition. Jerome, however, reads it interrogatively, i.e., will it profit you? In Lev. 22:2, it is stated that a stranger could not consume what had been consecrated to the Lord; therefore they would admonish sons who had poor parents to offer things to God. And if the parents wished to be sustained from those things, they would say to them: if you take anything from what I ought to offer to God, will it profit you? No, rather it will be to your condemnation. Augustine explains it thus. The Jews said that children, while they were under the guardianship of their father, were bound to them. Hence when the sons are small, the parents offer for the children, and it profits them; but when they come of age, then the devotion of another does not profit them. Hence they said that everyone who could reach this state and say to his father the gift which proceeds from me shall profit you, was not bound to his father.

DISCOURSE ON CEREMONIAL POLLUTION. ( = Mar 7:1, Mar 7:23). (Mat. 15:1-20) Then came to Jesus scribes and Pharisees, which were of Jerusalem--or "from Jerusalem." Mark (Mar 7:1) says they "came from" it: a deputation probably sent from the capital expressly to watch Him. As He had not come to them at the last Passover, which they had reckoned on, they now come to Him. "And," says Mark (Mar 7:2-3), "when they saw some of His disciples eat bread with defiled, that is to say, with unwashen hands"--hands not ceremonially cleansed by washing--"they found fault. For the Pharisees, and all the Jews, except they wash their hands oft"--literally, "in" or "with the fist"; that is, probably washing the one hand by the use of the other--though some understand it, with our version, in the sense of "diligently," "sedulously"--"eat not, holding the tradition of the elders"; acting religiously according to the custom handed down to them. "And when they come from the market" (Mar 7:4) --"And after market": after any common business, or attending a court of justice, where the Jews, as WEBSTER and WILKINSON remark, after their subjection to the Romans, were especially exposed to intercourse and contact with heathens--"except they wash, they eat not. And many other things there be, which they have received to hold, as the washing of cups and pots, brazen vessels and tables"--rather, "couches," such as were used at meals, which probably were merely sprinkled for ceremonial purposes. "Then the Pharisees and scribes asked Him," saying--as follows:

But ye say, Whosoever shall say to his father or his mother, It is a gift--or simply, "A gift!" In Mark (Mar 7:11), it is, "Corban!" that is, "An oblation!" meaning, any unbloody offering or gift dedicated to sacred uses. by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me;